International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Jul 3, 1884
General Articles.
By Ellen G. White
Business and Religion.
BY MRS. E. G. WHITE.
“Not slothful in business, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord,” is the exhortation of Paul to his Roman brethren. The first part of this injunction is quoted by many as an excuse for continually overtaxing their mental and physical powers in the pursuit of gain, while they entirely overlook the requirement to be “fervent in spirit, serving the Lord.”
No one has a right to load himself down with a multitude of cares. However lawful the business prosecuted may be of itself, however honorably it may be conducted, it must not be allowed to unduly absorb the mind and occupy the time. God will not accept a divided heart. His law requires supreme love to God, and unselfish love to our neighbor. If men and women allow mind and body to be so worn down by constant and excessive labor that this law is disregarded, they commit sin. They are serving other gods before the God of Heaven; for when some other object usurps the devotion that belongs to God, that object becomes an idol; and that to which is given the freshest hours of the day, the closest thought and study, the greatest skill, is that which is dearest and most valued.
There will be temptations to worldliness while society is in its present state,—while gold is power, and a man is measured by his wealth and position. Many are fascinated by these alluring temptations. They see that the possession of wealth and honor gives power and influence, and they would rather be ranked among those who enjoy the luxury and position that money gives, than among those who possess true goodness and nobility of character.
There are many professed Christians who are selfish and grasping, and who love themselves better than they love God or their neighbor. Often they are even more grasping than those who make no pretensions to godliness. They appear before the world almost entirely in the character of business men, as speculators grasping for worldly gain. They are not known as humble, devoted, self-sacrificing Christians, true-hearted and kind in all the relations of life. The plainest and most positive injunctions of the word of God are deliberately set aside for worldly wisdom and maxims. They say, “God does not expect us to carry strict religious principles into our business affairs. Business is business, and religion is religion, reserved for the church and the Sabbath.”
The man who takes this selfish course denies the faith, and strengthens and confirms the ungodly in their impenitence by making them believe that religion is all a pretense. His soul is laid a manacled victim on the altar of mammon. He does not seek “first the kingdom of God and his righteousness,” and he cannot claim the promise that all things needful shall be added unto him.
Gold is not the standard of judging with God. Jesus asks, “What shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?” Surely this is an exorbitant price to pay for the fleeting treasures of earth. Success here is terrible failure. He who judges correctly in the light of eternity, calls those who are rich in worldly possessions while they are not rich toward God, poor, wretched, blind, and miserable.
Sometimes the family is neglected. Parents do not deal faithfully with the souls committed to their trust. They do not take time to give their little ones the discipline they need to fit them to shine as jewels in the kingdom of God. Morning and evening, by earnest prayer and persevering faith, Christian parents should make a hedge about their children. They should patiently instruct them,—kindly and untiringly teach them how to live in order to please God.
Too often parents feel that they have no time for morning and evening prayer. In the morning the workmen must be hurried into the field, that the greatest amount of labor may be performed, and the service of God is not considered essential. They cannot spare a few minutes to be spent in thanksgiving to God for his abundant mercies,—for the blessed sunshine and the showers of rain, which cause vegetation to flourish, and for the guardianship of holy angels. They have no time to offer importunate prayer for divine help and guidance, and for the abiding presence of Jesus in the household. They go forth to labor as the ox or horse goes, without one thought of God or Heaven. They have souls so precious that rather than permit them to be hopelessly lost, the Son of God gave his life to ransom them from the power of the grave; but they have no more appreciation of his great goodness than have the beasts that perish.
Dear reader, will you not candidly and prayerfully consider how the moments are passing in your busy life? Remember that God requires your undivided affections, and that it is your duty to love your neighbor as yourself, and to labor unselfishly for his salvation. Your ability, tact, and talent should be employed to induce your fellow-men to enlist in the service of the Redeemer. Reckon up the hours spent in selfish pursuits when they should have been given to better purposes, and see how your account stands in Heaven. Deal honestly and truly with your soul. Have you not long been guilty of robbery toward God,—that God who constantly employs all the agencies of nature to work in your behalf, and who poured out to you all the treasures of Heaven in one gift, that of his own beloved Son?
There is no virtue in indolence. The idle are encompassed by as great perils as beset those that are overtaxed with care. While excessive labor destroys physical and mental vigor, do nothings rust from inaction. “Not slothful in business, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord,” says the apostle. Here we shall find the straight, safe path, which escapes alike the entanglements of worldliness and the evils resulting from want of occupation.
