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).