HE SPARKS 
 
 LIBRARY. 
 
 [MISCELLANY.] 
 Collected by 
 
 JARED Sparks, LL. D., 
 
 President of Harvard College. 
 
 Purchased by the Cornell University^ 
 
 1872. 
 
°iifili?i»?i,,S,?,f'.,.,f.?*^P o" theological 
 
 onn,an^ ^^24 031 447 208 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031447208 
 
DISCOURSES 
 
 ESSAYS 
 
 THEOLOGICAL AND SPECULATIVE TOPICS. 
 
 BY REV. STEPHEN FARLEY. 
 
 "THB TRUTH SHALL MAKE TOU FBEE. 
 
 BOSTON: 
 PUBLISHED BY H. FARLEY, 
 
 AND SOLD AT THB OFFICE OF THB " CHKISTIAN REGISTBB,' 
 
 ASD BT THB BOOKSELUIBS. 
 
 1851. 
 © 
 

 Entered, according to Act of Congreas, in the year 1851, by 
 
 HARRIET FARLEY, 
 
 In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 
 
 boston: 
 
 printed by john wilson and son, 
 
 22, School Sieebt. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 It is witli feelings of solemnity, though not of sadness, 
 that we suspend again, for a few moments, our watches 
 by the sick-bed, to trace the lines that terminate a task 
 which has for the last season had so prominent a place 
 amid our thoughts and cares. When the Discourses of 
 which this volume is composed were placed in our hands, 
 the regular publishers had already pronounced sentence 
 against them, on account of the unremunerating reputa- 
 tion of such works. But our readers will, many of them, 
 conceive of a daughter's sympathy with the author's 
 desire that they might appear in a permanent form, and 
 that this purpose might be accomplished while he yet 
 lived. The preparation for the compositor and other 
 preliminaries were soon completed ; and the work of 
 printing has gone on with a rapidity almost unprece- 
 dented in such publications. It is to be regretted that 
 circumstances, not needful to specify here, made it 
 impracticable to form of these Essays chapters in one 
 continuous discourse. Thus a revising hand coidd have 
 struck away repetitions which cannot now be eliminated 
 
IV PREFACE. 
 
 without marring the passage or connection in which they 
 appear. 
 
 The following prefatory remarks were dictated by the 
 author a few days since : — 
 
 " For many years past, I have received communications 
 from divers and very respectable sources, encouraging 
 me to make a publication, the basis of which should be 
 my contributions to the ' Christian Register.' One of 
 these communications was from Mr. Olnet, of Connec- 
 ticut, of geographic fame ; another from the late Rev. 
 James Kat, of Northumberland, Penn., written about a 
 month before his death. I have always had the intention 
 of publishing a book of this description : but the prepa- 
 ration of it has been neglected ; and now, at this very 
 late hoTir, I make an effort to accomplish the work. It 
 will not be just what was at first contemplated. It may 
 probably contain some things unacceptable to all my 
 readers ; but I ask their indulgence." 
 
 With printers so eminently qualified for their portion 
 of the work, our task, demanding care and attention, has 
 presented no difiiculties. The hardest part is now before 
 us ; and assistance in this we ask of the thinking, liberal 
 public, by a response to the appeal, " Will you buy our 
 book?" 
 
 Amesbuhy, Sept. 24, 1851. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 God and Creation 1 
 
 Developments of Religion and op Chbisxianitt . . 16 
 
 The Doctrine op the Fall Examined and Repudiated , 57 
 The Incorruptible Word : Tradition : the Infallible 
 
 Church 69 
 
 The Real and the Apparent in Biblical Theology . 82 
 
 The Wheat and the Chafp 105 
 
 The Trinity 131 
 
 The Messiah : the Messianic Idea : his Advent, Reign, 
 
 AND Kingdom 149 
 
 Christ a Sacrifice 171 
 
 Christ the Mediator 184 
 
 Character of Faith 196 
 
 Sin a Thing op Degrees 206 
 
 Grace and Merit 214 
 
 An Ideal op God 224 
 
 Truth, Knowledge, Reason, Sensation, Faith . . 233 
 
 The Bible a Book to be Examined 254 
 
 The Hidden Sense op the Word 267 
 
 The Hebrew Records . . . . . . . 279 
 
 The Scripture Records 297 
 
 The Return-advent op Christ 316 
 
 Nature the Universal Mediator between God and his 
 
 Creatures 341 
 
 Great Power and Use op Truth ..... 359 
 
 The New and the Old 368 
 
 Fasting and Prayer 385 
 
DISCOURSES AND ESSAYS. 
 
DISCOURSES ATyfD ESSAYS. 
 
 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 " Thou art Lord alone : thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, 
 with all their hosts j the earth and all things that are therein, the seas and all 
 therein, and thou preserves! them all ; and the host of heaven worshippeth 
 thee." — Nehemiah, ix. 6. 
 
 The views which the ancient Jews entertained of 
 God and of heaven are indicated in this passage. 
 They conceived of God as a kind of omnipotent 
 man, residing on the upper surface of that immense 
 solid structure, which, as they believed, overarches 
 the whole face of the earth, and is a platform to 
 sustain the sun, moon, and stars ; and where he 
 had a temple or palace indescribably magnificent 
 and beautiful, filled and surrounded by immense 
 multitudes of glorious spirits, who worshipped him, 
 and executed the orders of his will. They regarded 
 him as the great Builder of the world, the Con- 
 structer of the heavens, the Maker of all things 
 contained in the heaven, the earth, and the seas ; 
 also as their Upholder, Guardian, Director, and 
 Sovereign. From his palace on high, he could 
 1 
 
2 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 survey the whole surface of the earth at a glance; 
 could see every man and every creature, even those 
 which lay on the bottom of the seas, and in the 
 bottomless deep which underlies the dry land. All 
 Uving creatures were the subjects of his care, and 
 he provided for their wants ; aU men were the sub- 
 jects of his moral government, and he rendered 
 unto them severally according to their works. 
 
 The two questions. Is there is a God ? and what 
 and who is he? cannot be kept entkely distinct 
 from each other. In discussing the one, we easily, 
 and even necessavUy, run into the other. We 
 therefore, in the present discourse, propose to treat 
 of them conjointly and together. We shall en- 
 deavor to express our views of what God is ; the 
 proof of his existence ; and of the mode, order, 
 or way, in which he constructed and governs the 
 world. 
 
 The common argument in proof of a Divine 
 Existence may be thus stated : " Something now 
 exists ; of course, something always has existed ; for 
 existence cannot produce itself ; nothing can be self- 
 produced. It may, however, be self-existent, and 
 that which is self-existent is unchangeable ; it nei- 
 ther begins to exist, nor ceases to exist, nor changes 
 its essential essence. Hence, the visible world cannot 
 be self-existent ; for its phenomena are in a constant 
 course of change. Its parts, moreover, were obvi- 
 ously made for uses : it bears the unmistakable marks 
 of design ; and where there is design, there must have 
 been a Designer. There must, therefore, have been a 
 time when the world did not exist, and when God 
 
GOD AND CREATION. 3 
 
 existed alone ; and when he purposed and planned 
 the type, the model, the pattern, of the world." 
 
 In this argument there is much of just and in-e- 
 fragable force and truth. But perhaps it does not 
 tell the whole truth. It makes no distinction be- 
 tween simples and compounds. The things which 
 we see are compounds. The sun is a complex or 
 compound object. And such also is the moon and 
 the earth. And such, likewise, are all the things con- 
 tained in the earth and in the seas. All fishes and 
 animals are complex creatures ; all vegetables and 
 minerals are also complex or compound existences. 
 Here is a piece of rock : I carry it to a mineralo- 
 gist, and inquire for its character. He tells me it is 
 a fragment of granite. I ask him if it be a simple, 
 primitive substance. He answers. No; it is a 
 compound of quartz, mica, and feldspar. I then 
 ask him if the four integral, component parts of 
 granite are primitive and simple substances. He 
 returns a negative ans^wer, saying that each of 
 those parts are reduceable to elements more simple ; 
 such as silesium, magnesium, carbon, iron, lime, or 
 the like of them. Now, a compound substance 
 cannot be a primitive. Mortar, for instance, is a 
 compound of lime, sand, and water. The sand, 
 lime, and water must have existed before the mor- 
 tar. Therefore, mortar cannot be a primitive sub- 
 stance. Water is a compound of hydrogen and 
 oxygen. Hydrogen and oxygeto, therefore, must 
 have existed before water could exist. The earth 
 is a compound of all the known elements. These 
 elements, therefore, must have existed previously to 
 
4 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 the earth's existence ; and of them was the earth 
 constructed. All the primitive elements must be 
 perfect simples : for if an element be a compound, it 
 cannot be simple ; and if not simple, it cannot be a 
 primitive. That which is eternal, self-existent, and 
 unchangeable, must, in its parts, be simple and 
 pure. All things which are visible upon the earth, 
 being compounds, and having the marks of uses 
 labelled upon them, are not self-existent. But there 
 must be a self-existent cause. For, without such a 
 cause, there could not be a phenomenal world. 
 
