Earlier text: General ArticlesOf the nations that established themselves upon the ruins of the Western Empire, the next one in order is the kingdom of the FRANKS, whose course we will now trace. "As the posterity of the Franks compose one of the greatest and most enlightened nations of Europe, the powers of learning and ingenuity have been exhausted in the discovery of their unlettered ancestors. To the tales of credulity have succeeded the systems of fancy. Every passage has been sifted, every spot has been surveyed, that might possibly reveal some faint traces of their origin. It has been supposed that Pannonia, that Gaul, that the northern parts of Germany, gave birth to that celebrated colony of warriors. At length the most rational critics, rejecting the fictitious emigrations of ideal conquerors, have acquiesced in a sentiment whose simplicity persuades us of its truth. They suppose that about the year [A. D.] 240, a new confederacy was formed under the name of Franks, by the old inhabitants of the Lower Rhine and the Weser. The present circle of Westphalia, the Landgraviate of Hesse, and the duchies of Brunswick and Luneburg, were the ancient seat of the Chauci, who, in their inaccessible morasses, defied the Roman arms; of the Cherusci, proud of the fame of Arminius; of the Catti, formidable by their firm and intrepid infantry; and of several other tribes of inferior power and renown. "The love of liberty was the ruling passion of these Germans; the enjoyment of it, their best treasure; the word that expressed that enjoyment, the most pleasing to their ear. They deserved, they assumed, they maintained the honorable epithet of Franks, or Freemen; which concealed, though it did not extinguish, the peculiar names of the several States of the confederacy. Tacit consent and mutual advantage dictated the first laws of the union; it was gradually cemented by habit and experience. The league of the Franks may admit of some comparison with the Helvetic [Swiss] body; in which every canton, retaining its independent sovereignty, consults with its brethren in the common cause, without acknowledging the authority of any supreme head, or representative assembly. But the principle of the two confederacies was extremely different. A peace of two hundred years has rewarded the wise and honest policy of the Swiss. An inconstant spirit, the thirst of rapine, and a disregard to the most solemn treaties, disgraced the character of the Franks." "The Rhine, though dignified with the title of safeguard of the provinces, was an imperfect barrier against the daring spirit of enterprise with which the Franks were actuated. Their rapid devastations stretched from the river to the foot of the Pyrenees; nor were they stopped by those mountains. Spain, which had never dreaded, was unable to resist, the inroads of the Germans. During twelve years [A. D. 256-268] the greatest part of the reign of Gallienus, that opulent country was the theater of unequal and destructive hostilities. Tarragona, the flourishing capital of a peaceful province, was sacked and almost destroyed; and so late as the days of Orosius, who wrote in the fifth century [cir. A. D. 415], wretched cottages, scattered amidst the ruins of magnificent cities, still recorded the rage of the barbarians. When the exhausted country no longer supplied a variety of plunder, the Franks seized on some vessels in the ports of Spain, and transported themselves into Mauritania. The distant province was astonished with the fury of these barbarians, who seemed to fall from a new world, as their name, manners, and complexion, were equally unknown on the coast of Africa."—Dec. and Fall, chap. 10, par. 22, 24. In July, A. D. 276, Probus became Emperor of Rome, and reigned to August, 282. He drove back and severely chastised the Franks, and other German tribes who had wandered into Gaul "in quest of booty." "The most important service which Probus rendered to the republic, was [A. D. 277] the deliverance of Gaul, and the recovery of seventy flourishing cities oppressed by the barbarians of Germany, who, since the death of Aurelian [January, A. D. 275], had ravaged that great province with impunity. Among the various multitude of those fierce invaders, we may distinguish, with some degree of clearness, three great armies, or rather nations, successively vanquished by the valor of Probus. He drove back the Franks into their morasses; a descriptive circumstance from whence we may infer that the confederacy known by the manly appellation of Free, already occupied the flat maritime country, intersected and almost overflown by the stagnating waters of the Rhine, and that several tribes of the Frisians and the Batavians had acceded to their alliance. "Among the useful conditions of peace imposed by Probus on the vanquished nations of Germany, was the obligation of supplying the Roman army with sixteen thousand recruits, the bravest and most robust of their youth. The emperor dispersed them through all the provinces, and distributed this dangerous reinforcement, in small bands of fifty or sixty each, among the national troops, judiciously observing that the aid which the republic derived from the barbarians should be felt but not seen. . . . The wisdom of Probus embraced a great and beneficial plan of replenishing the exhausted frontiers, by new colonies of captive or fugitive barbarians, on whom he bestowed lands, cattle, instruments of husbandry, and every