Why will not men and women pursue a sensible course? They need employment, but should not permit themselves to become surfeited or drunken with the cares of this life. To be surfeited is to be in a feverish state, constantly anxious, hurried, unduly excited. The alcoholic draught deprives a man of reason, so that his actions are wild, inconsistent, and unreasonable. The drunkard does not, with calm judgment, act with reference to his own best interest, neither does the man who, drunken with the spirit of the world, barters eternal interests for the things of time.
There are high and holy themes that should engage our attention. We are Christ’s property, the purchase of his blood; and he has work for every one of us. All our skill and energy should not be devoted to worldly pursuits, so that we have no vigor, no clear, sharp intellect, to give to his service. The disobedient and ungrateful, who will not respond to his claims, will in no wise be excused because they did not enlist under his banner. It is the duty of all, by a well ordered life and a godly conversation, to present Christ to the world in his true character, as the self-denying, spotless Lamb of God.
Every one has a cherished object of pursuit. The lover of pleasure has an uneasy, restless, unsatisfied desire for enjoyment. He puts God out of his thoughts, and dismisses every duty that is not pleasant. He learns to depend on excitement, and is uneasy without it. His mind is ever on the stretch to invent new amusements and diversions. He drinks in iniquity, and poisons his soul by his unlawful pursuits.
The covetous man engages with his whole soul in his chosen enterprise. He may make a success of life so far as this world is able to judge. While many fail, perhaps are even beggared, he may amass wealth; but he is more to be pitied than the victims of his avarice, for he has lost his soul in an effort to grasp shadows.
The ambitious man seeks for position, honor, and power. He gains his object, and sinks into the grave. The world applauds him, and calls him a successful man; but, weighed in the balances of the sanctuary, he is pronounced wanting, and it is too late to redeem his failure. He has gratified vanity and chased illusions, and in the books of Heaven eternal loss is put down opposite his name.
Thus all have some engrossing object to absorb the mind, and often this cherished object is allowed to separate the soul from God. Jesus is acquainted with the desires of the human heart, and the Bible is given us to direct them into the proper channel. This holy word does not forbid activity; it does not leave men to lead aimless lives; it presents before them objects worthy of their best efforts. The Bible shows the pleasure-seeker the path of peace and joy; it directs the aspirations of the ambitious. If wealth is the object of desire, it unfolds treasures that will never disappoint,—unsearchable riches, imperishable as the throne of the Eternal.402The psalmist observed the righteous and the wicked. He saw the difference in their course of conduct, and in the principles that governed them. Of the worldling he says, “I have seen the wicked in great power, and spreading himself like a green bay-tree. Yet he passed away, and lo, he was not; yea, I sought him, but he could not be found.” But of the righteous he says, “Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright; for the end of that man is peace.”
NOTHING BUT LEAVES.
Nothing but leaves. The spirit grieves
Over a wasted life;
Sins committed while conscience slept,
Promises made, but never kept—
Hatred, battle and strife—
Nothing but leaves.
Nothing but leaves—no garnered sheaves
Of life's fair ripened grain;
Words, idle words, for earnest deeds;
We sow our seeds; lo! tares and weeds;
We reap with toil and pain
Nothing but leaves.
Nothing but leaves; memory weaves
No veil to screen the past;
As we retrace our weary way,
Counting each lost and misspent day,
We sadly find at last
Nothing but leaves.
And shall we meet the Master so,
Bearing our withered leaves?
The Saviour looks for perfect fruit;
We stand before him humbled, mute,
Waiting the word he breathes,
“Nothing but leaves.” —Sel.
The Commandments.
By John Wesley
[From a Sermon by John Wesley.]
“Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.” Matt. 5:19.
Who, what are they, that make the preaching of the law a character of reproach? Do they not see on whom the reproach must fall—on whose head it must light at last? Whosoever on this ground despiseth us, despiseth Him that sent us. For did ever any man preach the law like him, even when he came not to condemn, but to save the world; when he came purposely to “bring life and immortality to light through the gospel?” Can any preach the law more expressly, more rigorously, than Christ does in these words? And who is he that shall amend them? Who is he that shall instruct the Son of God how to preach? Who will teach him a better way of delivering the message which he hath received of the Father?
“Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments,” or one of the least of these commandments. “These commandments,” we may observe, is a term used by our Lord as an equivalent with the law, or the law and the prophets, which is the same thing, seeing the prophets added nothing to the law, but only declared, explained, or enforced it, as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
“Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments,” especially if it be done willfully or presumptuously. One; for “he that keepeth the whole law, and offends in one point, is guilty of all;” the wrath of God abideth on him, as surely as if he had broken every one. So that no allowance is made for one darling lust; no reserve for one idol; no excuse for refraining from all besides, and only giving way to one bosom sin. What God demands is an entire obedience; we are to have an eye to all his commandments; otherwise we lose all the labor we take in keeping some, and our poor souls forever and ever.
“One of the least,” or one of the least of these commandments. Here is another excuse cut off, whereby many, who cannot deceive God, miserably deceive their own souls. “This sin,” saith the sinner, “is it not a little one? Will not the Lord spare me in this thing? Surely he will not be extreme to mark this, since I do not offend in the greater matters of the law.” Vain hope! Speaking after the manner of men, we may term these great, and those little commandments; but in reality they are not so. If we use propriety of speech, there is no such thing as a little sin, every sin being a transgression of the holy and perfect law, and an affront on the great Majesty of Heaven.
“And shall teach men so.” In some sense it may be said that whosoever openly breaks any commandment, teaches others to do the same; for example speaks, and many times louder than precept. In this sense it is apparent, every open drunkard is a teacher of drunkenness; every Sabbath-breaker is constantly teaching his neighbor to profane the day of the Lord. But this is not all; a habitual breaker of the law is seldom content to stop here; he generally teaches other men to do so too, by word as well as example, especially when he hardens his neck, and hateth to be reproved. Such a sinner soon commences an advocate for sin; he defends what he is resolved not to forsake; he excuses the sin which he will not leave, and thus directly teaches every sin which he commits.
“He shall be called least in the kingdom of Heaven;” that is, shall have no part therein. He is a stranger to the kingdom of Heaven which is on earth; he hath no portion in that inheritance, no share of that “righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.” Nor, by consequence, can he have any part in the glory which shall be revealed.
But if those who even thus break, and teach others to break, one of the least of these commandments, “shall be called least in the kingdom of Heaven,” shall have no part in the kingdom of Christ and of God; if even these shall be cast into “outer darkness, where is wailing and gnashing of teeth,” then where will they appear whom our Lord chiefly and primarily intends in these words—they who, bearing the character of teachers sent from God, do nevertheless themselves break his commandments; yea, and openly teach others so to do; being corrupt both in life and doctrine?
These are of several sorts. Of the first sort are they who live in some willful, habitual sin. Now if an ordinary sinner teaches by his example, how much more a sinful minister, even if he does not attempt to defend, excuse, or extenuate his sin? If he does, he is a murderer indeed; yea, the murderer general of his congregation. He peoples the regions of death. He is the choicest instrument of the prince of darkness. When he goes hence, “hell from beneath is moved to meet him at his coming.” Nor can he sink into the bottomless pit without dragging a multitude after him.
Next to these are the good-natured, good sort of men, who live an easy, harmless life, neither troubling themselves with outward sin, nor with inward holiness; men who are remarkable neither one way nor the other—neither for religion nor irreligion; who are very regular both in public and private, but do not pretend to be any stricter than their neighbors. A minister of this kind breaks, not one, or a few only, of the least commandments of God, but all the great and weighty branches of his law which relate to the power of godliness, and all that require us to “pass the time of our sojourning in fear,” to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling,” to have our “loins always girt, and our lights burning,” to “strive” or agonize “to enter in at the strait gate.” And he teaches men so, by the whole form of his life, and the general tenor of his preaching, which uniformly tends to soothe those in their pleasing dream who imagine themselves Christians, and are not; to persuade all who attend upon his ministry, to sleep on and take their rest. No marvel, therefore, if both he, and they that follow him, wake together in everlasting burnings!
But above all these, in the highest rank of the gospel of Christ, are they who openly and explicitly “judge the law” itself, and “speak evil of the law;” who teach men to break (lusai, to dissolve, to loose, to untie the obligation of) not one only, whether of the least or of the greatest, but all the commandments at a stroke; who teach, without any cover, in so many words—“What did our Lord do with the law? He abolished it. There is but one duty, which is that of believing. All commands are unfit for our times. From any demand of the law, no man is obliged now to go one step, or give away one farthing, to eat or omit one morsel.” This is indeed carrying matters with a high hand; this is withstanding our Lord to the face, and telling him that he understood not how to deliver the message on which he was sent. O Lord, lay not this sin to their charge! Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do!
