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?

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."

Matt. 9:27-31 inclusive.

This is the principle, or law, of God’s activity in His saints, as well as of His grace to sinners. In the scriptures before us we have a perfect and beautiful illustration of it, as to the latter class, and in the seventeenth chapter, of the want of faith on the part of the former.

The blessed Master had returned to His own city -Nazareth-and had "forgiven the sins,"and healed "the man sick of the palsy," cured "the woman diseased with an issue of blood twelve years," raised the dead "daughter of a certain ruler," and "His fame had gone abroad into all that land;" so that when He departed thence, two blind men followed Him, beseeching Him to "have mercy on them." These, no doubt, had heard of the wonderful works wrought by Jesus, because " His fame had gone out into all that land," and in their extreme need, knowing full well this need, they were ready and willing to believe that He who could raise the dead must also be able to open their eyes. Therefore they came to Him, into the house, and the Lord knowing their thoughts, reading their hearts, said unto them, believe ye that I am able to do this? Do what? They had not told Him their desire, they had not asked Him to return their sight, but only to "have mercy on us,"-Ah! but He knows what we desire before we ask Him. Then touched He their eyes, saying, " According to your faith be it unto you," "and their eyes were opened." This is what they were expecting, what they desired and all they desired. It was "the end of their faith." "They received the end of their faith," even the opening of their eyes. On the same principle, the end of their faith may be the salvation of their souls (i Peter 1:9).

Now faith is not an act of our own wills, as many imagine, but it is the gift of God. "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights " (James 1:17). "By grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God" (Eph. 1:8). ‘’ Think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith " (Rom. 12:3). Now the question will arise, how does God deal to us the measure of faith? Just as He gave the manna to Israel:" Every man gathering according to his eating," or his appetite for it. So God deals to us the measure of faith. As we desire it, as we require it, as we will receive and use it according to His will. He cannot give faith for that which is not according to His purpose. His purpose now is for salvation to man; a new life, a new creation by the Holy Spirit. To this end He measures to His saints as they need all requisite gifts by the Holy Spirit. He does not give faith for physical wants beyond that which is ordained under natural law; because He is not now dealing with the race on this ground. He did do this in the beginning of this dispensation for the establishment of the truth in the world; so that no excuse should be possible to unbelief; but now, when the testimony of physical miracles has been sufficient to this end, His real purpose of salvation in grace, through faith, is working out His will according to His own eternal purpose. We are therefore not authorized by the word of God to have faith for or expect physical miracles; though the spiritually miraculous is before our eyes in every soul born of God. He is now through grace, by faith, taking out of the already judged world a people for His Name (Acts 15:14). Sanctifying, separating them from the world to Himself; to His fellowship, His society, His association!

Faith then being the gift of God, it may be said to be the instrument by which God calls men into this association. " If any man will do His will, he shall know of the teaching whether it be of God or whether I speak of Myself." So spake the Lord to the Jews as recorded in John 7:17. Also, "He that is of God, heareth God’s words:ye therefore hear not, because ye are not of God" (John 8:47). Subjection then is man’s part in salvation. Willing subjection. A heart for the truth, God’s truth, the source of truth; the highest truth there is for man. A lover of the truth. Any man thus willing, "shall know of the teaching." Of such were the two men who came to the Lord in the ninth of Matthew. He drew them to Him, into the house, and through faith, granted them the desire of their hearts. Their eyes were opened.

Opening the eyes lets in the light. So also is it in spiritual things. The light of heaven flows in through the open eyes of faith. God opens the eyes of every willing, subject soul. As in the beginning of the new creation life, so is it to the end, " According to your faith so be it unto you." We get on in heavenly things as we are willing to receive from God. He is always waiting to be gracious unto us, and His gifts are only limited by our desire for them. We gather the manna for our own eating, as much as we may; but no more than we use. It is gathering from day to day. It cannot be kept over. All not consumed spoils. No nourishment can be had from it. Christian progress, growth in grace, is from freshly feeding on the heavenly Manna every day, so that "to them that have, more shall be given," and we go on in "grace upon grace."

When the blind men were restored to their sight, Jesus commanded them that no man should know about it. But on the contrary, "they spread His fame throughout all that country! " They couldn’t help it. It was more than poor human nature could keep hidden. Their hearts were full to bursting; and out of a full heart the mouth will speak:Hence they spread His fame throughout all that country. That is what all true Christians will do, cannot help doing, when their eyes are fully open and "the light of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" is poured from heaven into their souls. Then they will sing, by the Spirit, with all saints:-

" Our hearts are full of Christ, and long
Their glorious matter to declare!
Of Him we make our loftier song,-
We, cannot from His praise forbear:
Our ready tongues make haste to sing
The glories of the heavenly King."

J. S. P.

Twice it is recorded in 2 Samuel 2:that David "inquired of the Lord," as if to attract our attention to this in a special way; because immediately afterwards he takes a most important step, and no inquiry of the Lord is mentioned. Saul had perished, and "David inquired of the Lord, Shall I go up into any of the cities of Judah? And the Lord said unto him, Go up. And David said, Whither shall I go up? And He said, Unto Hebron. So David went up thither," and his wives and his men with him.

But note what happens next. "And the men of Judah came, and there they anointed David king over the house of Judah." There is no waiting to inquire of the Lord, and no appeal to the other tribes, at least, so we are bound to infer. And a step is taken that is manifestly not of God, because not according to His word. David was not marked out to be king over the house of Judah, but to be king "over Israel."

And the two humble inquirings of the Lord, pointedly mentioned just before, surely are meant to call attention to the lack of any such inquiring here. It reminds one of Paul being ensnared at Jerusalem. David was now amid his friends. When humbly inquiring his way, step by step, he was still an exile; but now, as it were, at home again, it would seem that both he and the men of Judah acted by impulse, and not by the Spirit of God. And the consequences that follow are full of warning and instruction.

Abner made Ish-bosheth king over the other tribes, and war ensues; and acts of vile treachery and murder mark those years. And not until over seven years after is David anointed king over all Israel.

Surely all this had its influence towards the final rending of the ten tribes from Judah. And the later history of David’s career shows the same spirit at work in him. When being brought back to his throne after the overthrow of Absalom, David’s failure in this line is more signal than before. He now impatiently challenges the men of Judah for not being more forward to welcome him back when the other tribes were making demonstrations in his favor. The result is bitter words between the men of Israel and the men of Judah, because of Judah doing what David had himself incited them to do. "The king is near of kin to us," was the men of Judah’s plea.

Let us beware of sectarian thoughts! David’s failure in these two cases, and the consequences-for war ensued again in this latter case-are full of solemnity and full of warning and instruction. What far-reaching results may ensue from one step taken, at an important juncture, and especially by one whose responsibility is great, without inquiring of the Lord!

May the lesson be deeply impressed upon our hearts! and may we be well assured that any step taken without God must have an evil result!

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.

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.

Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord." There are two words in this opening to which I wish to call your attention. One is the word "finally," and the other is " Lord." The apostle at the time of writing them, was in the hands of the Roman emperor, a prisoner for the cause of the gospel. Looking back over his course he might recall countless hardships that he had suffered, perils on land and sea, poverty, hunger, thirst, imprisonment and beating. He had met with opposition also in the Church as well as outside. Those who should have been helpers, had forsaken him. Some preached Christ of envy and strife. Past, present, and future, except to the eye of faith, were as gloomy as possible, and yet he says, after all these things," rejoice; " and not, mark you, "rejoice in the Saviour," but "rejoice in the Lord."

Let me emphasize the difference a little; for the use of the latter title on this occasion is indeed much sweeter. It would be no great wonder for one in such circumstances to turn away from them all to rejoice in the Saviour. Surely this would be the soul’s great satisfaction, but it betokens a loftier flight of faith to rejoice in the Lord, One who might have removed the trial, but left it on. Perhaps some reader of this paper has had a hard struggle all his life with poverty; perhaps another has been given up by friend and relative, to lead a lonely life in this vale of sorrows; perhaps another has toiled long and labored hard in the vineyard, to find his toil rewarded but with abuse and scorn, or indifference. To such the undercurrent of Paul’s exhortation may be searching:You know the Christ so well, that, (realizing His power to remove all these things,) you can yet rejoice in the Lord, specifically as Lord, perfect Master of every circumstance. "Though He slay me yet will I trust Him," blessed be God! rejoice in Him too. Such is the cry of those who know Him best.

"The spirit of praise is the spirit of power," and yet at the same time there must be a practical guarding against the enemies we have to meet. Jehoshaphat with his singers in the forefront of the battle had his warriors behind them. So the apostle goes on to say, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision." Like the snapping", snarling animals that rove in packs through the streets of eastern cities, when night settles down, so these enemies swarm round us as we pass through this busy world, and our singing serves but to gather them more thickly to the attack. There is nothing Satan dislikes so much as rejoicing in the Lord, and he will do anything that he can to stop it. If his dogs cannot drown it with their howling, his concision will set up an imitation song to attract the attention away from it.

It has been thought by some, that the dogs, evil workers and concision all refer to one and the same class of people, but then it would seem that in that case the verb would not be repeated after each. It is true, however, that the concision are the class of whom they are in especial danger, as this is emphasized by the context.

It is interesting to notice how there seems to be a trinity of evil to oppose the good. The lust of the eyes, of the flesh, and the pride of life is a common example, while we may notice the three motives suggested to Eve, the three temptations of our Lord; the three kinds of bad ground in the parable of the sower, and in this chapter, the threefold cord opposing. As if to meet this latter trinity, believers are here represented in three ways, worshiping God in the Spirit, exulting in Christ Jesus, and having no confidence in the flesh. They who worship God in spirit and in truth, "for the Father seeketh such to worship Him," they who have found Christ Jesus exult in Him, for did they not, it would be proof they had not found Him; and because they know such an One has had to die for them, they realize how degraded their condition, and, in the "Sinless," their sin, not realized as such till they had seen Him, is really brought to light. No wonder it is then that the apostle tells us, that he had cast aside his own righteousness on account of Christ, and that he counted all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord.

Let us consider for a little the motive which actuated him. It is literally rendered the "projecting out (beyond all things) of the knowledge of Christ Jesus," and again he adds with lingering emphasis "my Lord." The word which I have translated "projecting out" is the same as is used for "promontory." Did you ever see a promontory? Do you know how it projects out beyond all things? I suppose that those who have seen the North Cape never forget it. It towers up so majestically a thousand feet above the sea. How puny are the waves at its foot! How the eye returns again to dwell upon it! How it absorbs the whole attention! So to the apostle is the person of the Christ. He is his Lord.

He is his Master. He is the One to whom his whole soul goes out in loyal devotion. The "shout of a king "is in his heart, and casting aside as it were his fisher’s coat, impatient of the slow progress of the boat, he steps forth on the deep to meet Him. Let us look for evidence. " For whom I have suffered the loss of all things."

Here we have a practical proof of what he asserts. Sometimes we delude ourselves with the idea that He projects out beyond all things while it is very manifest to those around us, that it is not so. They see us devoting so much time to ourselves, to our personal comfort, that they naturally come to such a conclusion. But then, we console ourselves with the thought that after all this is due to the exigencies of the time, and that our heart is all right. But how about "the projecting out beyond all things." Alas! do not exigencies then do so? Paul let exigencies go. "For whom I have suffered the loss of all things." What a word for us to-day! How salutary! especially if we consider the words which he adds, "And do count them but dung that I may win Christ."

In a certain sense it may be much easier to suffer the loss of all things, than to keep them. Our conscience may demand that we give them up. It may say, "You will be denying the faith if you do not! " and so we may let them go, and then when they are gone cry out, as did God’s people of old, "Would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots and we did eat bread to the full." Is that our spirit? Alas! then we never gave up. It was a case of tearing from our reluctant hands, things which we were loath to yield. We saw the angel of the Lord standing with drawn sword across our path and we fled back. How sorrowful for us when we remember that Christ, in all His beauty, stood to welcome us upon the other pathway.