 It is now pertinent to inquire what things are 
 simple, primitive, self-existent, uncreatable, inde- 
 structible, and underivable ? To this inquiry we 
 answer, 1. That Life is such a thing. We mean 
 life in its essence and abstract : we mean life 
 distinct from all the particular forms in which 
 it appears in the world. There is life in every 
 vegetable and in every animal. But the vegetable 
 and the animal are not life itself. They are only 
 the repositories of life. Take away life from them, 
 and they die ; they are dissolved into their compo- 
 nent elements. The life which rendered them living 
 creatures was communicated to them. And, if com- 
 municated by a creature, that creature must have 
 had it communicated to him ; and thus on, until we 
 come to the uncreated and uncreatable Fountain of 
 life itself. There must be such a fountain, or there 
 could never have been communicated life. Primitive 
 life must be self-existent, underived and underivable. 
 For, if derived, it ceases to be primiti^'e ; if depen- 
 dent, it ceases to be immutable and self-sufEcient. 
 
GOD AND CREATION. 5 
 
 The very existence, therefore of such a thing as 
 life, is proof that life has always existed. A form 
 of life cannot begin to exist without a previous life 
 to begin it. And thus, tracing backward, we come, 
 of necessity, to an unoriginated and self-dependent 
 fountain, — the cause and communicator of life to 
 all creatures. Life, therefore, is an uncreated es- 
 sence. 
 
 2. Intelligence. Mankind possess intelligence. 
 But men are not self-created beings. They did not 
 originate their own intelligence. They began to 
 think, to know. They are but the forms and recep- 
 tacles of intelligence. They must, therefore, have 
 received it from some pre-existing intelligence. 
 And this must have communicated it, mediately or 
 immediately, from an uncreated and independent 
 source. Intelligence, therefore, is an eternal and 
 self-existing entity. 
 
 3. Love, the susceptibility of enjoyment and de- 
 sire. Human nature possesses this attribute. Men 
 are capable of various forms of love. Without it 
 they could not be capable of motive, or of any volun- 
 tary action. But men did not originate their own 
 love. It must, therefore, have been communicated 
 to them. And the being who communicated it, 
 must have possessed it himself. And this being 
 must either have possessed it independently, or 
 have received it, directly or indirectly, from some 
 independent source. Love, therefore, is an un- 
 created essence. 
 
 4. Free Agency, including moral responsibility. 
 Men possess this power. They can, under due 
 
 1* 
 
6 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 circumstances, either do a thing or not do it. It is 
 this power which gives them rank above the brutes. 
 It is this, in connection with their moral sense, 
 which renders them the proper subjects of respon- 
 sibility. And this power is an endowment from 
 their Creator. He, therefore, must be a free agent ; 
 for the Creator cannot confer a power which he 
 himself does not possess. And all the powers of 
 the original Creator are underived and eternal. 
 
 5. Light, including heat and electricity, is, we 
 may believe, uncreatable and eternal. It is, how- 
 ever, generally believed that the Bible teaches a 
 different doctrine. God said, " Let there be light, 
 and there was light." But this language does not 
 necessarily signify that the light was then created 
 from nothing. Light and heat, in immense quan- 
 tities, are always existing in a latent state ; and 
 almost any man, with the requisite means, can 
 instantly produce a bright light in a totally dark dun- 
 geon. But this light is not then and there created : 
 it is only elicited from its previous condition. And 
 such may have been the fact when " God called the 
 light to shine out of darkness." 
 
 6. The MATERIAL SUBSTRATUM, On which all the 
 Divine attributes rest and are sustained, must obvi- 
 ously be self-existent and from everlasting. Every 
 thing which acts must have a substratum. It must 
 be pivoted upon some substantive basis. Wher- 
 ever there is motion, there must be something 
 which moves. Where there is sound, there mast 
 be something which makes a noise. Wherever there 
 is sensation, there must be something which feels. 
 
GOD AND CREATION. 7 
 
 Wherever there is intelligence, there must be some- 
 thing which thinks, understands, knows. Where- 
 ever there is life, there must be something which 
 lives. And where there is love, there must be 
 something which is the subject of love. And this 
 something, of which motion, sound, sensation, intel- 
 ligence, life, and love are predicated, must be a 
 substantive thing ; a thing consisting of some sub- 
 stance. Motion, sensation, sound, thought, life, 
 love, &c., are not substantive things. They are but 
 acts, modifications, phases, relations, &c. There 
 must, therefore, be a substantial substratum on which 
 the Divine attributes rest. And there obviously 
 can be but one kind of substance. It must be 
 material. We can have no conception of an im- 
 material substance. The distinctive property of 
 matter is its solidity ; its capacity to occupy space. 
 And a substance, which does not occupy space, is 
 inconceivable. 
 
 We have now specified some five or six entities 
 which we believe to be uncreated, self-dependent, 
 eternal, unchangeable. They are things pure and 
 simple. And of them, and by them, and from them, 
 do aU compound and complex things originate, ex- 
 ist, " live, move, and have their being." The things 
 which we have just named may constitute God. 
 They are essential and competent to his being, 
 efficiency, and perfection. One of them alone, or 
 a part of them without the others, would not be 
 God, all-sufficient and perfect. Intelligence alone 
 is not God. Neither is love, nor life, nor material 
 substance. There must be an assemblage of attri- 
 
8 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 butes to constitute an intelligent, living, personal be- 
 ing. A number of attributes, properties, principles, 
 does not mar nor prevent the perfect unity of such 
 a being. Man possesses body and soul ; flesh and 
 bones ; intellect, memory, consciousness, free-will, 
 and the faculty of locomotion. And yet man is a 
 unit. And such also is God. He is one ; one con- 
 sciousness, one will, one intelligence, and, of course, 
 one person. Each attribute has and executes its 
 own peculiar office. It is the office of the intellect 
 to think, to know, to design or purpose. It is the 
 office of love to desire, to move the will, to be de- 
 lighted. It is the office of matter to occupy space, 
 to be a substratum, to furnish the requisite of or- 
 ganization. 
 
 Our position stands thus. There must be mate- 
 rial substance as indispensable to organization ; an 
 organization as indispensable to life ; and life as 
 indispensable to sensation, thought, love, and volun- 
 tary action. In other words, organization is in- 
 dispensable to mind. This does not imply that 
 matter is capable of thought. It is a requisite 
 organization that can think. Original matter is 
 probably dead, inert, insensible. It must be ele- 
 mented in order to be organized ; and organized in 
 order to life, thought, and agency. 
 
 If these positions be correct, there must have, 
 always and eternally, been a material substance • 
 also an eternal, self-existent organization, life, and 
 intelligence. These constitute God, uncreated, un- 
 derived, self-existing, independent, almighty, good, 
 perfect. All the visible forms of life derived their 
 
GOD AND CREATION. 9 
 
 being from him. He constructed them, upholds 
 them, and governs them. Their substance is from 
 his substance ; their life is from his life ; their intel- 
 ligence from his intelligence. They are creatures, 
 and he is their Creator. 
 
 Though God consist of different attributes, such 
 as life, love, intelligence, freedom, consciousness, 
 and a material substratum, yet he is not a com- 
 pound of different elements. Life, love, and intel- 
 ligence are not elements. An element is a primi- 
 tive, simple substance, which can exist alone, by 
 itself. Such is carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, &c. 
 They can exist without being in company with 
 other things. But life, love, intelligence, and con- 
 sciousness cannot thus exist, alone, isolated, ab- 
 stracted. Where there is life, there must be organic 
 action ; where there is intelligence, there must be 
 consciousness and sensation. God, therefore, is 
 not a compound, and consequently a secondary and 
 a derivative being. Though not a proper simple, 
 yet he is a unit and a primitive. A unit may have 
 parts, but a pure simple is incapable of them. 
 
 It may, perhaps, be objected that the God we 
 have made out is a material one, and that our 
 doctrine is materialism. But we do not admit the 
 justice of this objection. We maintain the exist- 
 ence of as much intelligence, love, and life, as those 
 who may oppose our views. We hold to the exist- 
 ence of as much mind as they do. Why, then, are 
 not we as much and as good spiritualists as they 
 are? But, say they, you hold that God has a 
 material substratum; and is not that a material 
 
10 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 God, and the doctrine materialism ? By no means. 
 Man has a material body, and yet man is an intel- 
 lectual, spiritual being. His body neither embar- 
 rasses nor degi-ades him. Why did God give man 
 a material part ? It must have been necessary, or 
 it would not have been ; for God does nothing in 
 vain. Man, being a likeness or miniature of God, 
 he possesses, of course, similar parts, properties, 
 attributes. The difference between man and God 
 is chiefly a matter of degrees. The human facul- 
 ties and the Divine faculties are alike in kind, but 
 most unlike in measure. The human are small ; 
 the Divine are immense. Let, if it were possible, 
 the human faculties be enlarged so as to equal the 
 Divine, and a man would be as God. He would 
 be equally intelligent, wise, and good. Otherwise, 
 man would not be a true image of God ; God in 
 miniature. Man has a material substratum. But 
 this does nOt render him a mere material being. 
 He possesses as true an intellect as he would pos- 
 sess without it. Why not? Man dies. And in 
 what does death consist? What change does it 
 induce? The exchange of a natural for a spiritual 
 body. So teaches the apostle Paul. And he de- 
 clares the natural body to be corruptible, and the 
 spiritual to be incorruptible ; the former to be mor- 
 tal, the latter immortal. The spiritual body must 
 be material; for otherwise it is not a body. Its 
 elements are ethereal and imponderable. Every 
 element must be of matter; and matter, being un- 
 creatable, must, of course, be indestructible. Hence 
 the ground for the hope of immortality. 
 
