Volume 6. Number 2.September 1, 1828, pp. 470-478.

• Essays on Man in His Primitive State, and under the Patriarchal, Jewish and Christian Dispensations.--No. II.: Primitive State.--No. II. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 470-471.
• A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things.--No. XXVI.: On the Discipline of the Church.--No. III. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 471-472.
• [Introductory Note to Letter from H.] by Alexander Campbell, pp. 472-473.
• [Letter to Brother in the Lord] by H., pp. 473-474.
• Letter to the Editor by H. M., p. 474.
• Answer to the Above by Alexander Campbell, pp. 474-476.
• An Appeal to the Uncharitable by Alexander Campbell, pp. 476-477.
• Bishop Beveridge's Resolutions concerning the Choice of a Wife by William Beveridge, pp. 477-478.
• Religious News by [Alexander Campbell], p. 478.
• Three Important Queries by H., p. 478.

      IN the close of our former essay we left the progenitors of the human race in the full possession and enjoyment of paradisiacal bliss. Their Creator conversed with them viva voce, and they heard his voice without a tremor or a fear. They saw him, and were glad--they heard him, and rejoiced. All was calm and serene within--all was cheerful and joyous without. So rapid was their progress in this school, that Adam was soon able to give suitable names to all the animals around him; and when his acquaintance with language was thus tested by his Creator, not an imperfection or defect was found: for "whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof." His happiness consisted in the perfect subordination of his passions and appetites to reason, and of his reason to the character and will of his Creator. Conscious of the perfect approbation of his God, he had nothing to fear; and all his capacities for enjoyment being gratified, he had nothing to desire. In the full zenith of his enjoyment, he had not a wish uncrowned, nor a desire ungratified.

      But some tenure of his enjoyment must be granted, and a test of his loyalty must be instituted. This is the reason, as it was the basis, of the promise and law promulged to him. How long he was to be possessed of this felicity was not yet defined, and on what terms he was to continue in friendly intercourse with his Creator had not yet been stated. This gave rise to the law under which he was placed. This arrangement reminded him of his origin, of his dependence, and accountability; as well as anticipated any inquiry respecting the tenure of his enjoyments, or his destiny. But the nature of the law and of the promise, or the design of the trial under which he was placed, is all that interests us in reference to our design.

      However we may understand the terms or description of this arrangement, whether as literal or symbolic, one thing is obvious, and that is all and alone important to know, and that is the nature of the trial, viz. whether his spirit or his soul, his understanding, or his passions, shall control his actions. In one sentence, whether his spirit shall retain the sovereignty with which God had invested it, or his passions usurp the government. Reason was already enthroned, and had full command of all his passions, affections, and propensities; and so long as it continued at the helm, perfect subordination was to be expected and enjoyed. But if, by any means, his passions should gain the ascendant, and dethrone his reason, then disorder, confusion, and an awful reverse of circumstances, must inevitably ensue. Such was the nature of the trial. The law and promise promulged to him were predicated upon his nature and addressed to his reason, and could not fail to engage all his powers. The trial was made as easy as the nature of his relations to heaven and earth could admit, and was, therefore, the best possible test of his loyalty.

      The temptation, artful as it may be supposed, was evidently addressed to the soul or passions of the woman, and of the same character was that offered to the man. It addressed the understanding through the medium of the passions; and thus the sad catastrophe was accomplished. Man fell through the triumph of passion. His reason was dethroned by the usurpation of passion, and the harmony and subordination before existing within were now destroyed. From being the son of reason, he became a child of passion, and the slave of appetite. Guilt, shame, fear, and all their horrible retinue, now invade his peace and overwhelm him in ruin and despair. There is no regaining his former standing; the controlling power is lost. In this miserable plight he was called to judgment, and the sentence was executed. Exiled from Eden, and from the approbation of heaven, he, by an act of mercy, is respited, and becomes a pensioner under a small annuity, until his physical energies should be worn out by the conflicts of reason and passion upon his animal life. This was the necessary result of his preternatural condition. So that by a law of nature death became necessary.

      The change which now had taken place in Adam is difficult to be conceived of, as we can have but a very imperfect idea of his former moral and intellectual grandeur. But the best illustration we can conceive of, as it is the only analogical one we know any thing of, is a second fall of man, which sometimes takes place. When we have seen a person of what is now called [470] good moral character, and high intellectual endowments, by some sudden gust of passion, or by the ravage of some nervous disease, fall into a state of insanity, we have in his former and present character a partial representation of the nature and consequences of the fall of Adam. This we conceive to be, in many respects, a good analogical picture of the first fall of man, though we do not recollect of ever having heard it so used. Persons of good moral and intellectual standing, have fallen into fits and into habitual states of insanity, in which they neither morally nor intellectually exhibit a single trace of their former character. Yet these have all the faculties and powers which they once had, but in such a state of derangement as almost to obscure every spark of intellectual ability they once exhibited; and the balance being lost in the intellectual powers, actions foolish and wicked, mad and desperate, frequently characterize such unhappy beings. A restoration of such to reason and goodness is as great a change as that of a sinner from ignorance and wickedness to the knowledge, the fear and the love of God.

      Ideots and madmen have sometimes, however, their lucid intervals, in which they seem to think and act like their former selves; but these are not often of long continuance. So fallen man seems, at times, in point of moral government and intellectual displays, to equal our highest conceptions of man's primitive standing: but these are often followed up by strong and long continued exhibitions of the triumphs of passions and prostration of reason and goodness.