The most surprising of all the circumstances that attend this strong delusion, is that they who are given up to it really believe that they honor Christ by overthrowing his law, and that they are magnifying his office, while they are destroying his doctrine! Yea, they honor him just as Judas did, when he said, “Hail, Master, and kissed him.” And he may as justly say to every one of them, “Betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?” It is no other than betraying him with a kiss, to talk of his blood, and take away his crown; to set light by any part of his law, under pretense of advancing his gospel. Nor, indeed, can any one escape this charge who preaches faith in any such a manner as either directly or indirectly tends to set aside any branch of obedience; who preaches Christ so as to disannul, or weaken in any wise, the least of the commandments of God.
It is impossible, indeed, to have too high an esteem for “the faith of God’s elect.” And we must all declare, “By grace ye are saved through faith; not of works lest any man should boast.” We must cry aloud to every penitent sinner, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” But, at the same time, we must take care to let all men know we esteem no faith but that which worketh by love; and that we are not saved by faith, unless so far as we are delivered from the power as well as the guilt of sin. And when we say, “Believe, and thou shalt be saved,” we do not mean, “Believe, and thou shalt step from sin to Heaven, without any holiness coming between, faith supplying the place of holiness;” but, “Believe, and thou shalt be holy; believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt have peace and power together; thou shalt have power from him in whom thou believest, to trample sin under thy feet; power to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and to serve him with all thy strength; thou shalt have power, by patient continuance in well-doing, to seek for glory and honor, and immortality; thou shalt both do and teach all the commandments of God, from the least even to the greatest; thou shalt teach them by thy life as well as thy words, and so be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.”
Whatever other way we teach to the kingdom of Heaven, to glory, honor, and immortality, be it called the way of faith, or by any other name, it is, in truth, the way to destruction. It will not bring a man peace at the last. For thus saith the Lord: “I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.”
Liberality as a Christian Duty
LIBERALITY is a Christian duty. The measure of it is the need of others. We should regard our property as a trust for the benefit of all.
The Test of Christian Preaching
It is a bad sign for a preacher when his preaching awakens no antagonisms; when it is only and wholly popular. “Woe unto you when all men speak well of you.” Obloquy is not a conclusive evidence of Christian grace; but absolutely unimpaired popularity is a strong indication of the want of it. Every Christian preacher should have, like Christ, a fan in his hand, and his life and his preaching should have a judgment-day quality in them.
The National Reform Movement.
By D. A. Robinson
WHILE in Philadelphia, the last of March, it was my privilege to attend a convention of the National Reform Association, whose object, we hardly need state, is the securing of an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, inserting therein a recognition of God and Christ and placing "all Christian laws and usages on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the nation." This convention was merely a local one, its object being to discuss the salient points of their work, and to formulate plans for future operations.
The meeting was called to order by the Rev. T. P. Stevenson, editor of the Christian Statesman, who said he was very happy to have the privilege of introducing, as chairman of the convention, the gentleman who presented the first resolution at Xenia, Ohio, which led to the formation of their organization. The chairman congratulated the convention upon the fact that their cause had just gained its majority this year, and that it was now prepared for vigorous and aggressive action. This statement received prolonged applause.
The questions discussed were as follows: 1. Moral accountability of nations. 2. Jesus Christ the Ruler of nations. 3. Mail service on the Sabbath. 4. Shall we have a national Sabbath? 5. The Christian amendment of the national Constitution. 6. God's law and temperance legislation. Three sessions were held, on Monday and Tuesday evenings and Tuesday afternoon. Among the topics discussed, no one received more attention, or created greater applause when it was alluded to, than the Sabbath question.
The session of Tuesday afternoon was not really a private one, yet it was supposed to be attended chiefly by friends of the movement. One feature of that afternoon struck me with peculiar force. Notwithstanding the repeated assertion of the leaders of this movement in the past; that the Sabbath has not been a vital question in their minds, yet in that afternoon's programme, when they could best talk out what they would not care to say before a promiscuous audience, the only theme they discussed was the question of the Sabbath. The entire afternoon was devoted to questions three and four referred to above, the first being introduced by the Rev. S. M. Vernon, of Philadelphia, and the latter by the Rev. R. M. Somerville, of New York. The chairman, in opening that meeting, suggested that it should be a sort of normal school, where they would take a preparatory drill, which would tend to unify their efforts as they went out into the field.