GOD AND CHEATION. 11 
 
 We have thus, as above, treated the first part of the 
 subject we proposed, — the being and attributes 
 OF God. We now proceed to the second, — the 
 creation of the world. In what way, by what 
 process, was the world created, or rather construct- 
 ed? We claim not to know. We must assume 
 an hypothesis, and proceed on with it, guided by 
 what we know of the order in which God works. 
 Of this Divine order we know something from ob- 
 servation and experience. We know something of 
 the order in which God makes such things as rocks, 
 plants, trees, and animals. His order is different 
 from man's, who makes part after part, until the 
 whole is finished. In God's works aU the parts 
 progress together. The Divine order is that of 
 growth and development^^ All plants and trees 
 grow and are developed from seeds. The acorn 
 contains the oak. All the parts are co-ordinate, 
 and grow simultaneously. All animals grow from 
 germs. The germ contains the whole animal ; but 
 the animal is not developed while in the germ. 
 God makes plants and animals only in one way. 
 He always adheres to his own order. And God, 
 doubtless, made the world in the way of order ; in 
 the way of formation, growth, and development. 
 In the beginning of all things,- there was nothing 
 existing but God and dead matter, scattered in 
 atoms throughout boundless space. '' And the spirit 
 of God moved upon the face of the waters." Not 
 real waters, for they were not yet produced ; any 
 more than what is called the earth, in Gen. i. 2, 
 was a real earth, for this was not then made. It 
 
12 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 was a chaotic mass, and is called " the earth " be- 
 cause of it the real earth was constructed. The 
 atomic chaos had some resemblance to waters : it 
 was somewhat like a fluid. " And the spirit of God 
 moved upon the face of the waters." The word 
 spirit signifies ivind. Spirit and wind, with the 
 ancients, were the same thing. The wind of God 
 — Divine power, breath, fire, electricity — moved, 
 acted, upon the vast ocean of the atomic chaos. It 
 elemented the inert, dead atoms ; converted them 
 into elements, such as carbon, silesium, sodium; 
 hydrogen, &c. Thus they were fitted to be the 
 component parts of the world ; the solar system. 
 The agency by which the inert atoms were invested 
 with the properties of elements, doubtless, was that 
 of electricity. This is one of the forms or modifi- 
 cations of fire, light, heat, which is one of the 
 entities we have placed in the category of things 
 uncreated, eternal, and self-existent. Naturalists 
 inform us that electricity is the great and cardinal 
 agent in the deep operations of nature ; that the 
 magnetism of the earth depends on electricity, and 
 that the law of gravitation is probably identical with 
 its magnetism ; that the gi-avity of the earth, and 
 every fragment of it, depends on the action of elec- 
 tricity ; that all seeds and germs start into life by 
 this same electrical agency ; that this power is at 
 the bottom of all natural phenomena. 
 
 The elements being produced, their chemical and 
 mechanical powers would forthwith begin to act. 
 The dead ocean of atoms becomes an active atmo- 
 sphere. The centre of this immense atmosphere 
 
GOD AND CREATION. 13 
 
 becomes the nucleus of the sun. To this centre, 
 by their mechanical tendencies, all parts of the 
 atmosphere are tending. On their way the chemi- 
 cal tendencies affect many combinations. Thus the 
 sun is produced, containing, perhaps, nine-tenths of 
 all the material in the solar system. Within the 
 limits of the great solar atmosphere, other atmo- 
 spheres are formed. The centres of these become 
 the nuclei of the planets, both the primary and the 
 secondary. The work of central consolidation be- 
 gins and continues until the central spaces of all 
 the atmospheres become solid bodies, as the sun, 
 the planets, and the moons now are. This work 
 of consolidation is accomplished by the agency of 
 mechanical and chemical forces. Through the 
 agency of electricity, a rotary motion is given to 
 the great solar atmosphere ; also both a rotary and 
 a circular motion to the sub-atmospheres, which are 
 to become planets and moons, roUing on their own 
 axes, and circulating round the sun. In process of 
 time, — the length of which it is not perhaps with- 
 in the power of figures to measure, — " the heavens 
 and the earth are finished, and all the host of them." 
 They are a development from the immense ocean 
 of chaotic atoms, under the supervision, agency, 
 and purpose of eternal, self-existent intelligence, 
 love, and power. The stupendous work proceeded 
 by stages, from one stage to another ; the previous 
 preparing the way for the subsequent. The chaotic 
 was a preparation for the mineral; the mineral, a 
 preparation for the vegetable ; the vegetable, a pre- 
 
14 GOD AND CREATION. 
 
 paration for the animal ; the animal, a preparation 
 for the human. 
 
 We said that "in the beginning God was alone;" 
 a time when nothing had been created and made. 
 In the order of nature, the order of cause and effect, 
 it must have been so. But, as to actual time, " we 
 know not how to speak by reason of darkness." 
 There was no actual time until something was 
 done : then was the beginning. But, how far back 
 from the present time was the beginning, it is im- 
 possible for man to know : probably many millions 
 of years ; yea, many millions of centuries. And 
 more probably, there never was a definite, actual be- 
 ginning of time, and the work of creation ; that the 
 past is as really illimitable as the future ; an equal 
 eternity behind us, as that before us. We now 
 speak of the universal creation. In respect to our 
 own world, the solar system, we may, without stam- 
 mering, say that it had an actual beginning ; that 
 there was a time when it did not exist. It is a 
 construction. It bears the marks of age. Its dif- 
 ferents parts accomplish uses for which they were 
 obviously designed. 
 
 God made the world in the way of order, — his 
 own order. In doing it, he has taken the requisite 
 time. God has no occasion to hasten his work. 
 He could spare a million of years for the construc- 
 tion of our earth, if that period of time, in the Divine 
 order, was requisite. God does the same kind of 
 work always in the same way. He makes rock, 
 sand, gravel, soil, plants, trees, beasts, birds, fishes, 
 and men, in the way of one and the same order. 
 
GOD AND CREATION. 15 
 
 He gives life, knowledge, health, strength, and the 
 requisite supplies of fruit and harvest, in one way 
 only. "We must seek them in this way, or we shall 
 not find them. If we would preserve our lives, we 
 must live in the way of God's order ; be temperate, 
 active, sober, and careful. If we would enjoy a com- 
 petency of needful supplies, we must be industrious 
 and discreet in our business-pursuits. If we would 
 have a good reputation for uprightness, fidelity, and 
 kindness, we must possess and practise these vir- 
 tues. K we would have a good and consolatory 
 hope of a happy immortality beyond the grave, we 
 must hold and cherish that " faith which is the sub- 
 stance of things hoped for." There is no doctrine 
 so frequently uttered in the Holy Scriptures as this, 
 that God wiU reward every man according to his 
 works. Every man is what his life makes him. 
 He has his reward. If he is a good man, he will 
 enjoy the blessings which goodness creates and se- 
 cures. If we live contrary to God's order, we must 
 be miserable. The fear of the wicked — the evUs 
 which he forebodes — shall come upon him. The 
 way of transgressors is hard. There is no peace, 
 saith the Lord, to the wicked. They are like the 
 troubled sea, whose waves cast up mire and dirt. 
 But the ways of wisdom are pleasant and peaceful. 
 Whoso would live long and see good days, let him 
 refrain his feet from evil, and his lips from uttering 
 lies. 
 
16 
 
 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION AND 
 OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 " For the earth bringetb forth fruit of itself; first the blade, then the ear, 
 afterward the full corn in the ear." — Mark, iv. 98. 
 
 This passage declares the great law of progressive 
 production in the whole realm of nature, — in the 
 universal creation of God. A plant grows con- 
 stantly, regularly, progressively, until it attains its 
 maturity. This law is universal. Things begin in 
 their rudiments. Such is the fact in regard to 
 nations and kingdoms ; also in regard to all civil 
 and social institutions ; likewise in regard to litera- 
 ture, science, philosophy, and religion. The germs 
 are in nature ; but the developments are in provi- 
 dence, in time. Our Saviour illustrates the progres- 
 sive character of this kingdom by a similitude taken 
 from the natural world. " It is," said he, " like a 
 grain of mustard-seed, which, when sown, is less 
 than all seeds that be in the earth ; but it groweth 
 up, and shooteth out great branches, and becometh 
 greater than all herbs, — a tree ; so that the fowls of 
 the air lodge in the branches of it." He left, at his 
 death, but a small company of true, steadfast dis- 
 
DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION, ETC. 17 
 
 ciples. But he said to them, " Fear not, little flock : 
 it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the 
 kingdom." " In the regeneration, when the Son of 
 man shall have come, ye also shall sit upon thrones, 
 judging the twelve tribes of Israel." " The stone, 
 cut from the mountain without hands, became a 
 great mountain, and filled the whole earth." It is 
 the law of earthly things : " First the blade, then the 
 ear, afterward the full corn in the ear." 
 
