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." 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 deplore. 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 from 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.
REMISSION OF SIN—WHEN GRANTED.
It is a point that has elicited much discussion, whether or not sin is remitted in the act of baptism. Some—yes, many—have strenuously insisted that we are justified in this rite; and that neither before nor in any other way. Or, that remission of sin is granted in this action, and not otherwise. Though we would give the rite all the importance which the Scriptures accord to it, and that is not small, we cannot indorse that view. We find that that idea was held at a very early age in the church; and with it was held the idea of "baptismal regeneration;" the idea that gifts and graces, even a divine life, were imparted in baptism; that without baptism no one could possibly be saved; and for this reason infants were baptized. Even Cyprian, one of the best of the early African bishops, taught that infants should be baptized very soon after birth, that thus they might avoid the danger of the loss of a soul! Unfortunately, these false views of baptism, very early ingrafted into some parts of the church, have not entirely been put away. The same false application is still made, if not always to the same class, that is, to infants.
On this subject, as on other subjects, injustice is done to the Scriptures by drawing conclusions from a single text, without taking pains to examine other texts, and so secure a harmony of the evidence. The same virtue and power may be ascribed to faith, yet again, it is said to be nothing alone. At first, a penitent is doubtless accepted on his faith alone; but as duties are met, they must be discharged, or our faith is neutralized and we lose the favor we had enjoyed. Faith is the spring of action, and action is the life of faith.
The relation of truths must be regarded. However important a truth or a duty may be, if it is removed from its place and its relation, it is perverted. And a truth perverted is often the equivalent of error.
The word translated "for," in Peter's words, "for the remission of sin," (eis) is most frequently rendered in, to, or into; the latter is generally to be preferred. It is translated into over one hundred and twenty times in Matthew alone; and is translated nearly twenty different ways. Greenfield gives it the following definitions, and in the following order: On, into, upon; in, among; to, towards, near to, by; in, on, towards a person; towards, against; to, even to, until; to, for; that, so that, in order that, for the purpose that; for, about, concerning, as to, in respect to, on account of; in, at, among; before, in the presence of; according to, in accordance with.
We would not by any means convey the idea that either of these definitions might with equal propriety be applied in any given case. We only wish to show the latitude which usage gives to the word, and that a definition may not be selected and applied arbitrarily to the text in question. "In order to" is by no means the first definition, and if it is to be appropriated here, a reason must be given outside of the definition itself. Nor do we deny the importance of accepting the proper definition of words as the means of settling controversies; but when different definitions are given to the same word we need to exercise care in distinguishing between them in any case. In this case we must be guided to some extent by the doctrine of remission as presented in the Scriptures. As this is a great subject, we shall be obliged to present some thoughts on the scriptural view of remission as briefly as possible.
EDITOR.
Running From Sin
We once heard Dr. W. F. Broaddus tell of a little girl who, in the days when the conversion of children was not the subject of as much prayer as now, applied for membership in a Baptist church. "Were you a sinner," asked the old deacon, "before this change of which you now speak?" "Yes, sir," she replied. "Well, are you now a sinner?" "Yes, sir, I feel I am a greater sinner than ever." "Then," continued the deacon, "what change can there be in you?" "I don't know how to explain it," she said; "but I used to be a sinner running after sin, and now I hope I am a sinner running from sin." They received her and for many years she was a bright and shining light. Pray for the conversion of your children, and put your heart into the Sabbath-school; work for it more than you have ever done.—R. Herald.
How Are You?
The Duke of Richmond was once annoyed at the manner in which a lawyer questioned a witness, and gave the wordy lawyer a lesson the next time he met him, by addressing him as follows: “Ha, is it you,—? Now pray listen to the question I am going to ask you. Be attentive. Remember you will answer what you please; and, remember, I don’t care a rush what you answer. How are you?”
THE OBJECT OF THE SABBATH-SCHOOL.
By Erwin House
THE object of the Sabbath-school is the salvation of the child; to bring him to Christ, to develop in him the life of Christ, and to insure for him a place with Christ at the right hand of the Father. The object is a unit, but the appliances by which this work is begun and carried on are various.
No child can come to Christ except with a knowledge of the way. There is no way except that described in the Scriptures. The child is to be informed, either by parent or teacher, of his need of a Saviour. There is to be developed in his understanding and impressed upon his heart the character and work of that Saviour, the suffering, saving love of Jesus, his complete willingness and ability to redeem, purify, and bless.
