Q. 13.-Does Matt. 13:19, as to the way-side hearer, indicate that all who have heard the word are in the kingdom? Does the message from the King make all to whom it comes subjects, even though rebellious, so that the rejecter of Christianity, the infidel, is in the kingdom of heaven? If not, are there these three spheres of responsibility:that of the kingdom, that of the rejecter of the truth in Christianity, and that of the heathen? Does it not rob the King of His majesty if one may reject His message and yet have no kingdom-responsibility-that is, not be in the kingdom? Such an one would be unbaptized, it is true, but because rebellious.

Ans.-The word is the "word of the kingdom" (5:19), and therefore, I apprehend, the word must be in some sense received, in order to being in the kingdom. The unbaptized opposer of Christianity is an enemy simply, not a subject. He is responsible fully for his opposition, and in this way the authority of the King is fully maintained. It is on account of this case of the way-side hearer, as I take it, that the first parable does not begin as the rest do-with "the kingdom of heaven is like," and we only learn, in result, that it is of the mysteries of the kingdom He is speaking.

I should not say there are three spheres of responsibility. In the kingdom, the responsibility is the same for all. The knowledge of grace alone enables one for its fulfillment.

Q. 14.-If asked for scripture for connecting baptism with the kingdom as the formal entrance, is it not that when the kingdom was announced as at hand baptism began? If it is not connected with the Church, can it be with the house of God? When the Church, the house of God, is taken from the earth, the kingdom will continue, and baptism also:does not this show that it is entirely with the kingdom baptism is connected, and not with the house of God, which is the Church (1 Tim. 3:15)?

Ans.-The baptism into the Church is by the Spirit, not water (1 Cor. 12:13), and in God's thought, as we have seen elsewhere, the body and house are co-extensive. It is true that the house of God is become as a "great house," but this is through man's failure. Neither "living stones" nor "members of Christ" can be made by baptism, nor has man ever received authority to introduce into the number of these.

It is true that man builds (1 Cor. 3:), and that thus it is that the professing church has become enlarged so much beyond the true Church; but building is by the Word, through winch the Spirit of God acts, and the living stones are produced and put in place. Baptism neither produces them nor puts them in place. As to the first, there can be no right question; as to the second, whatever may be asked can be speedily answered; for we have seen that baptism is burial-deals with men not as members of Christ, nor even children of God, but as sinners under death, to whom is announced indeed the forgiveness of sins, and whom as a " figure " it " saves " (1 Pet. 3:21). This is abundant proof, for those who will consider it, that it has nothing to do with the Church as such, which does not begin until men are saved, and by a further act of divine grace-the baptism of the Spirit. Water-baptism does not, then, bring into the Church, whether (as men say) visible or invisible:that there is an invisible one is again due only to man's sin.

As to baptism going on after the Church is removed, I suppose it will, but it is hardly certain enough to me to be pressed as an argument. That it accompanied the first announcement of the kingdom is plain in the case of the Baptist, but this was not Christian baptism, nor could it be into the kingdom, which did not begin till Pentecost, or at least till Christ was glorified and enthroned.

Briefly, the arguments for the connection of baptism with the kingdom I would give as follows:-

1. That the kingdom is the sphere of discipleship, discipling is into it,-" Every scribe discipled unto the kingdom of heaven" is the expression in Matt. 13:52; "made a disciple to," says the R.V.

2. That introduction to it, or discipling, is twofold:there are "keys." And one of these is plainly the "key of knowledge" (Luke 11:52; Matt. 23:13).

3. That the two keys, or methods of discipling, are given, in Matt. 28:, by Him who, with all authority in heaven and earth, sends out His servants to "disciple all nations, baptizing them and teaching them."

4. That baptism is therefore "to the name of the Lord Jesus " (Acts 8:16; 2:36-38; 10:48), as owning His authority in the kingdom. "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord " (22:16).

5. That it belongs, therefore, to the commission of the twelve, who are connected with the kingdom (Matt. 19:28), and not to Paul's, the minister of the Church (Col. 1:24, 25; Eph. 3:2-7) ; who, although he did baptize, was "not sent to baptize" (1 Cor. 1:17).

Other arguments might be given, but these are the plainest, and (I believe) decisive.

Q. 15.-Pages 26, 27, of this volume, we read, "This very chapter" (Col. 2:) "speaks of our not being subject to ordinances." Are we to suppose that baptism is among the ordinances Which we are exhorted by Paul not to be subject to? That is the apparent teaching.

Ans.-I do not put baptism among these " ordinances; " but if we attached to it the virtue of which I have been speaking there, it Would be one of the most stringent kind. The ordinances of the law itself never made spiritual blessing so dependent upon a material opus operatum-a "work done"-as this would imply. Sacramentalists, in fact, out-judaize Judaism.

