diff options
Diffstat (limited to '28297-tei')
| -rw-r--r-- | 28297-tei/28297-tei.tei | 1984 |
1 files changed, 1984 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/28297-tei/28297-tei.tei b/28297-tei/28297-tei.tei new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d171b0c --- /dev/null +++ b/28297-tei/28297-tei.tei @@ -0,0 +1,1984 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?> + +<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "http://www.gutenberg.org/tei/marcello/0.4/dtd/pgtei.dtd" [ + +<!ENTITY u5 "http://www.tei-c.org/Lite/"> + +]> + +<TEI.2 lang="en"> +<teiHeader> + <fileDesc> + <titleStmt> + <title>The Christian Foundation, May, 1880</title> + </titleStmt> + <editionStmt> + <edition n="1">Edition 1</edition> + </editionStmt> + <publicationStmt> + <publisher>Project Gutenberg</publisher> + <date>March 9, 2009</date> + <idno type="etext-no">28297</idno> + <availability> + <p>This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and + with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it + away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg + License online at www.gutenberg.org/license</p> + </availability> + </publicationStmt> + <sourceDesc> + <bibl> + Created electronically. + </bibl> + </sourceDesc> + </fileDesc> + <encodingDesc> + </encodingDesc> + <profileDesc> + <langUsage> + <language id="en"></language> + <language id="la"></language> + </langUsage> + </profileDesc> + <revisionDesc> + <change> + <date value="2009-03-09">March 9, 2009</date> + <respStmt> + <name> + Produced by Bryan Ness, David King, and the Online Distributed + Proofreading Team at <http://www.pgdp.net/>. + (This book was produced from scanned images of public domain + material from the Google Print project.) + </name> + </respStmt> + <item>Project Gutenberg TEI edition 1</item> + </change> + </revisionDesc> +</teiHeader> + +<pgExtensions> + <pgStyleSheet> + .boxed { x-class: boxed } + .shaded { x-class: shaded } + .rules { x-class: rules; rules: all } + .indent { margin-left: 2 } + .bold { font-weight: bold } + .italic { font-style: italic } + .smallcaps { font-variant: small-caps } + </pgStyleSheet> + + <pgCharMap formats="txt.iso-8859-1"> + <char id="U0x2014"> + <charName>mdash</charName> + <desc>EM DASH</desc> + <mapping>--</mapping> + </char> + <char id="U0x2003"> + <charName>emsp</charName> + <desc>EM SPACE</desc> + <mapping> </mapping> + </char> + <char id="U0x2026"> + <charName>hellip</charName> + <desc>HORIZONTAL ELLIPSIS</desc> + <mapping>...</mapping> + </char> + </pgCharMap> +</pgExtensions> + +<text lang="en"> + <front> + <div> + <divGen type="pgheader" /> + </div> + <div> + <divGen type="encodingDesc" /> + </div> + + <div rend="page-break-before: always"> + <p rend="font-size: xx-large; text-align: center">The Christian Foundation,</p> + <p rend="font-size: large; text-align: center">Or,</p> + <p rend="font-size: xx-large; text-align: center">Scientific and Religious Journal</p> + <p rend="font-size: large; text-align: center">Vol. 1. No 5.</p> + <p rend="font-size: large; text-align: center">May, 1880.</p> + </div> + <div rend="page-break-before: always"> + <head>Contents</head> + <divGen type="toc" /> + </div> + + </front> +<body> + + +<pb n='161'/><anchor id='Pg161'/> + +<div rend='page-break-before: always'> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>The Old Covenant.—The Sabbath—The Law—The Commonwealth Of +Israel, And Christ.</head> + +<p> +The original term, rendered <q>Testament</q> and <q>Covenant,</q> +occurs thirty-three times in the New Testament. Greenfield +defines it thus: <q>Any disposition, arrangement, institution, or +dispensation; hence a testament, will; a covenant, mutual +promises on mutual conditions, or promises with conditions +annexed.</q> Secondly, <q>A body of laws and precepts to which +certain promises are annexed, promises to which are annexed +certain laws; the books in which the divine laws are contained, +the Old Testament, and especially the Pentateuch.</q> +Upon a careful examination of these definitions it will be seen +at once that the term <q>Testament</q> is a good translation. This +is confirmed, in Paul's letter to the Hebrews, in the inter-changeable +use of the terms <q>Will,</q> <q>Covenant</q> and <q>Testament.</q> +Our Sabbatarian brethren claim, that the Old Covenant, +which was done away, was the verbal agreement of the +Children of Israel to keep the law of the decalogue. But this +definition is not sufficient. It excludes almost all that was current +in its use. It renders it improper to call it a <q>Testament</q> or +<q>Will,</q> because fathers make testaments or wills without the +consent of their children, and these are called dispositions of +estates. Their definition of the term also makes the <q>Covenant</q> +depend upon the will of man, for covenants, in the +<pb n='162'/><anchor id='Pg162'/> +sense of agreements, have nothing to do with those who do +not enter into them. Neither can men be regarded as transgressing +a covenant, in the sense of an agreement, unless they +have first placed themselves under its obligations. So, if these +men are right in their definition of the Old Covenant, they +are wrong in trying to fasten its conditions upon all mankind. +Their logic also excludes, from all the promises of the covenant, +all those who were incapable of making an agreement. +Hence, infants were left to the uncovenanted mercies of God. +And as for the wicked, who never agreed to keep those commandments, +poor souls! they must be dealt with as violators +of a contract to which they never became a party. +</p> + +<p> +These absurdities, which are legitimately drawn from their +own premises, drive us to the conclusion that their whole theory, +upon the covenant question, is wrong. The apostle Paul +says we are the children of a covenant, which he denominates +<q>The free woman.</q> <q>She is the mother of us all.</q> But, according +to Sabbatarian logic, they are the children of two covenants, +or women. How is this? One good mother is sufficient. +When they tell you that the old covenant, which was +done away, was the people's agreement to keep the ten commandments, +remember that they, by their own showing, set +up the same old covenant by agreeing to keep the ten commandments. +So it is done away, and it is not done away. +That is, if the people say, <q>We will keep and do them,</q> it is +established, but if they say, <q>We will not,</q> it is abolished. +Again, if it was the people's agreement that was done away, +and the ten commandments were the conditions of that agreement, +then they also are of no force, for the conditions of an +agreement are always void when the contract is nullified. +Again, if the Lord had nothing to do in causing the Old Covenant +to be done away, how did it pass away by the action of +one party to it? And how can men enter into it without the +concurring assent of the party of the second part? Accept the +Sabbatarian definition of the term covenant, and it legitimately +follows that none were ever in that covenant save those +who held converse with Jehovah, through Moses, saying, <q>All +<pb n='163'/><anchor id='Pg163'/> +these things will we observe and do.</q> It is an old, trite saying, +<q>that it takes two to make an agreement.</q> And it also +takes two to abrogate an agreement. But these friends of the +seventh day say, The people rendered that old covenant void +by their wickedness, that they were at fault, that God never +abrogated it, that He always stood firm in reference to its conditions +and promises, holding the people to its obligations. +Then how was it done away? We will let Zechariah answer +this question: <q>And I took my staff, even Beauty, and cut it +asunder, that I might break my covenant which I had made +with all the people. And it was broken in that day; and so +the poor of the flock that waited upon me knew that it was +the word of the Lord. And I said unto them, If ye think +good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed +for my price thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said unto +me, Cast it unto the potter: a goodly price that I was prized +at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast +them to the potter in the house of the Lord.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Judas Iscariot sold his Savior for thirty pieces of silver, cast +the money down at the feet of the priests in the temple; the +priests took it and purchased the potters' field to bury strangers +in. And <q>in that day</q> the covenant of God was broken +by the Lord. Now, if the Lord broke that old covenant, it +follows that no man enters into it without one more concurring +action upon His part. Upon what mountain has He appeared +and reënacted this covenant? And if it was simply the people's +agreement to keep the ten commandments, how did He +make it with all the people of Israel, seeing many of them +were incapable of entering into an agreement? The truth is +this, the Lord made a covenant in the sense of a <q>Testament</q> +or institution. This sense alone admits of the irresponsible in +its provisions. In the argument from analogy, drawn from +the introduction of the New Testament, our position is confirmed. +The Savior's death gave force to this testament or +will, without any concurring action upon the part of any man +or number of men. And it is a covenant in the sense in +which Greenfield defines the term, that is, in the sense of a +<pb n='164'/><anchor id='Pg164'/> +testament, or will. This also admits of covenanted or bequeathed +blessings for all the incapable. +</p> + +<p> +The Sabbatarian view of the term covenant, if applied to +the <q>New Covenant,</q> cuts off all who do not enter into this +<q>contract.</q> But there is no reason in calling either testament +a <q>contract.</q> An earthly father may incorporate, among +other things, conditions, in his testament, or will, and +it is in force, by his death, even though his children find fault +with it. So it mattered not whether any man in ancient Israel +was satisfied with that ancient <q>testament.</q> But the Bible +nowhere limits the term covenant to the people's agreement +to keep the decalogue. On the contrary, it is said, <q>And +He declared unto you His covenant, which He commanded +you to perform, even ten commandments; and He wrote them +upon two tables of stone.</q> Deut. iv, 13. These commandments +were <hi rend='smallcaps'>after the tenor</hi> of all that was given by Moses, +as we learn in the thirty-fourth chapter of Exodus. After +Moses had given many precepts, the Lord said, <q>Write thou +these words; for after the tenor of these words I have made a +covenant with thee and with Israel. And he wrote upon the +tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.