Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 51, No. 16.

MR. SPURGEON ON THE LAW OF GOD

Review and Herald

Apr 18, 1878

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 18, 1878

MR. SPURGEON ON THE LAW OF GOD.

By John Nevins Andrews

The following discourse is by its author, Rev. C. H. Spurgeon, entitled a sermon upon “Sins of Ignorance,” and was delivered at Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, Eng., Nov. 25, 1877. It so fittingly sets forth the ignorant violation of the fourth commandment, that we might suppose it to have been prepared expressly for that purpose, were it not that Mr. Spurgeon is himself involved in this very transgression, and cannot therefore have intended to call attention to this particular sin. No Sabbath-keeping Christian could in a clearer light set forth the true character of the transgression of the fourth commandment, now so prevalent in the Christian world. I listened to the delivery of this discourse with deep interest, and was particularly impressed with the following remark: “Perhaps there is some commandment that you and I are ignorantly breaking, but our transgression is a sin notwithstanding our ignorance.” The sermon was taken down by a reporter, and the remark seems to have been stricken out by the preacher, perhaps because it reminded him of the fourth commandment. The sermon is most admirable till we come near its close, when the author, instead of inciting his hearers to obedience through grace, asserts that obedience is impossible, and that believers may be saved without it. But here is the sermon with our comments in brackets.
J. N. Andrews.
Bale, Suisse.
TEXT: “And if a soul sin, and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the Lord; though he wist it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity. And he shall bring a ram without blemish out of the flock, with thy estimation, for a trespass offering, unto the priest; and the priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his ignorance wherein he erred and wist it not, and it shall be forgiven him.” Lev. 5:17, 18.
It is supposed in our text that men might commit forbidden things without knowing it; nay, it is not merely supposed, but it is taken for granted, and provided for. The Levitical law had special statutes for sins of ignorance, and one of its sections begins with these words, “If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord.” If you will at your leisure read the fourth and fifth chapters of Leviticus, you will find it first of all supposed that a priest may sin. They knew nothing of infallible priests and infallible popes under the Mosaic law; but it was known and recognized that priests might sin, and sin through ignorance too. “The priest’s lips should keep knowledge,” but as they are compassed with infirmities, they learned to have compassion on the ignorant by being made themselves conscious that they were not perfect in understanding. In the fourth chapter a sacrifice is prescribed for “the priest that is anointed, if he do sin according to the sin of the people.” The highest in office, who ought to be best read in the things of God, might nevertheless err through misunderstanding, forgetfulness, or ignorance. The priests were teachers, but they needed also to be taught. As Trapp says, “The sins of teachers are teachers of sins,” and therefore they were not overlooked, but had to be expiated by trespass offerings.
Further on in the chapter it is supposed that a ruler may sin (see verse 22). A ruler should be thoroughly acquainted with the law which he has to dispense, but yet he might not know every point, and therefore might err; therefore it is written, “When a ruler hath sinned, and done somewhat through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord his God concerning things which should not be done, and is guilty; or if his sin, wherein he hath sinned, come to his knowledge, he shall bring his offering.” There existed no fiction among the Jews that the king can do no wrong: however excellent his intentions, he might be misinformed upon the divine law, and so fall into error. Errors in leaders are very fruitful of mischief, and therefore they were to be repented of and put away by an expiatory sacrifice.
It was also according to the law regarded as very likely that any man might fall into sins of ignorance; for in chap. 4:27, we read, “And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the Lord.” The sin even of the commonest person was not to be winked at and passed over as a mere trifle, even though he could plead ignorance of the law. It was not to be said, “Oh, he is quite an insignificant person, and he did it in error, and therefore there is no need to take any note of it;” but, on the contrary, he was also to bring his trespass offering, that the priest might make an atonement for him. Ignorance was common enough among the common people, and yet it did not constitute a license for them, nor screen them from guilt.