encouragement that might engage them to educate a race of soldiers for the service of the republic. . . . But the expectations of Probus were too often disappointed. The impatience and idleness of the barbarians could ill brook the slow labors of agriculture. Their unconquerable love of freedom, rising against despotism, provoked them into hasty rebellions, alike fatal to themselves and to the provinces; nor could these artificial supplies, however repeated by succeeding emperors, restore the important limit of Gaul and Illyricum to its ancient and native vigor. "Of all the barbarians who abandoned their new settlements and disturbed the public tranquillity, a very small number returned to their own country. For a short season they might wander in arms through the empire; but in the end they were surely destroyed by the power of a warlike emperor. The successful rashness of a party of Franks was attended, however, with such memorable consequences that it ought not to be passed unnoticed. They had been established, by Probus, on the sea-coast of Pontus, with a view of strengthening the frontier against the inroads of the Alani. A fleet stationed in one of the harbors of the Euxine [Black Sea] fell into the hands of the Franks; and they resolved, through unknown seas, to explore their way from the mouth of the Phasis to that of the Rhine. They easily escaped through the Bosphorus and the Hellespont, and cruising along the Mediterranean, indulged their appetite for revenge and plunder by frequent descents on the unsuspecting shores of Asia, Greece, and Africa. The opulent city of Syracuse, in whose port the navies of Athens and Carthage had formerly been sunk, was sacked by a handful of barbarians, who massacred the greatest part of the trembling inhabitants. From the Island of Sicily, the Franks proceeded to the columns of Hercules, trusted themselves to the ocean, coasted round Spain and Gaul, and, steering their triumphant course through the British Channel, at length finished their surprising voyage, by landing in safety on the Batavian or Frisian shores. The example of their success, instructing their countrymen to conceive the advantages and to despise the dangers of the sea, pointed out to their enterprising spirit a new road to wealth and glory."—Id., chap. 12, par. 18, 21, 22. After this we find no important movement of the Franks, till the time of Constantius, the son of Constantine. At the death of Constantine, March 22, A. D. 337, the empire fell to his three sons—Constantine, Constans, and Constantius—and was partitioned accordingly. But "three years had scarcely elapsed before the sons of Constantine seemed impatient to convince mankind that they were incapable of contenting themselves with the dominions which they were unqualified to govern." Constantine invaded the dominions of Constans, was drawn into an ambuscade, where, with a few attendants, he was surprised, surrounded, and slain, March, A. D. 340. Constans survived him nearly ten years, when he was murdered, February, A. D. 350, by the command of Magnentius, an ambitious soldier, who had usurped the purple. This left Magnentius and Constantius to dispute the sole reign of the empire. The dispute was soon brought to a close, however, at the battle of Mursa (Essek) on the River Drave. Magnentius was defeated, and "throwing away the imperial ornaments, escaped with some difficulty from the pursuit of the light-horse, who incessantly followed his rapid flight from the banks of the Drave to the foot of the Julian Alps. He, however, managed to escape into Gaul, where he gathered together some forces, but was defeated the second time, and, to escape being given up to Constantius he killed himself by falling on his sword, Aug. 10, A. D. 353, leaving Constantius in undisputed possession of the empire. See Gibbon, chap. 18. A CHRISTIAN is a follower of Christ, that is, one who lives according to the precept and example of Christ. Says the apostle John: "He that saith he abideth in him [Christ] ought himself also so to walk, even as he [Christ] walked." 1 John 2:6. Then how did Christ walk? He says: "I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love." And of him the psalmist wrote: "Then said I [Christ], Lo, I come; in the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart." Ps. 40:7, 8; cf. Heb. 10:7-10. Christ had the law in his heart, and if we have a part in the new covenant we shall have the law written in our hearts. "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant. . . . This shall be the covenant that I will make: . . . After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people." Jer. 31:33. And then when the work of writing the law in our hearts is fully accomplished, we shall be like Christ. Says the apostle— "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be; but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law; for sin is the transgression of the law. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin." 1 John 3:2-5. Truly we may say with Paul: "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." Rom. 7:12. The Value of Inspiring Thoughts
To READ the inspiring and elevating thoughts of the great and good, and make them our own for the moment, is well, but, if it so be that our virtue and common sense shall heartily indorse them, will it not pay to give them our careful consideration, until they shall become our deep and genuine feeling?—Sel. The Seventh Day Well Known.