 There is a religious principle in man. It is con- 
 stitutional : it is a part of his nature ; as much so 
 as the social principle, as the sexual principle, as 
 the moral and the loyal principles. And as eJI 
 these principles are gradually developed, so like- 
 wise the religious element. It has made its mani- 
 festations in various forms and phases, as external 
 circumstances and influences have determined. The 
 varieties are almost beyond enumeration. We 
 may, however, distinguish four which have been, 
 and which are, the most broad and general : I. The 
 Patriarchal ; II. Judaism ; III. Gentilism ; IV. 
 Christianity. 
 
 It wiU not, we trust, be uninteresting nor unin- 
 structive to take some historical and descriptive 
 notices of these, compare them with each other, 
 and inquire for their different merits. 
 
 I. We begin with what is denominated the 
 PATRIARCHAL. This was the primitive form. It 
 was, as we might expect, very simple and anthropo- 
 morphitic. Men, in the early ages of the world, 
 conceived God to be a Great Omnipotent Man, 
 residing in the firmamental heavens, having a hti- 
 2* 
 
18 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 man shape, sitting upon a superb throne, in a mag- 
 nificent palace, surrounded by myriads of glorious 
 beings, called gods, sons of God, morning stars, 
 angels, cherubim, seraphim, &c. These were em- 
 ployed in rendering him worship and services. 
 God, they conceived, h ad created the world. It was, 
 therefore, his property, with all its contents. The 
 earth and the heavens ; angels and men ; beasts, 
 birds, fishes, — all living things, being God's crea- 
 tures, were, of course, his property, and subject to 
 his disposal. It was his family ; his kingdom. 
 He ruled over them. His agency supervised all 
 things. " It greened in the grass, and blossomed 
 in the trees." The sun revolved round the earth : 
 it was God who moved it. The rain dropped from 
 the clouds : it was God who shed it down. When 
 the winds blew, it was God who breathed them 
 forth. When the lightnings flew and glittered, it 
 was God who shot them from his nostrils. When 
 the thunder roared, it was God uttering his mighty 
 voice. God's providence was universal. Most of 
 the dispensations of it were particular and retribu- 
 tive. God, being righteous, was pleased with the 
 righteous man, and rewarded him with blessings. 
 He was displeased with unrighteousness, and pun- 
 ished it with pains and penalties. Being subject 
 to like passions as men, God was sometimes angry 
 and wrathful. Wicked men exhausted his patience. 
 He was disappointed, and even repented that he 
 had ever made such a creature as man : he even 
 took the resolution to destroy him utterly from the 
 face of the earth. 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 19 
 
 As God took a deep interest in the condition and 
 aflairs of men, he sent down his angels to take 
 notices, to render services, and to bring him infor- 
 mation. He even, on important occasions, came 
 down himself. The Lord God sometimes ad- 
 dressed the sM^-gods as being his fellows and asso- 
 ciates. He said, " Let us do this and that thing ; " 
 " Let us make man ; " " Let us go down, and con- 
 found their language." Men were so perverse that 
 it required the exertion of all God's power and 
 wisdom to manage and control them. He, at 
 length, sent a flood, with the intent that every 
 living thing should die. Noah, however, being a 
 righteous man, received divine directions for the 
 preservation of himself and family. 
 
 As the angels were God's agents and representa- 
 tives, the sight of one of them was regarded as 
 equivalent to a sight of God himself. Jacob, hav- 
 ing conversed and wrestled with an angel at Penuel, 
 said, " I have seen God face to face, and my life is 
 preserved." " And Manoah said to his wife, We 
 shall surely die, for we have seen God." A sight 
 of God seems to have been regarded as a warning 
 of speedy death. 
 
 The patriarchs not only recognized the being of 
 God, but they also rendered him worship. They 
 did it chiefly by sacrifices. These were presents, 
 gifts, oblations, made to God in return for his 
 benefits. They were meant as expressions of grati- 
 tude and loyalty. But, as God did not need them, 
 nor would he use them, they were destroyed, burned 
 in the fire, poured out upon earth or into the sea. 
 
20 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 Being thus abstracted from the use of men, they 
 were considered as really given to Giod. And thus 
 were manifested the thankfulness and the venera- 
 tion of the worshippers. 
 
 There Avas probably at first no regular time for 
 the performance of religious worship. It took place 
 as occasions and circumstances occurred and deter- 
 mined. Nor was there a proper priesthood. The 
 patriarch acted as his own priest. He built his own 
 altar. Noah, Abraham, and Jacob reared altars for 
 their own use : they kiUed the victims, kindled the 
 fire, and laid the flesh upon the wood. 
 
 But whence, and how, did the patriarchs obtain 
 their conception of God ? It is generally believed by 
 Jews and Christians, that it was divinely communi- 
 cated to them. In that case, we might expect that 
 their conception of God would have been more 
 correct and complete. More probably, they obtained 
 it by reflection and intuitive reasoning. As every 
 house is builded by some one, some man ; so the 
 world must have been buUt by some one, who is 
 God. The connection between cause and effect; 
 the necessity of a cause to an effect, — this is the 
 starting-point in all human reasoning on this sub- 
 ject. The premises are obtained from observation 
 and experience. If a thing is moved, there must 
 be something that moves it. K a thing is stopped 
 from moving, there must be some power which 
 stops it. If a thing gi-ows, there must be some 
 agency that causes its growth. They could see 
 that the grass and the trees did grow ; but they 
 could not see the hand which made them grow. 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 21 
 
 They saw the sun rise ; they felt the wind blow ; 
 they saw the lightning's flash, and heard the thun- 
 der's voice ; but the doer of all these great things 
 was invisible to them. It was manifest, however, 
 that his power must be exceedingly great. He 
 must, of course, be a very great something. And 
 as a man was an agent superior to any other with 
 which they were acquainted, they conceived of him 
 as a gi"eat, omnipotent man. And they attached to 
 him all the attributes of a man : passions, hands, 
 eyes, ears, thoughts, motives, self-love, anger, placa- 
 bility, mercy, and goodness. 
 
 The patriarchs had little — indeed at first none 
 at all — of ceremonial religion. It was all impul- 
 sive, natural, instinctive. No ceremonial mourn- 
 ing, fasting, praying, or sacrificing. It was all done 
 from the inward promptings of the doer. No devo- 
 tional prayers ; no set times, and terms of time, for 
 mourning, fasting, praying, or sacrificing. All their 
 prayers were brief and occasional requests. Some- 
 times they made vows. These were sometimes con- 
 ditional, like Jacob's vow at Bethel ; and sometimes 
 absolute, like that of the Nazarite, who pledged him- 
 self to abstain from drinking wine, and from eating 
 any unclean thing.- Some of the patriarchs appear 
 to have been very contemplative and religious ; 
 full of faith and the spirit of piety. This probably 
 was the case of Enoch. Hence the high veneration 
 with which his cotemporaries and posterity regarded 
 him ; saying of him that he " walked with God," 
 and believing that he was translated to heaven 
 without undergoing the change of death. 
 
22 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 The most prominent virtues among the patriarchs 
 were sincerity, kindness, and hospitality to strangers. 
 We see all this in Abraham. But that which gave 
 to Abraham his incomparable character was his 
 religious faith, — its correctness and its strength. 
 Abraham was a monotheist, living among people 
 who were polytheists. He believed in one God; 
 they in many ; and he so impressed his own belief 
 upon his children and household, that the great cen- 
 tral doctrine of monotheism, in distinction from 
 polytheism, was perpetuated in the line of his de- 
 scendants. It is therefore testified of him, " I know 
 Abraham that he will teach his children and his 
 household, that they walk in the way of the Lord to 
 do justice and judgment."' It is hence apparent that 
 the service of God consisted essentially in doing 
 justice and judgment. The vices most prominent 
 in the patriarchal age were licentiousness, fierce- 
 ness, and vindictiveness. They had not learned 
 the wisdom of controlling the desires and passions 
 of human nature. These, when excited, would, if 
 possible, have their gratification. Examples of these 
 things appear in the cases of Cain and Abel, of 
 Lamech the Cainite, of Reuben and Judah, Simeon 
 and Levi. Every man revenged his own WTongs ; 
 and, deeming this to be right, he did it vAth a 
 veng-eancc. To be an avenger of blood was not 
 accounted an inconsistency in the character of a 
 good man. 
 
 Among the antediluvians there were two separate 
 lines, families, races. These were the Cainites, the 
 posterity of Cain ; and the Sethites, the posterity of 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 23 
 
 Seth. These two races were the Jews and Gentiles 
 of the antediluvian times. The Sethites appear 
 to have been the more quiet and religious ; the 
 latter, the more active, enterprising, and ingenious. 
 They invented useful and ornamental arts. Hence 
 it is said of one of them- that he was the father of 
 such as dwell in tents and have cattle ; — of another 
 that he invented a method of making those domiciles, 
 called tents ; also one for domesticating the ox, the 
 horse, and the ass ; — of another, that he was the 
 father of all such as handle the harp and the organ ; 
 and of another, that he was the instructor of aU 
 artificers in brass and iron. 
 