As I listened to the arguments presented, and saw the character of the appeals made, I mentally said, "If my faith in the success of the movement has ever been weak, it can be so no longer." It has been a question with some, "How can such a movement carry, when there is such a strong element of the laboring classes who have no regard for any day?" One speaker outlined an appeal that should be made to this class. This was under the discussion of the Sabbath and the mails. "We plead," said he, "for the vast crowd of men in Government employ. This Sabbath work is an attack on the piety and integrity of fifty thousand homes. These employés are demoralized, and it is no marvel that we have mail robberies when we teach and compel them to trample under foot the decalogue."
Think of it. A failure to observe Sunday means trampling under foot the decalogue! We wonder what portion of the decalogue the speaker meant. We imagine he must have referred to the same part of the decalogue that another speaker did of the Constitution, who declared that other nations regarded ours as a godless nation; this, however, he thought was false, notwithstanding a speaker before him had said that "our failure to recognize and obey the known will of God [by which he meant our failure to enforce the observance of Sunday] is open rebellion." "Though other nations regarded ours as a godless one, yet he thought this was untrue. The error of the founders of our Government," he said, "was not in their heads; they meant right but failed to say so explicitly, and now," he added, "we must have the Constitution conform to the unwritten Constitution." The decalogue trampled under foot by disregarding Sunday, we are forced to conclude, must be the unwritten decalogue. Aside from the ten commandments, I never have heard of but one definition to the term decalogue, and that was given by a young lawyer who, when asked by the judge if he knew what was meant by the decalogue, replied, "Certainly, your honor, it means a severe flogging for contempt of court." The speaker could not have had the latter definition in mind, and as to the former, we have carefully read the ten commandments over and are unable to find any reference whatever to Sunday-keeping; hence the unwritten decalogue must have been intended.
But to return to that appeal to the laboring classes, "The Government," continued the speaker, "compels its employés to violate their consciences; this it has no right to do. . . . We are growing up and raising a race of pagans. . . . Many will say they have not been in church for twenty years; . . . living as though there were no God, and this, too, partly by our sanction." He then presented a strong appeal, calculated to reach the sympathies of the class referred to. He thought God would hold the nation responsible for her example of Sunday labor to her subjects. The newspapers are not only printed on the Lord's day, but they are read as well, and the nation gives free lessons in Sunday secularization.
The address closed up with substantially the following words: "Our Christian Sabbath, the bulwark of our freedom, is in imminent peril, and we must not allow such proceedings to go on much further. There will be, erelong, in some form, an authoritative demand which shall result in a Sabbath for all, when all shall rest, and the land shall rest."
Behold here the counterpart of what the prophet predicted eighteen hundred years ago. We believe we state the truth, when we affirm that the very life and soul of the amendment movement—the most prominent point in the minds of its advocates—is the enforcement of a national sabbath law.
And what is the character of the institution that is to be thus elevated and backed up by the supreme law of our free land? Is it an institution that God has recognized and commanded in his word? No, indeed! It is a usurper, a supplanter of the Sabbath of Jehovah. Its name betrays its heathen origin. Baptized by the Catholic Church, and elevated by her above the day of rest which God commanded man to observe, it has become sacred to the greater part of the Christian world.
In Rev. 13:11 we have a two-horned beast brought to view, which it is easy to show is a symbol of our own nation. John says this power (see verse 12) "causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast [the papacy], whose deadly wound was healed." This power, then, is to promulgate some law, allegiance to which will not only result in worship to the papal church, but it will be a kind of worship in which the land, as well as the people, is to participate. Dear reader, trace the word of God through, search its every page, and you will find but one way in which the land is said to render worship. The prophet declares that the land "kept Sabbath." See Lev. 25: 3, 4; 2 Chron. 36: 21. The two-horned beast is to cause not only the people, but the land, to worship the papacy. This we have found can only be by the observance of a Sabbath; and mark—it must be the Sabbath which the papacy has brought into existence, for the worship is not to God, but to the "beast." The speaker last referred to said: "There will be erelong, in some form, an authoritative demand which shall result in a Sabbath for all, when all shall rest and the land shall rest."