But let us ponder still and ask God to search our hearts:"I do count them but dung" says the apostle. Not much yearning after them there, was there? "I do count them but dung." He does not say, mind you, "I would count them as dung" with a suppressed "if it were necessary." It is necessary for the acquisition of the blessed Object before him. With him there was no desire to keep anything. His eye was single and his one desire was to strip off everything that might incommode him in the race. And so he ran. Beloved! do we so run? Can we repeat the following lines from our hearts?

"Yes, He is mine! and nought of earthly things,
Not all the charms of pleasure, wealth, or power;
The fame of heroes or the pomp of kings,
Could tempt me to forego His love an hour.
Go! worthless world,’ I cry, ‘ with all that’s thine,’
Go! I my Saviour’s am, and He is mine."

Passing over the next verse let us now consider a little that very familiar one:"That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made comfortable unto His death."

The first clause of this verse is worthy of much meditation. Did not the apostle Paul know the Lord? He whose whole soul had been singing with delight, even in the most adverse circumstances? He presses on to know Him. Later on we learn that he stretches forward (as a racer) towards the mark. Did you ever know of anybody doing that, who only had a short distance to run? How strongly then this verse should speak to us. What an unbounded Elysium there is yet to enter upon. We had thought some time, after some glad vision, some close communion, that we had really seen the Lord; but no! it was only a clouded view, a far away prospect, for we realize that our knowledge has come nowhere near that of the apostle, and he still pressed on to know Him. The glorious light on the road to Damascus had been passed. The song in Philippi’s jail had been sung, stormy seas had been crossed, the dead had been raised by that Mighty Name; through sickness, the cohorts of the adversary, hunger, thirst, and beatings he had gone, and still the tireless racer stretches forth towards the goal, the blessed knowing of his Lord and Saviour.

And how about us, brethren? We should press on with greater vigor than the apostle, for we have further to run, but do we? We should look more eagerly for His return, for the night is more advanced, but do we? We might almost see Him coming "skipping upon the hills," but do we, oh! do we? Here is a question well worthy of consideration. How grand to stand for Him, in these days of declension, a faithful and true witness. What a crown of glory we are letting slip from our hands if we do not!

"That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection." Here is an additional clause to consider. Far off on a lonely mountain of Judea in the dark season of night, I see a few frightened disciples fleeing like sheep before a band of men with torches, gathered to take prisoner the Lord of Glory. Ashamed of his cowardice, one of them at last seeks out the palace of the High Priest, and tremblingly warms his hands within. The other night (do we know anything about other nights?) he had been very valiant, with the foe far away, but now all is changed. He is a broken reed shaken with every gust of wind. Once he had heard that Voice, now so meekly answering His enemies, hush the angry tempest on Galilee. He had seen the dead arise from the grave at its bidding. " Lord though all men forsake Thee yet will not I forsake Thee," he had cried, and that same night with oaths and cursing he denies Him. Alas, for human strength and resolution! Alas, for poor man!

A few weeks pass and we see that same frightened flock publishing His blessed name to the whole world. They are no longer fearful, no longer trembling, but with earth and hell against them, they stand undaunted, undismayed, glorying in the name of Jesus. But what had wrought this wondrous change? Why, Christ had risen. Death had yielded up its Prey and they now preached Jesus and the resurrection. What a mighty power it was! but oh brethren, it is one thing to be able to talk about it, and another thing to know its power, to feel it in our lives. What a passport to true blessing and godliness in every thing if we knew more that the One who died on the cross is now, for us, seated at the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens! And it is so, yes, it is so!

" And the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable unto His death."

Before speaking of this clause directly, I want to notice a point which although not in exact connection with it, is suggested by it. Until the Lord was taken from them, they knew but little of the fellowship of His sufferings, and the reason is good to think upon. During all the time of the Lord’s presence with them, He was the object of all man’s hatred and malice. They shared but slightly in it. Let me indicate the reason by an illustration. I was burning some sulphur one day in a room with the blind pulled down. It burned with a slightly visible flame. I then happened to let the sunlight in and on looking down thought my sulphur had gone out. On pulling down the blind however, I saw that it was burning as steadily as ever. I experimented several times with the same result. Where the sun shone the sulphur flame could not be seen. And so it was when Christ the blessed Light of the world shone among us, the rays of those lights soon to fill the world were swallowed up in His glory, and men saw them not. Dear brethren, to-day we also can behold His glory, "the glory of the Only-begotten of the Father full of grace and truth," and although 1800 years have passed since then, reading its story we bow our heads, and say from our hearts, "Truly this was the Son of God."

In closing this meditation here, I would ask the reader to join with me in petitioning that our hearts may be so filled by His beauty and glory that truly from our hearts we also may desire some sweet fellowship of His suffering. It is easy to write, it is easy to read, it is easy to be momentarily stirred by emotion, but what we need is that our lives may be wholly dominated and controlled by motives such as Paul’s were that we may bear fruit unto life eternal.

"Blest with this fellowship divine,
Take what Thou wilt I all resign,
While as the branches to the vine,
Saviour, I cling to Thee,

"Blest be my lot whatever befall,
Who can affright or who appal?
While as my God, my Rock, my All,
Saviour, I cling to Thee."

F. C. G.

To instruct even the unconverted child in the Scriptures is always of great value. It is like laying a fire well, so that a spark alone is needed to kindle it into a flame. It is a good and wholesome thing for Christians to be most particular in the training of their children in a thorough knowledge of the word of God. W. K.

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********************

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?

" Woe to the rebellious children, saith Jehovah, that take counsel, but not of Me; and that make leagues, but not of My Spirit, that they may heap sin upon sin." (Isa. 30:50:)

It is a solemn thing to read such words as these, and still more so to think how applicable they may be to ourselves. Even as children of God, the proneness of our hearts is to act according to our own judgments; for the flesh in the Christian is not a whit better than in any other man. Whenever there is a listening to ourselves, we may be sure the same character of evil is at work that the Spirit of Jehovah was rebuking in Israel.

What for Israel was going down into Egypt is to us the taking counsel, not of God, but of natural wisdom, in any difficulty. It was the same fleshly wisdom which Israel sought; and of this, Egypt is the symbol in the ancient world. No country in the early history of men, was so distinguished for the wisdom of nature as Egypt. In later days, Greece and Rome sprang up, but that was long after that time to which this vision applied as a historical fact. They were at first little more than a number of contentious hordes. No such wisdom was found anywhere to the same extent as in Egypt. The great Assyrian who invaded Israel was characterized not so much by wisdom as by vast resources and appliances in the way of strength. Egypt depended mainly on good counsel, as if there were no living God,- on the counsel of man, sharpened by long experience, for it was one of the oldest powers that attained eminence. Accordingly, as they had been versed in the state-craft of the ancient world, they had an immense reputation for their familiarity with means of dealing in national difficulties. . . . Israel when threatened by the Assyrian sought the help of Egypt:I am speaking now of the literal fact when this prophecy first applied. Though it did bear on the days of Isaiah, yet the character of the prophecy shows that it cannot be limited to that time:only a very small part was accomplished then. But between the two terms of Israel’s past and future unfaithfulness, in turning to the wisdom of the world in their troubles, there is a serious lesson for us in the pressure of any trial that concerns the testimony of God. The tendency is immense to meet a worldly trial in a worldly way. That you cannot meet the world’s efforts against you by spiritual means is what one is apt to think:so there is the danger of recourse to earthly means for the purpose of escape. What is this but the same thing that we find here? And yet who that feels for the children of God and for the truth but feels the danger of this? Be sure, if we do not feel the danger, it is because we are ourselves under the world’s influence. The feeling of the danger, the dread of our own spirits, the fear lest we should meet flesh by flesh, is what God uses to make us look to Himself. God will never put His seal on self-dependence; on the contrary, the great lesson the whole life of Christ teaches is the very reverse. He lived for* the Father:so "he that eateth Him, shall live for* Him."*"On account of," J. N. D’s translation:and in foot-note, " For the advantage of ". . . I do not believe to be the sense of the passage. Perhaps ‘by reason of.’ "*

It is in dependence upon Another, even Christ, as our object, that the joy and strength and wisdom of the Christian are found. This we gather before the difficulty comes. Then " I can do all things through Him who strengthened! me." Where we often fail is through acting from impulse. If we think to plan, instead of praying in real subjection to God, we need to fear for ourselves. What is rendered in 2 Tim. 2:i "intercession," and in i Tim. 4:5 "prayer," means such intercourse with God, as admits of confiding appeal to Him. We can thus freely and personally speak to Him about all things, now that through the one Mediator we know Him as a Saviour-God, who has first spoken to us in grace and given us the access we have into this grace wherein we stand. Is it not then an outrage on the God who has thus opened His ear to us if we look to fleshly means? and yet who does not know that this is the very thing to which, perhaps, more than any other, the wise and prudent are prone.

In this way it seems that the moral lesson of this chapter is to be seen-it is taking counsel, but not of Jehovah. Hence God caused the land of Egypt to become the means of deeply aggravating their evil. "Woe to the rebellious children, saith Jehovah, that take counsel, but not of Me; and that cover with a covering, (or, as some prefer, that make leagues), but not of. My Spirit, that they may add sin to sin; that walk to go down into Egypt, and have not asked at My mouth; to strengthen themselves in the strength of Pharaoh, and to trust in the shadow of Egypt. Therefore shall the strength of Pharaoh be a shame, and the trust in the shadow of Egypt a confusion. For His princes are at Zoan, and His ambassadors are come to Hanes. They shall all be ashamed of a people that cannot profit them, that are not a help nor profit, but a shame and also a reproach." "His princes " mean those of God’s people, as the next chapter proves decisively. The prophet’s irony thus expresses itself.

"The burden of the beasts of the south. Through the land of trouble and anguish from whence [come] the lioness and the lion, the viper and the fiery flying serpent; they carry their riches upon the shoulders of young asses, and their treasures upon the bunches of camels, to a people [that] shall not profit. For Egypt helpeth in vain, and to no purpose:therefore have I called her Rahab (or arrogance) that sitteth still."

Not man’s pride, but God’s guidance avails for His people.

If we examine the New Testament for our guidance in these difficulties, we shall find just the same truth. If the apostle is speaking merely about the ordinary trials of each day, we have the same lesson in other words. Thus he tells us, we are to let our moderation be known unto all men, the Lord being at hand; that, instead of being careful or anxious about anything (not that we are to be careless, but not to be careful in the sense of anxiety), our requests should be made known unto God with thanksgiving.

Our strength, it is said, is in quiet confidence. Christians have a right to expect God to appear for us:He has entitled us to count on it. We may be perfectly sure, it matters not what the circumstances are:even supposing there has been something to judge in ourselves, if one tell it out to God, will not He listen? He cannot deny Himself. He must deny him that slights the name of Christ. Where He now puts to shame, it is in our self-will:so far from putting shame on such being a proof that He does not love them, it is precisely the proof that He does. But at the same time, let men venture to go beyond what God sees good for the discipline of His child, He soon takes up the rod:and there can be more terrible than when the adversary exceeds the chastening that is just, gratifying his hatred towards them. For God will rise up in His indignation deal with them according to His own majesty; even the grace of the gospel does not set aside that. For instance, see in the second epistle to Timothy 4:14. If Persons bearing the Lord’s name are carried away by their fleshly zeal, and fight against the truth of God, or those charged with the of that truth, God may use them for dealing with the faults in His people. God knows how to bring down His people where their looks are high because of anything in themselves, or that may conferred upon them. But when the limit of rebuke is exceeded, woe be to those that gainst them, covering their own vindictiveness envy under God’s name. It is evident the very grace of gospel makes it to be so much the more conspicuous; for it sounds so much the more that God should thus deal in the midst of all that speaks so loudly of His love. The gospels also bring out in the words of our Lord Himself the wickedness of fighting against what god is doing even by poor weak disciples. This is the great lesson for us:we are not to consult our own hearts, or have recourse to the strength of man. When we flee to the various resources of the flesh, we slip out of our proper Christian path. Whereas the strength of God has indeed shone in that foundation-pattern in which all the blessing of grace to sinners is contained; and it always takes this form for a Christian, and that is death and resurrection. There may very likely be a great pressure of trial; there may soon appear a sinking down under it; but as surely as there is the semblance of death, there will be the reality of resurrection by and by. Let no one be disheartened. The cross is the right mold for the blessing of the children of God. When we were brought to Him, was it not after the same sort? We knew what it was to have the horrors of the conviction of sin; but God was going to bring us for the first time into a place of special blessing.

