Observer, June 1, '76. had been unintentionally omitted, and correct the supposed error by putting it into the text. It is supposed that the doxology to the Lord's prayer, which is known to be an interpolation, crept into the text in this way. Some devout copyist, noticing that the prayer ended abruptly with the words, "deliver us from evil," wrote on the margin of his parchment, "for thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory, forever, Amen." His successor, supposing very naturally that this was the proper conclusion of the prayer, copied it as such, and thus all copies which sprang from this contained it, while it was absent from all other copies. The interpolation of Acts viii. 37 occurred, most likely, in the same way. The above is a sufficient number of specifica tions to illustrate the subject to the reader, and enable him to see that instead of being surprised that so many various readings are found in the manuscripts, we ought rather to be surprised that there are so few. We have said nothing about intentional alterations, because, if any at all have occurred, they are few, and it is scarcely necessary to refer to them in our abbreviated treatment of the subject. In our next essay we will enter upon the subject of the detection of errors, and the restoration of the text to its original purity. What we have written thus far is only preliminary to the task which lies next before us. J. W. MCGARVEY. THE CHURCH-PLANTING AND DEVELOPMENT.-No. VII. THE LEGISLATURE. THOUGH the Saviour came to found a church He did not, Himself, make known the laws by which He would have it governed. For that important work He selected and qualified a faithful band. The announcement of the ordinances and discipline of His intended association of converted Jews and Gentiles was committed to those whom He selected, and whom the Father gave Him for that work-His Apostles. The laws of earthly kingdoms are mutable, ever requiring revision, seldom perfect when framed, and soon out-grown. Hence legislation is oft-repeated, and the short-sighted legislators of the last generation have their best performances re-modeled by the men of the present, whose work, in like manner, will fail to meet the requirements of their children. The works of God, like Himself, are perfect. The solar system requires no re-adjustment. Generation after generation, man rejoices in the same muscular, nervous, arterial, and respiratory systems, yet, after minute examination, with all the aids of science, not a shade of improvement can be desired. In a kingdom which, though upon earth, is not of earth, and which has God for its founderin a remedial system designed to prepare man for immortality, to destroy the love and power of sin, and to infuse a new and Divine nature— in a system for which the previous ages and states of the earth have been preparatory, can it be supposed, that infinite wisdom, power, and goodness, would give deficient legislation, and leave to uninspired men the formation or alteration of ordinances and laws relating to such stupendous results, and that too after man had demonstrated his utter incapacity to frame a government for a single state productive of holiness and happiness! Unquestionably not! Legislation for the Church of God was perfected ere the Apostles fell asleep in Jesus. He had prayed that they might not be taken out of the world but preserved from its evil. The churches they set in order were designed as models till the end of the age-not in the defects and sins of their members, but in the faith and polity established by the Apostles. To this end they have left us imperishable documents as the only standards of appeal. The voice from the excellent glory had proclaimed "This is my beloved Son: hear ye him." He had duly instructed His Apostles, when just before the traitor-led throng hurried Him away He lifted up His voice to heaven and said, "As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world." To them He said, "As my Father sent me even so send I you; he that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me." Till the Day of Pentecost, as He commanded, the Apostles remained waiting, praying for the promised bestowal of power. But when thus endowed with the Spirit, they gave laws to the Israel of God. The three thousand sinners who yielded to Jesus and were born again were organized, with others, as the church in Jerusalem, the first planted of the Churches of Christ. Many churches were subsequently planted, and were the one body ordered and governed by the Apostles. Thus their Apostleship being not of men, neither by men, but by Jesus the Christ and God the Father, they could do nothing against the truth but for the truth, speaking with the demonstration of the Spirit and in power, not in the words that man's wisdom teaches, but in words by the Holy Spirit, they were enabled to say, "He that is of God heareth us-God beareth us witness both with signs and wonders and divers miracles and gifts." Under the former dispensation, the law was given in one short period. In the new and more glorious, the Divine government was developed as rendered requisite. The laws of God delivered on the last principle, were, however, not less perfect and permanent. Perhaps, the main, or only difference is, that while the Jew can find his law compacted in a few pages, the Christian is called upon to regard not only the commands of the Apostles, but the approved examples of the churches. Were all who call themselves by the name of Jesus prepared to do this, then would names and sects, and parties fall, for the Apostles taught the same things and established the same order in every church. Paul to the Corinthians, observes, "and so I ordain in all the churches." (1 Cor. vii. 17.) Of Timothy, he says, who shall bring you in remembrance of my ways, as I teach everywhere, in every church. The churches planted in Judea were model