</q> +This covenant, or testament, like all other institutions which +the Lord established with the children of men, is accompanied +with reasons for its existence, and all the laws and instructions +necessary to carry out its principles. The reasons were placed +upon the tables of stone along with the commandments. When +Sabbatarians hang up their copy of those tables, it is always a +mutilated, partial copy. The whole is given to us in the fifth +chapter of Deuteronomy. No Seventh-day Adventist dare exhibit +the full copy before his audience, unless he does it at the +peril of his teaching. Here it is: <q>I am the Lord thy God +which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house +of bondage. Thou shalt have none other Gods before me. +Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness +of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in earth beneath, +or that is in the waters beneath the earth. Thou shalt +not bow down thyself unto them nor serve them: for I the +<pb n='165'/><anchor id='Pg165'/> +Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquities of the +fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation +of them that hate me, and showing mercy unto thousands of +them that love me and keep my commandments. Thou shalt +not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain, for the Lord +will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain. Keep +the Sabbath day to sanctify it, as the Lord thy God hath commanded +thee. Six days thou shalt labor and do all thy work, +but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in +it thou shalt not do any work, thou nor thy son, nor thy daughter, +nor thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thine ox, +nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is +within thy gates; that thy man-servant and maid-servant may +rest as well as thou. And remember that thou wast a servant +in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee +out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm, +therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath +day. Honor thy father and thy mother as the Lord thy +God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, +and that it may go well with thee in the land which the Lord +thy God giveth thee. Thou shalt not kill. Neither shalt +thou commit adultery. Neither shalt thou steal. Neither +shalt thou bear false-witness against thy neighbor. Neither +shalt thou desire thy neighbor's wife. Neither shalt thou +covet thy neighbor's house, his field, or his man-servant, or +maid-servant, his ox, or his ass, or anything that is thy +neighbor's. These words the Lord spake unto all your assembly, +in the mount out of the midst of the fire, of the cloud and +of the thick darkness, with a great voice; and he added no +more, and he wrote them upon two tables of stone, and delivered +them unto you.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Thus we have a <hi rend='italic'>fac simile</hi> of the law upon the tables of +stone. The terms employed in this law limit it to the Jewish +people, a people who were servants in Egypt. This was the +<q>testament,</q> <q>institution,</q> or <q>covenant</q> given at Sinai, and +it was after the <emph>tenor</emph> of all the rest that was given. It is worthy +of notice, that there is not a penalty in all that was written +<pb n='166'/><anchor id='Pg166'/> +upon those tables. And yet there were terrible penalties +inflicted for a violation of its precepts. How is this? Was +it all there was of God's law? If so, where shall we go to +find its penalties? This covenant is spoken of in Galatians, +the fourth chapter. It is called <q>the bond woman,</q> that was +cast out. In the third chapter of Corinthians it is termed +<q>the ministration of condemnation,</q> and <q>the ministration of +death written and engraven in stones, which was done away.</q> +Which Zechariah said was broken by the Lord in the day of +the terrible tragedy of the cross of Christ. +</p> + +<p> +The multiplicity of passages in the New Testament bearing +upon this great fact, causes our legalists in religion to shift +about most wonderfully. At one time, the people's agreement +to keep the law was the covenant that was done away. At +another, it was the act of executing the penalty of death that +was set aside. At another, it was the glory of Moses' face +that was done away. And at another, it was none of all these, +but it was the ceremonial law of Moses that was done away. +</p> + +<p> +All these positions were taken by one man, in one discussion +with the writer of these lines. All such turns are cheap; +it requires no great wisdom to accommodate yourself in this +manner to the force of circumstances. The fact that the <q>first +covenant</q> was a <q>testament,</q> or a body of laws with certain +promises annexed, as well as penalties, is evident from Paul's +statement in the ninth chapter of his letter to the Hebrews. +He says, <q>Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances +of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary, for there was a tabernacle +made; the first wherein was the candlestick, and the +table, and the show-bread; which is called the sanctuary.</q> +The distinction which our friends make between <q>Moses' +law</q> and <q>God's law,</q> as they are pleased to express it, is not +only unscriptural, the two phrases being inter-changeable, but +also <emph>absurd</emph>. Moses gave all, that these men are pleased +to term his law, in the name of the Lord. The law of the +passover, found in the twelfth chapter of Exodus, is prefaced +with these words: <q>And the Lord God said unto Moses.</q> In +the twenty-fifth chapter of the same book we have the laws +<pb n='167'/><anchor id='Pg167'/> +concerning the ark, the tabernacle, the priestly service, and +all are introduced with this saying: <q>And the Lord spake unto +Moses.</q> Moses never gave a law in his own name. Neither +did he give one of his own in the name of the Lord, because it +would have cost him his life. The Lord had guarded this +point in the following: <q>But the prophet which presumes +to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded +him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, +even that prophet shall die.</q> Now one of two things is evident: +first, all the laws that Moses gave in the name of the +Lord were His; or, secondly, Moses violated the law governing +the prophet. And if the record is false on this account, +how can we trust it in other respects? It is as easy to turn +God out of all the pentateuch, and put Moses into it, as to +maintain the proposition that Moses had a law of his own. +Sabbatarians act the part of the unbeliever in getting the Lord +out of the law that was done away, and Moses into it. All +that is accredited to the Lord was His, otherwise the record is +untrustworthy. If our friend's position is true, it follows that +Moses is the sole author of the sacrificial system of blood, +without which there was no remission, and thus the ancient +remedial scheme falls, being without divine sanction. But the +Lord claims all that our friends hand over to Moses. The following +phrases are uttered with reference to the priests and +other things: <q>My priest,</q> <q>My sacrifice,</q> <q>Mine altar,</q> +<q>Mine offering,</q> 1st Samuel, ii, 27-29; <q>The Lord's pass-over,</q> +Exodus, xii, 11; <q>The feasts of the Lord,</q> Lev. xxiii; +<q>My sanctuary and my Sabbaths,</q> Ezekiel, xxiii, 38. The +manner in which Sabbatarians emphasize the phrase <q>My Sabbath,</q> +and <q>My holy day,</q> is well calculated to mislead the +unsuspecting, but those who are schooled in biblical literature will regard it +as mere <emph>rant</emph>, <emph>cheap theology</emph>, <emph>mere display</emph>! All +that Moses gave, as law, was from the Lord, <emph>was His</emph>. <q>The +Lord came down upon Sinai, and spake to them from heaven, +and gave them right judgments, and true laws, good statutes +and commandments, and made known to them His holy Sabbath, +and commanded precepts, statutes and laws, by the hand +of His servant Moses.</q> Nehemiah, ix, 13, 14. +</p> + +<pb n='168'/><anchor id='Pg168'/> + +<p> +The seventh-day Sabbath was not given to the Gentile world. +It would require just as plain and positive legislation to bind +it upon us as it did to establish it in Israel. It was a sign +between God and the Hebrews. Ezek. xxxi, 13-18. <q>Moreover, +also, I gave them my Sabbaths, to be a sign between me +and them, that they might know that I am Jehovah that doth +sanctify them.</q> If there are any Gentile Christians upon the +earth who think it is essential to know that it was the Lord +that sanctified the children of Israel, set them apart from the +surrounding nations, I would say to such, It is sufficient to +your salvation that you know the Lord, as manifested in the +flesh in the person of Christ Jesus, and that you love and obey +him. I can not see that the seventh-day Sabbath, as a sign +upon a Gentile, would tell the truth, for the Lord never sanctified +the Gentiles in the sense of setting them apart from the +surrounding nations. Again, if our friends could succeed in +making it universal, it would <emph>cease to be a sign</emph>. It was a national +badge, or sign, between God and the Hebrews. Its +object was to keep in their memory that which was true of +them <emph>alone</emph>. <q>Remember that thou wast a servant in the land +of Egypt, and that the Lord thy God brought thee out thence +with a mighty hand and a stretched out arm, therefore the +Lord thy God hath commanded thee to keep the Sabbath day.</q> +Deut. v. Can any Gentile obey this instruction? It is impossible! +Moses said, <q>Behold I have taught you statutes +and judgments, even as the Lord my God commanded me, +that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it. +Keep, therefore, and do them, for this is your wisdom and +your understanding, in the sight of the nations which shall +hear all these statutes and say, Surely this great nation is a +wise and understanding people. For what nation is there so +great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this +law which I set before you this day.</q> Deut. iv, 5. The authority +and glory of Christ forbid all such Judaizing as that +which we speak against. <q>He was given of God to be head +over all things to the church.</q> <q>And He is head of all principality +and power.</q> The Father put all things under Him. +<pb n='169'/><anchor id='Pg169'/> +The prophet Isaiah said, <q>He shall not fail, nor be discouraged +till He hath set judgment in the earth, and the isles shall wait +for His law.</q> Ch. xlii, 4. And Paul said, <q>Bear ye one another's +burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.</q> Gal. vi, 2. +</p> + +<p> +The object of law is to regulate the exemplification of principles. +Some principle is exemplified in every act that man +performs. And one principle may be in a great variety of +acts. The principle of hatred is exemplified in a great many +different actions; and the principle of love to God is manifested, +or exemplified, in every act of obedience to God. So the +spiritual may be brought out under different dispensations, and +by different laws, while it remains always the same. Indeed, +principles are unchangeable; they belong to the nature of +things. Covenants, priesthoods, dispensations and laws have +changed, but principles, <emph>never</emph>. So the moral objective of every +law is the same, viz., to bring out and develop the spiritual in +man. To accomplish this great end it is necessary that the +evil principles of a carnal, or fleshly nature, should be restrained +by the penal sanctions of law, and the principles of +man's higher nature brought out by its motives of good. Such +being the nature of principles, and the facts of law, Paul says, +<q>We know that the law is spiritual.</q> And again, <q>The law +is fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh, but after the +Spirit.</q> <q>Do we then make void law through faith? God +forbid; yea, we establish law.</q> +</p> + +<p> +I have left the article out of this text because it is not in the +original. B. Wilson translates the verse in these words: <q>Do +we then nullify law through the <hi rend='smallcaps'>faith</hi>. By no means; but +we establish law.</q> The negative use of law is to restrain the +evil; and the affirmative is to bring out the good, the spiritual. +So, without any interference with <emph>the spiritual</emph> of any law +that ever was, either divine or human, we have a better +covenant, or testament, than the old testament; one that is +established upon better promises, which contains <q>A new and +living way into the Holiest,</q> which Paul says, <q>Is heaven +itself.</q> This new way was consecrated through the flesh of +Christ. The rule of life in this way is the <q>Law of Christ.