 Though the presiding patriarch of a family or a 
 tribe was greatly respected, yet there was no proper 
 civil government, — none but avengers of private 
 wrongs to punish wrong-doers. Of course, the 
 strong man held the mastery over the feebler one. 
 The consequence was, that oppression and injustice 
 soon began to prevail, and at length so abounded 
 that the land was laden with crime and blood. The 
 earth was corrupt and full of violence. 
 
 In this state of things occurred a most extraordi- 
 nary inundation. It swept the whole valley of the 
 Euphrates, of the Nile, and of all Western Asia. 
 Tradition said that it extended to the ends of the 
 earth. It was, however, then believed that the face 
 of the whole earth reached not much beyond the 
 regions above mentioned. And it was believed that 
 God sent this flood as a retribution for the oppres- 
 sion and licentiousness which men committed, and 
 that Noah and his family were the only survivors. 
 
24 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 And there must have been some ground for this 
 tradition. But, in the light of Christian civilization, 
 the whole account cannot be credited. A "wise and 
 holy God would not surely thus promiscuously de- 
 stroy the innocent and the guilty together. God 
 never does any thing in anger. He was never dis- 
 appointed ; never grieved; never repented that he 
 made man upon the earth. God is never so defi- 
 cient in wisdom as to adopt that mode of reforma- 
 tion which consists in killing off all the wicked, and 
 sparing a few of the righteous. " As I live, saith 
 the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the 
 sinner, but that he turn and live." 
 
 II. We now pass from the patriarchal dispensa- 
 tion to that of Judaism. We have already taken 
 some notice of Abraham, the most illustrious of all 
 the patriarchs. We have said that he was a mono- 
 theist, a believer in one only and true God. This 
 doctrine was retained by his posterity, the Jews. 
 They lived in Palestine, on the river Jordan, be- 
 tween the mountains of Lebanon and the deserts 
 of Arabia. They were surrounded by such nations 
 as the Egyptians, the Phoenicians, the Syrians, the 
 Chaldeans, and the Arabians. All these nations 
 were polytheistical, and practised idolatry. They 
 had images in their temples, and worshipped them 
 as the representatives of their gods. But the first 
 and greatest law of the Jews was : " The Lord 
 our God is one Lord. And thou shalt not make 
 unto thyself any graven image, or the likeness of 
 any thing in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, 
 or in the waters under the earth ; thou shalt not " 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 25 
 
 bow down thyself to such images nor serve them, 
 nor the gods they are said to represent ; for I am 
 the Lord thy God, and none besides me." The 
 Jews, during the lapse of many centuries from the 
 time of Abraham, did partially and for a season 
 become entangled in the toils of their idolatrous 
 neighbors. But there always remained those among 
 them who were steadfast and faithful ; and these, 
 on all such occasions, raised the voice of warning 
 and rebuke. They had a long struggle with the 
 aborigines of the country, before they could subdue 
 them. And the balance of power was repeatedly in 
 the hands of their adversaries, and the Israelites 
 were oppressed. And the reformers appealed to this 
 affliction as a mark of God's anger, and as the pun- 
 ishment of their sin in acknowledging and worship- 
 ping any god but Jehovah. Very gradually the Jews 
 became purified from all the idolatries of the Gen- 
 tile nations ; and, as they became pure, they adopted 
 laws and customs which made the distance wide 
 between them and the heathen. They became an 
 isolated people : they would have no fellowship with 
 idolaters. No intermarriages were allowed; They 
 might not eat and drink at the same table. The 
 Jew considered himself a consecrated man, — a 
 priest ; and, being circumcised, he carried the mark 
 and seal of his consecration in his own body. For 
 circumcision is said to have been the badge of the 
 priestly order among the Egyptians. Gradually 
 the Jewish law became ramified and multifarious , 
 extending its prescriptions to the whole routine of 
 life. The Jew was fenced round about with rules 
 3 
 
26 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 of conduct. He must worship in but one place ; 
 one altar and one sanctuary for the whole nation ; 
 three annual festivals, instead of but one as in the 
 times of Elkanah and Hannah, the parents of Sam- 
 uel ; at every sacrifice a regular priest must officiate, 
 not the offerer himself as in the days of Abraham 
 and Manoah ; very numerous sprinklings and ablu- 
 tions must be observed as purifications from cere- 
 monial uncleanness, which was contracted by such 
 slight causes as touching the garment of a. man 
 who had touched a grave or the bone of a dead 
 m.an ; his dress, his diet, the manner of his inter- 
 course with men, were matters of prescription. Yet 
 aU this heavy yoke was inade to sit easy on the 
 neck of a Jew. It made him think more highly of 
 his religion, and of himself as a subject of it. The 
 Jew was proud of his religion. It made him, as he 
 judged, a favorite of Heaven ; a much better man 
 than a Gentile could be in the sight of God. And, 
 indeed, the Jews were the most religious people 
 that ever existed on the face of the earth. No other 
 people ever made such high account of their religion. 
 The Gentile did not esteem it a thing very essential 
 whether he worshipped Bel or Jupiter. To him one 
 of these gods did not differ essentially from the other. 
 But, to the Jew, Jehovah alone was the real and 
 true God ; and every other divine name, that of an 
 idol and a demon. 
 
 But what conception had the Jew of the charac- 
 ter of God ? Very much like that entertained by 
 the patriarchs before him. He conceived God to 
 be a great, omnipotent man, residing on the upper 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 27 
 
 side of the firmament, in a most magnificent palace, 
 of which the tabernacle and temple On earth were 
 imitations. He was there attended and surrounded 
 by a vast " train " of angels and seraphim, who con- 
 stantly worshipped him, and were ready to execute 
 his orders. The prophet Isaiah gives a description, 
 in the four first verses of the sixth chapter of his 
 book ; also the prophet Ezeldel, another descrip- 
 tion of the Divine theophany in the first chapter, 
 which he substantially repeats in the tenth chapter. 
 Though a man, yet not like other men. He could 
 not be distinctly seen, being so enveloped in the sub- 
 lime scenery of the four living creatures and the 
 wheels. Yet he was there, and the prophet describes 
 what was " the appearance from his loins upward, 
 and the appearance from his loins downward : I 
 saw, as it were, the appearance of fire, and it had 
 brightness round about. Upon the likeness of the 
 throne was the likeness as the appearance of a man 
 above upon it." " No man can see me, and Uve." 
 
 Yet they conceived of him as a man. He had 
 hands, feet, eyes, ears, and loins. He sat upon a 
 throne. He spoke, and was heard. He weighed the 
 mountains in scales, the hills in a balance, and took 
 up the isles as a very little thing. He was suscepti- 
 ble of feelings and passions. He took great offence 
 at the disobedience of his people, especially at their 
 idolatries. " For I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous 
 God, visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon their 
 children, even to the third and the fourth generation." 
 The Jew believed that all the calamities which be- 
 fell the nation were special dispensations of punish- 
 
28 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 ment for some particular sins ; that the thraldoms, 
 in the times of the Judges, from the Moabites, the 
 Midianites, the Canaanites, and the Philistines, 
 were inflicted by God in chastisement for their sins ; 
 that the revolt of the ten tribes, and the consequent 
 schism and ruin of the glorious kingdom of David, 
 was a retribution for the iniquities of Solomon ; 
 that the three years' famine, in the days of David, 
 was for the injustice committed by Saul in slaying 
 many of the Gibeonites ; that the drought of three 
 years and a half duration, in the time of Ahab and 
 Elijah, was caused by the idolatry of the people who 
 worshipped Baal. Their philosophy of natm'e, was 
 theological. God, by immediate and special agency, 
 controlled aU providential events and phenomena. 
 He did his pleasure in the armies of heaven above, 
 and among the inhabitants of the earth below. He 
 was righteous and merciful, yet also judicial and 
 punitive. He would not permit the transgressor to 
 go unpunished. His wrath was terrible. He was 
 sometimes implacable. " When the land sinneth 
 against me by trespassing grievously, then I wiU 
 stretch out my hand upon it : though Noah, Daniel, 
 and Job were in it, as I live, saith the Lord God, 
 they shaU deliver neither son nor daughter, but their 
 own souls only by their righteousness. Though ye 
 make many prayers, I will not hear." 
 
 Yet the mercy of God is celebrated and extolled 
 even more than his justice, especially in the book 
 of the Psalms. In the proclamation which preceded 
 the enunciation of the ten commandments, he was 
 proclaimed "the Lord God, gracious and merciful, 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 29 
 
 slow to anger, abundant in goodness and truth." 
 And the expression is repeated perhaps an hundred 
 times, " His mercy endureth for ever." 
 
 The God of the Jews had one most prominent 
 attribute which makes but a faint manifestation in 
 the gods of the Gentiles. It is the moral element 
 of his character. He was righteous, holy, just, 
 good; and, if he is ever differently represented, it 
 is the mistake of those who describe him. Their 
 design was to describe him as unimpeachably right- 
 eous. If, by a special providence, he destroyed a 
 whole world of human beings, containing millions 
 who could not distinguish between their right hand 
 and their left, it was aU right. They who thus re- 
 present him did not intend to impugn his character 
 or his works. 
 