But we need not, dear friends, go to these Scripture references, for we are well assured by our own observation, and the verdict of our own experience, that sins of ignorance are possible; for we have often ourselves sinned in this fashion, and we have had deeply to mourn over the fact when we have been convinced of it. Very much in which we once allowed ourselves we would not do again; for we see the evil of it, though once we judged it to be right enough. An enlightened conscience mourns over sins of ignorance, which it would never do if they were innocent mistakes.
The word rendered “ignorance” may also bear the translation of inadvertence. Inadvertence is a kind of actual ignorance: a man frequently does wrong for want of thought, through not considering the bearing of his action, or even thinking at all. He carelessly and hastily blunders into the course which first suggests itself, and errs because he did not study to be right.
There is very much sin of this kind committed every day. There is no intent to do wrong, and yet wrong is done. Culpable neglect creates a thousand faults. “Evil is wrought by want of thought as well as want of heart.” Sins of inadvertence, therefore, are undoubtedly abundant among us, and in these busy, thoughtless, railway days they are apt to increase. We do not take time enough to examine our actions: we do not take good heed to our steps. Life should be a careful work of art, in which every single line and tint should be the fruit of study and thought, like the paintings of the great master who was wont to say, “I paint for eternity;” but, alas, life is often slurred over like those hasty productions of the scene painter in which present effect alone is studied, and the canvas becomes a mere daub of colors hastily laid on. We seem intent to do much rather than to do well; we want to cover space rather than to reach perfection. This is not wise. Oh that every single thought were conformed to the will of God.
Now, seeing that there are sins of ignorance and sins of inadvertence, what about them? Is there any actual guilt in them? In our text we have the Lord’s mind and judgment, not that of the church or of some eminent divine, but of the Lord God himself, and therefore let me read it to you once again: “If a soul sin, and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the Lord; though he wist it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity.” Sins of ignorance, then, are really sins, needing atonement, because they involve us in guilt. Yet let us clearly understand that they greatly differ in degree of guilt from known and wilful sins. Our Lord teaches us this in the gospels, and our own conscience tells us that it must be so. The Saviour puts it, “That servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes.” He who knew not his lord’s will was less punished than the intentional offender, but still he was beaten, and beaten with stripes, of which a few will be far more than you and I may wish to bear. The fewest stripes that will come from the hand of justice will be enough to afflict us grievously. One stroke has made good men lie in the dust and moan in sorrow. Sins caused by ignorance are punished; for the prophet says (Isa. 5:13), “My people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge;” and again in Hosea, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” Paul also tells us that “the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God.” These are to be punished, it seems, though their sinful ignorance is mentioned in the threatening.
Yes, and according to my text, there is sin in ignorance itself, for the eighteenth verse declares, “The priest shall make an atonement for him concerning his ignorance wherein he erred.” Ignorance of the law among those who dwell in the camp of Israel is essentially sinful. The Israelite had no business to be ignorant. The law was plain and within his reach. If he neglected to study the statute, his breach of the statute could not be excused by his neglect, seeing the neglect was in itself an act of omission of a censurable kind. Wilful ignorance of the Lord’s will is in itself sin, and the sin which cometh of it is grievous in the sight of the Lord our God.
Blessed be God, the solemn declaration of the text concerning the guilt of sins of ignorance need not drive us to despair, for a sacrifice was permitted for it. The offender, on discovering his error, might bring his offering, and pay the trespass-money for any damage which he had caused by his action; and there was a promise given in connection with the atoning sacrifice, which was no doubt often realized by the contrite in heart,—“It shall be forgiven him.” Be it ours this morning, not to attempt excuse, but to seek forgiveness. May the Spirit of God work in us a tender-hearted confession of that sin which we did not before know to be sin, and while we are confessing it, may the divine Spirit apply the precious blood that we may have a sweet sense of pardon. May the Lord make us to rejoice in the truth, that “the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.”
The teaching of my text does three things, of which I shall speak: First, by it the commandment is honored; second, by it the conscience is enlightened; third, by it the sacrifice is endeared.
[Ponder the words of this paragraph. The fourth commandment is one of the ten precepts of which Mr. Spurgeon thus speaks.]