</q> +<pb n='170'/><anchor id='Pg170'/> +It is a better law, for us, because its precepts are not limited to +our neighbor. The following is a part, at least, of the contrast: +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>the decalogue given to israel.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +<q>Neither shalt thou bear false witness against thy <emph>neighbor</emph>. +Neither shalt thou desire thy <emph>neighbor's</emph> wife. Neither shalt +thou covet thy <emph>neighbor's</emph> house, his field, or his man-servant, +or his maid-servant, his ox or his ass, or anything that is thy +<emph>neighbor's</emph>. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt not +kill.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>the law of christ bound upon the world.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +<q>Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer. But I say +unto you, love your enemies. If thou mayest be made free use +it rather. Be ye not the servants of men. Thou shalt not +bear false witness. Thou shalt not covet. Whosoever looketh +upon a woman and lusteth after her hath committed adultery +already in his heart.</q> +</p> + +<p> +I have presented a sufficient amount of each law to show +you a part of the great contrast which exists on account of the +ancient law being given to a people set apart from all the surrounding +nations by a legal wall interfering with them in their +social walks in life. That law was sufficient for all practical +purposes among the Jews. But, since that <q>Middle wall of +partition</q> has been taken down, it is utterly useless to talk +about a law limited to your neighbor being any longer worthy +of God, or a perfect rule for man's conduct in his associations +with all men. Indeed, it never was a law regulating a man's +conduct with all men. The middle wall was taken out of the +way, and Jews and Gentiles have shook hands in Christian +fellowship under the new institution. Let us see how this +was brought about. When the law brings about a separation, +nothing short of law can undo it, and bring about the union +of the parties separated. But, as authority, that controls law, +is alone competent to remove legal results, we must look for +this, as a matter of necessity, lying at the foundation of the +new institution. It is just there that we find it in these words: +<pb n='171'/><anchor id='Pg171'/> +<q>All authority is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go +ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name +of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching +them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded +you.</q> The result of obedience to this law of Christ is expressed +in these words: <q>But now, in Christ Jesus, ye who +sometime were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. +For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken +down the middle wall of partition between us, having abolished +in his flesh the enmity; even the law of commandments +contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one +new man, so making peace.</q> Eph. ii, 13-15. The God of +Abraham said unto Rebecca, <q>Two nations are in thy womb.</q> +Gen. xxv, 23. This language had its fulfillment in the decendants +of Jacob and Esau. The political history of the children +of Jacob begins at Sinai with their beginning as a nation +among the surrounding nations. The law given at Sinai was +a political law, for it was addressed to a community, pertained +to a community, and was accepted by a community. +</p> + +<p> +Such is a political law in the strictest sense of the term. +This law was given to the Jews, the decendants of Jacob. +Moses said, <q>The Lord our God made a covenant with us in +Horeb. The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, +but with us, even us, who are all of us here alive this day.</q> +Horeb is a synonymous with Sinai, and means, properly, ground +left dry by water draining off. So, Horeb and Sinai occur in +the narrative of the same event. The children of Jacob are +known as a commonwealth, from the giving of the law onward +until their overthrow by the Romans. Paul, speaking of the +Gentiles, in past times, says <q>They were aliens to the commonwealth +of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise.</q> +The Jews called them <q>dogs.</q> This great enmity had +its origin in the two-fold consideration of the Jew being favored +in a temporal and political point of view, and the pride +of his heart, which exalted him in his own imagination above +even his moral superiors. This corruption of the heart, with +the liability of its return, being removed by the abrogation of +<pb n='172'/><anchor id='Pg172'/> +all that was peculiar to the Jews and their conversion to +Christ, Paul says, <q>That all are one in Christ.</q> Christ was +the bond of union, all were joined to him. But the same authority +that separated them by legislation must legislate with +reference to this grand change that was to take place between +these decendants of Jacob and Esau. The law of commandments +separating the Jews limited them in moral duties to their +neighbors. It was unlawful for them to go in unto one of +another nation. It limited them in trade and traffic to their +own countrymen; also limited them to their own people +in matrimonial relations. So God must be heard again, I +say, <emph>heard!</emph> for He was heard at the giving of the law, which +is now to be taken out of the way. When Jesus took Peter, +James and John up in a high mountain and was transfigured +before them, Moses and Elias, the great representatives of the +Patriarchial and Jewish dispensations, appeared unto them +and <q>a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold a voice +out of the cloud, which said, This is my well-beloved Son in +whom I am well pleased, <hi rend='smallcaps'>hear ye him</hi>.</q> Math. xvii, 5. +Here is the authority that gave the institution peculiar to the +Jews legislating with reference to Him whose doings were to +end that system of things, and lead all into <q>a new and living +way.</q> Paul says: <q>God, who at sundry times and in divers +manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, +hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son.</q> So +Christ took away the first will and established the second. See +Heb. x, 9. Paul says: <q>As ye have received Christ Jesus +the Lord, so walk ye in Him.</q> This relation of duty to the +reception of Christ has direct reference to the character in +which we receive him. He was given to <emph>rule</emph>, to exercise +<emph>Lordship</emph>. He is Lord of all. The term Lord signifies +<q>ruler by right of possession.</q> If He is not Lord of all there +is an abundance of false testimony upon this one subject, and +Christianity is diseased in the head. And if he is Lord of all, +then we should leave that old mountain that shook and burned +with fire, and all the political paraphernalia of Sinai, and consider +ourselves complete in Christ, who is <q><emph>Emanuel</emph>, God +<pb n='173'/><anchor id='Pg173'/> +with us.</q> If any man does this he is not troubled with the +old <q>bond woman.</q> Jehovah said of Christ: <q>I have given +Him for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.</q> +Isaiah xlii, 2. New duties appear before us in the New Testament, +with new obligations lying at their foundation. Jesus +said: <q>If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not +had sin, but now they have no cloak for their sins.</q> Again: +<q>If I had not done among them the works which none other +man did, they had not had sin; but now have they both seen +and hated both Me and my Father.</q> John xv, 22-24. +</p> + +<p> +Justification turns no longer upon the ancient law, and the +sacrificial and typical system of blood is no longer the means +of pardon. The law contained a shadow of good things to +come, but the body was of Christ. He that believeth on Him +is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned +already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only +begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that +light is come into the world, and men love darkness rather +than light because their deeds are evil. Everything turns in +this dispensation upon Christ and his Law. Jesus told his +disciples to teach their converts to observe all things which +He had commanded them to teach, and they filled their mission. +Paul said, He <q>shunned not to declare the whole counsel +of God,</q> <q>kept back nothing.</q> With reference to law, he +said, <q>If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, +let him acknowledge that the things I write are the commandments +of the Lord.</q> For the glory of Christ, as his just meed +of praise, it was written, <q>Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, +do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.</q> <q>Christ is the end of +the Law for righteousness to every one that believeth.</q> In +this major proposition the minor, of the seventh-day Sabbath, +is involved. The Lord said of Israel, <q>I will also cause all +her mirth to cease, her feast days, her new moons, and her +Sabbaths, and all her solemn feasts.</q> Hosea, ii, 11. No man +is threatened, by Christ or any of his apostles, on account of +Sabbath-breaking, or any of those things which are peculiar +to the Jews. But men are threatened for disobedience to the +<pb n='174'/><anchor id='Pg174'/> +Gospel of Christ. The New Testament is of Christ. Its religion +is not <q>the Jews' religion,</q> but Christ's. There was +much in the Old Testament that is in the New, but it is there +by the authority of Christ. Hence, we are <q>complete in Him +who is the head of all principality and power.</q> Much in the +laws of the United States was first in the laws of England, but +we do nothing with reference to English authority. So it is +with us, as respects all who went before Christ, we do nothing +in reference to them, but do all in reference to Christ, and for +His name. The Old Kingdom of Israel, with its political +law, statutes and judgments, has passed away, and Christ +reigns <q><emph>all in all</emph>.</q> To Him <q>be glory and majesty, dominion +and power, both now and ever.</q> Jude, xxv. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Infidels Live In Doubting Castle.</head> + +<p> +Having shown that no man in his senses can be an atheist, +unless he assume that he comprehends the universe in his +mind, with all its abstract essences and principles, which +assumption would be to make himself omnipresent and eternal, +a god in fact; and having seen that the proposition of the +divine existence and perfections is demonstrable from the universe, +as far as it is known in all its general laws and in all +its parts, we proceed from these prefatory considerations to +other matters still more intimately introductory to our design. +</p> + +<p> +It is essentially preliminary to a clear and forcible display +of the reasonableness and certainty of our faith in Jesus +Christ as the author of immortality to man, that we ascertain +the proper ground on which the modern skeptic, of whatever +creed, stands when he avows his opposition to the gospel. +That we may duly estimate the strength of his opposition, +we must not only enumerate his objections or arguments, but +we must exactly ascertain the exact position which he occupies. +Does he stand within a fortified castle, or in the open +field? Presents he himself to our view in a stronghold, +well garrisoned with the invincible forces of logic, of science, +<pb n='175'/><anchor id='Pg175'/> +and of fact? or defies he armies and the artillery of light, +relying wholly upon himself, his own experience, without +a shield, without an ally, without science, without history, +and consequently a single fact to oppose? +</p> + +<p> +That we may, then, truly and certainly ascertain his precise +attitude, before we directly address him, we shall accurately +survey his whole premises. Does he say that he <emph>knows</emph> +the gospel to be false? No, he can not; for he was not in +Judea in the days of the evangelical drama. He, therefore, +could not test the miracles, or sensible demonstrations, by any +of his senses; nor prove to himself that Jesus rose not from +the dead. Speaking in accordance with the evidence of sense, +of consciousness, and of experience, he can not say that he +<emph>knows</emph> the gospel to be a cunningly devised fable. He has +not, then, in all his premises <emph>knowledge</emph>, in its true and proper +meaning, to oppose to the Christian's faith or hope. What +remains? +</p> + +<p> +Can he say, in truth, that he <emph>believes</emph> the gospel to be false? +He can not; because belief without testimony is impossible; +and testimony that the gospel facts did not occur is not +found extant on earth in any language or nation under +heaven. No contemporaneous opposing testimony has ever +been heard of, except in one instance, the sleeping and incredible +testimony of the Roman guard, which has a lie +stamped indelibly on its forehead: <q>His disciples stole his +dead body while we were asleep.