It has always been so with His own. We find it in the case of Abraham, and in proportion to the greatness of blessing is the force of sorrow that precedes it. Isaac was given when Abraham was a hundred years old, and Sarah as good as dead. There was death, as it were, and he had to wait for a son. Even after the birth and growth of .the child of promise, he had to surrender him-to offer up his only son to God. Directly that the singleness and truth of His heart was proved, and that the sacrifice in principle was offered up, the angel of Jehovah arrests his hand. How much sweeter now, when Isaac was, as it were, the child of resurrection! And so it is with all our blessings; it matters not what they may be. There must be the breaking down of our feelings, the mortification of self in a practical way, if we are to know what God is in blessing:our blessings are cast in the mold of death and resurrection.- Exposition of Isaiah, Kelly, p. 292.)

Real, deep knowledge of the ways of God is always accompanied by humility. There is no greater mistake, nor one more unfounded in fact, than the supposition that spiritual intelligence puffeth up; knowledge may-mere knowledge. But I speak of that spiritual understanding in the Word, which flows from the sense of God’s love, and seeks to spread itself, if I may so say, just because it is divine love, W. K.

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 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.)

"And upon His head were many crowns." (Rev. 19:12.)

(Continued from page 39.)

CHAPTER XIII. The Bridegroom.

The Church as the Body of Christ speaks, then, as we have seen, of service in subjection and fellowship with the Head. In the Bride we find it in a new aspect, in which, while association with Christ is just as prominent, there is rather the thought of rest than of activity; or it is the heart that is awake and in activity, Christ is seen as the Beloved of the heart, and in known and enjoyed relationship, its entire satisfaction and delight.

The " Body " is not the equivalent of the " Bride," and we miss much if we accept the one as substitute for the other. The incompatibility of the Church filling both these places has been, however, lately pressed, and that the members of Christ’;? Body are not the Bride, but part of the Bridegroom Himself. But surely, if these are both figures, there is no incompatibility here, and it is only by joining different aspects of truth in an incongruous manner-"part of the Bridegroom "-that they are made to appear so. Scripture does not so connect them, and to put things in this way is only an unconscious self-entanglement of thought.

It has been also represented that the Church was a "mystery hid in God" during Old Testament times, and that this is inconsistent with there being and types of it in the Old Testament, such as Rebekah, for instance, has been taken to be:for types teach, and were meant to teach doctrines, and the mystery is not said to be hidden in Scripture, but in God. But this is to overlook the plain statement of the apostle, where after a direct quotation of Gen. 2:24, ("the two shall be one flesh ") following an application of the preceding history of Adam and his wife, he says:"This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church" (Eph. 5:32). Now here the mystery of the Church as the Bride of Christ is found at the very beginning of the Old Testament.

Types by themselves teach nothing:they need the removing of the veil that is over them before they can be anything more than just history, ordinance, or what is upon the face of them. If Scripture were full of them, they would still be hid in God until it pleased Him to give the key to unlock their meaning. The distinction sought to be made is therefore quite unfounded.

It is true, that, as to the Body of Christ, the Old Testament, as far as we are aware, has no hint of it; while with regard to the Bride there are types from the very beginning. But not only so, the figure of marriage is used again and again with reference to the relation between Jehovah and Israel, as a people brought into intimate and unique attachment to Himself; and this both in the history of the past, and in the prophecy of the future. This was, therefore, no mystery hid in God,-no secret to be brought out at an after-time,-and cannot refer to the Church which is Christ’s Body. Thus in Jeremiah (31:31-34) God speaks of the covenant made with their fathers, when He took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, as of a marriage contract:"which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband to them, saith the Lord." And in Hosea (chap. 2:) God judges them for their wanderings from Him as adultery, while He prophesies the return of the nation to her " first husband " as the result of His dealings with her in the time to come:"I will visit upon her the days of Baalim, wherein she burned incense to them, and decked herself with her earrings and her jewels, and went after her lovers, and forgot Me, saith the Lord. Therefore, behold, I will allure her and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her. And I will give her vineyards from thence, and the valley of Achor as a door of hope; and she shall sing there as in the days of her youth, and as in the day when she came up out of the land of Egypt."

Then comes the renewal, but in a more intimate way, of the old relationship. "And it shall be at that day that thou shalt call Me Ishi, and shalt no more call Baali:for I will take away the names of Baalim out of her mouth, and they shall be no more remembered by their name."

The change of title here is significant. "Ishi" and "Baali" both are used for "husband"; but the latter is strictly "lord, master," and implies simply the wife’s subjection; whereas "ishi," "my man," as with similar words in other languages, goes back to creation and the fundamental fitting of man and woman to each other, so that there should be real fellowship or kinship in the relation. The connection with the substitution of the one title for the other as to the true God and the dropping of the very names of the "Baals," the false gods, out of Israel’s mouth, is therefore easy to be understood. They had only known God hitherto in the far off place of "master," not in the reality of His glorious nature, not in the affectionate intimacy which He sought. BJ Thus there was nothing to hinder their being drawn away to "other lords" which had usurped His place. But now, in the future which He here contemplates, all would be changed, so as to make stable the relationship:"And I will betroth thee unto Me for ever; yea, I will betroth thee unto Me in righteousness and in judgment, and in loving-kindness and in mercies; I will even betroth thee unto Me in faithfulness "-or " steadfastness"-"and thou shalt know the Lord."

Here, then, is the end of all wanderings:and now "Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land be termed Desolate; but thou shalt be called Hephzibah,"-" My delight is in her,"-"and thy land Beulah " (married):"for the Lord delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married" (Isa. 62:4).

Here it is plain that to Israel, God’s earthly people, it is that these promises belong. It should be as plain, surely, that the "Bride of the Lamb," united to Him in heaven before He comes forth to the judgment of the earth (Rev. 19:), is not Israel, and that the "new," the "heavenly Jerusalem," "Jerusalem which is above," (Rev. 21:; Gal. 4:26) cannot be the Old Testament city, even in the fullest glory of her glorious time to come. Thus there are certainly two " Brides" contemplated in Scripture, a heavenly and an earthly one; and the objections made against this are really of no force whatever. For instance, where it is said:"The Bride in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Hosea is Israel, or at any rate the elect of Israel; those who were partakers of the heavenly calling in Israel." Surely nothing could well be more contrary to Scripture than this. Was it with partakers of the heavenly calling that God made a covenant when He took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt? Was it the elect in Israel who broke that covenant, though Jehovah was a husband to them? Was it these to whom He gave a writing of divorcement, and put them away? Is it a heavenly land, that is no more to be called Desolate, but Beulah (married)? Is it to an elect heavenly people that it is said, "Turn, O backsliding children:for I am married unto you; and I will take you, one of a city, and two of a family, and will bring you to Zion "? If these questions cannot be answered in the affirmative, then assuredly, whatever the New Testament Bride may be, the Old Testament one is not the same.

The writer allows even that "all the promises to Israel as a nation were earthly," and such are the promises here:they are national; although it is true that only those can enjoy them who undergo that spiritual change which our Lord emphasizes as needed by any who enter the Kingdom of God. As Isaiah says (4:3, 4):"And it shall come to pass that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem; when the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof, by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning."

In the forty-fifth psalm the divine-human King, Messiah, is seen as the Bridegroom of Israel, and as to its being an earthly scene that is set before us in it there can be surely no question made. It was to such a Bridegroom that the Baptist testified (John 3:29); and the parable of the virgins doubtless speaks of the same. In the whole prophecy (Matt, 24:, 25:) Israel is prominent, the Church coming in only in that part of it which assumes that parabolic form in which the "mysteries of the Kingdom," "things kept secret from the foundation of the world," had been before declared. And the virgins going forth to meet the Bridegroom, have been inconsistently taken by many to be the same as the Bride. To set this right in no wise affects the doctrine, if it does not rather make it clearer. At least the conformity with the Old Testament is plain, and with the position that Matthew holds as the connecting link between the Old Testament and the New.

In the passage in Ephesians before referred to there is much more than an illustrated appeal to wives and husbands in view of Christ’s relationship to the Church. That relationship is stated in a very definite way in antitypical parallelism to that of the first Adam and the woman divinely given to him. Adam, we are distinctly told in Romans (chap. 5:14) "is the figure of Him that was to come." Christ is called in Corinthians (i Cor. 15:45) "the last Adam." But notice the contrast also, which here as always, in one way or other, obtains between type and antitype:"the first Adam was made a living’ soul; the last Adam was made a quickening Spirit." The same parallel, yet contrast, is seen in this passage in Ephesians:"Christ 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." It was God who presented Eve to Adam:it is Christ who as the fruit of His own self-sacrifice presents the Church to Himself.

It is certain that here Christ is looked at as in a higher,-and so in some sense a contrasted-way, repeating the story of the second of Genesis. But that is not all:the apostle goes on to say:"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; [we are]* of His flesh and of His bones." *The repetition of the "we are," or some equivalent of it, is necessitated by the insertion here of the preposition έκ ("out of") which separates the first statement from the latter one.* Here two things are brought together which, in different ways show the ground of the Lord’s care. We are members of His body:nearer to Him than that can nothing be. But this is by the baptism of the Spirit, and implies a prior, anticipative, originative work that shall prepare for it. The baptism of the Spirit effects union; but with whom then can He unite Himself? Now comes the answer:"we are of His flesh and of His bones."

But this carries us back at once to the Old Testament type again, and we hear Adam, after the whole of nature besides has failed to furnish a helpmeet for him, and when God to provide one has brought forth the woman out of his side,-we hear Adam saying, "This is now bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh." Her origin is from him, though not in the way of nature, but of divine power. And now again has been produced by a mightier act of divine power, a people who have received their spiritual origin from the last Adam, out of His death-sleep, who is not only a living Spirit, but a "Spirit giving life." The earthly history has found its complete fulness of meaning.

And thereupon follows the saying, whether it was Adam’s or not, which the apostle quotes and applies in the end of his exhortation:"for this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife:and they shall be one flesh." The argument and justification for those apparently foreign unions, is founded upon that original fitting of the woman to the man which was made by God Himself the basis of origin of the whole family relationship. Thus it retains its place as prior to and beyond all other.

But the apostle’s application is that with which we have here to do. He says of it:" This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church."

The mystery here then is spiritual, while God has manifested His interest in it by writing it out in natural hieroglyphics, impossible to be interpreted until He be pleased to give the key. "All these things happened unto them for types, and are written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages are come." F. W. G.

(To be continued.)

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.

(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.

Child of my tenderest love, I know thy care;
Seek not to bear alone what I would share,
Strange though it seem to thee, I laid it there
With My own hand.

The burden presses sore, My child, I know,
Ofttimes thy bitter tears will overflow;
And thou dost wonder why I leave it so,
And yet love thee!

Think not I laid this on thee willingly,
Or that in wrath, I seek to punish thee.
Ah! no; My child is very dear to Me;
‘Tis for thy good.

Child of My love come near to Me, and I
Will help thee understand the reason why
I mixed for thee this cup of agony,
And caused thee pain.

Sometimes of late, I’ve missed thee from My side,
First in the morning, then at eventide.
Shall it be ever thus? Oh! wilt thou hide
Thyself from Me?

Have I not shown My readiness to bear
My portion of thy grief, thy pain, thy care?
Tell Me, My child, canst thou refuse to share
My sympathy?

It was for thee I left My home above,
Suffered on earth, then died, that I might prove
My true, unchangeable, undying love.
Could I do more?

Wilt thou not come, and find in Me thy rest?
Wilt thou not stay, and lean upon My breast?
Wilt thou not trust that My way is the best,
Child of My love?