I. By the divine declaration that sins of ignorance are really sins, the commandment of God is honored. I need not multiply words to prove it so. The law is by this solemn sentence lifted into a place of awful dignity. If it be really so, that to break one of its precepts involves us in guilt, even if we did not know that we were offending, then is the law indeed enthroned upon a terrible eminence and girt around with fire.
[The rule of right is not conscience, but the law.]
Enlarging upon this thought, I would observe, first, dear friends, that hereby the law is declared to be the supreme authority over men. The law is supreme, not conscience. Conscience is differently enlightened in different men, and the ultimate appeal as to right and wrong cannot be to your half-blinded conscience or to mine. I might condemn what you allow, and you would scarcely tolerate what I approve: we are neither of us judges, but both alike culprits upon trial when we come under the law. The ultimate appeal will be to “Thus saith the Lord,”—to the law itself, which is the only perfect standard by which the deeds and actions of men can be measured. The law, from the supremacy into which this text lifts it, says to us, “You will not be excused because your conscience was unenlightened, nor because it was so perverse as to put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter. My demands are the same in every jot and tittle, whatever your conscience may condemn or allow.” Conscience has lost much of its sensitiveness through the fall and through our actual sins, but the law is not lowered to suit our perverted understanding. If we break the law, although our conscience may not blame us, or even inform us of the wrong, yet still the deed is recorded against us; we must bear our iniquity.
[The law is above human opinion, and is not changed by universal custom, however long continued. How this sweeps away the first-day Sabbath!]
The law is also set above human opinion, for this man says, “You may do that,” and a second claims that he may do the other, but the law changes not according to man’s judgment, and does not bend itself to the spirit of the age or the taste of the period. It is the supreme judge, from whose infallible decision there is no appeal. Right is right though all condemn, and wrong is wrong though all approve. The law is the balance of the sanctuary, accurate to a hair, sensitive even to the small dust of the balance. Opinions continually differ, but the law is one and invariable. According to the moral sensitiveness of a man will be his estimate of the act which he performs, but would you have a law vary accordingto man’s fickle judgment? If you would desire such a thing, God’s infinite wisdom forbids. The law is a fixed quantity, a settled standard, and if we fall short of it, though we know it not, yet are we guilty, and must bear our iniquity unless an atonement be made.
This exalts the law above the custom of nations and periods; for men are very wont to say, “It is true I did so and so, which I could not have defended in itself; but then it is the way of the trade, other houses do so, general opinion and public consent have indorsed the custom; I do not therefore see how I can act differently from others, for if I did so I should be very singular, and should probably be a loser through my scrupulosity.” Yes, but the customs of men are not the standard of right. Where they have been at first correct through strong Christian influence, the tendency is for them to deteriorate and sink below the proper standard. Habit, perpetuity, and universality of wrong, at last enable men to call the false by the same name as the true, but there is no real change wrought thereby; the customary wrong is still a wrong, the universal lie is still a falsehood. God’s law is not changed; our Lord Jesus said, “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.” The divine law overrides custom, tradition, and opinion; these have no more effect upon the eternal standard than the fall of a leaf upon the stars of heaven. If a man “do any of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the Lord; though he wist it not, yet is he guilty.” All the customs in the world cannot make wrong right, and if everybody that ever lived from Adam down to this hour had done a wrong thing and declared it to be righteous, yet would it make no moral difference in the evil deed. A thousand ages of whitewashing cannot make a vice a virtue. God’s command standeth fast forever, and he who breaks it must bear his punishment. Thus you see that, by the declaration of my text, the law is enshrined in the place of reverence.
[The guilt of known sin.]
Note again, if a sin of ignorance renders us guilty, what must a wilful sin do? Do you not perceive at once how the law is again set on high by this? For if an inadvertent transgression covers the soul with guilt which cannot be put away without a sacrifice, then what shall we say of those who knowingly and advisedly, with malice aforethought, break the commands of God? What shall we say of those who again and again and again, being often reproved, harden their necks and go on in their iniquities? Surely their sin is exceedingly sinful. If I may become a transgressor by breaking a law which I did not know, by what name shall I be called if, when I do know it, I presumptuously lift up my hand to defy the lawgiver and violate his statutes.