But the object of the Sabbath-school is not only to bring the child to Christ, but to bring him now. Nothing less—nothing more. Nothing more in time or in eternity than this. "Nothing is done while any thing is left to be done," was the motto of a great man. "Nothing is done unless my scholars are saved," ought to be the motto of every teacher.
The atmosphere of the school-room should be such that, on entering it, every child, even the youngest, will feel that the aim of the exercises and arrangements is to glorify God, and to bring souls to Jesus. That such a condition can be reached, the experience of many faithful laborers will testify. "Our school," says a Scottish superintendent, "resolved at one time to lead all other schools in Glasgow in raising missionary money. Teachers, male and female, pledged themselves to constant effort. It was not long till the Bible classes, the junior and the infant classes caught the infection. By the year's end the banner was ours. Considering our numbers and wealth we surpassed every other organization in the city. Another school that I knew, resolved on being the most orderly, I might say the most silent, in its discipline. Its order of exercises was printed on canvas, and the canvas unrolled, without creak or rustle, as the time called for a change of the exercises. The superintendent said nothing, the canvas did the talking, and the teachers and pupils instructed and recited in whisper. At last, it came to my mind that if our school could raise the most money for missions, and a neighboring one could produce, as it believed, the best example of order, possibly ours might be the most successful in winning souls for Jesus. The conviction dwelt upon my heart, and at last I gave it utterance. I talked with my teachers, and they were a unit in regard to it.
"Thenceforward the prayers, the singing, the lessons, the direct and side instructions were all with this one aim—Jesus—souls for Jesus. The scholars soon comprehended the new state, and each one felt an obligation to assist. In the efforts made, several of the older boys and girls were led penitents to the Saviour. It was a year of blessed and glorious triumph. We received the name of Immediatists; but we were willing to be called Immediatists, or anything else, so God was honored and Jesus glorified."
A school unconsciously takes on the spirit of its officers and teachers, particularly that of the superintendent. If the superintendent's heart has a single aim, and he works steadily and faithfully to that, it will not be long till the individual members of the school will make the discovery and respond to it.
But observe, that no converted child can be retained in the school or the church without constant care and instruction. There must be inculcated in the mind of the child profound Christian beliefs and opinions. He must be informed concerning the character, providence, and government of God; must know the duties, relations, and destinies of man; of the excellence and obligations of virtue, of the wickedness and danger of vice, of the right use and responsibilities of talent, of influence, and wealth, and the sinfulness of the heart; the danger and divine salvation of the soul.
And further, the child's heart must be inspired with Christian sentiments of reverence for the Divine Being, and his works and word; with profound love and gratitude to the Heavenly Father, and to the Saviour of men; with an active respect and love for mankind, for friends, for country, and the race; and with a profound regard for all that is true, honest, generous, gentle, and of good report.
There also must be formed habits of industry, economy, temperance, self-denial, liberality, courtesy, kindness; in a word, all habits of public and private virtue.
And yet further, this Christian culture embraces scholarship in Bible learning, Bible language and literature, the meaning of the terms prophet, priest, patriarch, temple, altar, sacrifice, repentance, faith, charity, atonement, redemption, grace, salvation, glory, blessing, and hundreds of others, which occur constantly in our religious utterances. There must be a comprehension likewise of Bible geography, of Bible biography, Bible history, Bible antiquities, Bible ethics, the grand system of moral precepts taught in the sacred pages, and Bible theology, that sublime scheme of doctrines; each and all of these should have their specific place and systematic treatment in the Sabbath-school.
If all the children in all the Sabbath-schools in the country, together with all the officers and teachers, were to-day converted and in the church, the necessity for culture would not be less, but as imperative as ever. Emotional Christianity—a Christianity of demonstration and of feeling may be well enough, but no Christianity can last that has not at its base an intelligent faith.
The skepticism of the age is to be met by heads clear and well informed, and by hearts sanctified by the Holy Spirit.
In this culture the storing of the mind with Scripture passages and the forms of sound doctrine in our Articles of Religion and the Catechism, can scarcely be too highly estimated; for although the child may not at the time comprehend in all their breadth the instructions imparted, yet in the advancing years the time will come when they shall prove a bulwark of defense, and when such garnered truth shall stand forth in more than an angel's radiance, dispelling the darkness of the path, kindling the heart, and preparing the soul for victory in every conflict.—Erwin House, A. M.