Another speaker in the convention, in referring to Sunday trains, Sunday newspapers, and Sunday labor in general, said: "What we look for, and what we need, is some Nehemiah who shall lay hands on these corporations and these men and compel them to observe the Lord's day." The prophet, centuries ago, drew a picture of what would be done in the last days, and as we place the work of the Reform Party beside that photograph, we behold not only the general contour, but the more minute features of the likeness beginning to appear. The agents are already training in the field. We live in a time when events move with lightning rapidity. The darkened heavens and the muttering thunders bespeak a storm which, if we read the word of God aright, will erelong burst upon a careless world and a slumbering church who are dreaming of a good time coming.
D. A. ROBINSON.
The Momentous Question.
We read in every issue of the press, we hear in every orator's harangue, warnings in regard to the terrible results that will follow the failure to perform some public measure for city, county, State, or national reform. They paint in vivid hues the sad demoralization that will follow the neglect to heed their warnings, while in the main the questions they present effect very slightly, it may be, the happiness or well-being of the individual, except the few interested individuals whose election or defeat hangs on the success or overthrow of the measure. But there is one question, the proper decision of which affects not slightly, but directly, the welfare of each individual, not temporally merely, but reaches on through eternity. This is the momentous question. It was asked by the Roman governor, Pilate, and has been presented to mankind ever since, "What shall I do with Jesus that is called the Christ?" On this question hangs the eternal welfare of the race; "For there is none other name under Heaven given among men whereby we must be saved." Dear reader, what are you doing with it? Are you trusting in and following Him whose name was called Jesus, because he should save his people from their sins? If so, happy are you. Or are you neglecting his claims? You do not need to blaspheme or be filled with rage against him. Mere neglect will do the work. If this is your position, we beseech you to consider well this question. It affects you. It demands your immediate attention. Ponder it; settle it as becomes a rational being. In God's name we beg you, be ye reconciled to Christ.—Sel.
Leaving Our Burdens With God
It becomes us to realize that God rules, just as certainly as that he exists. Is there not enough in this to quiet our anxieties, and to banish all groundless and useless forebodings? After we have faithfully and humbly done our duty, may we not then leave ourselves, our families, our friends, the country, the church—may we not leave all these with God, feeling, the while, that they are safe in his hands? Why should we be bending double under our burdens, when it is written for our comfort and help, "Cast thy burden upon the Lord!"—Sel.
Learning the Lord’s Prayer by Heart
The Lord's prayer may be easily committed to memory, but it is quite another thing to learn it "by heart." The thing desired (in prayer) may have been according to the will of God, but the petitioner may not have possessed the qualifications which entitled him to a hearing.
Living Out Prayer-Meeting Talk
By Watchman
The talk in the prayer-meeting should be supplemented in the life just as truly as should the deliverance of the pulpit.—Watchman.
The Baptism of John.
THERE has been much questioning in regard to the relation of John's baptism to the gospel,—whether or not it was gospel baptism. Our opinion is, that there is not so much difference between the baptism of John and that of the disciples of Jesus as is generally supposed.
Speaking of "the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ," Mark commences with the baptism of John, and the proclamation of John was identical with the first proclamation of Jesus. John said, "Repent ye, for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand." Matt. 3:2. The Saviour's first preaching was this: "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye, and believe the gospel." Mark 1:15. John said he preached the baptism of repentance, and faith in him that was to come, that was, Christ. The first sermon after the resurrection of Christ was of repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus. It appears that the whole period from the beginning of the preaching of John until the time when the apostles turned to the Gentiles, about three and a half years after the death of Christ, was one of transition from one dispensation to the full establishing of the other. The two dispensations were for a time interwoven, as the following will show.
Jesus and his apostles preached the gospel, and their baptism was certainly gospel baptism. But Jesus, when he healed a certain person, commanded him to show himself to the priests and to offer the offering required by the law of Moses. And thus he recognized the validity of that law of the Levitical dispensation at that time. And the apostles were not permitted to preach to the Gentiles, even after the death of Christ, until they had offered the gospel to the Jews, or until the seventy weeks of Daniel 9 were fulfilled. Yet the New Testament was ratified by the death of Christ, Heb. 9:15-17, and the rites of the Levitical law were taken out of the way by his death, being nailed to the cross. Col. 2:14.