      But we may have better means of illustrating the nature of "the fall" when we contemplate man as he now appears as a fallen being. He is from his birth subjected to the control of appetite and passion. Adam begat a son in his own likeness, immediately after "the Fall." This child was born in the likeness of fallen Adam--not in the likeness of Adam in Eden. Its misfortune is, that it is now necessarily a child of appetite and passion before it can exercise reason at all. This gives a mastery to its passions, which no education, intellectual or moral, can perfectly subdue. The grand difference betwixt Adam in Eden and any of his sons, is comprehended in this one fact, viz. His reason first controlled his actions--passion first controls theirs. The appetites and passions of children govern all their actions for a time; we may say, for years, before reason at all developes itself. And what we call reason, is rather the shattered remains of reason, warped by passion and appetite, than that which is worthy of the name. Thus every child of Adam begins its career, impelled and prompted by its appetites and passions, for a long time unchecked by reason; and when reason at length appears, it is so weak and incapable of government, and so unaccustomed to control, that it is continually baffled by the fearful odds against it; and can never, by any effort of its own, gain the ascendancy.

      But this is not all. The objects presented to the new born infant are so different from those which surrounded Adam in Eden, as of themselves, were there no other cause, to effect a wonderful change in its character and destiny. For an illustration, let us suppose that a prince and a princess, educated in the most courtly and magnificent style, surrounded with all the grandeur and majesty of an eastern palace, were immediately after their marriage to commit some crime worthy of imprisonment in some dreary dungeon; and while in this wretched confinement their first child is born, and confined to the scenery around it until it has arrived at manhood; what a difference in its views, feelings, and character, compared with the views, feelings, and character of its parents at its age; and is not this difference, of whatever nature and extent it may be, chiefly owing to the difference of objects or of scenery which surrounded it in prison, contrasted with those objects of contemplation which environed its parents from their birth to the moment of their imprisonment. This but imperfectly illustrates the essential difference in the circumstances of all human beings, compared with those of our progenitors in Eden. When we maturely reflect upon these two causes of human degradation, viz. The control of appetite and passion, and the sad reverse of circumstances surrounding the progeny of Adam, we shall find that in all their ramifications they are sufficient to constitute beings of a very different character from that which adorned our common father during his abode in Paradise.

      Not prosecuting this inquiry any farther at present, we shall leave our readers engrossed in these reflections till our next.

EDITOR.      

      IN our last we wrote on the evangelical law relative to private offences. We are now to call the attention of our readers to public offences. And before opening the law and the testimony on the treatment of such offences, we will occupy the present number in treating of these offences in general.

      Whatever action, or course of conduct, contrary either to the letter or spirit of either the moral or religious injunctions or restrictions delivered by the Saviour or his Apostles, is an offence against the gospel order and the author of it; and in proportion as such offences are known, either to the society or the world at large, are they more or less public; and, as such, to be examined, judged, and reprobated, according to the law of the Great King. After speaking in terms so general, it becomes expedient to descend to particulars. And here let it be noted that too little attention is paid to some infractions of the evangelical institution, and an extravagant emphasis laid upon others, as if they exclusively merited the attention of Christian communities, and were the only actions to be inquired into according to scriptural authority. Such reasoners ought to be sent to the Apostle James to learn logic. He teaches that he that violates any one commandment, sins against the authority and will of the lawgiver, as well as he that transgresses all the laws of the empire. For he that said, "Do not commit adultery," said also, "Do not steal." Now if you commit no adultery, yet if you steal, you are a transgressor. So reasons James the Apostle. Now according to this logic, let us attend to some offences or public trespasses very commonly not submitted to discipline in this latitudinarian age. And in the first place, let us attend to detraction, slander, or evil speaking. I do not mean to confine my remarks to that species of slander of which civil laws take cognizance, nor to those gross detractions which the different codes of ecclesiastical law take notice of; but to what, in the judgement of the New Testament, is as really and as truly slander, detraction, and evil speaking, as those instances punished by law.

      Every insinuation, innuendo, hint, allusion, or comparison, which is calculated or intended to diminish aught from the reputation or good name [471] of any person; brother, or alien, is, in the discriminating morality and purity of the New Testament, accounted slander, detraction, or evil speaking. And here we may observe, that the terms evil speaking are generic, and include every word and sentence, the meaning or design of which is calculated to do injury to the reputation of others. Slander is a species of evil speaking, and imports false and foul imputations, or falsely ascribes to others reproachful actions incompatible with good character. Detraction simply derogates and defames, either by denying the merits of another, or subtracting from them. In this age and country evil speaking is as fashionable as lasciviousness was in Corinth. Our political papers at this time are rather vehicles of slander, than heralds of intelligence: and these feed and pamper a taste for slander and detraction, which is more likely to be the first trait of a national character, so soon as we can form one, than any other we can think of. I could wish that the same character was not likely to be merited by some of our religious prints, whose avowed object is to subserve the spread of evangelical principles and practices through out the land. Where slander and detraction are the order of the day in the public walks of life, it is difficult to keep this great evil out of the church and from the fireside of christian circles.

      Political and religious sects and parties, and the necessary rival interests to which they give rise, are the true causes of this awful deterioration of morals, both in church and state. Now if slander and detraction are as real infractions of the law of the great King as murder and theft, (and we must think they are,) it is difficult to decide whether any nation or any people are more rapidly degenerating than the good citizens of the American Republics. It is the more difficult to resist this contagion because of its almost universal prevalence, and few appear conscious either of the enormity of the evil, or of what constitutes it. Even "ministers of religion," as they are fashionably called, seem not to think that more than the tithe of their public sermons are religious slander or detraction. Nor is this sin confined to one sect either in church or state. Society is working itself into such a state as to make aspersions, defamations, and slander necessary to political health. And what is still worse, the "religious presses," controled by good and religious men, are giving countenance and encouragement to this pernicious custom. Insomuch that one-sided representations, innuendoes, and detractions are supposed to be expedient for the maintenance of the popular plans and benevolent undertakings of the good men of the earth.