THE following, which we copy from the Sabbath Memorial, was written by Edward Elwall, in 1738. It is an extract from "An Answer to the Dissertation of my beloved Brother, Thomas Chubb, concerning the Time for keeping a Sabbath." We preserve the quaint style of the original, both as to expression and capitalization, but the reader will see that Sabbatarians have not had to make any change in their argument in the last one hundred and fifty years. Now nothing can be more vain and quibbling, than pretending to doubt, and query which is the seventh Day, on which God rested at the Creation; and which he blessed, and sanctified, viz., set apart to be kept holy. Because thou must confess, that God certainly knew which was the seventh Day, from the Creation to that Time, when he gave the Law. And thou must own that the people knew which was the seventh Day: For, otherwise, God would have spoke unintelligibly to 'em, which I am sure, a man of thy Sense, will not so much as think, he being infinitely wise, and just, and good; and would not command them to keep a Day which they did not know. Shall not the Judge of all the Earth do right? And now I have brought the certain knowledge of it down to two thousand five hundred Years at least, after the Creation, let me from thence bring it down to the Time wherein we live. No one will pretend, or suppose, that the Israelites could lose the Knowledge of the seventh Day, whilst they lived in Canaan: If there was any possibility of it, it must be in the Captivity. And yet nothing of this happened, nor ever was so much as pretended. For when Nehemiah returned from the Captivity, and saw some irreligious People leading Asses, with Sheaves, etc., on the Sabbath, he loudly exclaims at their prophaning the Sabbath-Day. And tells them, that these were some of the Sins, which caused God to send their Fathers into Captivity, and exhorts 'em not to provoke the Lord, by those Sins of prophaning the Sabbath; as the Prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and the rest, had warned them before. And long after this, in the Time of the Grecian Empire, we find by all the History of Maccabees, constant Testimonials of the Sabbath-Day, down to the Time of the Roman Empire. And then no Man was at any Loss to know which was the Sabbath-Day. The Prophet Jesus knew it as well, as the Prophet Moses did before. And told us the Sabbath was made for Man, not for Israel only, but for Mankind, as the Word Man there signifies. And all the Disciples, and Holy Women, that followed Christ through all his Preaching, and Suffering, and to his Death and Burial, they all knew which was the Day: And therefore on the sixth Day, they prepared Spices, and Ointments, and rested the Sabbath Day, according to the commandment. And early on the first Day, they went about their Work, carrying their Spices, Ointments, etc. And so did the Apostles travel quite to Emmaus on the first Day, and back again to Jerusalem, fifteen English Miles. But all of 'em knew the Sabbath, and preach'd every Sabbath Day, as one may see, by reading the 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, Chapters of Acts. Christ had taught 'em the same; for as his Custom was, he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath Day, so that he knew it well. The Apostle Paul did the same long after; as his Manner was, he went into the Synagogue on the Sabbath Day. And from that Time, to this, all Nations that worship the true God, have known which is the seventh Day, yea, our own Parliament Rolls, even to this Day, call it Die Sabbati, the Sabbath Day. And the Jews, who are almost in every trading Nation under Heaven, do all know the seventh Day, and never were at any Loss to avow it, but continue to keep it in its constant Rotation to them in every different Longitude and Latitude where they live upon the Face of the Earth. Neither is it possible ever to be lost, because God hath said, while the World endureth, the Seed-time and Harvest, Summer and Winter, Heat and Cold, Day and Night, shall not cease. Therefore as Day and Night will never cease, so neither did, nor ever will the seventh Day, cease to be known, while the World endureth. For though the Heathens, who had forsaken the most High, thought Scorn of his Law, and forsook his Way; notwithstanding the Law