churches. Hence to the Thessalonians the same Apostle writes, "For ye, brethren, became imitators of the Churches of God, which in Judea are in Christ Jesus." It may be said, that if the Apostles legislated for the church as events rendered necessary, why not now arrange, re-arrange, and adapt its polity to the circumstances of each generation? The answer is, that their acts were never reversed, they did not arrange and re-arrange. When, for instance, they were called to decide as to circumcision and things strangled and blood, they did so once for all. What they made law then is law now. They continued with the church till the completion of its legislation, and thus provided for future requirements. They affirm, in relation to their acts, that it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to them. Their conclusions were binding upon the churches, and excommunication followed disobedience, unless avoided by repentance and reformation. "Therefore brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle." (2 Thess. ii. 15.) Now, we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." (2 Thess. iii. 6.) They have no successors. All subsequent claims to inspiration are worthless. They have finished their work, yet, being dead, they continue to rule. As Moses was heard in the synagogue after his earthly career had terminated, they are now heard in every uncorrupt congregation, as the only propounders of the Divine Law. In view of such continued authority, Peter says, Observer, June 1, '76. "This second epistle I now write unto you, in which I stir up your sincere mind to remembrance, to be mindful of the words spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the COMMANDMENTS OF US, THE APOSTLES of the Lord and Saviour," "that you may be able, after my decease, to have these things always in remembrance." Thus, having perpetuated their laws and commands, recorded their sayings and doings, binding them upon the church, their rule ends not till the Lord come. Miraculous attestation of their truthfulness and accuracy was secured to the church during the entire legislative period, that is during their sojourn on earth. This was no longer required when the presentation of new truths ceased, and consequently, looking forward to a time when it would terminate, when they should know, even as they were known, the Apostles clearly announced the discontinuance of spiritual gifts. "And he gave, some apostles; and some prophets; and some evangelists; and some pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." "That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive." Eph. iv. 11, 12, 14.) These miraculously endowed brethren were then given, until the church should obtain the unity, or completeness of the faith, that "we should not be tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine," and freak of will-worship. With this on his mind, Paul could freely say, "Charity never faileth; but whether there be prophecies they shall fail, whether there be tongues they shall cease, whether there be knowledge (communicated by the Spirit), it shall vanish away"-cease to be thus given. The importance of this position is perceived only by those who understand that, had it been duly regarded, the apostacy could not have taken place, Papal Rome never could have existed, the union of Church and State must have remained impossible, and sects and sectaries have continued unknown. After trial, under every variety of circumstance, man has shown himself unable to frame a system suitable to his condition. He has erected empires before which the world has been prostrate; yet they have dissolved from want of just government. Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome have dissolved, as nations are now dissolving from the same cause-proving that man, in his best state, is unable to govern himself, leading us to feel the need of a Observer, June 1, '76. Divine legislature, and warning us to flee for safety to Him, "Of the increase of whose government and peace there shall be no end." Jesus, the head of the new dispensation, developed through His Apostles the principles of the Divine government, and having all authority in heaven and in earth given unto Him, the family of Adam are commanded to put themselves under His government. In every instance of deviation from the Jerusalem model, even by churches, fully sincere in their desires to bless humanity, failure has been the resultthat is to say, inferior results only have been produced, and a sectarian and powerless church is the standing monument of folly surpassing that of the builders of Babel. It is then our duty to hear the Apostles--to regard their laws to use their words-and thereby be enabled to say, "He that is of God heareth us." It is ours to reject all ordinances, bonds of union, creeds, and attempts to legislate for the church since the Apostles fell asleep in Jesus, that it may be said of us, "I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil, and thou hast tried them who say they are Apostles and are not, and hast found them liars." THE PARDON OF SINS AND BAPTISM. AMICABLE DISCUSSION.