</q> He that can believe this +is not to be reasoned with. We repeat it with emphasis, that +no living man can say, according to the English Dictionary, +that he <emph>believes</emph> the gospel to be false. +</p> + +<p> +Alike destitute of knowledge and of faith to oppose to the +testimony of apostles, prophets, and myriads of contemporaneous +witnesses, what has the skeptic to present against the numerous +and diversified evidences of the gospel? Nothing in +the universe but his <emph>doubts</emph>. He can, in strict conformity to +language and fact, only say, he doubts whether it be true. +He is, then, legitimately no more than an inmate of Doubting +Castle. His fortification is built up of doubts and misgivings, +<pb n='176'/><anchor id='Pg176'/> +cemented by antipathy. Farther than this the powers +of nature and of reason can not go. +</p> + +<p> +How far these doubts are rational, scientific, and modest, +may yet appear in the sequel; meanwhile, we only survey the +premises which the infidel occupies, and the forces he has to +bring into the action. These, may we not say, are already +logically ascertained to be an army of doubts only. +</p> + +<p> +Some talk of the immodesty, others of the folly, others of +the maliciousness of the unbeliever; but not to deal in harsh +or uncourteous epithets, may we not say, that it is most +unphilosophic to dogmatize against the gospel on the slender +grounds of sheer dubiety. No man, deserving the name of a +<emph>philosopher</emph>, can ever appear among the crusading forces of +pamphleteers and declaimers against the faith of Christians, +for two of the best reasons in the world; he has nothing better +to substitute for the motives, the restraining fears to the +wicked, and the animating hopes to the righteous, which the +gospel tenders; and he has nothing to oppose to its claims +but the weakness and uncertainty of his doubts. Franklin +was a philosopher, but Paine was a madman. The former +doubted, but never dogmatized—never opposed the gospel, +but always discountenanced and discouraged the infidel; the +latter gave to his doubts the authority of oracles, and madly +attempted to silence the Christian's artillery by the licentious +scoffings of the most extravagant and unreasonable skepticism. +</p> + +<p> +Modesty is the legitimate daughter of true philosophy; +but dogmatism, unless the offspring of infallible authority, is +the ill-bred child of ignorance and arrogance. Every man, +then, who seeks to make proselytes to his skepticism by converting +his doubts into arguments, is anything but a philosopher +or a philanthropist. +</p> + +<p> +One of the most alarming signs of this age is the ignorance +and recklessness of the youthful assailants of the Bible. +Our cities, villages and public places of resort are thronged +with swarms of these Lilliputian volunteers in the cause of +skepticism. Apprenticed striplings, and sprigs of law and +physic, whose whole reading of standard authors on general +<pb n='177'/><anchor id='Pg177'/> +science, religion, or morality, in ordinary duodecimo, equals +not the years of their unfinished, or just completed minority, +imagine that they have got far in advance of the vulgar herd, +and are both philosophers and gentlemen if they have learned +at second hand, a few scoffs and sneers at the Bible, from +Paine, Voltaire, Bolingbroke, or Hume. One would think, +could he listen to their impudence, that Bacon, Newton, +Locke, and all the great masters of science, were very pigmies, +and that they themselves were sturdy giants of extraordinary +stature in all that is intellectual, philosophic and learned. +These would-be baby demagogues are a public nuisance to +society, whose atheistic breath not unfrequently pollutes the +whole atmosphere around them, and issues in a moral pestilence +among that class who regard a fine hat and a cigar as +the infallible criteria of a gentleman and scholar. +</p> + +<p> +These creatures have not sense enough to doubt, nor to +think sedately on any subject; and therefore, we only notice +them while defining the ground occupied by the unbelievers +of this generation. They prudently call themselves skeptics, +but imprudently carry their opposition to the Bible, beyond +all the bounds embraced in their own definitions of skepticism. +A skeptic can only <emph>doubt</emph>, never <emph>oppugn</emph> the gospel. +He becomes an atheist, or an infidel, bold and dogmatic, as +soon as he opens his mouth against the Bible. +</p> + +<p> +Were we philosophically to class society as it now exists in +this country in reference to the gospel, we should have +believers, unbelievers, and skeptics. We would find some +who have voluntarily received the apostolic testimony as true; +others who have rejected it as false; and a third class who +simply doubt, and neither receive nor reject it as a communication +from heaven. But, though, unbelievers, while they +call themselves skeptics, often wage actual war against the +faith and hope of Christians, still their actual rejection of the +gospel has no other foundation than pure aversion to its +restraints and some doubts as to its authenticity. The quagmire +of their own doubts, be it distinctly remembered, is the +sole ground occupied by all the opponents of the gospel, +whether they style themselves antitheists, atheists, theists, unbelievers, +or skeptics.—<hi rend='italic'>Alexander Campbell, in 1835.</hi> +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='178'/><anchor id='Pg178'/> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Infidelity, And The French And American Revolutions +In Their Relations To Thomas Paine.</head> + +<p> +Infidels can not free themselves from the bands which tie +the universe to its God. Every effort has been fruitless. Not +one writer among all their hosts has been lucky enough to +avoid the use of Christian terms that are in direct antagonism +with their speculation and positions. It will be interesting +to review, occasionally, their literature. +</p> + +<p> +Speaking of Thomas Paine, Mr. Ingersoll says: <q>Every +American with the <hi rend='smallcaps'>divine</hi> mantle of charity, should cover all +his faults.</q> What use has Col. Ingersoll or any other infidel +for the word <hi rend='smallcaps'>divine</hi>? The term is thus defined: Pertaining +to the true God; (from the Latin <hi rend='smallcaps'>divinus</hi>; from +<hi rend='smallcaps'>deus</hi>, a god) +proceeding from God; appropriated to God; or celebrating His +praise; excellent in the supreme degree; apparently above +what is human; godlike; heavenly; holy; sacred; spiritual. +As a noun: one versed in divine things or divinity; a theologian; +a minister of the gospel; a priest; a clergyman. <hi rend='italic'>Zell's +Encyclopedia.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +Again, Mr. Ingersoll says, <q>Upon the head of his father, +<hi rend='smallcaps'>God</hi> had never poured the <hi rend='smallcaps'>divine</hi> +petroleum of <emph>authority</emph>.</q> +So much the better for the race. What would infidels do if +they had the authority? <q>Hume is called a model man, a +man as nearly perfect as the nature of human frailty will permit.</q> +He maintained that pleasure or profit is the test of +morals; that <q>the lack of honesty is of a piece with the lack +of strength of body;</q> that <q>suicide is lawful and commendable;</q> +that <q>female infidelity, when known, is a small thing; +when unknown, nothing;</q> <q>that adultery must be practiced +if men would obtain all the advantages of this life; and that +if generally practiced it would, in time, cease to be scandalous, +and if practiced frequently and secretly would come to be +thought no crime at all.</q> +</p> + +<pb n='179'/><anchor id='Pg179'/> + +<p> +Lord Herbert taught that the <q>indulgence of lust and anger +is no more to be blamed than thirst or drowsiness.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Voltaire contended <q>for the unlimited gratification of the +sexual appetites, and was a sensualist of the lowest type; nevertheless +he had the amazing good sense to wish that he had +never been born.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Rousseau was, by his confession, a habitual liar and thief, +and debauchee; a man so utterly vile that he took advantage +of the hospitality of friends to plot their domestic ruin; a man +so destitute of natural affection that he committed his +<hi rend='smallcaps'>base-born</hi> +children to the charity of the public. To use his own +language, <q>guilty without remorse, he soon become so without +measure.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Thomas Paine was, according to the verdict of history, <q>addicted +to intemperance in his last years, given to violence and +abusiveness, had disreputable associates, lived with a woman +who was not his wife, and left to her whatever remnant of +fortune he had.</q> +</p> + +<p> +What would such godless infidels give us if the Almighty +God should <q>pour the petroleum of authority upon their +heads?</q> But, in all candor, what use has Col. Ingersoll for +the <emph>idea of authority coming from God</emph>? Can't he keep in his own +ruts. <q>The <hi rend='smallcaps'>divine</hi> petroleum of authority was never poured +upon the head of <emph>Thomas Paine's father</emph>.</q> Well, so much the +better for the reputation of God. But why does Mr. Ingersoll +use the term God, and have so much to say of Him? Let us +hear him. He says, whoever is a friend of man is also a friend of +God—if there is one. Yes! <q><hi rend='smallcaps'>is there is one</hi>.</q> +This reminds me of an old infidel who was struggling with the +cramp colic, and just as a minister was approaching his bedside +he turned himself over in the bed and said, O Lord, if +there is any Lord, save my soul, if I've got any soul. The +minister walked out. What is the condition of those minds +which modify their declarations with the saying <q>if there is +any Lord,</q> <q>if there is one,</q> <q>if I've got any soul.</q> How +much more manly is it to own the great universal and instinctive +<pb n='180'/><anchor id='Pg180'/> +or inate truth, that there is a Master, God, or great +first Living Intelligence, and cease acting foolishly. +</p> + +<p> +Once more, the colonel, speaking of Thomas Paine's work, +says, <q>He was with the army. He shared its defeats, its dangers, +and its glory. When the situation became desperate, +when gloom settled upon all, he gave them the <q>Crisis.</q> It +was a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night, leading the +way to freedom, honor and glory.