perisheth not, but abideth in its Force. And though they have called the seventh Day, by their heathenish Name, Saturday, because they worshiped on that Day the Planet Saturn (as they call it), and have changed the Names of the first Day, second Day, third Day, fourth Day, fifth Day, sixth Day, which God gave them; and the Generality of People still chose to call 'em by their heathenish Names, rather than follow God, and call 'em by the Names that he gave them, and thereby seem to desire to darken the Light of God's holy Sabbath, because their Popes, and Prelates, and Priests, have hid their Eyes from God's Sabbath, and have set up a Day that they have devised out of their own Hearts, which neither God, nor his Prophets, Christ, nor his Apostles, ever commanded; yet God hath joined the seventh Day, and the Sabbath, together; and, as Christ said, in a like Case, What God hath joined together, let not Man put asunder. Why Do Men Die?
By R. F. Cottrell
MUCH fault is laid upon the God of the Bible because he lets men suffer and die, and this, in many instances, by those who extol the god of nature. To those who reject the God of revelation, and deify nature or any other fancied god, it is a sufficient answer to say that the god they admire is just as cruel—that he permits just as many to suffer and die—as the God of the Bible. As I was speaking once of the mercy and tender compassion of the Lord, that "like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him," I was met with this objection: Thousands upon thousands have been and are suffering and dying of famine. The almighty God of the Bible could, if he would, prevent all this by a single word of his power, and give them food; but he does not; therefore— Now the great aggregate of all this suffering is indeed terrible to contemplate; but, as individuals, each one only suffers all that his nature is able to endure, and is relieved by death. And such has been the lot of all the countless millions that have lived from the beginning of the world to the present generation, with but two exceptions. The question, then, is resolved to this: Is it right for God to permit men to die? Our Bible informs us that God allowed our race to choose between obedience and life, and disobedience and death. Our first parents sinned, and death followed. "The wages of sin is death." At this point God might have given over the race to death and oblivion; but his tender mercy devised a way to redeem man from death, and the Father accepted the voluntary offer of the Son to assume our nature and die for us; so that, being redeemed by a resurrection from the death into which we had fallen, we might, as individuals, have another probation, that by faith and obedience and patient endurance we might have everlasting life in a world to come. "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." The provision is made, and all are invited freely to come. We may become the children of God by faith in Christ. We are saved by faith in Christ. We are saved by faith and hope. Death still is the lot of the righteous, as well as the wicked. It is at the resurrection of the just that the saints are actually redeemed from death. "For the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible; . . . then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory." It will be seen in the end that God has dealt with our race in great mercy. He withheld not his Son, but gave him up for us all. We are his children by creation, but have become the children of the devil by doing his works. Still we may become the children of God by faith in Jesus Christ. "Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God." God has done, and will do, the very best for us that he can. He gives us the privilege of becoming sons of God and heirs of eternal life. And, "like as a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them that fear him; for he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust. As for man, his days are as grass; as a flower of the field, so he flourisheth; for the wind passeth over it, and it is gone; and the place thereof shall know it no more. But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto children's children; to such as keep his covenant, and to those that remember his commandments to do them." PRAYER FOR WATCHFULNESS.