      Men have their political and ecclesiastical idols; and these they worship not only with incessant adulations, but they offer them whole burnt offerings of the fame of their rivals. They seem to think no sacrifice is so acceptable to the idol of their party, as the good name of his competitor. The morning and the evening sacrifices of the Jews were not more regularly attended on in the tabernacles of Israel, than are the hecatombs of defamation and scandal in the temples of rival interests. No public nor private virtue can shield its possessor from the shafts of envy, and the calumnies of intrigue, should he be so unfortunate as to be nominated for any distinction amongst his peers. That moment his promotion is named, every restraint laid upon the tongue and the pen is withdrawn; and he stands a naked target upon a hill, to be pierced with the arrows of slander from every point in his horizon. He stands as a criminal upon a pillory, unprotected by law, unguarded by the sanctions of religion and morality. No man feels himself a sinner when he robs him of his good name, and as remorseless as the licensed hangman, he devotes him to destruction. So appears the state of things in the present crisis; yet but few seem to think that the evil is of much magnitude, or consider it in any other light than a tax which must be paid into the revenue of the Temple of Fame. And yet methinks the life and the public services of a Washington or a Moses, protracted to the age of a Methuselah, could not atone for the guilt contracted in the present campaign for a four years magistracy in these United States.

      But whither am I straying from the subject before me! I only intended to observe, that so popular is the evil of which we complain, that it has become less offensive to our feelings, and we have become less conscious of its malignity; so that in religious, as well as in political society, it has become quite a matter of course, or a subject of easy endurance, if not of perfect forbearance. And even christians seem to feel little (if any) compunction when they are whispering, backbiting, evil surmizing, and suspicioning one against another. Judgments well informed and tender consciences recoil at the very thought of derogating from the good name of any one whom the law of love embraces as a fellow-christian. Christianity puts us upon quite a different course; it teaches us to esteem another better than ourselves; it extols that love which hides a multitude of sins, and ranks all detractions, slanders, and envy the root of this accursed fruit, amongst the works of the flesh, and associates the actors with Satan the accuser, and his kindred spirits bound over to the day of righteous retribution. Every thing incompatible with the most cordial affection, is incompatible with the relation subsisting in the church of Christ; the nearest and the dearest, as well as the most permanent relation known on earth. The second birth introduces all into one family, one brotherhood, one inheritance, one eternal relation, which neither time, nor distance, nor death itself can destroy. In this relation, the highest pleasure is to see all honorable, irreproachable, and of exalted purity. It prompts us to draw the vail of forgetfulness over the defects, and to hide the faults we see in our brethren. It constrains the whole brotherhood to take cognizance of the person who, by a hint, innuendo, or allusion, defames any one they have confided in, and honored as a christian brother. It constitutes the good name of each public property and can view in no other light than in that of a thief or a robber, the person who steals away a jot or tittle of the good character of any one of the sacred fraternity. Whenever this ceases to be the character of any religious society, they have fallen from their first love, and have lost the highest ornament which adorns christian character. And here let us pause for the present.

EDITOR.      

      THE following Letter was written by a Christian in New-York, to a Christian in Georgia, without the least expectation of its ever finding its way into this work, or of being laid before the public; but it happened to fall into our hands, and after reading it, it seemed to breathe so much of the genuine christian spirit, that we thought it worthy of being preserved as a specimen of true devotion and of that christian affection which the love of the Sacred Oracles [472] inspires. Both the writer and the person addressed are supremely attached to the ancient order of things, and constant students of the Holy Scriptures. But it speaks for itself.

EDITOR.      

NEW-YORK, JANUARY 6, 1828.      

      DEAR BROTHER IN THE LORD,--I SALUTE you, beloved, as a brother disciple; and would desire you to sit down by the road-side and commune together, and warm one another's hearts in talking over, with the greatest freedom, the wonderful, the super-astonishing subjects revealed in the Bible.

      Here, brother, I have this precious book of Jehovah. Suppose we open it. But before we begin to read it, brother, don't our hearts respond to each other, and say, What an invaluable treasure we have in possessing this book--this book above all price! How insignificant all other books compared to this! We love and esteem it infinitely above every other book for its transcendant excellencies--for its antiquity--its sublimity. For example, "God said, Let there be light, and there was light," &c. Its history, the history of the world, from the creation to the consummation of all things. Its biography, the lives of prophets, kings, our blessed Saviour, and his apostles. If we want to read of crime and the end of this cursed fruit, we see it in the destruction of sinners by the flood, and of Sodom and Gomorrhah, &c. &c. Do we want to see pride humbled and humility exalted? we read it in the book of Esther--proud Haman degraded, and humble Mordecai exalted. Do we want to see God vindicating the cause of an oppressed people, who had been held in bondage by a cruel tyrant for centuries? we read here of the oppression and deliverance of the children of Israel out of Egypt, and the destruction of Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea, &c. Do we want poetry full of sublime sentiment? let us read Job, Isaiah, the Psalms, and the lesser Prophets. Nothing can be compared to these poems in all the world. Do we want prophecies and their fulfilment? in what other book in the world shall we find this, but in this blessed Bible? Do we want to read of covenants or wills? we have them in this book--the Old Will or Covenant God made with the fleshly seed of Abraham, promising them the land of Canaan, and all other earthly blessings, on condition of their obedience, and sealing or ratifying this Will at Mount Sinai with the blood of beasts--hence the practice of sealing wills or covenants with red wax.