</q> What use has the colonel +for such language? From whence did it come? Is he sitting +upon the bones of Moses and making grimaces at the old prophet +while he is adopting his sentences? Infidels blaspheme +the name of Moses, and abuse his hyperboles and his facts as +well, and, at the same time, go to his quiver to get their very +best arrows. +</p> + +<p> +<q>At the close of the Revolution no one stood higher in +America than Thomas Paine.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Ingersoll.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +<q>At that time the seeds sown by the great infidels were beginning +to bear fruit in France.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Ingersoll.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +<emph>Well, well.</emph> To what <q>mount</q> have we come at last? Paine +sailed to France in 1787. <q>He was elected to represent the +Department of Calais in the National Convention, and took +his seat in that radical assembly in 1792.</q> At this time Col. +Ingersoll's church had everything its own way in France. +There was no God to respect or devil to fear. <q>Free thought</q> +ruled—its reign was a reign of night. The goddess of reason +was the <q>twin sister of the Spanish Inquisition.</q> The soldiers +were in power, and great hearts were made to bleed. Three +hundred and sixty-six men in the National Convention voted +for the death of the king. Three hundred and fifty-five voted +against his execution. It is true that Tom Paine was one of +the three hundred and fifty-five. A year after the king's execution +Tom was put into prison, and remained there nearly +two years. When he was released he wrote the second part of +the Age of Reason, and in 1802 he came back to America. +What he did for American liberty was done while he was a +Quaker, and before he wrote his detestable works against the +Bible. Let some bold infidel produce just one noble public +<pb n='181'/><anchor id='Pg181'/> +act that Paine did for our country after he avowed himself an +infidel. <emph>Will it be done?</emph> +</p> + +<p> +The leaders of the French revolution were the disciples of +Rousseau, Voltaire and Diderot. They were atheists, or infidels. +Tom Paine was one of their number, participated in +their deliberations, helped to get up the constitution they enacted. +What they did is what the infidels of the United States +wish to have done. They wiped out Christianity by vote, and +forbade the utterance of the name of God to their children. +They abolished the Lord's day, and made the week to consist +of <emph>ten</emph> instead of seven days. They took the bells from the +churches and cast them into cannons. Chaumette, a leader in +the convention, came before the president <q>leading a courtesan +with a troop of her associates.</q> He lifted her veil, and +said, <q>Mortals! recognize no other divinity than Reason, of +which I present to you the loveliest and purest personification.</q> +The president bowed and rendered devout adoration. The +same scene was reënacted in the cathedral of Notre Dame, +with increased outrages upon God and common-sense. Wrong +was reputed right, and the distinction between vice and virtue +was banished. +</p> + +<p> +From this time, and onward, the test of attachment to the +government was contempt for religion and decency. Those +suspected of disloyalty were gathered; one thousand and five +hundred women and children were shut up in one prison, without +fire, bed, cover, or provisions, for two days. Men escaped +by giving up their fortunes, and women escaped by +parting with their virtue. +</p> + +<p> +Seventeen thousand perished in Paris during this reign of +infidel terror. This ungodly abrogation of religion in France +cost the nation three million of lives—<emph>think of it!</emph> France's +most dark and damning record was the fruit of the tenets of +the men that Col. Ingersoll lauds to the heavens. They were +the fruits of the labors of the men with whom Tom Paine sat, +and believed, and voted. <q>His faith was their faith.</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q>It was the Quaker Paine who worked for our independence, +and not the infidel Paine. He did nothing in the interests +<pb n='182'/><anchor id='Pg182'/> +of our national liberty after he avowed his irreligious +principles.</q> Neither was he the first to raise the voice in +favor of national liberty. Ten years before he wrote his work +entitled <q>Common Sense,</q> at the suggestion of Franklin and +Dr. Benjamin Rush, which was in 1776, Patrick Henry's voice +was heard amid the assembled colonists in Virginia. He said: +<q>Cæsar had his Brutus, Charles I. his Cromwell, and George +III.—</q> Just then some one cried out, <q>Treason!</q> After a +pause, Henry added,—<q>may profit by their example.</q> Years +before Tom Paine came to America, even in 1748, it went to +record that American legislatures were tending to independence. +<q>They were charged with presumption in declaring +their own rights and privileges.</q> Our independence was predicted +near at hand from 1758 and onwards. In 1774, before +Paine came from England, the word freedom was ringing out +upon the air. <q>James Otis was hailing the dawn of a new +empire</q> in 1765. In this year there were utterances of such +sentiments as tended to evolve the declaration of 1776, and +these were heard all over the land from Boston to Charleston, +S. C. In 1773 <q>Samuel Adams insisted that the colonies +should have a congress to frame a bill of rights, or to form an +independent state, an American commonwealth.</q> The North +Carolinians renounced their allegiance to the king of England +in the Mecklenberg declaration, which was made in May, 1775. +But Paine's little book, suggested by Dr. Benjamin Rush and +Franklin, and called <q>Common Sense,</q> was published in 1776. +Hildreth, writing of the year 1802, says that <q>Paine, instead +of being esteemed as formerly, as a lover of liberty, whose +pen has contributed to hasten the Declaration of Independence, +was now detested by large numbers as the libeler of +Washington.</q> In 1795 the <hi rend='italic'>Aurora</hi> put out the following +language, which seems to be that to which Hildreth alludes: +<q>If ever a nation was debauched by a man, the American nation +was debauched by Washington; if ever a nation was deceived +by a man, the American nation has been deceived by +Washington. Let the history of the federal government instruct +mankind, that the mask of patriotism may be worn to +<pb n='183'/><anchor id='Pg183'/> +conceal the foulest designs against the liberties of the people.</q> +This, gentle reader, was from the pen of the man whom Mr. +Ingersoll would immortalize if he could. +</p> + +<p> +William Carver addressed a private letter to Thomas Paine, +dated Dec. 2, 1806, and published in the New York <hi rend='italic'>Observer</hi> +Nov. 1, 1877, in which we have the following revelations: +<q>A respectable gentleman from New Rochelle called to see +me a few days back, and said that every body was tired of you +there and that no one would undertake to board and lodge you. +I thought this was the case, as I found you at a tavern in a most +miserable situation. You appeared as if you had not been +shaved for a fortnight, and as to a shirt, it could not be said +that you had one on, it was only the remains of one, and this +likewise appeared not to have been off your back for a fortnight, +and was nearly the color of tanned leather; and you had +the most disagreeable smell possible, just like that of our poor +beggars in England. Do you remember the pains I took to +clean you? That I got a tub of warm water and soap, and +washed you from head to foot, and this I had to do three times +before I could get you clean? You say also that you found +your own liquors during the time you boarded with me, but +you should have said, <q>I found only a small part of the liquor +I drank during my stay with you; this part I purchased of +John Fellows, which was a demijohn of brandy containing +four gallons, and this did not serve me three weeks.</q> This can +be proved, and I mean not to say anything I can not prove, +for I hold this as a precious jewel. It is a well-known fact +that you drank one quart of brandy per day, at my expense, +during the different times that you have boarded with me, the +demijohn alone mentioned excepted, and the last fourteen +weeks you were sick. Is not this a supply of liquor for dinner +and supper? Now sir, I think I have drawn a complete +portrait of your character, yet, to enter upon every minutia, +would be to give a history of your life, and to develop the +fallacious mask of hypocrisy and deception under which you +have acted in your political, as well as moral, capacity of life.</q> +So much for the apostate Quaker's character after the close of +the American revolution. +</p> + +<pb n='184'/><anchor id='Pg184'/> + +<p> +Mr. Lecky, an infidel, says, <q>It was reserved for Christianity +to present to the world an ideal character, which through +all the changes of eighteen centuries has filled the hearts of +men with an impassioned love, and has shown itself capable +of acting on all ages, nations, temperaments, and conditions; +has not only been the highest pattern of virtue, but the highest +incentive of practice: amid all the sins and failing; amid +all the priestcraft, the persecution and fanaticism which have +defaced the church, it has preserved <hi rend='smallcaps'>in the character +of its founder an enduring principle of regeneration</hi>.</q> +If such be the fountain let the stream continue +to flow. +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Shall We Unchain The Tiger? Or, The Fruits Of Infidelity.</head> +<head type='sub'>By Eld. A. I. Maynard.</head> + +<p> +An infidel production was submitted to Benjamin Franklin +manuscript; he returned it to the author with a letter, +from which the following quotations are extracted: +<q>I would advise you not to attempt unchaining the +Tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other +person.... If men are so wicked with religion, what +would they be without it?</q> He informs us that he was <q>an +advocate of infidelity in his early youth, a confirmed Deist.</q> +He says his <q>arguments perverted some other young persons, +particularly Collins and Ralph, and when he recollected that +they both treated him exceedingly ill without the least remorse, +and also remembered the behavior of Keith, another +<q>Freethinker,</q> and his own conduct toward Vernon and a +Miss Reed, which at times gave him great uneasiness, he was +led to suspect that his theory, if true, was not very useful.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Youth and inexperience have been the secret of many young +persons being led astray, like Franklin, by infidel speculations; +but age and observation have convinced many of them +that all infidel speculations are empty and worthless. +<pb n='185'/><anchor id='Pg185'/> +Look at the history of infidelity in France and Scotland, +and then look at liberalism in America, with Col. Ingersoll +leading the van. Can't you see that its only tendency is to +loosen the restraints of morality and <q>unchain the Tiger?</q> +</p> + +<p> +The inconsiderate and inexperienced youth of both sexes, +have need of all the motives of religion to lead them from +vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in its practice +until it becomes habitual. +</p> + +<p> +Unbeliever, if you read this article, and remember that you +have prepared one sentence to cut one cord that helps to hold +the Tiger, <emph>burn it</emph>. Do not unchain the animal. Would you +substitute infidelity for Christianity, for the religion of the +Bible? Would you do that in this country? The enemies +of this religion confess that its code of morals is holy, just and +good, its doctrine is dignified and glorious; its tendency is +to purity and peace; <q>it is pure, peaceable, gentle and easy +to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits; without partiality, +and without hypocrisy.