[God forbids men to be ignorant of his law, and therefore justly condemns those who neglect to study it.]
Thus again, dear friends, by the teaching of our text, men were driven to study the law; for if they were at all right-hearted they said, “Let us know what God would have us do. We do not wish to be leaving his commands undone, or committing transgressions against his prohibitory precepts through not knowing better.” They would therefore run to the prophets and other teachers, and ask them, “Tell us what are the statutes of the law. What hath Jehovah ordained?” and right-minded men would be led by a desire to obey, to become earnest students of the will of God, as I trust, beloved friends, we also shall be moved to be. Lest we should break the law through not knowing its commands, let us make it our continual study. Let us search it day and night; let it be the man of our counsels, and the guide of our lives. Be this the prayer of each one of us: “What I know not, O my God, teach thou me. Make me to understand the way of thy precepts; let me not be as the horse and the mule, which have no understanding, but enlighten me in my inmost heart, lest I ignorantly transgress thy commandments.”
Thus, you see, the law was glorified in the midst of Israel, and men were led to search it, to know what the Lord required of them. A holy fear, lest they should inadvertently fall into sin, moved them to diligent reading of the commands. Thus they were often checked when about to perform a hasty deed, and were made to ask themselves, “What would the Lord have us to do?” Without such an ordinance as our text they might have acted hurriedly, and so have sinned, and sinned again, in the blundering haste of a thoughtless spirit; but by this they were checked in their heedlessness, called to consideration, and made to have the fear of God always before them. They were thereby warned to look at their actions and examine their ways, lest through thoughtlessness they should sin against the law.
And you will see at once, beloved, that this would lead every earnest Israelite to teach his children God’s law, lest his sons should err through ignorance or inadvertence. The pious Jew carefully taught his children all things concerning the Passover and the yearly feasts, and the daily sacrifice, and the worship of the temple, and what was due to the service of God: he made them learn the moral law, and endeavoured, as far as he could, to enlighten their conscience, knowing that “for the soul to be without knowledge is not good.” He said to his son, “Take fast hold of instruction; let her not go: keep her; for she is thy life.” Without knowledge a man will fall into many pitfalls and snares, which the true light would have enabled him to avoid; good men, therefore, spent much of their time in training their families. “Come, ye children,” they said, “hearken unto me; I will teach you the fear of the Lord.” They were also zealous to make known the law as far as they could, saying each one to his fellow, “Know the Lord.” Fear of committing sins of ignorance was a spur to national education, and tended greatly to make all Israel honor the law of the Lord.
[The sin-revealing power of the law of God. Does the fourth commandment possess that power?]
I close these thoughts by noting that to me the sin-revealing power of the law is wonderfully displayed as I read my text. I know the law to be exceeding broad, I know its eye to be like that of an eagle, and I know its hand to be heavy as iron; but when I find that it accuses me of sins which I wist not, that it searches the secret parts of my soul, and brings to light what my own eye of self-examination has never seen, then I am filled with trembling. When I discover that I may stand before the bar of God charged with iniquities which I shall be quite unable to deny, but of which at this moment I am not at all conscious, then am I bowed into the dust. What a law must this be! What a light is this in which our conduct is placed! If you set your character side by side with that of your fellow-man, you may begin to compliment yourself; if you look at it by the dim candle-light of public opinion, you may begin to flatter yourself; if you even go no further than a diligent search by the aid of your own judgment, you may still be somewhat at ease: but if the light in which we shall stand at last will be the light of Jehovah’s own ineffable purity, if his omniscience detects iniquity where we have not perceived, and if his justice will visit sin even where we were not cognizant of it, our position is solemn indeed. What a law is this by which men are bound! How severe and searching! How holy and how pure must God himself be! O thou thrice holy Jehovah, we are filled with awe of thee! The heavens are not clean in thy sight, and thou chargest thine angels with folly, how then can we be just with thee? After reading this, thine own word, we see how justly thou wilt charge us with folly, and how impossible it is for us to hope to be justified in thy sight by any righteousness of our own. Thus, my brethren, we see that the law is honored.
(Concluded next week.)