By Whittier
Oh, Thou, who in the garden's shade
Didst wake thy weary ones again,
Who slumbered at that fearful hour,
Forgetful of thy pain,
Bend o'er us now as over them,
And set our sleep-bound spirits free;
Nor leave us slumbering in the watch
Our souls should keep with thee.
— Whittier. THE simplest lessons are often the most impressive and abiding. Many years ago a child was leaving the junior department of a city school for a new home in the country. As he left, his old teacher put her hand upon his head, and in a single, simple sentence, commended him to God and to good. Years passed, and the child grew up, and read books—English, French, German, Greek—on ethics, and listened to lectures on the same subject, by famous professors, in a venerable university. But no word which he read in the pages of ancient philosophers, or listened to from the lips of loving teachers, ever proved to him a beacon-light like the simple words of his old school mistress. In the time of temptation, the learned discussions of the philosophers were forgotten, or were remembered only to cause bewilderment as to the basis of right and duty; but the lessons of childhood shone then most clearly in the secret chamber of the soul, and neither time nor doubt had power to dim its radiance. That, nothing could obscure; that, nothing can obscure. Here is the power which God has given to those who train the little ones. Perhaps neither mother nor teacher can lead the child into the knowledge of the world's deeper wisdom; but a few simple, earnest words for God and good, from either, may do far more—they may enter into the very being of the child, to be a strength in weakness, a refuge in temptation, and a cherished memory in the long, hard conflict of earthly life. This is not the wisdom which is taught by the speculative thinkers; but it is the best and most enduring wisdom, nevertheless.—Sunday School Times. Religion and Human Character
By Christian at Work
RELIGION is a necessary, an indispensable element, in any great human character. There is no living without it. It is the tie that connects man with his Creator and holds him to his throne.—Christian at Work. WE have now learned the danger which threatened the Galatian brethren, and can understand Paul's fear for them, and his statement that they desired to be "under the law,"-in bondage to the elements of the world. It will therefore be a short task to examine the remaining portion of this fourth chapter of Galatians, and note what bearing it has on the law. The apostle continues:- "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a free woman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory; for these are the two covenants; the one from the Mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all." Gal. 4:21-26. It will be seen at once that in these verses three things are placed in contrast with three other things: Hagar, ancient Jerusalem, and the old covenant are placed in opposition to Sarah, the new Jerusalem, and the new covenant. Ishmael and Isaac stand respectively as representatives of those under the old covenant, and those under the new. It will also be noticed that those who are free are the children of the New Jerusalem, the new covenant, while those in bondage, "under the law," are children of the old Jerusalem, the old covenant. The explanation of this chapter, then, involves an explanation of the two covenants. This we can do only in the briefest manner. The first covenant was made with the children of Israel when they left Egypt. See Heb. 8:8, 9. The terms of that covenant are found in Ex. 19:3-8; 24:3-8. They were simply as follows: God promised to make of the Israelites a great nation, a kingdom of priests, if they, in turn, would obey his law. This they promised to do. Thus the covenant, or agreement, was made. The law of God was the basis of the covenant, or that concerning which the covenant was made. See Ex. 24:8. Now notice what this covenant required of the people. The Lord had first promised to do certain things for them if they would obey his voice. Then they heard his voice speaking the law in thunder tones from Sinai, and after that they renewed their promise of obedience, saying, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Ex. 24:7. This was nothing less than an agreement to yield perfect obedience to the law. Those who "hear the law," know that it covers every act or thought of man's entire life. Therefore, if the Jews had fulfilled their promise, they would have merited all the blessings which God promised them; but, unfortunately, they did not, neither could they. They had already broken the law many times, and were sinful by nature, so that it was utterly impossible for them, in their own strength, to yield perfect obedience to it. See Rom. 8:7, 8; Gal. 5:17. Now in this covenant there was no provision for the forgiveness of sins either past or future,-no hint of Christ, through whom alone forgiveness and power to keep the law can come. They had virtually made a promise to make themselves righteous before God. But every one who attempts to do this must fail, and therefore it is truly said that that covenant gendered to bondage. Let no one imagine that we mean