</q> Montesquieu, the publisher +of the Persian letters and president of the parliament of Bordeaux, +says: <q>The Christian religion, which ordains that men +should love each other, would, without doubt, have every +nation blessed with the best political and civil laws, because +these, next to religion, are the greatest good that men can +have.</q> +</p> + +<p> +The Congress of 1776, speaking of religion, declared it was +the <q>only solid basis of public liberty and happiness.</q> General +Washington said it was <q>one of the great pillars of human +happiness, and the firmest prop of the duties of men and citizens.</q> +What could we gain by exchanging it for Deism, or +Atheism, or Ingersollism? Infidelity proposes to break down +the altars of prayer, take away our Bibles and our days of +worship, shut up the doors against all our Sunday-schools and +turn more than a million of children into the streets, away +from sweet song and moralizing influences, and the pure +morals of the gospel of Christ. This would bereave the +living of his rule of life, and rob the dying of the antidote +of death. +</p> + +<pb n='186'/><anchor id='Pg186'/> + +<p> +Shall we <q>unchain the Tiger</q>—<emph>unbelief</emph>? What would it +bring us in return? Its doctrines are vague speculations, +founded on neither data nor evidence; some of its supporters +believe in some kind of a God, while some deny every God; +some few believe in the immortality of the soul, while a majority, +with the French infidels, write over the gates of their +cemeteries, <q>Death is eternal sleep.</q> +</p> + +<p> +In looking over the various infidel productions I think of +the old saying, <q>Be sure you are right, and then go ahead.</q> +There is no certainty in their speculations. They do not +agree even in their so-called moral code, nor, as yet, in their +doctrinal speculations. +</p> + +<p> +Lord Herbert and the Earl of Shaftesbury thought that +the light of nature would teach all men, without the aid of +revelation, to observe the morality of the Bible. Spinosa and +Hobbes, one believing in a God, and the other an Atheist, +agreed that there was nothing that was either right or wrong +in its own nature; and also agreed <q>that every man had a +right to obtain, either by force or fraud, everything which +either his reason or his passions prompted him to believe was +useful to himself—duties to the State were his only duties.</q> +</p> + +<p> +Blount, another Freethinker, supposed <q>that the moral law +of nature justified self-murder.</q> Lord Bolingbroke claimed +that it enjoined polygamy; and neither Blount nor Bolingbroke +prohibited fornication, or adultery, or incest, except between +parents and children. +</p> + +<p> +But the vagueness and uncertainty of the doctrinal speculations +of infidelity, and the looseness and immorality of its +rules of life, are not the only objections to it. Its tendency, +wherever it has been introduced in the history of our world, +has been evil, and <emph>only</emph> evil. France, at the commencement +of her revolution in 1789, was an infidel nation. The profligacy +of the Catholic priesthood, and the demoralizing example +of the Regent, Duke of Orleans, and the infidel publications of +Voltaire and his associates, had produced a contempt for religion +through every rank of society. The people of France +were taught by their literati that the Bible was at war with +<pb n='187'/><anchor id='Pg187'/> +their liberties; and that they could never expect to overturn +the throne till they had, first, broken down the <q>altar.</q> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>here the tiger was unchained!</hi> +</p> + +<p> +The lusts and passions of man were set free from the restraints +of Christianity, and the bloody history of that nation, +in its devotion to infidelity, should convince every man that +infidelity only <q><emph>unchained the tiger</emph></q>! It did France no good, +<emph>but much evil</emph>. In this state of things France needed revolution, +as America did, and had she engaged in it, with as pious +reliance upon God, <q>and with the hearts of her people deeply +imbued with the morality of the Bible, the scion of liberty, carried +in the honored Lafayette from this country,</q> would have +taken deep root, and spread forth its branches; and ere this +time the fairest portion of Europe might have reposed under +its shadow. But her principles poisoned her morals, and her +immorality disqualified her for freedom. After expending an +incredible amount of treasure, and sacrificing more than two +million of men, she consented to be ruled by a despot in hope +of some protection from her own people, and in hope of some +security against the animal which she had unchained. +</p> + +<p> +With such facts before us, let us Americans decide, not +merely as Christians, but as <q>patriots and fathers,</q> whether +we will cling to the pure <q>Gospel of Jesus Christ,</q> given to +us in the love of Heaven, and in the blood of Jesus, rather +than accept in its stead the empty, Godless, Christless, good-for-nothing +negative of God and Christ and Christianity. The +chief article in the unbeliever's creed is in these words, <q>I believe +in all unbelief.</q> +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule: 50%'/> + +<p> +Will not our friends take interest enough in the <hi rend='smallcaps'>Journal</hi> +to increase its circulation. There is no reason why it should +not be immediately doubled, and thus placed upon a solid basis. +It is our intention to make it a thorough defense of the +truth, so much so that all will relish it, and remember it with +delight. +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='188'/><anchor id='Pg188'/> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>The Struggle.</head> + +<quote rend='display'> +<lg> +<l><q rend='pre'>Passion riots; reason then contends,</q></l> +<l><q rend='post'>And on the conquest every bliss depends.</q></l> +</lg> +</quote> + +<p> +There are two different periods in the history of the race; +in the history of a nation; in the history of the church; in the +history of moral institutions, and in the history of families. +In one the intellect predominates, governs; in the other the +emotional nature, or passion, rules. The fatal day in the history +of a nation is the day in which, through party strife or +otherwise, a nation of people becomes a seething mass of heated +passion. Such a nation is like a vessel tossed upon the +waves above the falls of some mighty river, liable to be buried +in the whirlpool of destruction. Men who are governed +by their emotional nature are most liable to disappointments, +to troubles, and difficulties of every kind. Select all the miserable +families in your community, tell me where they are, +and I will show you every family in which passion reigns. +</p> + +<p> +Troubles are generally legitimate children of passion. Who +has not heard some one say, repentingly, <q>If I had taken a +second, sober thought I would not have done it.</q> Intellect +belongs to our higher nature, and emotion belongs to our lower. +Intelligence is always at a discount where the emotional +nature governs—it is subordinated to passion. When the intellect +governs, the emotional is subjected to thought; when +either one predominates, the other is brought under and enslaved. +These are the two conflicting elements in man's nature +which are generally at war with each other, leading to +different and antagonistic results. During the dark ages, +which were ushered in through the repudiation of intelligence +and the predominance of passion, the emotional reigned, and +men were governed by their passions in religious as well as +state affairs. The shadows of those ages still linger with +some communities, and with many persons in almost all +communities. Our fathers had a long and hard struggle in +getting away from an emotional to an intellectual state, both +<pb n='189'/><anchor id='Pg189'/> +in civil as well as religious affairs. To-day, if we consider +this matter in connection with our people as a nation, we may +safely say that we are in an intellectual period—mind predominates. +This is an age of investigation. The time was, +in the history of our fathers, when a man was fined fifty +pounds of tobacco if he refused to have his innocent child +christened. <emph>See the</emph> <q><emph>old Blue Laws.</emph></q> The time was when +innocent persons were tried, condemned, and put to death for +being, in the estimation of men, clothed with disgraceful ignorance, +<emph>witches</emph>. Who has not heard of the <q>Salem witchcraft?</q> +</p> + +<p> +The emotional nature of man, as a ruling sovereign, is losing +its <q>legal-tender value</q> daily. The time was when it +brought a premium in the most of the churches in our country. +An aged father, who is now <q>across the river,</q> once said to +me, <q>I was bewildered, and mentally lost for thirty years of +my life.</q> I asked him for the facts. He, answering, said: +<q>During all that period of time I was a church member, and, +like some others, I was a quiet, still kind of a soul; I paid +my honest debts; told the truth about my neighbors, and +lived a moral life to the very best of my abilities. There +were others of the same character. The preachers frequently +called us Quakers—the Quakers were a very still people in +those days. There were others who were reckless; would not +always tell the truth, and would not always pay their honest +debts, but they were, nevertheless, very noisy in the church, +and the preacher always made most of those noisy fellows. +Now,</q> said the aged father, <q>I never could understand that.</q> +The old man lived to learn the secret, and changed his religious +relations and began a new life in religion. +</p> + +<p> +The scenes of the <q>Cane Ridge revival,</q> down in Kentucky, +have not been repeated in all our country for more than twenty +years, and it is probable that they never will be. There +are many things in the past history of religion in our country +that will never be repeated. Did you ever witness a panic in +a large congregation of people? If you have, you may go +with me to <q>Cane Ridge.</q> Before we start I wish to remind +you of the fact that some of the most fearful panics known to +<pb n='190'/><anchor id='Pg190'/> +men took place where, and when, there was no reason for them +outside of existing ignorance. Fright or fear, coupled with +ignorance, produced them. Now let us go to <q>Cane Ridge.</q> +There we find the people in the emotional period in the history +of religion. They are laboring under the conviction that +Jehovah has concentrated all the powers of His Spirit at Cane +Ridge—it is the common conviction. The people all over the +country believe that God is there. The excitement runs high, +and yet higher; it becomes contagious—a religious epidemic—the +ruling element being the thought of the presence of the +Divine Majesty, and the emotional nature of man the field of +its operations. All the ignorance of a genuine panic is there. +There were no well-informed unbelievers there to tear off the +veil, nor better-informed Christians to remove it, not even so +much as a Wesley to exonerate God by saying, <q>I am constrained +to believe that it is the devil tearing them as they are +coming to Christ.</q> No! There is one conviction at Cane +Ridge—it is this: <emph>Jehovah is here.