Bring Me thy heaviest woes, and thou shalt see
How they will lose their weight when shared by Me;
Thou wilt prove the sweetness of My sympathy,
Child of My love. T. P.

" For the life of the flesh is in the blood:and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls:for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul" (Lev. 17:11.)

Nothing but blood, the precious blood
Of Christ, can purge the soul from sin;
He freely gave the cleansing flood,
And all are saved who trust therein.

"I will execute judgement .I am the Lord! . . . And the blood
shall be to you for a token . . . and when I see the blood, I will
pass over you."(Exodus xii:11, 12.)

It was redemption’s pledge of old,
Salvation’s token sent from heaven;
God said, "when I the blood behold,"
It stands for peace and sins forgiven!

"Neither is there salvation in any other:for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts iv:12.)

Nor name nor character will count,
For sin is purged by blood alone,
And Jesus’ veins supplied the fount,
The only stream that can atone.

"By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God:not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians ii:8, 9.)

And they who would atonement buy
With wealth or works, but build in vain;
"The soul that sinneth it shall die,"
Except the blood has cleansed the stain.

"And without shedding of blood is no remission. "(Heb. 9:22.)

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE. (John 3:16.)

Without the blood there cannot be
Remission from the guilt of sin,
But Calvary’s fount is flowing free
To any who will trust therein.
"God commendeth His love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. . . . Christ died for the ungodly. (Romans 5:8, 6.)

Unsaved one, now this word believe:
"For the ungodly Jesus died,"
And thus, through faith, the gift receive,
And "by the blood be justified."

Ye were not redeemed with corruptible things as silver and gold . . . but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot (1 Peter 1:18, 19).

Above the silver and the gold,
And all the wealth of worlds untold,
The precious blood of Jesus Christ
Is still the gift of love unpriced.

G. K.

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.

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.

Ques. 1. – What may we ask Christ our Lord for, and what God the Father?

Ans. – Cold exactness Is not so valuable in prayer, as ardent desire and simple faith. And yet there is a propriety In presenting certain petitions to our Lord and others to the Father. Doubtless many a Spirit-taught soul Is guided unintelligently. In general, all that pertains to the Church, its testimony, order, and ministry would be referred directly to the Head of the Church. Thus Paul, when afflicted and apparently hindered in his ministry, appealed to the Lord. Equally, when it is the need of the child, or confession or supplication, the Father would be addressed.

There should ever be care not to allow the thought that our Lord Jesus Is more accessible than the Father, – "the Father Himself loveth you;" and on the other hand, that the Lord la not equal with the Father.

In this connection also we may be allowed to point out a confusion in addressing the Godhead which surely It would be pleasing to our God to correct. It Is painful to hear the expression, " O Lord our Father," and thanks to the Father that He died for us.

Ques. 2. – Would you explain from God’s word what Is the nature of the meeting commonly called "The Prayer Meeting."

What place is there in it for teaching or exhortation, or for the preaching of the gospel?

If It is a prayer-meeting, should we not go with the expectation and desire that it should be really that? How is It that so few pray, of those who attend this meeting?

ANS.- The mariner of life in New Testament times was, of necessity, far simpler than in ours. While they had meetings in which either prayer, teaching, or exhortation might be prominent, there is no distinct mention of what we would call a prayer, or a reading meeting exclusively.

The general exhortation as to meetings-"not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together as the manner of some Is" (Heb. 10:25) -would be our warrant for meeting together for prayer or for any other godly purpose. There cannot be the least doubt, that prayer has a prominence In the descriptions of Christian life that is too often forgotten. " They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and In prayers" (Acts 49:42). This gives the general practice of the early Church. When special needs arose, as In the case of Peter’s imprisonment, there was unceasing prayer for His release, and at a meeting evidently for that purpose, he presented himself after his miraculous deliverance (Acts 12:1-19), particularly verse 12). At Philippi (Acts 16:10), we have what is the nearest approach to the thought of an exclusive prayer-meeting. This passage at any rate shows that prayer was the prominent feature at a meeting where even such a teacher as (he apostle Paul was present. We would gather from these and other scriptures, together with the general tone of the New Testament, that while there was no special meeting so designated, the prayer-meeting was the characteristic feature of the gatherings of God’s people.

And what could be more natural? They were weak and helpless, and felt it; Ignorant, and knew whence wisdom came. Certainly they would pray, both as individuals and as companies of Christians. Our shame Is that we feel our weakness and Ignorance so little, and that, we have little doubt, lies at the root of the lack of prayer and Its answer. If we feel this, surely we can take courage to believe God is awakening us.

As to the remedy, it must be a divine one which awakens the saints to a sense of their need. We do not believe any arrangements of man can do this. We may call it a prayer meeting, but that will not make it one. Felt need, earnest desire, a simple faith,- these will make the gatherings of the saints real seasons for prayer. We do not believe that any rule, written or understood, can give its true character to this meeting. The Spirit of God must be unhindered in His holy work of leading us in prayer, praise, exhortation, or whatever may be called for.

On the other hand, we believe with our correspondent, that there is great danger of neglect of united prayer. Surely, with all the occasion there is for it, it becomes us to be much in believing prayer for "grace to help." Sad it is indeed, with all our needs, personal and corporate, with all the Lord’s work that should be done,-to see saints sit mute, or engage in what seems so little to be the "effectual fervent prayer of the righteous." How is it, in our assemblies, the voice of some is never heard in prayer? May there not be a subtle pride at the root of this- the feeling that we cannot pray as long or as eloquently as others? God forbid that such thoughts should prevail. The Pharisees, "fora pretense," made long prayers, and all those prayers recorded in the New Testament, even our Lord’s matchless one in John 17:, are brief; while many a needy one uttered his petition in a sentence or two:"Lord, help me;" "Lord, save me; " " Thou Son of David, have mercy on me." We long to see a spirit of deep earnestness in every saint, that will express itself in such pungent brief petitions. May there be thus many brief prayers, rather than a few lengthy ones. Far be it from us to criticize. Thank God for much real prayer; but do we not all feel our lack in this matter?

Where there is a real spirit of prayer, it will unquestionably be a prominent feature of the meeting; but how sweetly will a suited word of exhortation and encouragement suit with the prayer. As to a word of gospel at a meeting for prayer, it would hardly be suitable, unless the unconverted were present in such numbers as to warrant our turning particularly to them. We are to remember that the strongest testimony to the unsaved is the manifest presence of God in the midst of His gathered people. (1 Cor. 14:23-25.)

May our God awaken us as to our need in this matter, stirring us up to true prayer as never before. What joyous thanksgiving would soon mingle with the supplications!

(Concluded.)

4. THE TARES, THE WHEAT, AND THE HARVEST.

Mr. Brown brings forward in further proof the Scripture statements as to the end of the age and the harvest; but these we shall better consider as more fully taken up by another writer, B. W. Newton,* to whose arguments I therefore turn. *"Five Letters on Events predicted in Scripture as antecedent to the Coming of the Lord."* The parable of the wheat and tares will come before us in this connection, and he believes it decisive as to the whole question before us. I think it will be found that all depends as to this upon how the parable is to be explained. But we must go carefully through his arguments which touch many questions and a considerable range of prophetic scripture. He says:-

"I have long felt the parable of the tares to be quite conclusive of the question we are considering …. Whatever else may be true, the Lord’s explanation of the parable must certainly stand. We have in it a period definitely, and I might also say, chronologically marked, commencing with the sowing of the Son of man, and ending with the separation of the children of the wicked one. It is said that this separation shall not take place until the harvest; consequently until the harvest the field has some wheat in it. ‘Let both grow together until the harvest.’ No words could be more plain than these. They could not grow together until the harvest, if all, or even some of the wheat were gathered in many years before the tares were fully ripened; and they will not fully ripen until the time of Antichrist; indeed, it is expressly said that the tares are to be gathered first; and let it be remembered that not one tare is gathered except by angels sent forth; not one is gathered except at the time of harvest; not one is gathered without being rooted up; that is, taken out of the world. The meaning of the gathering of the tares is not left to our conjecture, but is explained by the Lord Himself:‘As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be at the end of this age. The Son of man shall send forth His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom’ [this is the explanation of the gathering] ‘all things that offend and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire:’ this is the explanation of the burning. The wheat and the tares are to grow together until this is done ….

" How can any one doubt after reading this parable that the saints of this dispensation (for to them alone the name of wheat, as contrasted with tares, belongs) will continue in the world together with the professing visible body until the end of the age, that is the harvest? for it must be remembered that the harvest is not said to be in the end of the age, but that the harvest is the end of the age." (Pp. 18-20.)

This is the whole of Mr. Newton’s argument; which he defends, however, at the close of his pamphlet from objections drawn in part from some very natural mistakes as to his doctrine, which will serve to keep us from falling into them, while some of them with his answers we shall have to consider further on.

First of all, as to the "end of the age," a term which we have already considered, and which is of very great significance in relation to the whole matter before us:he guards us from the mistake that he takes it to be "one definite moment, marked by one event, and that the saints remain until it is entirely over and passed away." He regards it "as the name of a certain period, perhaps a considerably lengthened period, during which many events will occur. But this period," he remarks, "must have a beginning, and as soon as ever that beginning comes, we may say, ‘the end of the age ‘ has come … I have never said that the saints will remain on the earth until the end of the end of the age." (P. 95.)

One may agree then thoroughly with this, that the saints of the present time will remain upon earth, neither resurrection nor rapture will take place, until the end of the age arrives. The Lord’s concluding words in Matthew are alone sufficient proof of this:" Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the age." Nay, more, they should make us also expect that this would be the precise measure of the time in which we should need such an assurance. When the end of the age arrives, we may infer that the period of the Church’s stay upon earth will have reached its limit, and His coming to take us to Himself will be no more delayed.

It has been already shown that the "end of the age " can in no way be taken as the end of the Christian age; for there is no such age:times and seasons are now not being reckoned, but we live in a gap of time, a blank in Old Testament prophecy, which has Israel always in the foreground. Israel it is that is to "blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit " (Isa. 27:6). Israel then being nationally set aside, it is not hard to realize that all is at a stand as far as this is concerned, until she is again taken up.

What, then, must be the significance of times beginning again which are specifically times determined upon Israel to bring her into blessing! Such times we find in Daniel’s seventy weeks, which are to end with this, sixty-nine having already passed when Messiah the Prince having come and being cut off, the downfall and ruin of the nation followed, and all was indefinitely suspended. The one week that remains is naturally and necessarily therefore the end of the age, the last seven years of these determined times. The beginning of this period means that God’s thoughts have once more returned to Israel; consequently, that the Church period is just at an end. With the beginning, therefore, of the end of the age, the hour strikes for her removal to heaven.

Of all this Mr. Newton has nothing to say. For him the Church and the remnant of Israel are found side by side during at least a considerable time towards the end of the Christian age, as he considers it,-a view which we have to consider presently. We have seen already, however, how differently the whole structure of the book of Revelation speaks. But the Lord’s words:"So shall it be at the end of this age; the Son of man shall send forth His angels and they shall gather together out of His Kingdom," show that now the Kingdom of the Son of man is come, and the present time of the Son upon the Father’s throne is already over.

But this is the Lord’s interpretation of the parable, and not the parable itself, which ends short of any actual coming of the harvest. The householder tells his servants what will take place when the time of harvest shall have come, but this is when he is comforting them for their own impotence in undoing the mischief that has been done. They are not competent to remove the tares that have been sown amongst the wheat:but angel hands shall do it effectually at a future time. The time is future:the action of the parable does not go on to it.