that that covenant made them under obligation to keep the law. The obligation to keep the law existed before any covenant was made; but we mean that that covenant left them just where it found them,-in condemnation because of violated law. Had there never been any other covenant than this, the whole world must have been lost. (Rom. 3:19.) Some will ask if God did not know that they could not of themselves keep the law perfectly, and if it was not trifling with them to make such a covenant with them. God did indeed know that they had no power to do as they agreed, but in making the covenant he was not trifling with them. The making of such an agreement was the most forcible way that could be devised to bring home to their minds a sense of their condition. In their vain endeavors to keep the whole law in their own strength, they would learn their need, and that would turn their attention to that other covenant, called the new covenant, but which in reality had been in existence ever since the fall. Here it is:- "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord. But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord; for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord; for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." Jer. 31:31-34. In what respect does this covenant differ from the other? Is it in regard to the keeping of the law? No; for that is required in both. But in this there is forgiveness of sins, and the blotting out of transgressions. More than this, the law is to be written in the hearts of the people, and that means that they will be enabled to keep it perfectly. See Ps. 40:8. This work is done by Christ. Through him pardon is secured, and he enables us to be made the righteousness of God. It will readily be seen that, whereas the other covenant found and left the people in bondage to sin, and under condemnation of death, this covenant enabled them to become free from sin and condemnation. "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Rom. 8:1. Now the application of Paul's words is easy. Hagar was a bondwoman, and Ishmael, her son, was begotten according to the flesh. Sarah was a freewoman, and her son, Isaac, was a child of promise, born not according to the flesh, but when, humanly speaking, such a thing as the birth of a child was impossible. Since Ishmael "was born after the flesh," he is a fit type of those who are "in the flesh;" and in this condition are all careless sinners, as well as all who attempt to secure salvation by their own unaided efforts. When men have once sinned, it is contrary to anything in nature that they should ever be made to appear perfectly righteous,-as though they had never sinned. But God, by a miracle of grace, which is manifested through Jesus Christ, causes this to be done, so that the sinner may stand before the law uncondemned. And so those who have obtained this freedom may be fitly represented by Isaac, who was born contrary to the order of nature, solely because of the promise of God. So likewise the old Jerusalem, which was rejected of God because it had killed the prophets, and stoned them which were sent to it, and had rejected Christ, is very aptly termed the mother of those who are in bondage because of sin. The New Jerusalem, however, is called the Bride, the Lamb's wife (See Rev. 21:2, 9, 10, and onward); and since Christ is the Everlasting Father (Isa. 9:6), and it is he alone that gives freedom (Rom. 8:1; John 8:33-36), the city is very properly called the mother of all those who are saved from sin. "But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now." Gal. 4:29. This is only another form of what we find in Gal. 5:17: "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary the one to the other; so that ye cannot do the things that ye would." "Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son; for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman." Gal. 4:30. Exactly; the works of the flesh must be put away, for "they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God." "They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." Gal. 5:24. The apostle, having shown the bondage in which all sinners are held, and how Christ alone can set men free, and enable them to do the requirements of the law, says: "So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free." Gal. 4:31. And following that, how appropriate is this exhortation: "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." Gal. 5:1. Compare this with Gal. 4:8, 9. Here we might leave this portion of Scripture, since we have fully explained verse 21, which is all that we set out to do; but the one who has read thus far will scarcely fail to read the verses immediately following the one last quoted, and will doubtless be puzzled over one or two expressions which are there found. A few words will suffice to explain them. We quote:- "Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith." Gal. 5:2-5. The reader will recall what has before been said concerning circumcision and other ceremonies. It is evident that Paul did not mean that circumcision was in itself so terrible a thing that the receiving of it would cause a person to fall from grace; for