MARAH AND ELIM

By Bonar

To-day ’tis Elim, with its palms and wells And happy shade for desert weariness; ’Twas Marah yesterday, all rock and sand, Unshaded solitude and bitterness.
Yet the same desert holds them both; the same Soft breezes wander o’er the lonely ground; The same low stretch of valley shelters both, And the same mountains compass them around.
So is it here with us on earth; and so I do remember it has ever been; The bitter and the sweet, the grief and joy, Lie near together, but a day between.
Sometimes God turns our bitter into sweet; Sometimes he gives us pleasant water-springs; Sometimes he shades us with his pillar-cloud, And sometimes to a blessed palm-shade brings.
What matters it? The time will not be long;— Marah and Elim will alike be past; Our desert-wells and palms will soon be done; We reach the city of our God at last.
O happy land! beyond these lonely hills, Where gush in joy the everlasting springs; O holy Paradise! above these heavens, Where we shall end our desert-wanderings. —Bonar.

THOUGHTS ON BAPTISM.

By J. M. Waggoner

BY ELD. J. M. WAGGONER.
(Continued.)

THE ORDER OF BAPTISM.—CONCLUDED.

We think we hazard nothing in the assertion that that is not Christian baptism wherein the conditions of the gospel are not met. We would speak with modesty, leaving it to each one’s conscience as to how wide a divergence from the divine plan there must be to justify an imitation of the course pursued by Paul and the believers, recorded in Acts 19:1–5. But we would speak decidedly in favor of having both candidate and administrator look well to the teachings of the gospel on this subject. It is no light thing to trifle with divine ordinances. He who administers them improperly does so at his peril. Paul praised his brethren inasmuch as they kept the ordinances as they were delivered to them, and very deeply blamed them when they perverted one, for not preserving it pure according to its intention. 1 Cor. 11. The importance of the ordinance of baptism, as presented by the Saviour in Mark 16:16, and by the apostle Paul in Rom. 6 and 7, cannot be overestimated; and the necessity of carefulness in its observance is according to its importance.
Paul to the Colossians speaks in terms equally direct and decisive on this subject: “Buried with him in baptism, wherein ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” Col. 2:12. This adds new lustre to the ordinance. Dead to sin; buried with Christ by baptism into death; and risen with him in the same ordinance. It cannot be possible that they who speak disparagingly of baptism, as some unfortunately do, have ever examined with care this impressive passage. Here it is shown that “the likeness of his resurrection” is not altogether reserved to a future life. “Risen with him.” As he died to sin and lives to God, so we must die to sin, be buried with him, and rise with him to a new life—to a life of obedience to the Heavenly Father’s will.
“If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God.” Col. 3:1. This brings to view the entire Christian life,—a life of consecration to God in imitation of the love and zeal of our Saviour. In the present argument it is not necessary to pursue this further, having fully met our design,—to show the important place which baptism occupies in the divine plan for the remission of sin and union with Christ.
We do not present these views in a captious spirit, or with any desire to find fault, but with a deep sense of responsibility for the honor of the cause of Christ, which is so often shamed by the lives of those who consider themselves Christians because they have been baptized and accepted as members of a church. We deprecate the practice of baptizing people on too slight evidence of purpose of heart,—with a conversion altogether too superficial, or no conversion at all. We have reason to believe, and it pains us to record it, that there are ministers not a few in this land of gospel privileges who think far more of the numbers they are able to call in and baptize in a given time, than of the Christian walk, of the stability and integrity of their converts after they are baptized. Gathering a mass of unstable souls, who are deceived into the belief that they are Christians because they have assented to certain truths and been baptized, and who show that their convictions of sin were not deep, and that their hearts were never touched by the enlightening and converting power of the Holy Spirit, is not the way to find acceptance with God as a laborer, or to honor the Christian cause and the Christian ministry. Such workmen would do well to remember that their work is yet to be tried, and if it does not abide they will suffer loss. Gold, silver, and precious stones are the only material which will be accepted and bring a reward to the builder in the temple of our Master. The “foundation” is exceedingly precious and valuable, and the counsel is worthy of being held in constant remembrance,—“Let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.” 1 Cor. 3:9–18. Often have we seen the record set forth that so many scores were baptized during a certain meeting, while in a year from that time the strength of the church under whose auspices the labor was performed, was not a whit increased by the effort. Wood, hay, and stubble are not accepted for the building and bring no reward to the builders.
It is true that the Scriptures give no warrant to put off the baptism of the penitent. But we should have some evidence of sincerity and purpose of heart; evidence that the claims of God’s holy law, and the requirements of the Scriptures for a holy life, are somewhat appreciated. As the “present truth” for any age should receive our most earnest attention, even so the prevailing errors of any age should be specially guarded against. If there is danger of erring, it is better to even err on the side of carefulness where a want of caution, because of prevailing false teachings, is likely to cause the professing believer to settle down into a state of false confidence and self-deception.