</emph> It was a wonderful panic—a +wonderful time. Persons going on to the ground immediately +fell down like dead men; got up with the jerks; +barked like dogs. Women went backwards and forwards, +making singular gestures; their heads were bobbing with the +jerks, and their long hair cracking like whips. The scene was +beyond description. The whole country flocked to the place, +and all were confounded with amazement and astonishment. +</p> + +<p> +If such operations were religion, our country has been without +it for a long time. Then our old-fashioned camp-meetings—where +are they? They are things of the past. I recollect +leaving a camp-ground at a late hour of the night, just as the +congregation divided up into groups, and the groups went out +into the woods in different directions to engage in secret +prayer. We heard them when we were three miles away—<emph>strange +secret prayer</emph>! Do you know anything of that kind +of secret prayer at the present time? +</p> + +<p> +The common pulpit teaching of those times was wonderful(?), +but it was the best they had. It was common for preachers to +make war upon education. They often boasted of their ignorance. +<pb n='191'/><anchor id='Pg191'/> +They claimed that education was not necessary to +qualify a man for the pulpit. The best school teachers in our +country received twelve and fifteen dollars per month for +teaching, and boarded themselves. Teachers who now pay +five dollars per week for board, can't see how those old teachers +got along upon such wages. In those times it was very +common for teachers to get their board for seventy-five cents +per week. The farmers claimed that it was unnecessary to +educate their daughters, and only necessary to educate their +sons sufficiently well to enable them to keep their accounts. +Beyond this it was often claimed that an education was of no +value—that it only made rascals. I recollect a very zealous +old man who preached for the German Baptists; he is now +<q>across the waves.</q> Once, in my presence, he disposed of a +grammatical argument that was put against him, by saying, +<q>It is the wisdom of the world, and it is sensual and devilish.</q> +It was common forty years ago for preachers to say, <q>I don't +know what I shall say, but just as the Lord gives it to me I +will hand it to you.</q> As a general thing those men knew no +better, and the masses of the people knew no better. The +people were living in an Emotional period, with the exception +of a few brave thinkers, and they were governed by their emotions. +</p> + +<p> +Prosperity grew with the growth of our country, and the standard +of education was elevated. The free-school system +took the place of the old-fashioned subscription schools, which +were worth twelve dollars per month to the whole community, +and the brave thinkers continued stirring up thought in religion, +and giving the fathers and mothers trouble about this thing +of confounding religion with passion, and our country is now +fairly at sea in an Intellectual period. Religion is now a +thing to be learned and lived—<emph>to be done</emph>. Those brave men +who advocated an intelligent religion forty years ago, were +denounced, from almost every pulpit in our country, as a set +of <q>whitewashed infidels,</q> having no religion, and <q>without +God in the world.</q> +</p> + +<p> +But that day is past, and we are in a period in which mind +<pb n='192'/><anchor id='Pg192'/> +generally predominates. The language of the emotional is +seldom heard. In that period it was common to hear men +ask: <q>How did you get religion?</q> <q>where did you get religion?</q> +<q>where did you get religion?</q> <q>describe it;</q> <q>O +I can't, it is better felt than expressed.</q> Such language was in +keeping with a very common idea which was held sacred in +those days. It was this, the Lord made general provision +for the salvation of men, but He makes a special application +to the sinner. Of course, all to whom salvation was not especially +applied, were, in the estimation of those people, <emph>lost</emph>. +There are a few communities yet that are away back in the +emotional period. There are men and women in every community +who are yet governed by their emotional nature in +matters of religion. Those persons have no use for an intelligent, +argumentative preacher. They want a preacher who +will say smoothe things; and there is now and then a preacher +who has no strength outside of the emotional. +</p> + +<p> +We have an emotional nature. I am glad that we have. I +would not be an intellectual wooden-man if I could. But if +you say, the Almighty Father intended that we should be intellectually +subordinated to our emotional nature, and therefore +governed by our passions, or feelings, I shall deny it. He +never intended that we should be governed by our passions. +To-day there are strong intellects in unbelief flooding our +country with their literature. How shall they be met? Mr. +Moody says, <q>Show them that you are full of Jesus Christ +and the Holy Ghost.</q> Very well. Can you do that without +the truth? can you do that without word or wisdom? can you +do it without <q>contending earnestly for the faith once delivered +unto the saints?</q> In the days of Christ and His apostles the +men who were full of the Holy Spirit had a mouth and wisdom +which none of their adversaries were able to resist or +gainsay. The antichrists of our day can not be met successfully +without reason, without argument, without meeting the +intellectual demands of the times. +</p> + +<p> +There are intellectual men and women in almost every community +throughout our country—men and women with whom +<pb n='193'/><anchor id='Pg193'/> +intelligence governs—who want the whys and wherefores upon +every subject. This class is on the increase at a rapid rate. +It does no good to set ourselves against reason, and oppose the +current of thought with our emotional nature. In that way +we may succeed with those who are governed by their emotional +nature, but the work, when it is done, is a work upon +the passions, and will soon pass away, unless the intellect was +at the same time enlisted. The men who stir the world with +thought, and give intellectual cast to the age in which we live, +are to be met with thought, met with reason, met with truths +tried in the crucible. +</p> + +<p> +Christianity has nothing to fear in the great struggle that is +being carried on for the truth's sake. But it has lost much +for want of investigation. Our free school and Sunday-school +systems are making the rising generation better acquainted +with both science and the Bible, and a thorough +acquaintance with both is the one thing most needed in order +to a better future in religion, as well as in every other human +interest. The time is come when men will no longer be content +to listen to grave errors and keep silence. Every truth +is being put to the test of logic, as well as fact. It is natural +to abhor a contradiction, and it is right. All truth is harmonious. +I am glad that harmony is demanded in religious +teaching; I often think of pulpit teaching away back thirty +and forty years ago. It used to be very popular in some +parts to tell people that they could do nothing to better their +condition in a future state, and, at the same time, exhort them +to do better. +</p> + +<p> +I heard of three brothers, George, William and James. +George and William were <q>Hard-shell Baptist</q> preachers; +James made no profession. His wife was a member of +George's congregation. She was a great <q>scold.</q> One day +James failed to do just as she wished him, and, as a matter of +course, he received quite a lecture; finally the woman told +him that it was a great pity that he could not be a good man, +like his brother George or brother William, and fell to exhorting +him to do better. He finally became impatient and +<pb n='194'/><anchor id='Pg194'/> +said, <q>Yes! George and William were too lazy to work, and +I called them to preach. They both stood it until the third +call, and then put on their hats and went. You belong to +George's church, and I go there with you to hear him preach. +He tells me that I can do nothing, and you tell me that I can +do nothing; and, now, what in the h—l do you want me to +do?</q> Such inconsistent teaching was always repugnant to +common sense and natural reason. There are many persons +yet teaching the old falsehood that man is passive in his conversion, +notwithstanding the fact that men are imperatively +commanded to convert—turn, that their sins may be blotted +out. Men are yet found in some Protestant pulpits who spend +a great deal of their time praying the Lord to convert sinners. +It is often the case, in their own estimation, that the Lord +gives no heed to their prayers; but this has happened so frequently +that it does not seem to trouble them. It has been a +very short time since I heard a minister advocating what he +was pleased to call <q>miraculous conversion.</q> I thought, if +you are right in that matter, why did the Heavenly Father +command his love, commended in the Savior's death, preached +to every creature, and still refuse to convert every creature? +What difference does it make to me whether the Lord passed +me by before He made Adam, or passed me by on yesterday? +And if He refuses to send His spirit and convert me until the +last, and I die in my sins and am lost, who is to blame? +What is the difference between His neglect to convert me and +the old Calvinistic idea that Christ did not die for me? What +is the difference between the spirit of God being partial to +communities—going into one and converting a great many +persons and passing others by—and God Himself being partial? +And why does the Spirit not convert all the unwilling +sinners in the community where it does convert sinners? +These are questions that have been asked in a great many +hearts before they yielded themselves up to skepticism and infidelity. +</p> + +<p> +In the present stage of critical investigation it is well for +all preachers to remember that there is but one question involving +<pb n='195'/><anchor id='Pg195'/> +this whole matter of conversion and pardon, and that +is the question coupled with the Judgment; it is not, How +much did the Heavenly Father love me? He loved all men. +It is not, How much did Jesus do for <emph>me</emph>? He tasted death +for every man. It is not, How much has the Spirit done for +me? It gave the gospel to all nations, as the power of God +unto salvation to every man that believeth. The one, and +only, question in the Judgment is, What have I done for myself? +What are the deeds done in my body? the deeds +which <emph>I have done</emph>. +</p> + +<p> +Christianity is right thinking and doing; all that is to be +attained in the religion of Christ is enjoyed in an upright life. +Every theory that conflicts with this grand sentiment is smoked +with the darkness of the dark ages. The Father of Spirits +made us with the power of choice—gave us the liberty to +choose—and we all may have, in the future, just such a state +as we will. The Father loved all; the Son died for all; and +the Spirit says to all, <hi rend='smallcaps'>come!</hi> +</p> + +<p> +The great struggle that is now going on between Christianity +and unbelief is accomplishing two good things: First, it is +making it hard for professors of religion to hold their errors, +or cover up hypocrisy; and second, it is making it hard for +infidels and skeptics to hold on to their flimsy objections to +the Christian religion. Let the struggle go on! +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>The Records Respecting The Death Of Thomas Paine.</head> + +<p> +That he bitterly regretted the writing and the publishing +of the <hi rend='italic'>Age of Reason</hi> we have incontestable proof. During +his last illness he asked a pious young woman, Mary Roscoe, +a Quakeress, who frequently visited him, if she had ever read +any of his writings, and being told that she had read very little +of them he inquired what she thought of them, adding, +<q>From such a one as you I expect a true answer.