 The Jew did not merely boast of his God, but he 
 devoutly loved him. God was not more his pride 
 than his joy. He saw in God all that was excellent, 
 beautiful, desirable. To him God was safety, hap- 
 piness, full satisfaction. His God could, and there- 
 fore he would, do for him to the extent of his need. 
 No dangers so great that God could not protect 
 him ; no wants so deep and broad that God could 
 not supply them ; no enemy so strong that God 
 could not annihilate him. His faith, his trust, his 
 hope, his assurance, his steadfast confidence in 
 God, lived with him, and went with him wherever 
 he went. He could always sing, though he some- 
 times wept. When he spake of God, his language 
 was significant and rich. " The Lord is my Shep- 
 herd, I shall not want ; he maketh me to lie down 
 3* 
 
30 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 in good pasture, beside the still waters." " My 
 cup is made to run over." " The Lord is my 
 strength, my shield, my rock, my high tower, the 
 horn of my salvation. He maketh my feet like 
 hinds' feet. He teacheth my hands to war and 
 my fingers to fight, so that a bow of steel is bro- 
 ken by my hands. I will not be afraid of ten 
 thousand who set themselves in array against me. 
 Should all nations encamp against me, in the name 
 of the Lord I would destroy them." " Give unto 
 the Lord, O ye mighty, give unto the Lord glory 
 and strength. Give unto the Lord the glory due 
 unto his name ; worship the Lord in the beauty 
 of holiness. The voice of the Lord is upon the 
 waters : the God of glory thundereth : the Lord is 
 upon many waters. The voice of the Lord is 
 powerful : the voice of the Lord is full of majesty. 
 The voice of the Lord breaketh the cedars ; yea, the 
 Lord breaketh the cedars of Lebanon. He maketh 
 them also to skip like a calf; Lebanon and Sirion 
 like a young unicorn. The voice of the Lord divi- 
 deth the flames of fire. The voice of the Lord 
 shaketh the wilderness ; he shaketh the wilderness 
 , of Kadesh ; and in his temple doth every one speak 
 of his glory. The Lord sitteth King for ever ; he 
 win give strength and peace to his people." 
 
 The religion of the Jew made him a poet, a hymn- 
 ist, a devout describer and extoller of the works and 
 character of God. The psalms, the odes, the hymns, 
 contained in the old Hebrew Bible, are incompara- 
 ble, are inimitable. They are a unique specimen 
 of literature; — in their kind, unrivalled and unsur- 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 31 
 
 passable. They can be duly appreciated only by 
 the eye or the ear which reads or hears them, and 
 by the heart which understands and feels them. 
 They are the models and the very mines of devo- 
 tion ; the Ophir golden region of the spiritual earth. 
 All Christian nations have learned their lessons of 
 devotion from the Psalms in the Old Testament. 
 Christian churches and congregations depend upon 
 them. There is not a church-service book in all 
 Christendom which does not take its gems from 
 this source. They constitute the w^ealth of the de- 
 votional world. "Without them, our religious meet- 
 ings would lose half their interest. Our churches 
 would be poor in point of spiritual furniture. They 
 cannot be rich without them. 
 
 And here we note, that this spirit of devotion, — 
 these sentiments of trustfulness, thankfulness, love, 
 and praise, in the Jewish mind, were obviously the 
 resultants of their monotheism. It was because 
 their Divinity was one personal being that they so 
 loved and confided in him. The unity of God 
 served to concentrate their affections and thoughts. 
 The fact was different among the Gentiles. Their 
 gods were many. Their aflFections, consequently, 
 were divided ; and, being divided, they were weak. 
 Hence there was no spirit of devotion in them. 
 Of devotional composition they had none, or next 
 to none ; no devotional odes, no spiritual songs. 
 They sometimes sang the adventures, the for- 
 tunes, the exploits, and the praises of their gods ; 
 but they furnish no examples of devotional medita- 
 tion and feeling. Faith in the unity of God, strict 
 
32 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 personal unity, was the fountain whence flowed 
 those sweet streams of devotion. They can flow 
 from no other source. The doctrine of the Divine 
 unity has been impaired among Christians of the 
 middle and modern ages, and it has injured the de- 
 votional spirit. It has divided the affections. The 
 holy love of Christians has chiefly been drawn forth 
 toward the Lord Jesus Christ. The Father has been 
 revered, but it is the Son who has been loved. They 
 may have prayed to the Father, but their hope has 
 been in the Son. The former has been the object 
 of their fear and submission ; the latter, of their joy 
 and thankfulness. 
 
 But what effect did the monotheism of the Jews, 
 and the holiness of God's character, have upon 
 them ? Were the Jews a better people than others ? 
 In order to answer this inquiry, it is requisite to 
 compare the character and manners of these two 
 descriptions of men, — the Jews and the Gentiles. 
 We therefore pass to the third phase or mani- 
 festation of the religious element in human na- 
 ture, — 
 
 III. Gentilism. This did not succeed Judaism, 
 and grow out of it, but existed cotemporaneously 
 with it. Both Judaism and Gentilism succeeded 
 the patriarchal ages, and were simultaneous in their 
 prevalence. 
 
 The religion of the Gentiles may perhaps justly 
 be denominated the worship of nature. Their 
 gods were natural agents, tendencies, laws, and 
 phenomena. Because these produced eff'ects, divi- 
 nity was accorded to them. As the sun is the most 
 
AND OF CHEISTIANITY. 33 
 
 glorious agent in the visible world, it became the 
 chief god of many nations. The Horus of the 
 Egyptians, the Baal of the Phcenicians, the Bel of 
 the Chaldeans, it is believed, was no other than the 
 name of the sun regarded as a . deity. The sun 
 directly made the day, and indirectly the night. It 
 gave life, comfort, and beauty to the earth, and to 
 the creatures which move or grow upon it : and its 
 beneficence was equal to its power. How, then, 
 could there be a higher god than the sun ? 
 
 There was a tendency in the earth to yield bread- 
 stuifs, and an art among men by which the ground 
 was caused to produce them. This tendency and 
 art were converted into divinities, and called Ceres 
 and Saturn ; a tendency and an art which produced 
 the grape and wine ; and of these Bacchus became 
 the embodiment and representative, — the god of 
 wine. There was something in nature that com- 
 municated strength to the human body ; and this 
 something was embodied in Hercules, who had 
 been a very strong and useful man. That power in 
 nature which shot forth the lightning, and roared out 
 the thunder, must be great and uncontrollable; hence 
 the thunderer and the chief of the gods, under the 
 appellation of Jupiter, who had been a superb king 
 and conqueror. Thus, manifestly, were the thou- 
 sand gods and goddesses of the GentUe nations 
 produced. They represented the various powers of 
 nature ; and the worship of them may not impro- 
 perly be denominated the worship of nature. They 
 seem to have had no god whom they called Creator, 
 or to whom they attributed the origin of all things. 
 
34 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 The originating power lay back of the gods, who 
 were as dependent upon it as all other creatures. 
 Hence the doctrine of fate, — a blind, ineffable, and 
 unintelligent power, to -which the god^, as weU as 
 men and things, were subjected. 
 
 Religion, among the Gentiles, was appreciated 
 very differently from what it was among the Jews. 
 With the latter it was a most serious concern ; but 
 with the former it was a kind of amusement. Their 
 mythology was filled with accounts and stories 
 which amused them : it gave scope and play to 
 their fancy and imagination. Their religious festi- 
 vals were occasions and seasons of hilarity, amuse- 
 ment, dissipation, and debauchery. Those of the 
 Jews were times of solemnity. They not only 
 congregated to feast and rejoice, but sometimes 
 also to fast and to weep. As a general thing, the 
 religious anniversaries of the one people were moral 
 and useful ; those of the other, carnal and corrup- 
 tive. The Jew attended a public ordinance to dis- 
 charge a duty, to honor God ; the Gentile went as 
 to a play, to enjoy himself. 
 
 Yet neither in the one case nor in the other were 
 the concomitants and the results either wholly 
 good or entirely evil. Some benefits accrued to the 
 Gentile from his religion ; and some disadvantages 
 to the Jew from his. The former obtained some 
 elevation of mind and thoughts. He was led to 
 contemplate another and a higher sphere of exist- 
 ence than this life and world. The gods had a resi- 
 dence and a condition i'ar above ours. Even the 
 ghosts in the lower world were more intelligent and 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 35 
 
 refined there than when here on earth. Their 
 religion, doubtless, had some efiect to give then- 
 thoughts and aspirations an upward direction. The 
 Gentile, therefore, on the whole, was not cursed, 
 but blessed, by his religion. 
 
 Nor did the Jew, from his religion, reap nothing 
 but benefits. There was a tendency in it to forma- 
 lity and exclusiveness. And this tendency Avrought 
 out its effects. The Jews did become a nation of 
 formalists and bigots. Their righteousness was 
 little other than ceremonial. They thought them- 
 selves holy, and despised others. It was " a grie- 
 vous fault, and grievously have they answered it." 
 