In thus speaking, it is not our purpose to abate one jot of the necessity and importance that the penitent should be baptized. It is because the duty is important—the institution is too sacred to be trifled with— that we so earnestly plead for maintaining it in its purity, and administering it only according to the revealed will and intention of the divine Institutor.
The unity of truth is well illustrated in this subject. To mar it in one part is to injure the whole. No error stands alone; when once it enters, it multiplies, and taints the whole system. Very few in the present day apprehend how far the truth on the subject of baptism has been obscured by a change of the ordinance. Being accustomed to view it only in the light of tradition or of popular opinion, the thoughts of the majority seldom rise above these to the full intent of the simple but grand truths of divine revelation. It seems fitting that we close our remarks on the relations of baptism, with a few quotations which have in view the same things which we have tried to set forth.
In Conybeare and Howson’s “Life and Epistles of Paul,” vol. 1, p. 439, are the following remarks:—
“It is needless to add, that baptism was (unless in exceptional cases) administered by immersion, the convert being plunged beneath the water to represent his death to the life of sin, and then raised from this momentary burial to represent his resurrection to the life of righteousness. It must be a subject of regret, that the general discontinuance of this form of baptism (though perhaps necessary in our northern climates) has rendered obscure to popular apprehension some very important passages of Scripture.”
These authors, of the Church of England, show the powerful influence of popular error by themselves excusing the wrong they deplore, the evil tendency of which they seem to understand. We leave it to the reverent reader that an error is neither slight nor excusable which “obscures to popular apprehension some very important passages of Scripture.”
Chancellor Est., of the University of Douay, (Catholic) on Rom. 6:3, says:—
“For immersion represents to us Christ’s burial; and so also his death. For the tomb is a symbol of death, since none but the dead are buried. Moreover, the emersion, which follows the immersion, has a resemblance to a resurrection. We are, therefore, in baptism, conformed not only to the death of Christ, as he has just said, but also to his burial and resurrection.”
Dr. Conant, in his work entitled “Baptizein,” published by the American Bible Union, says:—
“The word ‘baptize’ is an anglicized form of the Greek baptizein. On this account it has seemed to some that it must necessarily express the same meaning. It has been said, that no other word can so perfectly convey the thought of the Holy Spirit as the one chosen by himself to express it in the original Scriptures; and that we are, therefore, at least right and safe in retaining it in the English version. A comparison of the meaning of baptizein, as exhibited in sections 1–3 of this treatise, with the definitions of ‘baptize’ as given in all dictionaries of the English language, and with its recognized use in English literature and in current colloquial phraseology, will show that this is far from being the case. The word ‘baptize’ is a strictly ecclesiastical term; broadly distinguished by that characteristic from the class of common secular words to which baptizein belonged. It is a metaphysical term, indicating a mystical relation entered into with the church, by virtue of the sacramental application of water. In both these respects it misrepresents the Saviour’s manner and intent. Concealing the form of the Christian rite under a vague term, which means anything the reader may please, it obscures the idea thereby symbolized, and the pertinency of the inspired appeals and admonitions founded on them. The essence of the Christian rite is thus made to consist in this mystical church-relation, into which it brings the recipient. With this view associates itself, naturally and almost necessarily, the idea of a certain mysterious efficacy in the rite itself; and, accordingly, we find the belief prevailing in the majority of Christian communions that, through baptism, the recipient is, not externally alone, but mystically united to the body of Christ. Thus the rite ceases to be the symbol of certain great truths of Christianity, and becomes an efficacious sacrament. The tenacity with which this fatal error is adhered to, even in communions not connected with the State, is largely due to the substitution, in our English Bibles, of this vague foreign term of indefinite meaning, for the plain,intelligible English signification of the Greek word.”
We have taken the liberty to italicize one sentence in the above. And to these we must add, that it is much to be regretted that many who see the necessity of restoring the ordinance, as to the form, yet lose sight of the “great truths of Christianity” which are symbolized by it. Ignoring the truth that “sin is the transgression of the law,” and that repentance has respect to the law of God as faith has to the Son of God, Acts 20:21, they shut out the idea that death must precede burial, and introduce the very error so clearly pointed out by Dr. Conant. And thus we think we have fully justified our statement that the form, without regard to the order or relation, does not constitute it the baptism of the gospel. A person may be immersed, and yet so hold the rite in his faith and in his life as to destroy it, so far as it is a symbol of the death and resurrection of the Lord and of our death to sin and rising to walk in a new life of righteousness or obedience.
(To be Continued.)