The Sabbath School.
By Malcolm
POETRY OF TEACHING.
"Come ye children, hearken unto me: I will teach you the fear of the Lord." Ps. 34:11.
Despise them not. Would’st thou a jewel slight?
Each one before thee is a parent’s pride.
This little thing, in tattered corduroy,
A mother with a mother’s fondness loves,
And would not for your large estate exchange.
Methinks at morn she kissed his cherry cheeks;
He lightens labor to yon son of toil,
Who, while he wipes the sweat from off his brow,
Thinks of his son—his hopeful little boy,
Whom he has dandled oft upon his knees,
And daily pleads for at the throne of grace.
Each one’s a favorite at home, and each—
Why not?—should also be beloved in school.
Desist from teaching, ye who love them not;
For who can render up their second selves
To those whose welfare they have not at heart?
—Malcolm.
CHURCH MANNERS.
Be on time. No one has a right to disturb a congregation or a preacher by being tardy.
Never look around to see who is coming in when the door opens. It diverts your own and others' attention from the exercises, and is discourteous to the leader.
Never talk or whisper in church, especially after the exercises are opened.
Never pull out your watch to see what time it is when the text is announced, or during the sermon. Better to feed on a sermon than to time it.
"Never lean your head on the pew rail before you, as though indifferent to the preacher."
Conform if possible, in conscience, to the usages of the church in which you worship. Kneel, stand, bow, accordingly.
Never manifest your disapprobation of what is being said by unpleasant sounds, or signs, or by hastily leaving.
Do not fidget, as though the service were a weariness. Be quiet and decorous to the very end.
Do not put on your overcoat or adjust your wrappings till after the benediction.
No gentleman ever defiles a place of worship with tobacco.
Never be one of a staring crowd about the door or in the vestibule, before or after service.
Do nothing out of keeping with the time, place, and purpose of a religious assembly.
Let your politeness be positive. Invite the near stranger to a seat. Offer him a hymn-book, or share with him your own. Be cordial to all, but do not be offended if you are not specially noticed.—Tomlinson's Handy-book.
NOTICE TO SABBATH-SCHOOLS.
By Editor
WILL the Sabbath-schools in the southern part of the State please send in their quarterly reports immediately. We have as yet received reports from but two, viz: Lemoore and San Pasqual. Blanks were sent to every school three weeks ago, but if any have failed to receive them they can be supplied by addressing the State Secretary, W. J. BOSTWICK, Oakland.
VALUABLE BOOKS FOR BIBLE STUDENTS.
The Church, School, and its Officers, by J. H. Vincent, D. D. This thoroughly instructive and interesting volume was written mainly for ministers and teachers, and for officers of the church. 224 pp. 75 cts.
Hand-Book of Bible Geography. Containing the Name, Pronunciation, and Meaning of every Place, Nation, and Tribe mentioned in both the Canonical and Apocryphal Scriptures. By Rev. Geo. H. Whitney, A. M. Illustrated by one hundred Engravings, and forty Maps and Plans. 400 pp. $2.50
Bible Manners and Customs. Containing Descriptions of the Ancient Manners and Customs mentioned in the Bible, and explaining over three thousand Scripture Texts. By James M. Freeman, D. D. Illustrated by 168 Engravings, and accompanied by an Analytical Index, a Textual Index, and a Topical Index. 515 pp. $2.50
A Dictionary of the Holy Bible, for general use in the study of the Scriptures; with engravings, maps, and tables. Pub. by Am. Tract Society. 534 pp. $1.25
Cruden's Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, with a Concordance of the books called Apocrypha, and a Life of the Author, also an Alphabetical Table of Proper Names with the signification of the words in their original languages. 856 pp. $1.75
Cruden's Concordance condensed, a Complete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures, on the basis of Cruden, edited by John Eadie, D. D. Pub. by Am. Tract Society. 561 pp. $1.00
The Art of Questioning, with an introductory address on Training Classes, by J. G. Fitch. 15 cts.
The Use of Illustrations in S. S. Teaching, by J. M. Freeman. 15 cts.
The Art of Securing Attention in a S. S. Class, by J. G. Fitch. 15 cts.