Notice now another thing:the interpretation of the parable is cut off from the parable itself, and begins a second section of the whole series, which is thus divided, as commonly with a septenary series, into four and three. Four is the number of the world, and the first four parables, as spoken in the presence of the multitude, give us the public or world-aspect of the Kingdom in the eyes of men; and not one of them goes on in its action to the end. The three parables which follow (the number being that of divine manifestation) give us on the other hand what is told to disciples in the house; and in them we have the divine side, the secrets whispered in the ear of faith. Thus the parable of the treasure gives us the purpose of God as to Israel; that of the pearl, the Church in its preciousness to Christ; that of the net, the going forth of the everlasting gospel among the nations after the Church period is over.* *"See for a full detail, "The Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven," or the notes on Matt. 13:in the "Numerical Bible."* It is with this second series that the interpretation of the second parable has its place, and thus we come in it to the "end of the age," as in the last parable of the draw-net; for we are in both beyond the present time. The interpretation, therefore, carries us beyond the present, and we must not hastily assume that the gathering the tares out of the Kingdom and casting them into the fire is simply the equivalent of the expressions in the parable itself. Indeed upon the face of them they are not so:gathering into bundles to be burnt is not the same as the actual burning, though it may be preparatory to it; just as again the gathering the wheat into the barn is not the equivalent of the righteous shining forth as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. Mr. Newton even allows this, although he does not carry the difference out sufficiently, as we see by the answer he makes to an objection. The Lord Himself explains, he says, the gathering of the tares [into bundles] as gathering out of His Kingdom all things that offend. And to the objector who urges that "All the tares being burned before the saints are caught up at all, nothing remains to be judged," he answers, "I have never said that the tares would be burned before the saints are caught up. I make a distinction between gathering them into bundles, and burning them." (P. 100.) This is true, but how far does the distinction go? for he says of the gathering, "Not one is gathered without being rooted up; that is, taken out of the world." Thus the objection is not really met:for the meaning would be the same if it were put:" All the tares being rooted up out of the world before the saints are caught up, nothing remains to be judged (on earth)." Then his only reply would be what follows:"Even if the tares were all burned," (or rooted out of the world), "there yet remain Jews, Apostates, Heathen Nations, to be judged." (P. 100.)

He says again:" ‘Gathering’ does of itself imply removal from the field; for the reason given for allowing the tares to grow with the wheat until the harvest is this, ‘Lest while ye gather (συλλεγω,-the same word) the tares, ye root up the wheat with them." (P. 101.) Thus the tares he takes to be really rooted up out of the world as the first thing; then the wheat being gathered into the barn, the field of Christendom is entirely empty.
Before we go on to consider what he says is left in this case as objects of the judgments afterwards, let us see if this idea of gathering as rooting out of the world be in this case warranted.

We are told in the parable that the servants of the householder, as soon as they discerned the tares among the wheat, inquired if they should go and gather them up. Are we to suppose that their question meant, should they root them up out of the world – exterminate them? No doubt, Romanists have attempted to do so, and illustrated the inability to separate the tares from the wheat; but is that what the servants wished really to suggest? had they no thought but of killing the heretics that had come in among the orthodox? Alas! the tares were found much earlier than the time in which the Christians could have used or thought of using the arm of flesh to accomplish such, a purification; and they must have sought it in other ways than by carnal weapons which both our Lord and His apostles so emphatically condemn. Was it not, in fact a rectification of the Kingdom which they desired, rather than of the world? a kingdom which, however easy it may be for us now, primitive Christians would never have thought of identifying with the world, or any portion of the world!

May not this put us upon the track of what the gathering of the tares would mean in the interpretation? Of course, before harvest-time the riddance of the mischief could only be by the hand, and then rooting up would be what would take place. But at harvest-time it would not be so. Reaping would be ordinarily at least with the sickle, and there would not be rooting up at all. Rather it would be a severing from the root that would take place, which might imply a separation from the doctrinal faith, of the heretic from his heresy, but not for good, so that apostasy would be the outcome. Angelic hands might accomplish the severance,-events might take place even which would make it impossible to retain the heresy; the apostasy would be their own. Thus two of Mr. Newton’s classes would be one:a thing which Rev. 17:would indicate as probable, and which would naturally lead to the Beast throwing off the woman, and the kings of the Roman earth helping to destroy her. The "strong delusion" of 2 Thess. looks exactly in the same direction, except Mr. Newton has proof that the professing Christians that fall into the snare of Antichrist are not "tares." Certainly the present antichristian systems should furnish followers for the Antichrist to come; and his rise in connection with the great head of the revived Roman empire, must make us think of Romanism and kindred systems as those out of which the great mass of these followers come. Are not these tares, who become apostates? if not, what else?

It is easy to see, then, why Mr. N. should have to speak as he does of the great book of prophecy in the New Testament. "I see comparatively little," he says, " about the judgment on the tares in the Revelation; it appears to me to be concerned almost entirely with the means which lead to the consummation and the consummation itself of Apostasy. But that apostasy is the result not merely of Christianity first them." (P. 101.) Thus the tares he takes to be really rooted up out of the world as the first thing; then the wheat being gathered into the barn, the field of Christendom is entirely empty.

Before we go on to consider what he says is left in this case as objects of the judgments afterwards, let us see if this idea of gathering as rooting out of the world be in this case warranted.

We are told in the parable that the servants of the householder, as soon as they discerned the tares among the wheat, inquired if they should go and gather them up. Are we to suppose that their question meant, should they root them up out of the world – exterminate them? No doubt, Romanists have attempted to do so, and illustrated the inability to separate the tares from the wheat; but is that what the servants wished really to suggest? had they no thought but of killing the heretics that had come in among the orthodox? Alas! the tares were found much earlier than the time in which the Christians could have used or thought of using the arm of flesh to accomplish such, a purification; and they must have sought it in other ways than by carnal weapons which both our Lord and His apostles so emphatically condemn. Was it not, in fact a rectification of the Kingdom which they desired, rather than of the world? a kingdom which, however easy it may be for us now, primitive Christians would never have thought of identifying with the world, or any portion of the world!

May not this put us upon the track of what the gathering of the tares would mean in the interpretation? Of course, before harvest-time the riddance of the mischief could only be by the hand, and then rooting up would be what would take place. But at harvest-time it would not be so. Reaping would be ordinarily at least with the sickle, and there would not be rooting up at all. Rather it would be a severing from the root that would take place, which might imply a separation from the doctrinal faith, of the heretic from his heresy, but not for good, so that apostasy would be the outcome. Angelic hands might accomplish the severance,-events might take place even which would make it impossible to retain the heresy; the apostasy would be their own. Thus two of Mr. Newton’s classes would be one:a thing which Rev. 17:would indicate as probable, and which would naturally lead to the Beast throwing off the woman, and the kings of the Roman earth helping to destroy her. The "strong delusion" of 2 Thess. looks exactly in the same direction, except Mr. Newton has proof that the professing Christians that fall into the snare of Antichrist are not "tares." Certainly the present antichristian systems should furnish followers for the Antichrist to come; and his rise in connection with the great head of the revived Roman empire, must make us think of Romanism and kindred systems as those out of which the great mass of these followers come. Are not these tares, who become apostates? if not, what else?

It is easy to see, then, why Mr. N. should have to speak as he does of the great book of prophecy in the New Testament. "I see comparatively little," he says, "about the judgment on the tares in the Revelation; it appears to me to be concerned almost entirely with the means which lead to the consummation and the consummation itself of Apostasy. But that apostasy is the result not merely of Christianity first perverted and then renounced, it is also the apostasy of man as man (‘worship him who made the earth), and also of the Jew; a threefold combination of Apostasy." No intelligent student of prophecy doubts the combination of other elements with it; but what is this "Christianity perverted, and then renounced," but virtually tares becoming apostates?

Nay, but, says Newton, "I also see that angels and not saints, are sent to the Tares, whereas saints come with the Lord against Apostates." "On the Tares [judgment] is by angels sent forth while they are growing quietly with the wheat." Certainly in this manner we can make plenty of oppositions, by comparing things that cannot rightly be compared. A wheat-field is, no doubt, a very image of quietness; but one may well doubt whether that is what we are meant to gather from it. And angels come with Christ against the apostates; as Mr. Newton himself says:" ‘His army,’ 1:e. saints and angels." (P. 93.) As to the exact part each may have in the judgment, Revelation does not seem to say.

But to return to the parable:the binding in bundles must come after the reaping, if the figure is to be preserved. Would one naturally think of it as something to follow death? If so, one can hardly expect to translate it into any distinct meaning. If, on the other hand, the tares (though dead as tares) are still viewed as in the field of the world, then we may imagine a various compacting of men loosened from the hold of their religious systems, in ways that are not pointed out, but which lead them on toward their final doom. The gathering out of the Kingdom of the Son of man, as in the interpretation of the parable, goes, I believe, further than this:for the Kingdom of the Son of man is not local, but over the whole earth. It is a gathering after that of the parable itself, and immediately to judgment.

Mr. Newton’s own interpretation is different in so many respects from this, that there would be little profit in proportion to the labor of any extended comparison. For him the end of the age is the Christian age, and although in the tract from which I have quoted, he allows that the "end" may be "a considerably lengthened period," yet elsewhere he charges those with endeavoring to avoid the force of the argument from this parable, who suggest that "the end of the age may mean an indefinitely (?) lengthened period." He replies that it is definitely marked as "the harvest," quotes the interpretation of the parable as if the gathering and casting of the tares into the fire were the whole matter, and asks, "Is Antichrist to arise after this? "

But we shall apprehend his system better when we have reviewed his arguments as to the Jewish and Christian remnants at the time of the end.

5.THE SAINTS IN THE TRIBULATION, WHO ARE THEY?

We have already briefly considered the structure of the book of Revelation, and the evidence that it gives us as to the change of dispensation that is impending. The argument is a connected one of many arguments combined. We have in the first chapter the Lord in the midst of the candlesticks, the Christian assemblies. In the addresses to these which follow in the next two chapters, emphasized in each case by a solemn appeal for our attention, we find what is in fact the history of the Church of God on earth. As they progress from the address to Thyatira onwards, the promise or the warning of His coming is more and more enforced; ending with the threat of Laodicea being spued out of His mouth, and immediately after this a Voice as of a trumpet calls, and the apostle is caught up to heaven.

There he sees thrones around the throne of God, -a throne of judgment circled by the bow of God’s covenant with the earth; and, while the company of kings and priests sing their redemption song to the Lamb slain, he is told that this is Judah’s Lion-the King of the Jews-who has prevailed to open the book. We look upon the earth again as the book is being opened; judgments are being poured out upon it; there are saints there still and martyrs; presently a company sealed out of all the tribes of Israel; then an innumerable company of Gentiles also, but who have all come out of the great tribulation; by and by we see the actors in this,-the last beast of Daniel, and the lamb-like, dragon-voiced beast who leads men to worship him; times are reckoned, the half-weeks of the last week of Daniel; and looking on beyond the judgment of Babylon the Great, we see the marriage of the Lamb is come, and presently the Lamb Himself, with a glorious train of saints who follow Him, descends to the judgment of the earth.

Now this is simply the story of Revelation, with scarce a word of comment, and none needed, one would think, to make it plain. Through all this latter part we hear nothing of the Church of God on earth. The Lion of Judah opens the book; the book gives us Jewish scenes, Israel, Jerusalem, the time of Jacob’s trouble, the instruments of it, the false woman and her doom, until after the marriage of the Lamb, He comes with His saints from heaven. Does this fit with Mr. Newton’s views, or Mr. Brown’s, or Dr. West’s, or with that view which they all oppose? What have they to say about it? what arguments do they use against it? I can only speak as far as my knowledge goes, but as far as I know, they use no arguments; they simply ignore it. They give us proofs of their views, or what they conceive proofs, from Revelation, as from other parts of Scripture; but face this long line of witnesses they do not. We have seen what has been so far offered; we are going on still to see what Mr. Newton offers; but it is well to keep in mind how much of positive testimony for the views they are opposing they leave aside.

Mr. Newton hopes he may now assume, upon the warrant of the parables of the Tares and of the Fishes, and the Lord’s parting words in Matthew, that saints marked by the characteristics of the present dispensation will be found on the earth until the end. He urges that their testimony will be most needed, and suffering most glorious in the times preceding the end. He finds that "On all past occasions of destroying judgments, whether on Sodom, or the world at the flood, or on Egypt, or on Jerusalem, some testified and suffered, though all were removed before the threatened judgment fell. He urges also that "all who have thus testified have not been either ignorant of or enemies to the truth peculiar to the dispensation that was closing in; for how then could they have testified at all?" (P. 25.)