</q> She told +him, when very young she had read his <hi rend='italic'>Age of Reason</hi>, but +<pb n='196'/><anchor id='Pg196'/> +the more she read of it the more dark and distressed she felt, +and she threw it into the fire. <q>I wish all had done as you,</q> +he replied, <q>for if the devil ever had an agency in any work, +he has had it in writing that book.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Journal of Stephen +Grellet, 1809.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +Dr. Manley, who was with him during his last hours, in a +letter to Cheetham, in 1809, writes: <q>He could not be left +alone night or day. He not only required to have some person +with him, but he must see that he or she was there, and if, +as it would sometimes happen, he was left alone, he would +scream and halloo until some person came to him. There was +something remarkable in his conduct about this period, which +comprises about two weeks immediately preceding his death. +He would call out during his paroxysms of distress, without intermission, +<q>O Lord, help me! God, help me! Jesus Christ, +help me! O Lord, help me!</q> etc., repeating the same expressions +without the least variation, in a tone of voice that +would alarm the house. It was this conduct which induced +me to think that he abandoned his former opinions, and I was +more inclined to that belief when I understood from his nurse, +who is a very serious, and I believe pious woman, that he +would occasionally inquire, when he saw her engaged with a +book, what she was reading, and being answered, and at the +same time asked whether she should read aloud, he assented, and +would appear to give particular attention. The doctor asked +him if he believed that Jesus Christ is the Son of God? After +a pause of some minutes he replied, <q>I have no wish to believe +on that subject.</q> <q>For my own part,</q> says the doctor, +<q>I believe that had not Thomas Paine been such a distinguished +infidel he would have left less equivocal evidences of +a change of opinion.</q></q> +</p> + +<p> +The Roman Catholic Bishop, Fenwick, says: <q>A short +time before Paine died I was sent for by him.</q> He was +prompted to do this by a poor Catholic woman who went to +see him in his sickness, and who told him if anybody could do +him any good it was the Catholic priest. <q rend='pre'>I was accompanied +by F. Kohlman, an intimate friend. We found him at a +<pb n='197'/><anchor id='Pg197'/> +house in Greenwich, now Greenwich street, New York, where +he lodged. A decent-looking, elderly woman came to the +door, and inquired whether we were the Catholic priests; <q>for,</q> +said she, <q>Mr. Paine has been so much annoyed of late by +other denominations calling upon him, that he has left express +orders to admit no one but the clergymen of the Catholic +church.</q> Upon informing her who we were, she opened the door +and showed us into the parlor. <q>Gentlemen,</q> said the lady, +<q>I really wish you may succeed with Mr. Paine, for he is laboring +under great distress of mind every since he was told +by his physicians that he can not possibly live, and must die +shortly. He is truly to be pitied. His cries, when left alone, +are heart-rending. <q>O Lord, help me!</q> he will exclaim during +his paroxysms of distress: <q>God, help me! Jesus +Christ, help me!</q> Repeating these expressions in a tone of +voice that would alarm the house. Sometimes he will say, +<q>O God, what have I done to suffer so much?</q> Then shortly +after, <q>but there is no God,</q> then again, <q>yet if there should +be, what would become of me hereafter?</q> Thus he will continue +for some time, when, on a sudden, he will scream as if +in terror and agony, and call for me by name. On one occasion +I inquired what he wanted. <q>Stay with me,</q> he replied, +<q>for God's sake, for I can not bear to be left alone.</q> I told +him I could not always be in the room. <q>Then,</q> said he, +<q><emph>send even a child to stay with me, for it is a hell to be alone.</emph></q> +<emph>I never saw</emph>,</q> she continued, <q><emph>a more unhappy, a more forsaken +man. It seems he can not reconcile himself to die.</emph></q></q> +</p> + +<p> +<q>Such was the conversation of the woman, who was a Protestant, +and who seemed very desirous that we should afford +him some relief in a state bordering on complete despair. +Having remained some time in the parlor, we at length heard +a noise in the adjoining room. We proposed to enter, which +was assented to by the woman, who opened the door for us. +A more wretched being in appearance I never beheld. He +was lying in a bed sufficiently decent in itself, but at present +besmeared with filth; his look was that of a man greatly tortured +in mind, his eyes haggard, his countenance forbidding, +<pb n='198'/><anchor id='Pg198'/> +and his whole appearance that of one whose better days had +been one continued scene of debauch. His only nourishment +was milk punch, in which he indulged to the full extent of his +weak state. He had partaken very recently of it, as the sides +and corners of his mouth exhibited very unequivocal traces of +it, as well as of blood which had also followed in the track and +left its mark on the pillow. Upon their making known the +object of their visit, Paine interrupted the speaker by saying, +<q>That's enough, sir, that's enough. I see what you would be +about. I wish to hear no more from you, sir; my mind is +made up on that subject. I look upon the whole of the Christian +scheme to be a tissue of lies, and Jesus Christ to be nothing +more than a cunning knave and imposter. Away with +you, and your God, too! Leave the room instantly! All +that you have uttered are lies, filthy lies, and if I had a little +more time I would prove it, as I did about your imposter, +Jesus Christ.</q> Among the last utterances that fell upon the +ears of the attendants of this dying infidel, and which have +been recorded in history, were the words, <q>My God, my God, +why hast thou forsaken me?</q></q> +</p> + +<milestone unit='tb' rend='rule: 50%'/> + +<p> +<q>Some thousand famous writers come up in this century to +be forgotten in the next. But the silver cord of the Bible is +not loosened, nor its golden bowl broken, though time chronicles +his tens of centuries passed by.... You can +trace the path of the Bible across the world, from the day of +Pentecost to this day. As a river springs up in the heart of a +sandy continent, having its father in the skies; as the stream +rolls on, making in that arid waste a belt of verdure wherever +it turns its way; creating palm groves and fertile plains, where +the smoke of the cottage curls up at eventide, and marble cities +send the gleam of their splendor far into die sky—such +has been the course of the bible on +earth.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Theodore Parker.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +<q>I must die—abandoned of God and of +men.</q>—<hi rend='italic'>Voltaire.</hi> +</p> + +</div> + +<pb n='199'/><anchor id='Pg199'/> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Three Reasons For Repudiating Infidelity.</head> + +<p> +Bishop Whipple says, <q rend='pre'>I once met a thoughtful scholar who +told me that for years he had read every book which assailed +the religion of Jesus Christ. He said he would have been an +infidel if it had not been for three things:</q> +</p> + +<p> +<q rend='pre'><q rend='pre'>First, I am a man. I am going somewhere. I am to-night +a day nearer the grave than last night. I have read all +that they can tell me. There is not one solitary ray of light +upon the darkness. They shall not take away the only guide +and leave me stone blind.</q></q> +</p> + +<p> +<q rend='pre'><q rend='pre'>Secondly, I had a mother. I saw her go down into the +dark valley where I am going, and she leaned upon an unseen +arm as calmly as a child goes to sleep upon the breast of a +mother. I know that was not a dream.</q></q> +</p> + +<p> +<q><q>Thirdly, I have three motherless daughters. They have +no protector but myself. I would rather kill them than leave +them in this sinful world if you could blot out from it all the +teachings of the Gospel.</q></q> +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Col. Ingersoll Is A Philosopher?</head> + +<p> +Col. Ingersoll tells us that <q>intellectual liberty, as a matter +of necessity, forever destroys the idea that belief is either +<hi rend='smallcaps'>praise or blameworthy</hi>, and is wholly inconsistent with +every creed in Christendom.</q> Again, he says, <q>No man can +control his belief.</q> Notwithstanding all this, his whole occupation +consists in traveling over the country and blaming men, +women and children for their belief. He is consistent? He +is a Scientist, you know? He does nothing that is absurd? +He is a philosopher, sitting on the bones of Moses and making +grimaces at the faith of Moses, when neither Moses nor his +friends could control their belief? He works hard for no purpose +if men can't control their belief, and does men injustice, +<hi rend='smallcaps'>if he blames them for their faith</hi>? +</p> + +<p> +<q>No man can control his belief.</q> Then why labor to make +your brother of humanity believe that he is but— +</p> + +<pb n='200'/><anchor id='Pg200'/> + +<quote rend='display'> +<lg> +<l rend='margin-left: 4'>The pilgrim of a day?</l> +<l>Spouse of the worm and brother of the clay,</l> +<l>Frail as the leaf in autumn's yellow bower,</l> +<l>Dust in the wind, or dew upon the flower?</l> +</lg> + +<lg> +<l rend='margin-left: 4'>A child without a sire;</l> +<l>Whose mortal life and transitory fire</l> +<l>Light to the grave his chance-created form,</l> +<l>As ocean wrecks illuminate the storm.</l> +</lg> +</quote> + +<p> +And then— +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<lg> +<l>To-night, and silence sinks forevermore!</l> +</lg> +</quote> + +<p> +If these— +</p> + +<quote rend='display'> +<lg> +<l>The pompous teachings ye proclaim,</l> +<l>Lights of the world and demi-gods of fame,</l> +<l>The laurel wreaths that murderers rear,</l> +<l>Blood-nursed and watered by the widow's tears,</l> +<l>Seems not so foul, so tainted, and so dread,</l> +<l>As the daily night-shade round the skeptic's head.</l> +</lg> +</quote> + +<p> +<emph>Think of Ingersoll at his brother's grave!</emph> +</p> + +</div> + +<div> +<index index='toc'/> +<index index='pdf'/> +<head>Life Of Elder E. Goodwin.</head> + +<p> +This interesting volume will be ready for delivery in a few +days, as it is now in the hands of the binder. It is a neat volume +of 314 pages, on good paper, and substantially bound in +cloth. Price, $1.50. +</p> + +<p> +Some two months ago we issued a prospectus for this book, +proposing to make a work of 300 pages, and putting the price +at $1.25, and these papers have been in the hands of agents +for some time, and quite a large number of persons have subscribed +for the book at that price. Of course all who have +subscribed to date shall have the book in good faith at $1.25, +as understood, but we are compelled to raise the price to all +new subscribers from this date to $1.50, on account of the advance +in all book stock and the increased size of the book. +</p> + +<p> +All our old agents, and all persons desiring an agency for +this work, will please correspond with us at this place—Bedford, +Lawrence County, Indiana. +</p> + +<p> +April 2, 1879.<lb/> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>J. M. Mathes.</hi> +</p> + +<p> +Elder Mathes, also, keeps on hand a full supply of all the +publications of the Christian church. Address all orders for +any good book in the market to Elder James M. Mathes, +Bedford, Lawrence County, Indiana. Send money by postal +money order, bank draft, or registered letter. +</p> + +<p> +<hi rend='smallcaps'>J. M. Mathes.</hi> +</p> +</div> +</body> +<back rend="page-break-before: right"> + <div rend="page-break-before: right"> + <divGen type="pgfooter" /> + </div> +</back> +</text> +</TEI.2> |