Pilgrim's Progress. Firmly and beautifully bound, printed on heavy tint paper, contains 36 engravings, and has marginal references to such texts of Scripture as are illustrated by the story. 336 pp. $1.50
Dowling's History of Romanism. From the earliest corruptions of Christianity to the proclamation of Papal infallibility, and the deposition of Pius IX. as a temporal sovereign. It refutes the errors and superstitions of Romanism, tells the story of their origin, exhibits the workings of the iniquitous system, reviews historically its domination over kings and princes, its oppression of the consciences, and tortures of the bodies of men, and the efforts of different ones at different times to relieve Christendom of its terrible thralldom. Price in Muslin, $4.00
Half Morocco, $4.75
Fables of Infidelity and Facts of Faith. Being an examination of the evidences of infidelity, by Rev. Robert Patterson. 528 pp. $1.75
Case's Bible Atlas. A new and comprehensive atlas to illustrate the Old and New Testaments, containing fifteen maps with explanatory notes on each map, and a full and accurate index. Also an article on the Jewish and Roman modes of computing time mentioned in the Scriptures. List of maps:—
The maps are clearly lettered and distinctly printed and the index is more complete and perfect than we have seen in any other Bible Atlas. Over a thousand places are given in alphabetical order with figures showing the map in which it is given and letters indicating the latitude and longitude near which the place will be found.
CASE'S BIBLE ATLAS.
This Atlas contains the following list of maps:—
Distribution of Nations after the Deluge.
Gentile Countries, and Nations of the Old Testament.
The Exodus, or Journeyings of the Israelites from Egypt to Canaan.
Modern Egypt and Sinai (Physical).
Holy Land as allotted by Joshua to the Twelve Tribes of Israel.
Kingdoms of Judah and Israel.
United Kingdom of Saul, David, and Solomon.
Lands of the Jewish Captivities.
Plan of Ancient Jerusalem.
Solomon's Temple and the Tabernacle (Bird's-eye View).
Palestine in the time of our Lord.
Modern Palestine (Physical).
Sea of Galilee and Environs of Jerusalem.
St. Paul's Journeys.
Modern Jerusalem.
Prevailing Religions of the World.
Address, Signs of the Times, Oakland, Cal.
DOCTOR BENSON'S SUNDAY BOOK.
UNDER the head, "The Jewish Sabbath Abolished," the Doctor does himself as much discredit as in any point in his book. We might notice that he has placed himself in antagonism with the standards of his own church. But having so largely contradicted the Bible, we esteem it a small matter that he also contradicts the Methodist Discipline!
In endeavoring to prove the abolition of the Sabbath he has made reference to but few scriptures, but in noticing those few he has been peculiarly unfortunate. He has made sad work with the word of inspiration to prove the entire abolition of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. Recognizing the truth, evident to every reader, that no day is enjoined in the fourth commandment but the seventh day, in his zeal against the seventh day he has made an onslaught on the very existence of that commandment, as we propose to show. Then the reader will inquire, What ground of Sabbath obligation remains if the Sabbath of the decalogue is abolished? We leave the Doctor and his admirers to answer. If it is any satisfaction to them to sail with the "Disciples" of Alexander Campbell, or rather drift, into antinomianism, they are welcome to it. On this subject we much prefer the company of Wesley and Fletcher, of whose writings the Methodist ministers of this day seem to be unmindful if not altogether ignorant. "If we had been in the days of our fathers." We will erect a monument to Wesley and his associates, the champions of the authority of the law of God, while we feast on antinomian diet,—and thus put down Seventh-day Adventism!
His first proof of the abolition of the Sabbath is found in Col. 2:16, 17. And the intelligent reader would never imagine where he finds the evidence in this text. It is in the fact that the apostle uses the genitive plural, sabbatone, the identical form that is used in the Septuagint in the fourth commandment! We have no words sufficient to express our astonishment that a sane man should present such a reason. It shows how hard pressed for argument are the enemies of the Sabbath of the Lord. Let us notice a few facts respecting the fourth commandment:—
It enjoins the observance of only the seventh day.
It says the seventh day is the Sabbath, or rest day, of the Lord God.
It says it became the Sabbath of the Lord because the Lord rested upon it when he made heaven and earth.
It says that because the Creator rested upon it from the work of creation, he blessed and hallowed, or sanctified it.