      But our gracious God did not intend this should be his last Will and Testament for his prodigal children. Oh no! Our heavenly Father said (if we may so speak) in his benevolent, merciful, and compassionate heart, This Covenant will not do for my children, they will not, nor can they keep its requisitions; they will, according to this covenant, be all disinherited; they will remain prodigal; they will never return to my house; I shall never see my lost children; I cannot bear this; I must reclaim them; I must embrace them; I must make them happy under my roof. This Will or Covenant of mine must be defective; it embraces too few of my children; why, look! it only includes the family or fleshly children of Abraham; my Gentile children are all excluded. The ceremonies are too many, and too expensive and burdensome. Behold the inheritance I bequeath is too mean in its value and extent--too limited in its duration; and I perceive it has a clause in it that will kill every one of my children. Why I say in this Covenant, "Cursed is every one that continues not in all things written therein to do them," and "the soul that sins shall die." Why it is all defective, it will not answer the purpose; it will not bring back my children. I will therefore make a new covenant, which I am sure will bring them back. I will make a covenant that will include both my Jewish and Gentile children, all that will be reconciled in their minds to me. I will try to prove in the highest possible manner, that I love and pity them; that I desire above all things that they should return to my embrace as the only certain friend that can do them good, and not perish by the hand of their enemies. I will send my Son, my well beloved and only begotten Son, to the very place where they are to seek them, and to assure them of my love, and invite them to return to their Father's house; to forsake their wicked and unprofitable ways, and thoughts of me; that I will have mercy on them, and abundantly pardon all their sins and transgressions; that I will not upbraid them for any of their past conduct; but, on the contrary, embrace them most cordially, and rejoice over them as my beloved children, and bless them exceeding abundantly above all that they can desire. He, my Son, shall show them this my New Covenant, that includes every creature of them, no matter what their color or condition, or however far they have strayed, or drenched themselves in crimes; whoever of them believes this gracious proclamation of my Son and thereby becomes reconciled to me, shall inherit all the great provisions of this my Last Will and unalterable Covenant.

      Why, my dear brother, give me your hand.--Let us embrace each other as redeemed sinners. Is it true? Is this wonderful good tidings true, that we have such a Covenant God and Father? Let us open this Covenant, for we have got it here in this blessed Bible, and in our own language. Blessed be our Heavenly Father for such a treasure to us his prodigal children. Don't it seem, brother, that "the trees clap their hands, the little hills skip, and the mountains leap for joy." All nature, animate, and inanimate, praises God for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men. But before we get up, brother, from our seats, to travel towards our Father's house, let us look a little into our Father's Will, and refresh our minds with some of the provisions and promises, and the love and mercy which appear to dwell in our Father's heart, expressed and made known in this blessed Will or Covenant. See, brother, this Covenant says we are all the children of God by belief in Jesus Christ, (his beloved Son, who came to seek and save us from our woe;) "and if children," it says further, (O wonderful love) "then heirs, heirs of God and joint heirs with his own peculiar Son." Did he rise from the dead? So says this Covenant, (see chap. xv. 1 Cor.) Shall all believers triumph over death and the grave? See, brother, in anticipation of this great event, the dead in Christ rising first, (before the living are changed or the wicked raised,) coming up out of the sea, and those out of the dry land, as they rise and ascend with their immortal and incorruptible bodies; the saints when alive on the earth will be changed too, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, and all ascend together, shouting and singing that triumphant song, "Oh Death, where is thy sting! Oh Grave, where is thy victory!" &c. 1 Cor. xv. And, my brother, don't you think, for this grand and glorious prospect overwhelms us with thoughts. I know you say, Yes, brother, my mind is full of thoughts of our future glory. Suppose we give vent, and let our thoughts flow [473] a little, on this delightful subject. Don't you think, brother, our bodies and spirits will be made perfect, every faculty of soul and body fit to be a companion of a holy God, &c. our affections properly placed, undivided, our memories made so perfect as to retain all we see and hear, a storehouse of heavenly, holy, and wonderful knowledge, always accumulating through the countless ages of eternity; and on which faithful record we can at any time turn our eyes and read the past, though it may be millions of years back; so shall be never at a loss for a subject of God's goodness, love, mercy, wisdom, power, majesty, &c. and so our other faculties: our conceptions will be strong and clear, able to communicate our thoughts on any subject with ease, grace, and perspicuity--and so of our will. God's will, will be our will, perfectly so; so of our understanding, so of our reason, all perfect, &c. &c.

      Brother, before we rise, let us consider a little more about our heavenly Father's Will. Let us look at the seal, and examine who are the witnesses. See what a long list of witnesses. Let us read their names: Enoch, Noah, Father Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and all the Prophets, and John the Baptist, and all the Apostles; but time would fail us to read them all. But stop, here is a name in large capitals, JESUS CHRIST THE SON OF GOD. Wonderful! And look at this large red seal, which spreads before the names of all the witnesses.--It appears to be blood. Why, brother, it is blood. Perhaps the Covenant will inform us about this singular seal, that appears to ratify the whole Covenant. Let us look. Yes, read, brother, there it is (Heb. ix. 11. to end.) Hold, brother, that will do. No doubt this wonderful seal is explained in other parts of the Covenant more particularly. Look here, brother; while you were reading I cast my eye on another part of the Covenant. O wonderful! only to think of the compassion of our heavenly Father to us his prodigal children! his assuming our infirmities! that after giving us so many witnesses and ratifying this covenant with such a wonderful seal, he has confirmed the whole by an oath, (Heb. vi. from 13th verse,) it reads thus--"Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show to the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation who have fled for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before us." Blessed and praised be God for such a glorious hope, full of immortality. Amen, you say, brother. Amen, say all the witnesses. Amen, say all the martyrs, all the church, all the angelic host, and at last we shall unite with all the redeemed around the throne, shouting and singing that blissful song, "To him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and made us kings and priests to his and our Father, forever and ever." Amen.

      Let us now rise, brother, and travel on our journey. First, let us take good care of that blessed Covenant of our Fathers, for we will want often to look into it to refresh our minds, and to know more perfectly our Father's will respecting us. Now that we have put it in a safe and convenient place, so that we can get it any moment we want to look into it, by day or by night, we will run with patience the race set before us, laying by every weight and the sin that doth most easily beset us, looking to Jesus, who has run the race before us. See him yonder, brother, seated at our Father's right hand, crowned with glory and honor, waiting to receive and crown us, and to set us down with himself in all his Father's glory. Come, brothers give me your hand, let us exceedingly reach ourselves forward, press along the mark for the prize of our high calling, that we may be crowned, not with such a perishable crown as a wreath of parsley or laurel; but with the ever-abiding crown of everlasting life, and never-ending happiness in our Father's house and presence. While we are running this race, brother, let us take care that we run by the line marked out by the Judge. Let us be temperate in all things, and keep our bodies under, (our sinful lusts and passions,) thus running, brother, with our prize in full view, surrounded by a crowd of witnesses and our Judge looking at us.----

H.      