He does not notice the Lord’s assurance to Philadelphian overcomers that He would keep them "out of the hour of temptation which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth " (Rev. 3:10), nor that the tribulation to come at the end is "Jacob’s trial," although it may involve others also, as we have seen. He does not understand that the end of the age is not part of the present dispensation, but the time of darkness covering the earth, and gross darkness the peoples, when the light begins to dawn on Israel (Isa. 60:), and that God’s testimony for that time is an Elias one (Mal. 4:5- Rev. 11:3-6,) and not that of the Church.
He does not know that he can ‘’ find with any degree of accuracy the extent of this testimony "(!), and that on account of that of which he does not know the signification, that "the recorded facts of prophecy have always Jerusalem for their center;" and he needs to remind us that "a Christian in Jewish circumstances is a Christian still"!

Another strange thing is that he has to go to Old Testament scriptures for the main part of his proof of Christians giving this testimony, and to justify what seems strange in this, he has to refer to Rom. 16:25, 26, taking, as many do, the "prophetic scriptures" there, as being those of the Old Testament prophets. (Comp. Eph. 3:5.) He illustrates this by types, however, which we should all admit, and some other passages which show a singular lack of knowledge of the calling of the Church which he says they reveal. But I cannot dwell on this.

From the Old Testament he brings forward Daniel. Here he interprets for us the "wise," who "instruct many" among the Jewish people, without being able to prevent their fall "by the sword, and by flame, by captivity and by spoil many days." This he calls, though we may well doubt it, "the moment of Jerusalem’s ratified desolation," and thinks we can be therefore at no loss to understand them to be "Christ and His servants; nor from that time forward would the Holy Spirit give the name of ‘understanding ones’ to any but those who acknowledged Him and had received His Spirit." But on the contrary, most commentators refer this to the Maccabees, and with apparent reason. We have not time to argue as to it, it is plain; but proof-text it can hardly be When all depends upon a very questionable interpretation. The "wise"or "understanding ones," with this special meaning forced upon them, are then found by him in the time of Israel’s great tribulation following; and so his point is proved. But to merge Christ among the "understanding ones" is certainly not the way of the Spirit of God; and the presence of Christians depends entirely upon this. On the other hand "the two witnesses" of Rev. 11:would certainly have this character of "wise," while as certainly they are not what we should now call Christians. All here is mere rash assertion and not proof.

That these understanding ones (as illustrated by the witnesses) will be worn out by the Little Horn, (identified at the last with the Beast itself,) is seen in Revelation, and being raised from the dead they will have a heavenly place contrasted with Israel’s earthly one. That these are, in fact, the saints of the high places, of whom Daniel speaks, and who are Mr. Newton’s next and remaining proof of Christians in Jerusalem, we have no need to question. He makes no distinction between "heavenly" and "Christian"; but he must certainly know that those he is opposing do make one, and that for them all that he gives for proof is entirely futile.

This closes his argument from the Old Testament:he passes on to Revelation, which he rightly takes as in its "central part" relating to the same period as (much of) Daniel. Here his first argument is from persons being mentioned "who keep the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus"; and again in chap. 14::"here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." No doubt there is difficulty in defining in any perfectly satisfactory way what either expression may mean. "The testimony of Jesus" is said, in the book of Revelation itself, to be "the spirit of prophecy" (19:10), and this will be found in the saints of those days. There is no excuse for confounding this with Church testimony. " The faith of Jesus " will be, no doubt, imperfect enough in the darkness of days from which the light of Christianity has disappeared, and the Spirit itself as now known and enjoyed in Christianity. I presume He will be known as Messiah, not in His own proper glory as Jehovah; and this will be the discovery that will bow them in humiliation and repentance, when they look upon Him whom they have pierced.

The next text (chap. 13:7), if parallel with Dan. 7:20, is nevertheless also, as we have seen, of no importance whatever for his argument.

Again, those on the sea of glass (chap. 15:2) are saints martyred under the beast, and having got victory over him in this way, and the passage in chap. 20:4-6, which Mr. Newton rightly associates with the former one, shows that such have their part in the first resurrection, and reign with Christ for the thousand years of the Kingdom. All this is very familiar truth to those whose views he is opposing; and he certainly must know it. There is nothing about the Church in either passage.

As a specimen of what a more minute interpretation would give, he adduces chap. 11:i, to urge that the worshipers in the temple of God (the sanctuary) must be Christians. In his argument he says rightly enough that the temple consisted of two inner courts, but speaks as though this were proof that for worshipers in it, the holiest of all must be accessible. There is no proof of it whatever. For the priest in Israel the veil was not rent, but he could worship in the temple in the outer holy place, and once a year the high priest went into the holiest. There is absolutely no token of Christian worship:the "clear evidence " of it, of which he speaks, does not exist.

But while all this is to him clear, the witness of the whole book of Revelation, as I have briefly given it, passes absolutely without notice. And yet when he wrote this he must have known quite well that it stood at least to be accounted for.

Of the Jewish remnant of the last days which according to Mr. Newton exists side by side with the Christian one he says:-

"They must have an intermediate standing:not Antichristian, for they would be consumed; not Christian, for then as suffering with and for Jesus, they would also reign with Him, and stand upon the sea of crystal in heavenly glory; whereas they are destined, after having passed through the fires from which the Christian remnant are altogether delivered, to be God’s witnesses on the earth:… I now request your attention to the following passages which show that this remnant is not owned by the Lord, nor has the spirit of grace and supplication poured on it, until after the Lord has appeared, and they have been carried through the day of His judgment" (Pp. 43, 44).

He quotes for this, first, Isa. 10:12, 20-22; of which he says:-

"The passage teaches us that they are not regarded as ‘ returning’ and ‘staying themselves ‘ upon the Lord, until after He has accomplished all His work upon Mount Zion and Jerusalem." (P. 45.)

I can only answer that to me it says nothing of the kind. It does say that in that day there will be no going back on the part of the saved remnant, to repeat the sad story of declension, so often recurring in the past. They "shall no more again stay upon him that smote them, but stay upon the Lord." Then the truth of their return is affirmed:"The remnant shall . . . unto the Mighty God. For though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall return." There is nothing about their only returning after God has accomplished His work. It does not mean that He delivers them in an unbelieving condition, and then they believe. That is certainly not God’s ordinary way of delivering, but to wake up a soul to faith and then answer it. Nothing contrary to that is said here.

The next passage is from Zech. 13::"And it shall come to pass that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined . . . they shall call on My name and I will hear them:I will say, It is My people, and they shall say, The Lord is my God." This expresses only the full confidence reached as the result of purification; but it is because they are "silver" He refines them. No one ever refined into silver what was not silver; and that is not what is done here.

The third passage, Zech. 12:9-13:i, shows undoubtedly that an amazing discovery is made by them when they look upon Him whom they have pierced; and I think that will be, as before said, when they realize their rejected Messiah to be Jehovah Himself. That they own Jesus as Messiah seems clear from the guidance given to them in His own prophecy of the end of the age (Matt. 24:); but the "Alan, Jehovah’s Fellow "may be yet unknown.

As to what is said about their having to believe nationally, and the nation being born in a day, Zion travailing and bringing forth, he is surely wrong in taking that as new birth, a truth of which as such the Old Testament never speaks. That at the time of their deliverance, the remnant will come to the birth, as the new nation of Israel, is true, and is what is meant by this. The implication that as individuals they were not born again before is unwarranted and false.

Again, the principle is a very simple one, that in the Psalms and prophetic Scriptures, we may take out all that is bright and happy and confident, and apply it to a Christian remnant, while we relegate all that is gloomy and querulous to a co-existing Jewish one. It is a short road to interpretation, but a most unsafe one. The Psalms, for instance, are expressive of the whole education and purification of a Jewish remnant, through all the trials of the latter days, until they are brought into full blessing. Of this the five psalms, from Ps. 3:to 7:, are an introductory epitome, which shows this very clearly. But they begin with faith (Ps. 3:), the joy of which they can contrast with the restless seeking of "any good" on the part of the ungodly around them (Ps. 4:). Here they reason and plead with these, but in the next, as the evil grows more determined, plead against them (Ps. 5:), assuring themselves of the distinction God will make between them and the wicked. But the gloom darkens and the shadow falls upon their own souls (Ps. 6:). The prevalence of the evil makes them dread divine displeasure, and the confidence they have had changes into a cry for mercy. In the seventh psalm the shadow passes, they can maintain again their innocence as far as their persecutors are concerned and look for divine intervention; which in the eighth is come.* This is only an introduction, of course, but it shows the character of the book, which the arbitrary invention of contrasted remnants completely destroys. *See the volume of the Psalms in the " Numerical Bible " for a full exposition.* All these fruitful exercises become but the wailings of unconverted men; all the expressions of faith belong to another people!

This is indeed a "higher criticism" of a peculiar kind, which by taking texts here and there and applying the moral test, putting in juxtaposition passages of diverse character, from different places, and apart from their context, can make it at least a tedious and difficult thing to expose its unsoundness. And this is made worse by misleading comments scattered here and there throughout, in which truth itself can be so applied as to give apparent countenance to what is error. Who would not agree, for instance, that "to suffer for righteousness’ sake in conscious fellowship of spirit with God, is something very different from .suffering penalty under the rebuke of His heavy hand "? But apply this to the case before us,-a remnant of converted people making part of a nation which as such is away from God, and going on to complete apostasy; suffering penalty thus, and involving these in their sufferings, who from sharing their guilt at first have been gradually awakened, with the light increasing for them, but allowed of God for their good to be thoroughly exercised as to everything. Plowed up as to their sin, they find their way amid the promises and threatenings of His word, without firm footing as to the gospel; and in a time of trouble such as never was! These various exercises, the conflicts of faith with unbelief, the many forms of trial, are given for their help, and for the help of multitudes in any similar ones, as poured out in the utterances of the Psalms and prophets. Think of a criticism like Mr. N’s, which ignores these varied and subtle differences, and makes it all a question of the highest Christian communion or of suffering penally! Why the Psalms are a human resolution largely-under the control and guidance of God-of problems of the most difficult character. Are they suffering penally? there is sometimes their perplexity. They reason upon it all round:the clouds break and return; but no:we are to use the scissors, it seems, separate what is not fit for the Christians, and give it to these poor, unconverted Jews! and the practical use and beauty of the Psalms are largely gone for us. How much shall we value the miserable experiences of mere unconverted men!

We may close then with this:for here is the rest of his argument, and we have no interest in following Mr. Newton’s further account of how, according to his thought, a Christian remnant is not found in Jerusalem at the last, which we have not been persuaded exists there at all. But it may not be without profit to have seen how destructive of Scripture at large is this system which makes hypothetical differences which do not exist, only to ignore those that are real and vital.

There is only one more point, therefore, that we need to. consider in this connection, and that is his argument from the eleventh of Romans. He says:-

" I would briefly notice these things:-

"1. That it speaks of Israel as blinded for a season by the judicial infliction of the hand of God. It is important to notice the judicial character which attaches to their being broken out of their olive-tree.

"2. The blindness thus judicially inflicted has never been, and never will be anything more than ‘in part’; that is, it has never rested on every individual in Israel, but there has ever been a seeing remnant. Some, not all, the Jewish branches, have been broken off.

" 3. The fact of there being a seeing remnant during the blindness of Israel, is a proof that Israel as a nation is still under the infliction of the hand of God.

"4. That this judicial infliction cannot be continued after the fulness of the Gentiles has come in."