 Compared with the patriarchal worship, the Jew- 
 ish was superbly magnificent. The patriarch had 
 no temple or tabernacle in which to worship ; no 
 altar more than a heap of earth or a naked rock ; 
 no attendants more than his household and friends. 
 But the Jew had, first, a tabernacle, which was 
 composed, in part, of precious metals to the amount 
 of more than a million of dollars ; and, second, a 
 temple, which cost perhaps a hundred-fold as much 
 as the tabernacle. In the Jewish sanctuary was a 
 brazen altar for the burnt-offerings, and a golden 
 one for incense. At liis sacrifice, the patriarch 
 officiated in his coarse, ordinary mantle ; at the 
 tabernacle and temple, the priests were clothed in 
 vestments of fine twined linen, ornamented with 
 gold and precious stones. The assembly of wor- 
 shippers consisted of thousands gathered from all 
 the twelve tribes of Israel. The whole of the appa- 
 ratus and scene was august, grand, imposing. The 
 
36 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 worship of the patriarchs was simple : that of the 
 Jews was magnificent. 
 
 But were the morals of the Jews better than 
 those of the Gentiles ? At this distance of timje, 
 it is not easy to decide from known facts of the 
 case. One fact, however, is tolerably clear. There 
 was less of slavery among the Israelites than 
 among the Greeks and Romans. Among these, 
 the slaves are said to have amounted to more than 
 one half of the whole population. Among those, 
 the proportion was vastly less. Solomon, when 
 about to commence the building of the temple, 
 caused aU the strangers, who were probably en- 
 slaved, to be then counted, and found the num- 
 ber of them to be an hundred and fifty thou- 
 sand. These were the operatives in that great work. 
 About twenty years after the death of Solomon, we 
 find two armies of Israelites waging war against 
 each other : on one side eight hundred thousand 
 men ; on the other, four hundred thousand. Twelve 
 hundred thousand men, all of them Israelites, en- 
 gaged in one and the same battle, 2 Chron. xiii. 3. 
 Contrast these with the one hundred and fifty thou- 
 sand bondmen, and the balance is eight freemen to 
 one man in bonds. One eighth of the nation of 
 Israel are slaves ; one half of the Gentile nations. 
 Now, if we possessed the requisite data for com- 
 parison on other points, they might be found as 
 much to the advantage of the Jews, in respect to 
 morality, as we find it on the point of slavery. It 
 is not presumption to infer something in their favor 
 from the fact, that the Jewish religion contained a 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 37 
 
 strong moral element; while this element in the 
 religion of the Gentiles was weak, and scarcely 
 perceptible. 
 
 The apostle, in the latter part of the first chapter 
 of his Epistle to the Romans, describes the moral 
 character of the Gentiles as being excessively vicious. 
 Nor does he say in the next chapter, as some perhaps 
 may understand him, that the Jews were as bad as 
 they ; but only that, so far as they did commit the 
 same sing, they were equally guilty as the Gentiles. 
 The point of the apostle's argument was to prove, 
 that corruption of morals kept pace with corruption 
 of religion; that a vicious theosophy tended to 
 vitiate the character and manners of a people. We 
 have already stated, that the Jews had become a 
 nation of formalists and bigots. There were, how- 
 ever, then, as there always is in similar cases, excep- 
 tions to the general rule. Formality and bigotry 
 were things which they had learned by education. 
 The Jews were born as pure from these faults as 
 other men. And, during the process of any vicious 
 education, the natural reason and conscience wiU, 
 more or less, reluct and rebel. President Edwards 
 said that he remembered the time when the severe 
 doctrines of Calvinism appeared to him to be very 
 unreasonable. It was, therefore, by educational in- 
 fluences that to him they were iriade to take the 
 appearance of justice and truth. No false system 
 of doctrine and manners wiU. sit imiformly and 
 universally easy upon human nature. There is an 
 unfitness in the one to the other. And there will 
 be some minds possessed of sufficient strength to 
 i 
 
38 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 protest ; and these protests will multiply until the 
 wrong is exposed, and the right manifested. No 
 untruth, no injustice, can endure for ever. 
 
 IV. We now come to the consideration of Chris- 
 tianity, — the last manifestation of man's religious 
 nature. The previous forms were defective. In 
 the patriarchal phase there was ignorance, inconsis- 
 tency, disorder. Men's appetites and passions were 
 unsubdued, ungoverned ; prone to outbreaks of tur- 
 bulence and mischief. In the legal or Jewish phase, 
 there was bondage, servility, formalism, exclusive- 
 ness. Yet it served to teach the great lesson of 
 government. Man must be governed; and, if he 
 does not govern himself, there is need that some- 
 thing else should govern him. The apostle Paul 
 spoke significantly when he said, that " the law was 
 a schoolmaster " to prepare men for a better dispen- 
 sation. The Gentile phase was defective. It was 
 almost destitute of good moral influences. It did 
 not bring men near to God ; it did not lead them 
 to purity, righteousness, and peace. They needed 
 a religion adapted to the wants of human nature ; a 
 religion that would not conflict with their reason ; 
 that would satisfy conscience ; that would gua- 
 rantee their freedom ; that would direct them to 
 things which are intrinsically good; that would 
 enable them to govern themselves by principles, 
 instead of rules and laws ; for good principles are 
 always good, but laws and rules are not invariably 
 adapted to all the different chcumstances and cases 
 of life. Men wanted a reUgion that would bring 
 them into acquaintance and communion with the 
 
AND OF CHKISTIANITA\ 39 
 
 true God of nature, — him who created the world, 
 and men, and all things ; for then human nature 
 and universal nature would be in harmony. And 
 Christianity, in its purity, is a religion of this 
 description. The more it is studied and known, 
 the more perfectly will it be found to fulfil the 
 above-stated conditions. 
 
 It is with the race, with generic man, as it is 
 with the individual. At first he is in a state of na- 
 ture ; actuated by impulses of appetite and passion ; 
 destitute of experience, knowledge, and good hab- 
 its. And these he must learn by going through a 
 process of discipline, under the influence of laws, 
 authority, and restrictions. " The heir, while he is 
 a child, is under tutors and governors until the time 
 appointed by the father." It was as requisite that 
 the generic man should go through a legal process 
 of discipline as it is for the individual man; for, 
 without it, he cannot understand the principles, and 
 acquire the habits, requisite to safe freedom and 
 self-government. 
 
 " And, when the fulness of time was come, God 
 sent forth his Son." Jesus of Nazareth was bori}, 
 and at the age of thirty years commenced his min- 
 istry of instruction and reconciliation. He taught 
 men how they might become reconciled to God 
 and to nature ; that they must live in harmony 
 with God, and with the world as God made it ; be 
 submissive, confiding, trustful, diligent in prov- 
 ing all things and holding fast to that which is 
 good. In his discourses he urged chiefly those du- 
 ties which are things intrinsically good, in distinc- 
 
40 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 tion from those which are but relatively good; 
 moral duties in preference to ceremonial ; justice, 
 mercy, faith, and the love of God, before tithes, sacri- 
 fices, and forms. He insisted strongly on purity of 
 heart, meekness, forgiveness of injuries, intenseness 
 of desire and pursuit for the righteousness and felici- 
 ty of the kingdom of God. He taught that sin was 
 bondage, and that holiness was freedom. He insist- 
 ed less upon such duties as fasting, and keeping the 
 sabbath, because these are but ceremonial, and do 
 not of themselves constitute real righteousness. 
 " These," said he, the moral, " ye ought to have 
 done, and not to leave the other — the ceremonial — 
 undone." Of the latter the Scribes and Pharisees 
 possessed an abundance. But the Lord Jesus de- 
 clared to his hearers, " Except your righteousness 
 exceed that of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye cannot 
 enter the kingdom of heaven." 
 
 The difference between the religion of Moses and 
 that of Christ may be noted in the following par- 
 ticulars : — 
 
 1. The requisitions of the Mosaical law were 
 chiefly for ritual observances. But the demands 
 of Christianity are chiefly of a moral character. The 
 former was of the letter ; the latter is of the spirit. 
 
 2. The blessings and the penalties annexed to 
 the law of Moses were present and earthly ; those 
 of the gospel are chiefly future and heavenly. 
 
 3. The Jewish religion was exclusive, and almost 
 anti-philanthropic ; the religion of Christ is liberal 
 and fraternal. It opens its arms to the embrace of 
 all mankind. It contemplates a brotherhood of all 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 41 
 
 nations, languages, and people. The God of the 
 Jews was a national Deity ; the God of Christianity 
 is the Father of aU mankind. 
 
 4. The law of Moses made its subjects bondmen ; 
 the gospel of Christ makes them freemen. The 
 former were governed by an authority over them, 
 and out of themselves; the latter govern them- 
 selves by the application of Christian principles 
 to their conduct. And they apply these prin- 
 ciples according to their own conviction of right, 
 propriety, and duty. The difference between a law, 
 a rule, and a principle has already been intimated. 
 In every good law there is always something which 
 makes it good. This something is an element or 
 principle. It is something more primordial than 
 the rule or law itself. There are but few Christian 
 rules, laws, or precepts, that are of so simple and 
 elementary a composition as to be always right 
 and useful. But good principles are unchangeable, 
 and uniformly right. As there are elements, un- 
 changeable elements, in the material world, so like- 
 wise in the moral or spiritual. And it is by the 
 presence of these that all acts, and courses of ac- 
 tions, are determined as to their moral character. 
 The true, the enlightened, the advanced Christian 
 understands these principles, and is, or ought to be. 
 at liberty to apply them. He has no master upon 
 the earth. He makes his own laws, and is bound to 
 answer to none but to his Master and Father in 
 heaven. 
 