-LETTER ELEVEN. Jesus said, "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life." Again, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." And again, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." I HAVE placed these words at the beginning of this letter that the minds of the readers of those interested in this discussion may be recalled to a solemn sense of the question before us, and that they may accordingly be more concerned about ascertaining the mind of Him whose disciples they profess to be, upon these solemn and important subjects, than taken up with the strife of tongues, and watching how skilfully the disputants may wield words of fence or offence. For my own part I have no wish to excel in this exercise; nothing would have tempted me into this discussion but an intense desire to be of service to those whose leading thought is, that they are disciples of Jesus but who, I am painfully persuaded, in their great anxiety to be faithful to all the commands of Christ, have been misled through the misapprehension of the meaning of a few texts of Scripture, into the adoption of exaggerated views respecting Baptism, to the distortion, if not perversion, of the Gospel in several respects. To me it is a matter of rejoicing that I have had so able an opponent to contend with. I suppose it is no violation of literary etiquette to recognise in the initials D. K. those of one of the very foremost debaters of the day, one who has made his name respected in biblical and ecclesiastical questions. If then he fails to justify the views he advocates upon these subjects, it may be at once concluded it is from no lack of ability or accomplishment on the part of the advocate, but simply from the fact to which I have not ceased to direct attention, viz., that there is not one single passage of Scripture which asserts that God pardons any one in the act of Baptism. I regret much the necessity of having had-in the face of his boasting as to having annihilated my proposition and refuted my arguments to charge him with garbling the one and misrepresenting the other. As far as I am personally concerned it is a small matter, but in respect to its possible effect in obscuring the judgment of some readers, it becomes very serious indeed. In response, then, to his challenge I must substantiate these charges, that it may be clearly seen he has shrunk from facing my proposition, and finding it unassailable, has put up something else of his own, that the spectators may see him overthrow it. My first proposition is expressed in these words (page 5.) "The remission-or pardon of sins is-received by the repentant sinner whenever he believes in Jesus." In his second letter (page 56), he skilfully but unfairly mutilates it, and writes "his proposition cannot be true; put it thus, Sinners are saved whenever they believe in Jesus .. he can give up his proposition." In arguing as if this garbled version were mine-by suppressing the word repentant he changes the scope of the terms altogether, both by a suppressio veri, in concealing my qualifying term, and by a suggestio falsi, suggesting the false inference that I included mere assenting but unrepentant sinners. I called attention to the change in the gentlest terms possible. He might have frankly made the amende honorable, by apologising, or he might have passed from the subject in discreet silence; he did neither, but tried to put a bold face on the matter by representing first that he never said it was my proposition-which a reference to the printed words I have quoted confutesand second that it was at any rate an embodiment of my argument, as after setting down repentance at the first I had abandoned it and it had never been seen in my possession since. This is simply absolutely untrue, a reference to my letters will show that I was careful to guard against this very snare, and therefore put in besides the words repent and repentance repeat 6 edly, such qualifying sentences as these: they who received and accepted the message,' surrendering the soul entirely to Him, confiding surrender to Him,' repentant believer,' 'faith in Him as a personal Saviour for the personal sinner,' the contrite sinner believing in Jesus,' 'unreserved acceptance of Him,' 'a broken and a contrite heart He will not despise,' and so on. These things I could have let pass, I had no wish unduly to press a discomfited opponent, nor to humiliate him in his defeat; but when he, after being unable in the smallest way to invalid ate my proposition, or to controvert my argument, boldly turns round and once more, in violation of the distinctly recognised rule of all honourable debate, reproduces statements which I had expressly repudiated, and asserting that what is his own creation was my argument, and, creating absurdity asserts it is mine, he covers himself with confusion, and acknowledges his inability to impugn my statement unless he is permitted to garble and to mutilate it first. Passing from this I must now notice as concisely as possible accumulated arrears of "assumptions, mis-statements, and fallacious arguments," which I have been unable to overtake for the simple reason that any one can tie half-a-dozen knots, as my opponent has done in less time than is required to undo one, which has been the task forced on me. But 1. An analogy has been instituted between the one act of disobedience which brought death, and the act of baptism which is said to be the one external act of the law of restoration. the whole analogy depends upon a petitio principii; it is first a begging of the question, an assumption of the truth of a disputed statement; then, assuming that it is true, instituting an analogy then declaring it is true because of the analogy instituted upon the assumption. It is what is called reasoning in a circle-and the one fatal defect in the whole is that the Scriptures nowhere predicate salvation or life upon the observance of the rite of baptism, but, contrariwise, upon the act of faith in Christ. Compare Genesis ii. 7, "In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" with John vi. 48, "I am that bread of life." (51.) "If any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever." (47.) "He that believeth on me hath everlasting life." 2. His pleas for rejecting the words of Jesus and for refusing to accept His specific acts of pardon as precedents. They remind somewhat of the absurd defence in the case of the borrowed article returned broken-which was (a) It was never borrowed at all; (b) it was returned whole; and (c) it was broken when got. So my opponent pleads (a) The words of Jesus were uttered under a bygone dispensation-for did not Peter Observer, June 