These are facts quite beyond dispute, and they prove,
That the seventh day is not "the Jewish Sabbath," there being nothing peculiar to the Jews or to that dispensation in its origin and sanctification.
That it is not a shadow or type—that it does not point forward to anything in the gospel. It is only a memorial of the Creator's work, established before sin entered into this world, and therefore it is not referred to in Col. 2:16, 17. There were three feasts in the Jewish system, two of them of seven days each, the first and last of which were sabbaths, in which no work was to be done. Also the day of atonement was a sabbath. These sabbaths all fell on a particular day of the month, coming annually. No regard to the day of the week was had in their observance. They are all enumerated in Lev. 23. In verses 37, 38, they are enjoined as feasts and holy convocations "Beside the Sabbaths of the Lord." The Sabbaths of the Lord were weekly—the seventh day of every week. The seventh day became the Sabbath, or rest day, of the Lord when the Lord rested from his work of creation. It is a memorial of that work. It was sanctified in Eden, before the fall. It is no more typical than is marriage; neither of these primeval institutions is affected by changes of dispensations. Both of them originated in the mind and will of God, whereas, all typical institutions grew out of the necessity of redemption—a necessity which arose from the rebellion of man. Did God institute the Sabbath, and bless and sanctify the seventh day because man was a sinner and needed a Saviour? Every one knows better than that. Why, then, will men of education, of scholarly attainments, professed teachers of the word of God, take such absurd positions? Why will professed followers of Christ let their prejudices and their worldly positions so sadly pervert their judgments?
The truth on this subject is easy to see. The seventh-day Sabbath—the Sabbath of the Lord God—is not referred to in Col. 2:16, 17. That text reads: "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days; which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ." Meats, drinks, feast days, new moons, annual sabbath days, were in the Levitical law system, but not in the ten commandments. That was a system of types; there are no types in the decalogue. Dr. Justin Edwards, in the "Sabbath Manual," thus sums up on this text:—
"So in the second chapter of Colossians. . . . The sabbaths spoken of are not 'the Sabbath' associated with, Thou shalt not commit murder, or adultery, or theft; but the sabbaths associated with meats and drinks, and new moons, which were, indeed, shadows of things to come. But to take what he said of those sabbaths, which were associated by God with ceremonial laws, and which the apostle himself, in this very discourse, associates with them, and apply it, as some have done, to 'the Sabbath' which God associated with moral laws, is wrong."
Reader, please examine the fourth commandment with care, and see what is in it which points forward to Christ. It no more relates to a plan of redemption than does the commandment against blasphemy, murder, adultery, and theft. It is no more typical than these. It is only a memorial of that which is past,—of that which existed before the fall of man, and would have continued to exist if sin had never entered the world, and the Saviour had never been required. Why will men perversely "darken counsel by words without knowledge?"
But we must examine the Doctor's reason a little further. He uses the following language:—
"The genitive plural is the form used ordinarily in the Greek. See the Septuagint, Ex. 20:8, and hemeran sabbatone occurs. We turn to Deut. 5:12, where the Decalogue is recited, and find the genitive plural in the Greek occurs. The text in the epistle to the Colossians is precisely the same, except that hemeran does not occur. Supply it before sabbatone, where it is a governing word, in the grammatical construction, in the sentence, and it is a verbal copy of the terms used in the decalogue. If Paul did not mean 'the day of the Sabbaths,' or the Sabbath day, it is unaccountable that he should have been so unguarded in his language."
All this is said on the hypothesis that the form of the substantive determines the subject of the sentence. Also the idea is conveyed that sabbatone, genitive plural, can refer to nothing else but the seventh-day Sabbath—the Sabbath of the decalogue. But the hypothesis, the entire idea, is false and deceptive.
The day of atonement was a sabbath. See Lev. 23:27-32. It fell always on the tenth day of the seventh month, without any regard to the day of the week. In the Septuagint of Lev. 23:32 the genitive plural is used. Nothing more can be required to show that the Doctor's position is a fallacy; and such a fallacy as any one with but a tithe of the Doctor's knowledge of the Greek can readily detect.