FRANKFORT, KY. May 31st, 1828.      

      DEAR SIR--BEING myself a student of the Scriptures and a seeker after truth, I have met with a difficulty of a very serious nature, which, if removable, I have thought you could remove; and doubting not your good disposition, I have determined to lay my case before you, and ask your aid. Christian or no christian, depends upon the answer; or rather I should say, upon a plain, clear and satisfactory reconcilement between the accounts of Matthew and Luke, of the origin, birth, and treatment of Jesus; and the conduct of "his parents," Joseph and Mary, until they were resettled in Nazareth. For, to me, very inconsistent are these accounts; and hence my difficulty, from which I have not been able to relieve myself, without supposing the accounts related to two persons who were born, or reported to have been born, at Bethlehem. You know the gospels too well to need a reference to the first and second chapters of the above named Evangelists for their respective histories.

      Now you are possessed of the subject, permit me to tell you that I am unskilled in languages; I want no new translations; follow the obvious meaning of the words: and where they import facts, I shall admit the facts referred to, as they are represented:--if in nature, why in nature? if supernatural, then be they so; while I hold an adherence to fact an indispensable rule and condition of the exposition desired. There is no truth in narratives where the representation is different from the fact. Therefore, as a seeker after truth, I beg you, (supposing, for the cause you are engaged in, if not of courtesy, you will notice this letter,) attend to the facts of the two stories, and place them side by side, as you trace them step by step. I languish for conviction; and am willing, if it can come, it shall come from you. I shall lose no time in announcing it to you. Had I not known as one of your subscribers and otherwise, your readiness to engage in solutions of the kind proposed, I should not probably have taken this liberty with you, which may have an effect beyond the day.

      Accept the respects of yours, &c.

H. M.      

      DEAR SIR--I AM always pleased to find a student of the bible inquiring after facts; for it is a volume of facts of the most interesting import ever presented to the human mind. These facts are stated with the most artless simplicity which can be conceived of, and are narrated in the style and manner of the ages in which they are said to have happened. Had the sacred historians been any thing else than what they pretended to be, they would have adopted any other [474] course rather than that which they adopted. But, conscious of the irrefragable nature of the statements they give, they manifest, in no instance, the least solicitude about the credibility of their narrative. As though careless how their testimony would be received, they are at no pains to reconcile apparent incongruities, or to explain facts suitably to any particular design. They relate what they conceived necessary to be known in order to produce faith in their readers, and leave them to examine their histories without offering a bribe to their understanding, or a bias in favor of any darling scheme--well aware, as the fact proves, that the more strictly they are examined, the more impossible it will be to discredit their narration. But to the point in hand: Matthew and Luke do not, in any instance, contradict one another in the narratives to which you refer. They wrote in different parts of the world, and at dates more than twenty years apart, but do not record all the same facts nor all the same circumstances of the same facts which they record. [See my "Hints to Readers," New Translation, page 211.] This, you know, often happens among different witnesses on the most commonplace topics, and in ten thousand cases where neither the court nor the jury ever suppose there is a real contradiction. First of all, Matthew gives the lineage of Jesus Christ from Joseph to Abraham. He begins with Abraham, descends through the line of Judah to David--from David through Solomon, down to the death of Josiah and the removal to Babylon; and thence through Jechonias, the youngest son of Josiah, till Joseph espoused Mary. Luke begins with Jesus and ascends through Eli, the father of Mary, up to Nathan, one of the sons of David; and thence through David ascends in the same line with Matthew, up to Abraham, and thence ascends higher than Matthew, even up to Adam. You know that David was the ancestor both of Solomon and Nathan; and as Luke gives the natural descent of Jesus by his mother from David, it behooved him to trace Eli, her father, up to David, through that branch of David's family in the line of Nathan. Whereas Matthew, intending only to show his legal descent by his reputed father Joseph, from David, he traces the ancestry of Joseph up to David through that branch of David's family descended from Solomon. Thus the lineage of Luke and Matthew differ from David down, but agree from David up. David was the ancestor of both Joseph and Mary, but by different sons. He was the ancestor of Joseph by Solomon's family, and he was the ancestor of Mary by Nathan's family. So far there is not the least contradiction. Luke mentions forty ancestors of Jesus by his mother, up to David. Matthew mentions twenty-six ancestors of Jesus from Joseph to David. In this there is no contradiction. You may have a hundred and forty ancestors by your father, up to Noah--and your wife may have two hundred ancestors, by her father, up to the same parent, without supposing any difficulty. In comparing these rolls of lineage with those found in 1st Chronicles, chapters xxiii. xxiv. xxv. and xxvi. you will find that, in the Jewish style, the word father often denotes ancestor, and the term son means sometimes no more than descendant, and the term begot only denotes the line of descent. This unfolds any difficulties that I know of in the registers of Matthew and Luke.

      The most apparent contradiction in this department, on which some very ignorant sceptics have descanted with so much apparent triumph, is in Luke's calling Joseph a son of Eli, and in Matthew's calling him a son of Jacob. Now this, so far from being a contradiction, when fairly and fully understood, is rather a corroboration of the truth and honesty of the two historians--and, indeed, it tends to explain difficulties which have puzzled some commentators. This apparent contradiction and difficulty I solve as follows:--