“CASTING ALL YOUR CARE UPON HIM.”

How much the anxieties of life are increased by forgetting the little but comprehensive word “all” of the text! What father might not learn a lesson from his child, with whom he is starting for a journey. His little boy says, “Father, you will have to carry the big bag; I cannot; and I will carry the little one.” The strong father smiles, and says, “I think you had better let me carry both.” They start. After a few minutes, the little bag becomes a great burden, and the child, overheated and weary, says, “Father, you had better take the little bag too.”
One of the greatest lessons of life is for a child of God to let his Heavenly Father carry every burden; to cast all his care upon him. Little trials are a Christian’s great temptations. “Be careful for nothing; but in everything, by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God.” “Truly,” says Archbishop Leighton, “the godly are much in the wrong to themselves by not improving this their sweet privilege. They too often forget this their sweet way, and fret themselves to no purpose; wrestle with burdens themselves, and do not entirely and freely roll them over on God.” Many a man who never doubts God’s care of the whole church, to the minutest particular, is tempted to distrust God’s interest in the little things that concern his own daily life.
“Do I confide in him,” says the same writer, “for the steering and guidance of the whole ship, and shall I be peevishly doubting and distrusting about my pack in it?” The same age that invented the telescope, brought out the microscope. The same grace that reveals distant things as near, ought to discern our least cares as great to a Father’s love. “The very hairs of your head are all numbered.”—Christian Treasury.

NO FAITH IN PROPHECY.

By Charles P. Whitford

I am acquainted with some who claim the Bible to be a revelation of God’s will to man, and yet, at the same time, say they do not believe the prophecies it contains.
We read in Amos 3:7, “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secrets unto his servants the prophets.” That which is revealed becomes a revelation, and a revelation is something made known. Prophecy belongs to that portion of the Bible which may properly be called a revelation. The object of it is to forewarn the world of things to come, in time for all to make the necessary preparations. It is designed to reveal to us things of which we could not in any other way gain information. God never sends judgments upon the world unheralded. He does not punish men without giving them full opportunity to know for what cause the judgment is inflicted.
Did our friends who have no faith in prophecy ever consider that about one-third of the Bible is of a more or less prophetical character? Do they ever consider that the old world perished by the flood because they did not believe in the prophecy of Noah, and that the Jews suffered famine and captivity because they would not believe in the prophecy of Jeremiah, who warned them of coming perils? And will it not prove as dangerous now to reject the prophecies which are given to warn us of present duties and dangers? We believe it will.
There are no less than twenty-two distinct prophecies that point directly to the second, personal advent of Christ. One would suppose that all would be deeply interested in this important subject. And why are they not interested in it? Is it not because they do not wish the end to come, and therefore prefer to remain in ignorance? They are not ready for this event, but come it will, prepared or unprepared. We can assure you, dear reader, the sublime realities of the advent are already at the door.
In Rev. 14: 6-12 there are brought to view three advent messages, all immediately to precede the second advent. The first was given from 1840-4, the second followed at once, and the third and last is now rapidly swelling into the loud cry, and will close with the coming of Jesus on the white cloud to reap the harvest of the earth. Only a few more years, and all will be over. The strife for money and power, the sorrow and crime,—all is about to close in the final day of the advent. You do not believe it? Ah! the proof is too full for unbelief. You may shut your ears and close your eyes, but it will come by-and-by, whether you believe it or not. We exhort you to interest yourselves in this deeply interesting and important subject. Let the signs of the times admonish you to make no delay.
Do not wait to work out this or that plan, and then flatter yourself that you will be ready to investigate and obey the truth. Alas! that time seldom comes. Now is the time to work. The days are evil, therefore redeem the time.
CHARLES P. WHITFORD.
Continue reading: NO FAITH IN PROPHECY