the apostle himself circumcised Timothy as an act of expediency. See Acts 16:1-3. It must be, then, that he refers to circumcision as taught by the men who came down from Judea, and who were trying to turn away Paul's converts from the faith. They urged it as the means of justification. They said: "Except ye be circumcised, . . . ye cannot be saved." Acts 15:1. But since pardon and justification can be secured through Christ alone, those who adopted circumcision for that purpose, necessarily rejected Christ; and if they had previously accepted Christianity, of course their rejection of Christ was a fall from grace. Christ was of no effect to any one who expected to be justified by his own works. But we, on the contrary, says Paul, "wait for the hope of righteousness by faith." This shows that the mode of justification from sin is the subject still under discussion. But how about the expression, "I testify to every327 man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law"? Does that mean that if a man is circumcised he must keep the law, but that if he is not circumcised he may disregard the law? Not by any means. The law is of universal obligation; all men, whatever their condition, are in duty bound to keep it. It is because this duty rests upon every individual, that all the world are guilty before God; for all have transgressed the law. Since all have transgressed the law, they are condemned. Now "the doers of the law shall be justified." None others can be. But "a doer of the law" is one who can present a record of obedience unbroken by a single sin. Thus it follows that, after all have sinned, by the deeds of the law no flesh can be justified. Now suppose a man starts out with the determination to secure righteousness without the aid of Christ. What must he do? Why he must do the whole law. Very well; suppose that it is possible for him to keep the law perfectly for the remainder of his life, will he be lacking in anything? Certainly; for the law demands obedience for that part of his life which he spent in sin, before he attempted to do right. Perfect obedience is required of him who would stand as a doer of the law. So Paul virtually says: If you set out to be justified by circumcision, or by any other work, it will be necessary for you to show a perfectly clean record; you must your own self take away those past sins, so that the law will witness to your perfect righteousness,-so that it may appear that you have never sinned. But this he cannot do, and therefore he is in the fullest sense "a debtor,"-eternally a debtor. He is in the condition of the man who owed his lord ten thousand talents, and had nothing with which to pay, and who was cast into prison till he should pay it all. For him there was no hope. To all eternity he must remain a debtor to his lord. So with the man who seeks to stand justified before God by any works of his own. There is a depth of meaning to the words, "he is a debtor to do the whole law," which the casual reader does not catch. The hopelessness of the bondage into which the man is cast who goes about to establish his own righteousness can scarcely be conceived. In this bondage we all are, or have been. Let us ever rejoice that "with the Lord there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption" (Ps. 130:7); and that the blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin. W. A Little Confused.
By James White
THE editor of the Tennessee Baptist, having received a copy of Professor Pettengell's book, "The Unspeakable Gift," feels moved to do something to stay the tide of "heresy," and gives the following notice:— "A RICH TREAT FOR OUR SUBSCRIBERS.—We have engaged our stated contributor, A. J. Frost, D. D., of Sacramento, Cal., to review thoroughly the prevailing theory of Conditional Immortality, or Annihilationism. This is a modern phase of old Universalism and Restorationism, which is extensively prevailing in many parts of the North and West, and is destined, at an early day, to be the most popular delusion of this age." If Mr. Frost knows no more about the doctrine of conditional immortality than the editor of the Tennessee Baptist seems to, his review will indeed be "a rich treat." To say that conditional immortality is a modern phase of Universalism and Restorationism is about as true as it would be to say that Presbyterianism is a modern form of Catholicism, or that Luther was a special emissary of Pope Leo X., or that Christianity is a modern form of paganism. Conditional immortality is as much different from Universalism as daylight is from darkness. Indeed it is the only doctrine that can successfully combat Universalism. Universalism teaches that all men will by some means be saved, whatever their belief and practice; the doctrine of conditional immortality teaches just what the Bible teaches, that, "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life." The one robs Christ of all his glory, making his sacrifice a useless thing, while the other crowns him "Lord of all." No man can be a Universalist or a Spiritualist so long as he holds to the doctrine of conditional immortality; but the one who believes in natural immortality has no safeguard against either delusion.