      1. According to the Jewish custom and law, when the head of a family had no male issue, whosoever married his daughter, especially his first born daughter or his only daughter, was enrolled as his son in the family registers, which were kept with great care by all the communities and tribes of the Jews. An instance of this sort, for illustration, I will just state. From the book of Ruth it appears that "the line from Salmon through Elimelech become extinct by the death of the two sons of Elimelech, whom I take to have been the eldest branch of Salmon's family. On this event the right of succession devolved on the next or second branch; but as the descendant of that branch declined to comply with the law of consanguinity, and chose to continue to be the head of a subordinate family bearing his own name, the right therefore devolved on Boaz, who appears to have been a grandson of Salmon, by the third son of Salmon; and by marrying the widow of Elimelech's son he gave up his claim of establishing a family to be called by his own name, and took the title of Son of Salmon. So in the case of Joram, and the succession of Ozias, it appears from 2 Chron. xxi. that the Philistines and Arabians destroyed the family of Joram, so that he had not a son nor a daughter left, save only his youngest son Ochosias: and by 2 Chron. xxi. it appears that Ochosias being slain by Jehu, his mother Athaliah slew all the rest of the royal seed, save only Joas, whom Josabeth, the wife of the high priest Jodac, stole and kept concealed till he was seven years old. He was then made king, and reigned 40 years, and was succeeded by Amasias, [see 2 Chron. xxv.] who reigned 29 years; but a conspiracy being formed against him, Azarias alias Ozias [see 2 Kings, xv. 1.-2 Chron. xxii.] was made king in his stead, and called Son of Joram, the line through, Ochosias, Joas, and Amasias, being then extinct or set aside." Here we see that a person is called the Son of Salmon, who was not his literal, but only his enrolled son; and another is called the Son of Joram, who was not his natural or literal, son, but only his by law established, or enrolled son. In this way the families and communities of the Jews were kept up.

      2. Now Eli, the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus, having no male descendant, it was agreed in the espousals of his eldest daughter Mary--(for he had another daughter Mary, the wife of Cleopas, as it was not an uncommon thing among the Jews to have two daughters of the same name) to Joseph that he would renounce the idea of becoming the head of a subordinate family, and be enrolled as the Son of Eli.

      3. His being enrolled as the Son of Eli, or as Luke expresses it, "by law established the Son of Eli," explains two items of some importance in the history. 1st. It was the occasion of Jesus being born in Bethlehem; and 2d. It was the cause why the children of Mary, the wife of Cleopas, viz, James, Joses, Simon, and Judas, were called the brothers of Jesus. When the decree of Cesar Augustus gave occasion for a general enrolment of the inhabitants of the land of Judea, it became necessary that Joseph should be placed upon the roll with Mary his [475] wife and though it was not necessary that every woman should accompany her husband on such occasions, it was necessary on this occasion because of the transfer to be made in favor of the house of Eli, that Mary his daughter should be present, that it might be made in the most authentic manner, [See Ruth, ch. iv.] The decree of the emperor fixed the time, and the transfer to be made, obliged the attendance of Mary, though in such circumstances; and both together were the occasion of the Messiah being born in Bethlehem, according to the ancient prophecies. Again, when such a transfer was made the first born became the lineal descendant of the father of the family, and his children, though only cousins, were supposed to be nearer of kin than ordinary cousins, and were called brothers. This was the reason why the children of the other Mary, the wife of Cleopas, were called the brothers of Jesus. For in other cases the Jews used the term expressive of the relation we call cousin, as in the case of Elisabeth and Mary. Now all these circumstances taken together, show with what propriety Luke calls Joseph the Son of Eli, though the natural descendant of Jacob. It also accounts for the birth of Jesus at Bethlehem, and gives a suitable occasion why the cousins of Jesus were called his brothers. For the scrupulosity and care with which these matters were attended on, see Potters Antiquities of Athens. These things premised, I proceed to state the facts concerning the nativity and childhood of the Messiah, gleaned from Matthew and Luke.

      While Augustus Cesar was emperor of Rome, and Herod king of Judea, John the harbinger was born, son of Zacharias and Elisabeth. Before his birth an angel announced to Mary, the espoused wife of Joseph, the literal son of Jacob, and the by law established son of Eli, that she should bring forth a son miraculously conceived, of divine origin, and predicts his future destiny. Joseph and Mary at this time lived in Nazareth, a city of Galilee. In consequence of the decree of Augustus, and in fulfilment of the contract with Eli, Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem the city of David to be enrolled. While there Jesus was born. That same night an angel of the Lord appeared to shepherds in the vicinity of Bethlehem and announced to them the birth of the Messiah in the city of David. When eight days old he was circumcised, and named Jesus. After the days of his mother's purification were accomplished he was taken up to Jerusalem by his parents, and the usual rites of dedication were attended on. While in the temple, Simeon, a just man, and Anna a prophetess, moved by a divine impulse, recognized him, eulogized his mother, and predicted his career.

      About this time a star in the east appeared to a sect of eastern philosophers called the magians. They came to Jerusalem to inquire his birth place, and to do him homage. Herod and his courtiers are alarmed and consult for his life. The magians, led by the star, discover the place of his residence, enter and present their gifts. They return to their own country without acquainting Herod of his abode. Herod, incensed at the neglect of the magians, resolves on killing the child, and despatches those within the period he supposed of his age. Before this bloody decree is executed, Joseph is admonished to flee into Egypt, and by night departs thither. He continues with the child until Herod dies; returns to Judea, but is afraid to settle there, and by a divine monition retires to Nazareth. Jesus passes his childhood there, and is not spoken of until he arrives at the age of twelve, at which time he is taken to Jerusalem, and on one of the great festivals is taken notice of by the Doctors, whom he astonishes by his uncommon wisdom and sagacity. Such are the facts as stated by Matthew and Luke. And as to incongruity or contradiction, I can see none. If any difficulties occur to you on these narratives, which I have not noticed, please state them definitely, and they shall receive due attention. I know of no other or greater than I have noticed.

      Wishing you, and every student of the New Testament, all the revealed knowledge of the only true God, and his Son Jesus Christ, I subscribe myself your friend,

THE EDITOR.      