1, '76. get the keys. (b) The cases of pardon adduced belonged to the same abrogated dispensation. (c) Jesus being present could do as he pleased and dispense with baptism, and (d) The probability was that the paralytic, the woman who was a sinner, and the crucified thief had all already been baptized. It is surely no libel to call these pleas "ingenious," but what are the facts? (a) Jesus said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my word shall not pass away." As for the insinuation that Peter might with his keys have shut up and abrogated the words of Jesus, we find Peter's Lord saying in that book which closes the revelation from heaven to earth. "I am He that openeth and no man shutteth." (b) Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our instruction. (c) Jesus is present wherever two or three are gathered together in His name. He is with His people till the end of the world. He will be present at the day of judgment. He never has dispensed with Baptism as a duty since it was appointed of God, and He never has, either personally or by the mouths of His Apostles, ordained that Baptism should be the "receiving cause or medium of reception of the forgiveness of sins. (d) One thing is certain, the converted thief could not undergo a subsequent "birth out of water," his sins could not be pardoned subsequently in the act of baptism, and if his faith was perfected in baptism it was perfected before it was begun. 3. I notice this, in conclusion, not that it is the last of the crude suggestions adduced as facts, but that it is just as well before turning away with weariness and vexation from the spectacle of a powerful intellect groping and grasping desperately in blindness along the wrong path, to ask it to open the eyes and, taking the word of God as a lamp, to look at the way along which it is stumbling. It is asserted "That persons baptized with John's baptism were required to be baptized again in the name of the Lord Jesus." The fact is that in the whole history of the establishment of Christiany one solitary instance is recorded in its singularity of a small company of twelve Jews in a city in Asia Minor, who, two and twenty years after the resurrection of Jesus, were found practising the baptism of John in the faith of a Messiah yet to come. then, as any Christian church would now, refused to recognise this irregularity, and commanded them to be baptized into the name of Jesus." So one more theory explodes by a careful looking at facts. Before closing let me point out the sequence or subsequence of the steps from Sin to Heaven. (1) Sin; (2) The Word; (3) Preached; (4) Conviction; (5) Repentance. (6) Faith in the Lord Jesus. At this point, according to the united and unvarying testimony Paul Observer, June 1, '76. of Jesus and all His Apostles, The remission of sins is granted. Then comes (7) Baptism; (8) Attendance to all Christ's ordinances and commands; (9) A life of faith and labour of love in good works. I trust that will make the truth on this subject plain to the simple minds. Very regretfully I find my available space occupied. I just take room to say that while I stipulated for six letters only as my share in this discussion, now that I find my opponent is at last, after so many urgent entreaties, going to bring forward passages of Scripture, I will cheerfully fill up the year if need be in examining them with him. I do not understand at all his plan of advancing and retreating. I will take up John i. 12 and Mat. xxviii. 19, with him in a full and careful examination. No harm in his repeating what he has said. In John i. 12, I deny the ideas of process and subsequence adduced. In Mat. xxviii. 19, I regret I must speak of fallacies and non-sequitiers. Meanwhile I conclude with repeating that the Scriptures uniformly teach that the repentant sinner is pardoned whenever he believes in Jesus, that we are justified by faith, and that it is not once stated that we are or can be in any way pardoned or saved, in, by, or through Baptism. Edinburgh. H. MCINTOSH. We regret having to interpose an Editorial note. In so doing, however, we touch not the arguments. It was in our capacity as Editor that we arranged with Mr. McIntosh the conditions of this discussion, which appear at the head of his first letter. The number of letters is not limited to six on each side, nor to any other number. It is agreed that "the number of letters be not predetermined." (See p. 5.) We are, consequently, willing for Mr. M. to go on "to the end of the year" if so doing appear needful and profitable to our readers. But we must require an alteration. Finding Mr. M. desirous of refuting what he deems the wrong views of Disciples upon baptism, we offered him space for "a close and orderly discussion," but for nothing else. He, however, leaves the proper business of a debatant and constitutes himself exhorter and preacher, and that again and again, the result being that answers to arguments are deferred and the discussion needlessly prolonged. The foregoing letter is headed by a text wanted only as the ground work of the exhortation and sermonette which immediately follow. This course is both irrelevant and offensive. We have many "Baptists" among our readers, but there is no attempt, in our part of the discussion, to exhort, warn, or preach to them. We offer argument without reflection, song, or sermon. During the remainder of the discussion this course must be observed on both sides. It will be our duty to omit matter not affecting the discussion and of the kind referred to, should it again be found in the copy. Ed. THE THRONE OF POWER.-No. V. (1 Samuel xxviii., xxxi.) Our enemies encamp in power and pride, As deer that hear the lion roar, they fled, The fire which warmed me seems to burn no more. No sunshine from the face of God was there! Slaughtered or driven in disgraceful flight, The ancient shadows glimmer on the wall! |