But we have some proof still more striking. The subject is not determined at all by the form of the noun in the Greek, more than it is in the English, but by the construction and the context. As proof of this we state the fact, known to every reader of the Greek of the New Testament, that sabbatone, the genitive plural, is used ten times in the N. T., and in eight of these ten times hemeran is supplied, as in Col. 2:16, and it is then translated day of the week! Suppose we affirm that at Troas the disciples met on the identical Sabbath of the decalogue. We cite in proof that the same form, sabbatone, is used both here and in the decalogue. Then, disregarding the context, we conclude thus: "If Luke did not mean the Sabbath day, it is unaccountable that he should have been so unguarded in his language!" Were Dr. Benson an ignorant man, had he been deprived of the privilege or ability to fully examine this subject, we could find in that fact some excuse for what he has said; but as it is we cannot allow him even that refuge. We must say, only changing the subject of his own sentence:—"If the Doctor did not mean to deceive his readers, it is unaccountable that he should have been so unguarded in his language!"
We will now turn to another text. On Gal. 4 the Doctor writes:—
"Then, in writing to the Galatians the apostle reproves Christians because of their Jewish practices, 4:9-11. 'But now after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain.'"
We affirm that the apostle here refers to heathen practices, and not at all to Jewish practices. In Deut. 18:9-12, the observance of times is specified as one of "the abominations of the nations" in Canaan, and classed with divination, necromancy, witchcraft, etc., for which those nations were destroyed. It is possible that Dr. Benson is ignorant of this fact, as well as of the connection of the verses he quotes from Paul to the Galatians. It is quite evident that he has not examined this subject closely. The apostle wonders that, after they knew God, they should turn back to the bondage of their former practices. And what was their condition before they knew God? We learn this in verse 8—the one preceding the Doctor's quotation: "Howbeit, then, when ye knew not God, ye did service to them which by nature are no gods." On this it is enough to ask a few questions:—
Was the observance of times specified in the Scriptures as a Jewish or a heathen practice? Deut. 18:9-12.
Was the keeping of the ten commandments, or even the law of Moses, doing service to them which by nature are no gods?
Are the ten commandments, or any of them, "weak and beggarly elements?"
Does obedience to the ten commandments tend to bondage?
Is it not evident that Dr. Benson is a very loose writer, and a very unsafe expositor?
We have never read more outspoken, rank antinomianism than the Doctor has furnished in his Sunday book.
And yet once more, he disproves the obligation of the Sabbath by Gal. 5:19-21, quoting the apostle's enumeration of the works of the flesh. And then he comments:—
"In this catalogue of the deeds of the flesh, no Jewish ordinance, obligation, or ceremony is mentioned, not even the seventh day as holy."
We might exhaust our printer's exclamation marks on this, and then not do it justice. Look at this a moment, reader. Why is the seventh-day Sabbath not binding? Because Paul did not set it down as one of the works of the flesh! This is his statement. Shall we try to help him out of his most ridiculous position by supposing that he meant that Paul did not enumerate Sabbath breaking among the works of the flesh? If that were his statement, it would be deceptive. He did not specify, in his enumeration, blasphemy, dishonoring parents, nor covetousness. Are these not works of the flesh? Why did Paul leave them out? He did not. After his enumeration, he added,—"and such like." When reference is made to violations of part of the ten commandments, "and such like" refers to the violations of the rest of them. If not, then the argument proves that blasphemy, covetousness, and others, are allowable.
Where is Methodism drifting, that Methodists publish and recommend such antinomian heresies? such bold attacks against the fourth commandment? Bear in mind that in his argument on Col. 2, he applies verses 16, 17, directly against the fourth commandment. If the Sabbath of the fourth commandment is abolished, where is found any basis for Sabbath obligation? It does not exist. We have before shown the fallacy of his positions in favor of Sunday. The truth is, and it is well to recognize it, that when the Sabbath of the fourth commandment is removed, we have no means to reach the conscience of the Sabbath breaker. We could fill our columns with admissions of Sunday-keeping authors to prove that there is no divine law for Sunday observance.
The Sabbath of the fourth commandment "is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." It is never called by any other name. The only reason given in the fourth commandment for its Sabbath is the work of creation and the Creator's resting on the seventh day. The sacredness of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment is found in the act of Jehovah in blessing and sanctifying the seventh day—the day of His rest. It is this Sabbath—the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, the Sabbath of the Lord God—against which Dr. Benson wages his warfare, endorsed by the great Methodist denomination! "How has the fine gold become dim!"
A little attention to his history will end our notice of his remarkable work.