      SO MUCH as has been plead for the rights and liberties of the free born sons of the free woman, even amongst the Baptists, who have gloried in the liberality and freedom of their church polity, there are frequent displays of intolerance and tyranny, which would not have been incompatible with the policy of the Old Mother of Bigotry and Proscription some few centuries ago. We are, however, glad to say, that these occurrences are comparatively very rare, and that we have only heard of two or three of recent date. These are not to be attributed so much to the genius of their ecclesiastical policy, as to the spirit and temper of unsanctified individuals who have crept in unawares. There is the peculiar genius of each ecclesiastical policy, as well as the peculiar genius of the individuals which adopt it. There are as good republicans under the monarchies of Europe as any in the United States, and some as staunch monarchists in these United States as there are in England or France. This is as true of the members of every ecclesiastic establishment, as of the citizens or subjects of the civil governments in the Old World and in the New. But there is no scheme of ecclesiastic policy under which tyranny and proscription appear so odious as under the Baptist system. There is light enough to exhibit its deformity, as the shade in the picture exhibits in stronger colors the beauties of the painting, so the light in the congregational economy seems to render more glaring the darkness of tyranny whenever it presents itself in the Baptist communities.

      We have been often asked, What is a church to do when some of its members oppose any attempt towards a more exact conformity to the institutions of Jesus Christ? and, What is a church to do when other churches are threatening to declare non-fellowship with it for its attempts to obey more fully the apostolic traditions? To such questions the answer which Peter gave to the Sanhedrim seems to be always in season, viz. "Ought we not to obey God rather than men?" It is, however, expedient to avoid divisions, and to maintain peace, so long as it can be maintained without the sacrifice of truth. We must condescend to all christians, however weak, so far as allegiance to the Lord will permit. But the most zealous opposers of reform, and of a return to primitive usage, are said to be carnal, worldly, speculative and prayerless members of the respective communities. These are content with the forms of religion in any shape which does not pinch them too closely, or require a too great disconformity to the world. These, in all ages, have been the greatest opponents to a return to Jerusalem. They have married the Babylonish [476] women, and prefer the latitudinarian principles and practices of the Chaldean idolatry to the strict and spiritual worship of the God of Israel. These have always been a dead weight on those who wish to worship God in spirit and in truth. Some of them will continue in Babylon all the days of their lives; for, like the Jews in the wilderness, they would rather return to Egypt, to the onions and flesh pots of Egyptian slavery, than eat the manna and proceed towards Canaan. These prayerless, speculative, worldly christians (forgive the abuse of the sacred name) are always zealous for the traditions of the elders, and are rigid in their contentions for the present state of things. But to please their taste you must be as latitudinarian as themselves, and prefer the friendship of the world to the honor which comes from God only. They will tell you they were converted under the present order of things, (and, indeed, they do tell the truth, for they look like it) and they can entertain you with a long recital of a work of grace upon their hearts. To this we have no objections, provided they could show a work of grace upon their lives. But so long as we have only their word for what they have felt, and see what they do, we are compelled to judge by the Saviour's prescription, which says, "By their fruits you shall know them." But all who have known the grace of God in their hearts, will show it in their lives; and it matters not, according to the above prescription, what men may have felt, or say they have felt, so long as their lives are not in subordination to the authority of the One Only Christian Lawgiver. We must say they are either self-deceived or gross hypocrites. For we hold it to be a self-evident position in the Christian science, that whosoever is born of God will keep his commandments, and will, like Paul, desire to know the will of the Lord.

      But to those christians, in any religious community, who seem unwilling to return to the Lord, or who are satisfied with their present circumstances, and somewhat disposed to proscribe all inquiry and investigation--I should think that an appeal such as the following, could not be made in vain, provided they have a spark of Christian love, or even of Baptist liberality:--

      Brethren, you profess to be christians. Like Isaac, the son of the free woman, the child of promise, you profess to be free born. This is a sacred and a solemn profession. The Lord your King, your Prophet, and your Priest, calls you his people, and requires your whole and undivided veneration and devotion. To honor and obey him you have solemnly vowed; and must either renounce your own profession or yield him unreserved submission. He has repeatedly taught you that you "cannot serve two masters." You cannot court honor, fame, or worldly respectability, and seek the honor which comes from God only. You cannot seek to please man, and at the same time be disciples and servants of the Lord Jesus. You cannot venerate the doctrines, traditions and commandments of men, and at the same time obey the commandments of your King. You must serve the Lord with your whole heart, or he will not own you at all. You must be content with his approbation, with the "Well done, good and faithful servant," or you will never obtain it.

      Now we beseech you, for the sake of him who died for our sins, who opened to us the gates of immortality, that you put yourselves under his guidance. No obedience is acceptable to him but unreserved and universal obedience. He calls no religion his but that which governs all the actions of life. But if you cannot perceive, if you do not understand all his requirements as we do, we then ask your permission to allow us to obey him as far as we understand the meaning and scope of his requirements. We say we ask your permission, not as if our obedience was to be suspended upon, or measured by, your permission: for, whether or not, we must and will obey; but we desire you to permit this without uncharitably unchristianizing us, or attempting to lord it over our consciences. So long as you appear to us to love and venerate our King, we will love and honor you; we will bear with your mistakes and your misunderstandings, so long as they appear not to proceed from a perverse obliquity of will, but from a simple misapprehension of the will of our Lawgiver. We will not lord our views or our sentiments over you: we will not denounce you as either traitors or rebels against him that is crowned Lord of all, because you cannot walk as fast as we; nor will we submit to have our rights and liberties wrested from us; nor any lords to reign over our faith or obedience, but the Lord of all. Do then, brethren, allow us the rights and liberties we allow you. Your principles, your profession require this. As you would not permit others to become masters of your faith, nor dictators to your practice, assume not the character of masters nor dictators to us. So far as we are agreed in our apprehensions and sentiments, "let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing;" and thus we will maintain unity and peace with all them of a pure heart. We will commune with you and welcome you to commune with us in all acts of religious worship, so long as you hold the head, and build upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets; and so long as you will allow us to worship him agreeably to our own consciousness of his will. We already agree in all the grand items of Christian faith. We adore the same Lord God--we worship, confide in, and supremely love the same Saviour--we all partake of the same Holy Spirit. We believe the same glorious facts, and hope for the same blissful resurrection. Why, then, bite and devour, or consume one another. Let us, then, aim at union, harmony, and love; and by our mutual prayers and endeavors, we shall come to be one in all the items of christian worship, as we are now in the one body, the one spirit, the one hope, the one Lord, the one faith, the one immersion, the one God and Father of all. We entreat you, then, to extend to us that love and respect which you would require of us and all christians towards yourselves. We meet you then on holy ground, the ground on which the holy Apostles stood. We are for unity--for harmony--for peace. If discords and divisions must ensue, the blame shall not be ours. We will bear and forbear to the utmost limits which the constitution and laws of the kingdom of Jesus permit. We call Heaven and earth to witness that we will pursue peace with all our hearts; and that all which a conscience void of offence towards God and man can do, to prevent division, shall be done by us. But brethren, we trust that your love to him that gave himself for us, and your fear of offending him, will induce you more than any thing we can say, to seek the peace and prosperity of Zion, the city of our God.