Thus, he says, "it is proved beyond a doubt that Israel’s Antichristian period (when as a nation they be emphatically blinded, though there will be even then a seeing remnant) cannot be after the fulness of the Gentiles has come in. Observe, I do not say that as soon as all the elect Gentiles have been gathered in, all Israel will instantly be filled with light and knowledge; but this I affirm that the positive action of the hand of God in blinding them will not be continued after the period which He has been pleased to fix-1:e., when the fulness of the Gentiles shall have come in. Consequently, the period of their deepest and most fatal blinding cannot be after the period which He has fixed for the ceasing of His wrath against them. There can be no seeing remnant in judicially blinded Israel; no election out of Israel, and therefore no Antichristian period to Israel, after the fulness of the Gentiles has come in; therefore all such conditions of Israel must be before the fulness of the Gentiles has come in." (Pp. 63-65.)

Now, I apprehend that the writer has spoiled his own argument. For if he had maintained that, as soon as ever the fulness of the Gentiles had come in, all Israel would "instantly be filled with light and knowledge " that would have been consistent at least. But he could not say so; only that the positive action of the hand of God in blinding them will not continue. But that would seem to infer that there would or might be still a seeing remnant for awhile among them after the judicial blinding was removed. Let us see then what in fact takes place. The beginning of the " end of the age" or the last week of Daniel, shows that the fulness of the Gentiles has indeed come in; it shows also that the judicial hardening of Israel is at an end by this week being the return of times determined upon her to bring in her blessing. Israel is now going to be saved; and as a pledge of this, those now converted are no more brought into the Church, but remain Israelites, grafted back into their own olive-tree.

Yet this is the time of Antichrist, as Daniel and Revelation unite to show us, and the nation that is to be is refined and purified in a furnace of affliction. It is the remnant that becomes the nation, the rebels and apostates being separated and purged out. It is a mistake, surely, to look at Antichrist as a sign of the "nation" being "emphatically blinded," when in fact, it is Israel’s travail-time; and presently it will be found, when the followers of Antichrist have received their judgment, that "he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem, when the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment and by the spirit of burning" (Isa. 4:3; 4). The fulness of the Gentiles having come in, and so the end of the Church-period, is the very thing which allows this truly Jewish remnant to be formed, which is the nation in embryo, and to which Antichrist in Jerusalem is Satan’s power in opposition. The man of sin in the temple of God there, instead of showing that the judicial blinding of the nation is going on, shows that God is taking up Israel once more, and that the determined times are bringing on her blessing.

Christianity and Judaism, hopes heavenly and hopes earthly, the body of Christ in which is neither Jew nor Gentile, alongside of Jews and Gentiles (if the sheep and goats apply to these last),-all this owned of God alike and going on at one and the same time:this is Mr. Newton’s theory; the very statement of which might assure us that it is only theory. Scripture condemns it in every particular.

6.SECRECY, MANIFESTATION, AND SIGNS OF IMMINENCE.

All that remains to be considered can be stated in few words. As to the secrecy of the rapture of the saints, it is a point of small importance, reached only by inference, and need not be discussed at all. It is "when Christ our Life shall appear," that "we shall appear, (or be manifested) with Him in glory" (Col. 3:4). Thus we may argue that we shall not be manifested before. But it affects no point of all that we have been looking at, so far as I am aware, however it be decided.

As to the manifestation, or appearing, or revelation of Christ, it is that which is most largely spoken of in Scripture, as we might expect, for various reasons.

1. It is that which connects itself with prophecy and the blessing of the earth. It is the rising of the Sun of righteousness in contrast with the simple heavenly radiance of the Morning Star.

2. It connects thus with the rights of Christ as to the earth, the place of His rejection.

3. It connects with the rewards given to His people, so far at least as these have to do with the kingdom and its displayed glory. And thus we can understand that we are to "wait" for it, as that in which every one will "receive his praise from God." Timothy’s being exhorted to "keep the commandments without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of Jesus Christ" (i Tim. 6:14), while often urged to the contrary, in fact shows how such things are to be taken. The appearing is the goal of responsibility; the time between this and the end of the path here would not affect the matter of the exhortation; and no one would contend that the apostle meant to guarantee that Timothy would live until the appearing.
Signs are all connected with the appearing necessarily, but yet so far as they are manifested, will only be more forcible for those who are expecting to be with the Lord before it. We are not taught that we need them, but are not certainly to ignore what is before our eyes. Times we cannot reckon, inasmuch as we are in that gap of prophetic time in which all Christianity has its place. Our Lord has also given us warning with regard to this (Acts 1:7). In the same passage we find Him telling His disciples that they were to be His witnesses "to the ends of the earth." That this and other declarations implied some lapse of time before His return is undoubted. We must remember, of course, that this did not imply for them what it does for us, and that Augustus Caesar could command "all the world" to be taxed (Luke 2:i). In the parables of the talents (Matt. 25:19) "after a long time" the absent lord returns and reckons with his servants; but it is with the same servants whom he left when he went away. Nothing hints to us as a delay of generations long. We are in other circumstances, in a world that widens no more, looking back over the Church’s history as Revelation has at last unfolded it to us, and finding ourselves certainly near the close, and how near we cannot say. Is there another page yet to be written? We do not know; but certainly of all men that ever lived we should be " as men that wait for their Lord." A clear view gained of what is prophesied as to the end, with the knowledge of what the Church of God is, and its place amid the dispensations, will make all else clear as to what in this respect may not have been considered. F. W. G.

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."

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.

Daniel, as his name suggests, is the Gentile prophet. In this book we are in the times of the Gentiles. It is, as you see, the fourth in the list, corresponding thus to the book of Numbers, the wilderness or world book. We have not to do primarily with Israel at all.

The scene is laid in distant Babylon, which has usurped the place of Jerusalem and with Nebuchadnezzar as king, instead of one of the descendants of David. We have the concerns of the nations of the earth, but just so far as they refer to God’s purposes.

There are many very instructive features in this book. Let us notice that just as the book of Numbers has in one of its earliest chapters that which characterizes, or should do so, the people as seen in that book-in the place and testimony of the Nazarite-so you have in the first chapter of Daniel the Nazarite place. When you come to the putting of the children of God in the world, and to the question as to how we are to walk in it, what is the first great principle that is to guide us? Numbers tells us.

In the sixth chapter of that book, a man to be a true pilgrim, a true and faithful witness for God in this world, must be a Nazarite; he must be separated from that by which he is surrounded. Abraham was the typical pilgrim, and he was the man who lived in a tent, isolated from others. In like manner, Lot is presented to us as the child of God typically linked with the world, defiled by it, his testimony destroyed and he himself saved only as by fire.

Nazariteship is the only power by which we can walk in this world for God, if we are to be a testimony for Him. If His name is to be honored by us, it must be absolutely by our separation from everything that would defile, degrade, and drag us down. How often has the lamp of testimony been quenched by the Lord’s people being mingled with the world, by our living here as those who have interests and objects in common with the world.

I say again, in Numbers you have the key-note of the whole book in that chapter on the Nazarite-separation in the midst of defilement. And here in the book of Daniel, the book where the world is going to lift its head and show its power, where we are going to have spread before us the history of the Gentile nations, the very key to it all is, the Nazariteship of Daniel and his brethren in the court of the king of Babylon. Think of that young man taken from Jerusalem-Jerusalem itself all in ruins -transferred to the very courts of the king of Babylon, the first nation of the earth; Babylon itself the first city of the earth, with all that would attract, all that would appeal to the natural man, and he himself there introduced not into some humble inferior position, but to be one of the attendants about the king himself; to be in the very line of promotion, to make a success of his life. And what does he do? The first thing he does is to cut the line that would link him with the throne of Babylon; he separates himself absolutely from everything that partakes of the character of Babylon. " Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile himself with the portion of the king’s meat;" and in that purpose of heart I trace the success-if 1 may use such a word-of his life down here for God. In that separation from the dainties of the king of Babylon, the pleasures and the allurements of that world-city,-I trace the secret of those wondrous revelations that God gave to Daniel.

For an illustration of the same thing take John in the book of Revelation, where he has opened up to him a still wider vision, where his eye takes in not only the earth, but the heavens, not only time but eternity; takes in the whole range of God’s dealing with men, and His purposes in connection with His blessed Son. What is the key-thought of that book? "I was in the island that is called Patmos, for the word of God and the testimony of Jesus." Separate from all the glory and power of this world, John the lonely prisoner, in isolation, sees visions which no mortal eye can see; hears words that none but the anointed ear can hear, and opens to us the revelation of all the ways of God, introducing us into eternity itself.

Do you want to understand prophecy? Do you want to stand upon the pinnacle from whence you can look over all the kingdoms of this world, and the glory of them? Do you remember One who stood upon the mountain top and looked over all that glory, all that splendor of this world and its kingdoms, unmoved, un-attracted by it? It was the blessed Son of God; and when Satan pointed out all to Him, and offered to put it into His hands, that blessed One, the true Nazarite, in heart separate from it all, would have none of it until His Father gave it to Him. So, I say, the Nazarite heart, the Nazarite position, the Nazarite separation in heart from the things of the world that would defile and clog, is the only proper spirit in which to come to and understand prophecy.

Prophecy is for the heart. I know nothing more deadening, nothing more injurious to our spiritual welfare than to be occupied with prophecy in a cold intellectual way. Look at the apostle Paul in the eleventh chapter of Romans. He has been unfolding God’s dealings with Israel and with the Gentiles in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters. He has been quoting Scripture proof-texts as to prophecy, foretelling the time when Israel as a nation will be restored to the Lord; but, it is his heart that has been kindled by these things. His heart takes them up, and as he gets through with his subject, he bursts out in praise, "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! " If we are in true Nazarite spirit occupied with these prophetic subjects, we will find that they introduce us into the sanctuary of God Himself, to be occupied with Himself, praising and worshiping.-(Extracted from one of the Lectures which are being published in "TREASURY OF TRUTH.")

I have only one precious word to say to you:keep close to Jesus, you know you will find there joy, strength, and that consciousness of His love which sustains everywhere and makes everything else become nothing; there is our life and our happiness. J. N. D.

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. 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).

The glory of the gospel is its freeness. Without any "works of righteousness," the helpless and guilty sinner who believes in Jesus is justified and has eternal life. All efforts or struggles to gain salvation are a dishonor to Him who

"fought the fight alone"

and won the victory for His people. Of this we need scarcely be more than reminded in taking up a subject that speaks not of rest, but of conflict, and is the legitimate result of the rest obtained through the gospel.

But there is a conflict which though, alas! frequent is neither necessary nor proper for the Christian to be engaged in-not necessary unless his own neglect has made it so. We mean that conflict with the flesh, with sin in us, which comprises so much of the history of God’s dear people. It will be remembered that the first mention we have of Amalek as a hostile power is in connection with the strife and chiding of the children of Israel at Meribah, because they had no water. " Then came Amalek and fought with Israel at Rephidim " (Ex. 17:7-16). It was when they began to murmur, to be discontented with their pilgrim way through the wilderness, that the "lusts of the flesh" began to war against them. The connection of a passage upon this point in Deuteronomy is significant. (Chap. 25:17-19) "Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way, when ye were come forth out of Egypt, how he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, even all that were feeble behind thee, when thou wast faint and weary.

Feebleness of a spiritual nature is always blameworthy. Here was a mighty host, brought up out of Egypt, and in the eye of God, yea, and to sight, "there was not one feeble person among their tribes" (Ps. 105:37). Their feebleness was shown in the lack of faith and earnest purpose to press forward. The stragglers in the rear were attacked by the enemy; had they been pressing forward they would have had the vigor to resist such an attack, and at the same time it would not have been offered. Their bold front would have compelled the enemy to keep his distance.

So is it at all times. When in the vigor and joy of faith we press forward," forgetting the things which are behind," the eye fixed on Christ, the very first appearance of the lusts of the flesh will be met with such firmness that there will be little need for those fierce hand-to-hand conflicts with it, which, as we said, make up so much of the record of our lives.

The subsequent history of Amalek affords much material for careful thought upon this subject. It will be found that they were not, in the full sense of the word, inhabitants of the land of Israel’s inheritance, though they did dwell-some of them-in the south of Canaan (Num. 13:29), the border district next the wilderness. Strictly they were children of the desert and did most of their fighting there.