Q. 16.-Page 28, we have," Baptism actually introduces into the body." Also it is said to be the authoritative key of admission. If so, evidently salvation must come through baptism, which does away with personal faith for souls' receiving Christ. Or do yon make salvation come only to infants through it, as "the child and the adult are held to be on different footings? "

Ans.-Our correspondent has made a very strange mistake. The passage first quoted says, "into the body of disciples upon earth." This has been confounded with the body of Christ,- the Church! a very different thing surely. Baptism does not in any sense admit into the Church, nor does it "save," except as a figure. It is admission into the Lord's school on earth-that is, to the body of disciples,-scholars.

Q. 17.-How does the Word of God divide between soul and spirit (Heb. 4:12) ? and in what consists the necessity for its doing so? If "between joints and marrow" is figurative, are "soul and spirit" likewise so? and is "discerning the thoughts and intents of the heart" making them manifest to ourselves?

Ans.-If the spirit be synonymous with mind and conscience- the mental and moral judgment-and the soul with the affections and emotions, then there is plain need for " dividing"-or distinguishing-between them. How often do we need to distinguish between conscience and sentiment, intelligence and feeling? And the Word dividing between these implies, of course, that it is forming the mind and enlightening the conscience. Thus the division would practically be between what is natural and what is spiritual.

"Between joints and marrow" is clearly figurative, and the "marrow" of a thing is used in Greek for the " inmost part." The difference between what is external and what is internal seems here the point. I do not think that this figurative expression involves the one before it being figurative ; nor do I see how soul and spirit could be used in this way, in connection with one another.

"A discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart" is what first of all the Word is, but of course it is for us that it detects and pronounces on them.

Q. 18.-Scripture clearly teaches that people may evangelize without being evangelists, just as they may teach, and teach well, without being teachers. Whatever we have, we are not only permitted but responsible to use-in what way exactly we most learn from God, and as subject to the Lord only in it, though if the assembly's room is used, they of course must be consulted. What edifies and has the divine blessing in it is what love seeks, and wisdom will not in general be lacking where real love to souls is the motive power.

An "open meeting"-such as 1 Cor. 14:speaks of-is not suitable for the gospel. It is an assembly-meeting only, as the chapter in question shows, and in character quite different from those for the gospel, where all the world is invited in. These are the definite responsibility of those who feel they have a message to give, and undertake to give it. In this, two or three may unite together, but we do not invite people to come and see if the Lord will give somebody a word for them, but to hear what we are pledged to give them. The assembly does not preach:individuals do.

As to the question about the hymns in assembly-meetings, I do not think that the raising of tunes would come under the prohibition of 1 Cor. 14:34. The general rule, as indicated by the question, "Is it seemly?" must decide (chap. 11:13). "Let all things be done decently and in order."

Q. 19.-Would unleavened bread at the Lord's table misrepresent His body given for us? Can there be any modification from the teaching of the Word itself of the statement that "He bore our sins in His own body"?

Ans.-At the first institution of the Lord's supper unleavened bread must have been used, as no other could be in the house at the time of the passover. The use of it still would therefore be quite suitable, and in its meaning preferable to what is ordinarily used. There is no direction as to it in the Word, and we have no right to enforce any tiling, therefore; but if all were agreed, the unleavened bread might suitably remind us of Him who knew no sin, and of how we too should keep the feast with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

The second question I may not rightly understand; but the bearing of our sins by the Lord in His body on the tree simply means that the sufferings of the cross were due to our sins being borne by Him there. "In His body" means that He suffered in His body, a living Man, yet on to death, in which this suffering for us terminated. The sins being borne means that their due was borne-their weight. It is a form of what grammarians call metonymy, in which one word is put for another closely related to it, as, for example, in this case, the cause for the effect.

Q. 20.-What is the scriptural meaning of the term "repentance"?

Ans.-The word metanoia means "an after-thought; " and, as used in Scripture, speaks of a changed way of thinking, implying a judgment of the past. It is the self-judgment of a renewed soul accepting the divine judgment of his sins and of himself. It is not, as some have put it, a change of mind about God, though Godward-having reference to Him,-" Now mine eye seeth thee; therefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes."

Q. 21.-Can an assembly as such, if in arrears for rent, etc., scripturally minister to a brother in need?

Ans.-Certainly not, unless it were a need so urgent as to justify the diversion of funds to this purpose, and then with the purpose of replacing them as soon as possible. But this is not, I suppose, the case referred to, and, unless in cases of very exceptional circumstances, such a state in an assembly implies a spiritual condition as low as the funds. If "owe no man any thing" is the rule for the individual, how much more should it be for an assembly, where poverty to this extent can be hardly ever pleaded, and where the honor of the Lord is much more compromised! Many words cannot be needed surely about such a matter.