EDITOR.      

      "ALTHOUGH it be not necessary for me to resolve upon marrying, yet it may not be improper [477] to resolve, in case I should, to follow these rules of duty:--First, in the choice of a wife; and secondly, in the affection that I ought to bear towards her. As for the first, I shall always endeavor to make choice of such a woman for my spouse, who has first made choice of Christ for a spouse to herself, that none may be made one flesh with me, who is not made one spirit with Christ my Saviour. For I look upon the image of Christ as the greatest mark of beauty I can behold in her; and the grace of God as the best portion I can receive with her. These are excellencies which, though not visible to our carnal eyes, are, nevertheless, agreeable to a spiritual heart, and such as all good and wise men cannot choose but be enamored with. For my own part, they seem to me such necessary qualifications, that my heart trembles at the thoughts of ever having a wife without them. What! shall I marry one that is already wedded to her sins? or have possession of her body only, when the Devil has possession of her soul? Shall such a one be united to me here, who shall be separated from me for ever hereafter? No: if ever it be my lot to enter into that state, I beg God that he would direct me in the choice of such a wife only, to lie in my bosom here, as may afterwards be admitted to rest in Abraham's bosom to all eternity;--such a one as will so live, and pray, and converse with me on earth, that we may both be entitled to sing, to rejoice, and be blessed together for ever in heaven. That this, therefore, may be my portion and my felicity, I firmly resolve never to set upon such a design before I have earnestly solicited the throne of grace, and begged of my Heavenly Father to honor me with the partnership of one of his beloved children; and shall afterwards be as careful and as cautious as I can, never to fix my affection upon any woman for a wife, until I am thoroughly convinced of the grounds I have to love her as a true Christian. I could be thus happy as to meet with a wife of these qualities and accomplishments, it would be impossible for me not to be hearty in loving, and sincere in my affections towards her, even although I had the greatest temptations to place them upon another; for how could I choose but love her, who has God for her father, the church for her mother, and Heaven for her portion--who loves God and is beloved by him; especially when I consider that thus to love her is not only my duty, but my happiness too?"

      FROM the 22d March to the 22d June, a period of three months, Bishop John Secrest, immersed two hundred and twenty-two persons, about an equal number of males and females.

      A correspondent informs me that Bishop Jeremiah Vardeman arrived in Cincinnati the Friday before the 4th Lord's day in June, and immediately after his arrival began to call upon the citizens to "reform and believe the gospel!" On the first Lord's day he immersed forty-one; on the second Lord's day he immersed forty-four; and on the third Lord's day from his arrival he immersed thirty-three; and had it not been for ill health, ten more would have been immersed the same day. Thus, in three weeks, one hundred and eighteen persons were immersed into the belief of the gospel, through the instrumentality of one individual proclaiming reformation towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. My correspondent farther informs me, that, amongst the persons immersed, were the descendants of all denominations in that place, except Jews, viz. Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Universalists, Catholics, Deists, Swedenborgians, &c. Also, that they were collected from almost all the grades and occupations in society doctors, lawyers, judges, clerks, auditors, merchants, mechanics and laborers.

      A correspondent in Lincoln county, Ky., informs me in a letter dated the 8th ult. that between three and four hundred persons had been immersed in that and the adjoining counties within a few months before that time, under the labors of brethren Polson, Anderson, Sterman, and others. Another informs me that bishop G. G. Boon, since last fall, immersed about three hundred and fifty; and bishop Wm. Morton, three hundred at least. Bishop Jacob Creath, has immersed a great many.

      Bishop John Smith, of Montgomery county, Ky., who labors abundantly in the proclamation of the ancient gospel, has immersed since the 20th of April, till the third Lord's day in July, two hundred and ninety-four persons. Thus, in a little more than five months, brother Smith has immersed six hundred and three persons "into the name of the Lord Jesus for the remission of sins."

      We have received from our correspondents intelligence of very extensive additions to the numbers of the disciples in many other regions; but have not room for the details, nor are they sufficiently definite. May all these disciples remember, that as they have put on the Lord Jesus Christ, they are from every consideration, bound to walk in him, to submit to his government, and to glorify God with their spirits and their bodies, which are his. Amen!

      1. Is a church, or any member thereof, that lives in the neglect of the duties enjoined on them in the gospel of Jesus the Messiah; such as assembling themselves together on the first day of the week, commemorating the death and resurrection of our Lord, contributing to the necessities of the poor, worshipping God in their families, or training up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, and when called upon in the assembly of the saints to pray, cannot or will not do it; capable of judging of the correctness or incorrectness of the doctrine of the gospel?

      2. Is not any man or woman in disorder that has united himself or herself to a church or assembly of saints, to be whispering, back-biting, and defaming those persons and their doctrine or sentiments, that they never have seen, and know nothing about, and who will not read or hear what they have to say of those sentiments?

      3. Are men or women, that have united themselves to a church or an assembly of saints, justified by the gospel of the Messiah, in omitting to attend on every first day of the week at the appointed place of worship, under pretence that they must go among their brethren in other churches, and that they are fulfilling their engagements to God in so doing?

H.      

[TCB 470-478]