Broadly, then, it is when "as living in the world " that we are more particularly exposed to the attacks of what answers to Amalek. On the other hand they did make raids into the land, alone and in conjunction with other enemies, but it was always when Israel had been unfaithful. Let us look briefly at some of these attacks.

They were the allies (Judges 5:14)* of Jabin, king of Hazor and of Sisera, in the memorable resuscitation of the northern foe who had been so effectually extirpated by Joshua 130 years previously. *As this may not be evident to many, we add a note that the Revised Version renders the verse referred to, "They whose root is in Amalek," describing the situation of Ephraim as in chap. 12:15. We are not clear as to this rendering. The LXX. renders it, "Ephraim rooted them out in Amalek." Most certainly the presence of the name is suggestive, and the spiritual meaning of what has been said is clear.* Spiritual foes never "die," except to faith, and only remain dead as that faith is in exercise. The whole book of Judges is a sad comment upon the failure of the people to go forward and to hold fast what they had gained. On the contrary, they departed from the living God, and so He must let them taste the fruits of their own ways. "Thine own wickedness shall correct thee, and thy backslidings shall reprove thee:know, therefore, and see that it is an evil thing and bitter, that thou hast forsaken the Lord thy God, and that My fear is not in thee" (Jer. 2:19). Solemn words indeed which may well be prayerfully pondered by any tempted to depart even in thought from the fullest communion with our God.

We shall see presently what Jabin seems to signify, and only mention here that this second conflict with him is complicated with the league of Amalek. Wherever failure comes in, there we find not merely error to contend with, but the flesh in league with it. When one who has known God takes up any untruth, we have not simply to disabuse his mind of his error, but, alas! to overcome the pride of his flesh which ‘has now leagued itself with that error.

In like manner, when the Midianites who had been "vexed," for their corruption of Israel with their abominations (Num. 25:16-18; 31:2-12), were permitted to make such a fearful inroad upon Israel, and to settle upon the land as locusts, Amalek was with them. Midian may suggest by its name – "strife"-that warring of the lusts in the members which is so common in the world. And now they are leagued with Amalek their natural allies, to make the bondage more complete and intolerable. Barak and Gideon are the champions who can meet such allied hosts and conquer them.

King Saul met his doom with Amalek. He began well (i Sam. 14:48), but when sent to completely extirpate them, spared the best "to sacrifice to the Lord." Saul is the man after the flesh, and he will spare the flesh. It is David who is the true and final victor (i Sam. 27:8)-type of Him who triumphs over the flesh by displacing it. So much is this the case that when David slipped and had leagued himself with the Philistines, Amalek came in and carried all he had captive (i Sam. 30:i).

We trust that what is suggested here will open up a subject for the thoughtful reader who will develop it from Scripture-the rise and progress of Amalek as an enemy of God’s people. But we must pass on to that which is the theme more directly before us.
The conflict in the seventh of Romans is one which should soon be over. The walk in the liberty and power of the Spirit is the secret of deliverance from the power of the flesh. But there is another conflict, in Ephesians, which is a constant and necessary exercise of soul. To be warring with Amalek is a sign that spiritual decrepitude has come in; to contend with the "seven nations" of Canaan is the mark of spiritual vigor. ."We wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places;" or, as more correctly, " against the universal lords of this darkness, against spiritual [hosts] of wickedness in the heavenlies."

Not to delay long over a simile familiar doubtless to all our readers, we simply mention here the well-known correspondence between the conflict in Ephesians and that in the book of Joshua. It is not the fact, which all would doubtless accept, that we would dwell on, but the application of that fact to some lessons which we believe may be fairly gathered from the account of those conflicts.

We will briefly gather up the teachings of the first part of the book which lead to the conflicts. The land is first of all given to them and then they are encouraged to go in and fight for it, to take possession of that which is their own. " Be strong, and of good courage " is the word here (chap. i). Next, the spies go over to Jericho-faith which looks at difficulties, not for discouragement, but for guidance, and finds opportunities thus to be the bearer of good news to any who may desire it (chap. 2:). Following this, we come to that which is the great type of the book- the passage of the Jordan, death and resurrection with Christ. Here the ark goes first; Christ must be alone in that which has stopped the waters of death and of judgment for His redeemed. Then His people follow; and in the two heaps of stones, in the bed of the river and at Gilgal,-we have, respectively, our identification with Christ in His death and resurrection. Gilgal is our making this truth a practical reality to ourselves, in order to learn the great lesson of "no confidence in the flesh." Gilgal is the place of power; when we are there the enemy quails; the people, as it were, enter into a new covenant with God. Here the manna ceases, and they eat the stored corn of the land,-treasures of Christ in glory laid up for His people’s food. At Gilgal they are brought face to face with the "Captain of the Lord’s host" (chaps, 3:-5:).

It is the entrance, in somewhat of reality and spiritual power, into these preliminary lessons which makes possible the subsequent course of victory corresponding with Joshua’s career. Alas! beloved brethren, have we not all cause for confession, as we smoothly glide over the surface of these amazing themes? We can talk, perhaps, quite well of "death and resurrection," "Gilgal," "old corn of the land," but are they substantial realities to our souls? If so, we are prepared to go on into actual conflict. And it is here that we would seek to point out more particularly what suggested the theme of this paper.

Jericho means "fragrance," and it typifies this world in its attractiveness, which lies at the very gateway to the land. Spiritually, there cannot be any attainment in the true knowledge of our inheritance as long as the world attracts us. Hence it is of immense importance, particularly for the young Christian, that the world should be no longer an object of attraction. If it is, it will shut out Christ’s things. It is the great hindrance to-day to growth. We would most urgently and affectionately press upon our younger brethren the importance of this subject. " Love not the world," was written to the young men who were strong (i John 2:).

As to the manner of conflict here, there are unquestionably lessons of much value to be gleaned from the history. Doubtless, the mutual exclusiveness is a point to be pondered. The gates of Jericho were straitly shut up, "none went out and none came in." How often does the Christian leave a way open, in his heart or thoughts, if nowhere else, for intercourse with the spirit of the world. So did not Paul when he could say, "God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world" (Gal. 6:14).

But there was to be no direct conflict until divine power threw down the walls. Everything emphasized the fact that all was of God; they had no power of their own. The priests were to blow the jubilee-trumpets and the ark was to be borne around the walls accompanied by the host. It was, typically, bearing Christ about and proclaiming His coming. Obedience, patience, and human weakness were emphasized by the compassing of the walls seven days. At the time appointed they fall, and vigor of faith has full play for unsparing judgment of evil.

We pass on quickly to Ai and Achan to notice the former rather than the latter. Of Achan it must suffice to say that he seems to set forth that spirit which would take some glory to itself (gold) which all belongs to God, and would in the very hour of triumph over evil make some compromise with it. The Babylonish garment was the first enemy, if we may so speak, before which Israel fell, and to Babylon itself they went at last. "He that hath an ear, let him hear." (Chap. 6:)

Now Ai is the exact opposite of Jericho. It means "a heap of ruins," and presents the world as an object to be despised rather than to be allured by it. One who has truly and fully conquered Jericho, has turned it into Ai, and yet we can never treat this foe with contempt. The lesson here is plain:first of all it discloses unjudged sin, which always leads to presumption; secondly, when this is judged-the troublers detected-the whole power of Israel must go against the enemy which had been regarded as already conquered. And in the ambuscade and retreat, we learn the humiliating lesson which should have been fully learned at Gilgal.

If Jericho speaks loudly to the young Christian, does not Ai have a voice for the more mature? Such may take it for granted that the world is powerless to overcome them, and yet, with some root of pride unjudged, are really under its power. They may congratulate themselves on having put off much in the way of dress, occupation, pleasure-seeking,-that linked them with it; and under that plain exterior, that unworldly manner, they may, Achan-like, be hiding that which compromises them before ‘God. "Lord, is it I?" (Chaps, 7:and 8:)

When Ai has been conquered, at cost of much pains, and a great sense of weakness, a distinct step in advance has been taken. But one more test must be made before the tide of victory can rise so high as to sweep the whole land. There are the " wiles of the devil."

The plot of the Gibeonites was so transparent that one would be tempted to think,-did we not remember self,-that it must fail. In Ai they learned to have no confidence in their strength; the Gibeonites teach them they can have none in their wisdom. Perhaps it is more humbling to give up our wisdom than our strength. The position of this assault of Gibeon seems to indicate this. And yet had there been the least exercise of discernment, the faintest bit of recollection, it would have been impossible for them to hearken to the Gibeonites.

They showed their old shoes; Joshua could have replied, "Forty years did we wander in the wilderness, and our feet did not swell." They put forward their bread, and he could have replied," We received fresh bread every morning." They could not be pilgrims seeking God, for He never let such grow weary, or feed on stale food. Let us note this:the true pilgrim is marked by freshness. How much have God’s people loaded themselves down with the unequal yoke of Gibeon – alliances which in many cases must be respected, as where it is a personal’ link with an unsaved person by marriage. From much that would call itself the Gibeonite league it may be possible even yet for saints to free themselves, as in business, political, or ecclesiastical relationships. But enough has been said to indicate the lesson of Gibeon. (Chap. 9:)

One thing may be noted now:they are back at the camp at Gilgal. They seem to have learned at last the abiding lesson of "no confidence in the flesh." Have we not here distinct progress? Human thoughts, human strength, human wisdom have been all tried, and found wanting, and we come back to that which we should have learned at the first. Alas! we usually learn by experience, and not, as with Israel, does one lesson on a given point suffice:we need many.

But from chapter 10:a change takes place. The enemy, strong enough singly, now combines his forces, and will sweep from the land this invader. But now that they have learned their lesson of weakness, the combined forces are but "meat for them," they only serve to magnify the power of God. What a sweep of victory there is in the next three chapters! Here is the conflict at last where a holy joy can be felt, as one after another the "armies of the aliens are put to flight."

We enter but briefly into this latter portion, merely pointing out the salient features of the campaign. First, there is the conflict in the south. At the risk of being thought fanciful, we would suggest that as the subsequent inheritance of Judah, and as the land turned toward the sun, the south is connected with the thought of revealed truth. The truths of the Bible must first be recovered, and here we meet not the infidel, but the one who professes’ to know and love the Bible, but who makes use of it to support his false doctrines. Adonizedek is leader of this southern league; and his name, by its similarity to Melchizedek, "king of righteousness," while the first means "lord of righteousness,"and both being king of the same place (apparently), would suggest that imitation of truth which is ever the mark of error. Under the southern sky of Bible light and knowledge, how much deadly error holds sway. We will name but a few:Adventism, Annihilationism, Restorationism, and the like. These all profess to believe the Bible and quote it in support of their errors, but faith must and can dislodge them. For a most helpful and suggestive treatment of this whole subject, we would refer the reader to the notes in the Numerical Bible, at this point.

There is no faltering now, and we have many a touch that is most suggestive. Note how all terror has fled. Joshua says, "Come near, and put your feet upon the necks of these men." Where is the faith that will do this? Oh, for fearless faith that will meet error, and drive it from its professed hold upon the Bible!

Lastly, we come to the northern league, whose conquest completes the general occupation of the land. Jabin, we are told, means "understanding." And if the southern league typify that error which uses the word of God:the northern, as turned away from the sunlight, would suggest that side of error which denies the word of God, and flourishes upon the independence of human thought. It is commonly called rationalism, and lays its cold hand upon all knowledge, and even upon the word of God itself, and robs them for us of God Himself. Who that has been in the icy grasp of this northern foe, but knows his dread power. Infidelity, the deification of human reason, is this Jabin.

Blessed be God, this foe has no terrors for faith. " Suddenly " does the leader of God’s host fall upon him, scatter his forces, and destroy his power of recovery. Would that we might see such victories today! Man’s reason is exalted, is made the supreme judge of all truth, even of God’s revealed word. Where is the man of faith?

Thus we have, imperfectly indeed, traced the believer’s conflict, from the struggle with Amalek, the flesh, onward to the world, in Jericho, till learning his lessons, he can meet Satan himself in his strongest citadel and vanquish him.

"For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down of strongholds; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. 10:4, 5).