It may be asked how baptism can commemorate the resurrection of Christ if it began to be observed before his death. If we consider the ordinance of the Lord's Supper, we shall find certain facts in regard to its origin which will help to solve this difficulty. This ordinance commemorates the breaking of Christ's body, and the shedding of his blood. No one doubts that it is the memorial of the death of Christ. But it was observed for the first time before the death of Christ. Jesus said of the bread, "This is my body, which is broken for you," though it was certainly given in anticipation of the breaking of his body, and the shedding of his blood.
The ordinances of baptism and the Lord's Supper, though designed to commemorate the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, were first, by divine authority, observed in anticipation of those events, and as expressing the faith of the disciples that those events should actually take place. But from that time to the present, they have been observed in memory of these events.
Acts 19 does not afford so clear proof that they who were baptized unto John's baptism were again baptized by the apostles as has been supposed by many. This was an unusual case, according to the record. On being questioned by Paul they said, "We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost." They had not been baptized by John, but by Apollos, who was converted at Ephesus a short time before the visit of Paul. Though this was twenty-five years after the resurrection of Christ, Apollos knew only the baptism of John, and baptized just as John had administered the ordinance, unto a belief in a Messiah who was yet to come. That they were unacquainted with the facts concerning Christ, and the fulfillment of John's predictions of Christ's work, is evident from their answer to Paul, "We have not even heard whether the Holy Spirit is given." (Anderson's translation.) It was an error on the part of Apollos to teach the people that Christ was yet to come, when he had already died and was risen from the dead. This error of Apollos was corrected when Aquila and Priscilla expounded to him the way of God more perfectly.
Those who were baptized by John in the faith of a coming Messiah, did not need to be baptized again when they accepted him. But those who were baptized in the faith of a coming Messiah after he had died and risen from the dead, needed to be baptized again, inasmuch as their first baptism was nearer to a denial of him who had come, than of a belief in him. It every way seems just and fitting that Paul should commence with them as novices.
But this instance does present satisfactory proof that it is right to re-baptize those who have not met the requirements of the gospel rite in their first baptism. Intimately connected with this subject is
THE BAPTISM OF CHRIST.
By Editor
We do not by this mean that baptism which was taught or administered by Christ, as in the case of John, but that which he received at the hands of John in Jordan. On this also there has been much conjecture. It is mostly supposed to have been merely for an example. Jesus truly was our example, but we think his baptism has a significance beyond that of mere example. And here again, if John's baptism was so essentially different from that of the gospel as most people suppose, his example under one would carry no weight in favor of obedience to the other. To this point we would call particular attention.
Christ was not our example merely, but he came into the world to be our substitute and our sacrifice. They who deny (as some do) the substitutionary or vicarious nature of the work of Christ, set aside the efficiency of his work unto our salvation. His suffering for us was not altogether on the cross; his whole life was one of trial, of temptation, and of affliction. In the garden his soul was exceedingly sorrowful, even unto death; but an angel strengthened him that he might not then sink under the heavy burden of suffering. When Paul said, "He hath made him to be sin for us," he evidently meant he was made to occupy our position, or be a partaker of our condition. And again when he said, "He was made under the law," he must have meant that he was subjected to our condemnation; the apostle's argument on the need and work of justification shows that this expression—under the law—signifies under its condemnation. He was made under the law, to redeem them that were under the law. Not under obligation to the law, as some vainly urge, for that condition does not call for redemption. Adam was subject to the law before he fell, but not a subject for redemption. It is a sinful condition, or being condemned by the law, which calls for redemption. It is evident that Christ was "made under the law" in this sense. As "the wages of sin is death," he was "made sin for us," to fall under death for our sakes. And this condition must have dated from his taking upon him the nature or "seed of Abraham." And if he died because our sins were upon him (Isa. 53), and suffered under temptations and sorrows in our behalf and on our account, we must conclude that he was baptized for the same reason. And this is yet more evident when we consider that John's baptism was "the baptism of repentance for the remission of sin." Mark 1:4. There could be nothing appropriate to this purpose in his being baptized for himself; for he had no sins to confess, and needed no repentance. But inasmuch as the Lord "laid upon him the iniquity of us all," it seemed suitable that he should be baptized, even as sinful men, for whom he stood, should be baptized.
There is a wonderful significance in his baptism which seems to be entirely lost if we lose sight of this momentous truth. "He bore our sins;" he acted and suffered as our substitute—in our stead. They who pervert or lightly esteem baptism, must lightly esteem the sufferings and the cross of Christ, as well as his example.
EDITOR.