 5. The Jew had but a small chance to make 
 mental and moral progress ; the Christian is encou- 
 
 4* 
 
42 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 raged to grow in grace and in knowledge, to make 
 attainments, to strive for the stature of perfect men 
 in Christ Jesus. It was expected of a Jew, that 
 he would be an obstinate, stationary conservative ; 
 it becomes a Christian to forget the things which 
 are behind, and to press forward to those which are 
 before. 
 
 6. and last. The penalties annexed to the Mosai- 
 cal code were severe and sanguinary. The death- 
 penalty was frequent. It was the punishment 
 for murder, for adultery, for sabbath-breaking, for 
 some descriptions of theft, for stubbornness in a 
 son, for constructive idolatry. Christianity leaves 
 the offender in the hands of God. It seeks his 
 reform, not his destruction. Jesus said to the 
 woman, " Go, and sin no more." " Vengeance is 
 mine, I will make recompense, saith the Lord. 
 Therefore, if thine enemy hunger, feed him ; if 
 thirsty, give him diink; for, in so doing, thou shalt 
 heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of 
 evil, but overcome evU with good." 
 
 But what has been the real character of Chris- 
 tianity in the world ? Has it been always pure, 
 complete, uncoiTupt ? Far otherwise : in different 
 times and ages, it has had different phases and fea- 
 tures. There have been the Apostolic, the Catholic, 
 the Papal, and the Protestant. 
 
 1. Apostolical Christianity. It differed little from 
 the original, evangelical type, except in one point, 
 — the contrast between faith and works. In our 
 Saviour's time, no such contrast was made. Faith 
 and works were homogeneous. The one was the 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 43 
 
 tree ; the other, the fruit. But, in the times of the 
 apostles, new relations had come up. The Gentiles 
 wished for admission into the church. And the 
 question was, Shall they be admitted with or with- 
 out the Mosaical ordinances ? And the observance 
 of these was denominated the deeds of the law. 
 The apostle Paul contended for the liberty of the 
 gospel; — the liberty of either using those ordi- 
 nances or omitting them. He maintained that 
 faith, working by love, was the ground of justifica- 
 tion, the foundation of righteousness ; and not the 
 observance of the Jewish ordinances. Hence came 
 the contrast between faith and works. But the 
 apostle did not impugn the doctrine of good works. 
 He enjoined them. He declared that " the doers of 
 the law shall be justified." He earnestly exhorted 
 his brethren to abound always in the work of the 
 Lord, assuring them " that their work in the Lord 
 was not in vain." 
 
 2. The next phase of Christianity, after the Paul- 
 ine or Apostolic, we have called the Catholic. In 
 the third and fourth centuries of the Christian era, 
 the church was divided into sects and denomina- 
 tions ; and the most conservative party, which was 
 also the largest, assumed to itself the title of catho- 
 lic ; i. e. general, universal. They claimed to be the 
 whole Christian church. The other parties, called 
 by different names. Gnostics, Montanists, Sabel- 
 lians, Arians, Novatians, Donatists, &c., whose col- 
 lective number, it is said, was at some periods 
 larger than that of the Catholics, were denied the 
 Christian character, anathematized as heretics, and 
 
44 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 in a state of condemnation. The Catholic party 
 being larger than any one of the other, and being 
 spread over all countries, had great advantage over 
 the dissenters ; and they improved it to do them 
 great injustice. The Catholics erected a nevi^ stand- 
 ard of Christianity. The old and the true standard 
 was faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Now it was 
 faith in the doctrine of what they called the Econo- 
 my ; adhesion to the Catholic party. It was admit- 
 ted that their faith in Christ might be as sincere as 
 that of the Catholics, and their morals also as good. 
 But they were out of the pale of the church ; and 
 the church was the Christian ark ; and all out of it, 
 remaining so, were as sure subjects of perdition as 
 those out of Noah's ark were of destruction from the 
 flood. Such had now become the phase of Chris- 
 tianity. Christians of these times had become as 
 exclusive and as bigoted as the Jews were before 
 them. The last and special injunction of the Lord 
 Jesus himself was overlooked, — was forgotten : " A 
 new commandment I give you, that ye love one 
 another as I have loved you." And his prayer : " I 
 pray, not only for these, but for all who shall believe 
 on me; that they all may be one, even as we are 
 one." The majority — if they were such — said. 
 No : we will not be one and brethren, except with 
 those " who follow with us." 
 
 3. The phase which succeeded the Catholic was 
 the Papal. It is very frequently called the Roman 
 Catholic, and sometimes the Romish or Roman. It 
 acknowledges the Bishop of Rome to be the absolute 
 sovereign of the whole Christian church, and even of 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 45 
 
 the world. He is God's vicar upon earth. His 
 throne overshadows that of princes. They bow 
 down to him, and kiss his very foot. When the 
 continent of America was discovered, the Pope — as 
 this ecclesiastic is called — assumed that it belonged 
 to his dominion, and divided it between the kings 
 of Spain and Portugal. No monarch on earth is 
 approached and treated with so much ceremonial 
 reverence and humility. The bishop of Rome at- 
 tained this distinction very gradually. The Catho- 
 lic phase may be computed as reaching from the 
 fourth to the seventh century. In this century, the 
 claim of the Roman bishop was recognized and 
 allowed by the emperor of Constantinople. It was 
 also aclaiowledged by all the nations in Western 
 Europe and Northern Africa. And although the 
 bishops and chm'ches of the East, or what is called 
 the Greek Church, have refused to succumb before 
 the Roman pontiff, yet his dominion has been gen- 
 eral. " The whole world has wandered after the 
 beast." 
 
 The hierarchy of this church has doubtless been 
 the most systematic and complete of any which 
 ever existed upon earth. It corresponded to a great 
 and perfect monarchy. AU the individual churches 
 were subject to their ministers; and these to the 
 diocesan bishops ; and these to the archbishop, or 
 to the metropolitans ; and these directly to the 
 Pope. The whole population of Christendom was 
 claimed as being rightfully subjects of his Holiness 
 at Rome. He also claimed inspiration and infaUi- 
 bility. His decisions of controverted points of 
 
46 
 
 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 doctrine were considered to be unerrable and final. 
 All his ordained ministers were regarded as pos- 
 sessed of a divine unction, which rendered all their 
 ministrations, especially the sacramental ones, mys- 
 teriously efficacious. They could pardon sins, and 
 inffict maledictions. Whatsoever they bound on 
 earth was also bound in heaven. The church, 
 through the organization of its sacred ministry, 
 having the Pope for its head, was believed to be 
 possessed of an immense fund of merit, arising 
 from the obedience and sufferings of Christ, mar- 
 tyrs, and saints, which, at discretion, could be 
 dispensed and transferred to sinners on earth and in 
 purgatory, and exonerate them from the pains and 
 penalties due for their sins. And these they sold 
 for money ; and thus money became a substitute for 
 penances and duty. 
 
 Laws, rules, rites, and all the paraphernalia of 
 ceremonial offices, became as superabundant here 
 as they had been in the Jewish Church. Christi- 
 anity almost lost its distinctive character. It was 
 not spirit, but letter. It consisted not in moral 
 righteousness, but in ceremonial. It was external, 
 not internal ; the power being considered as working 
 from without to within, instead of from within to 
 without. The most extravagant estimate was put 
 upon the importance and efficacy of ordinances. 
 Baptism washed away sins. The bread and the 
 wine in the Lord's supper were transformed into 
 the actual body and blood of Jesus Christ, so that, 
 in each celebration of that holy rite, there was a 
 real death and sacrifice of him ; that on such occa- 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 47 
 
 sions there was a literal fulfilment of the Saviour's 
 words, " He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my 
 blood, dwelleth in God, and God in him ; and ex- 
 cept ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son 
 of man, ye have no Kfe in you." 
 
 We do not intend to signify that there was no 
 true religion in the Papal Church. There was such 
 religion in the Jewish Church when in its worst 
 condition. So Kkewise in the papal communion. 
 But it was not proper Christianity. It was Chris- 
 tian in name, but scarcely such in reality. It was 
 rather Judaism, formalism, ceremonialism. Our 
 Saviour's description applied as well to ecclesias- 
 tical Romans as it did to the Scribes and Phari- 
 sees, •' Ye are like whited sepulchres, which indeed 
 appear beautiful without, but within are full of dead 
 men's bones and all uncleanness." The descrip- 
 tion, however, is general, not strict. In the time of 
 the greatest declension in Israel, there were seven 
 thousand men who remained true and faithful ; 
 and, doubtless, there have been hundreds of thou- 
 sands in the worst times of Romanism. 
 
 4. We now come to the last-mentioned phase of 
 Christianity, Protestantism. It took form and name 
 in the sixteenth century. It professes to repudiate 
 reliance upon ceremonial religion, and commenced 
 by alleging and maintaining that righteousness and 
 justification come by faith, not by penances and 
 indulgences purchased with money. And the word 
 faith was then employed to signify the religious 
 action of man's inward nature. It meant some- 
 thing within him, belief of truth, a feeling of con- 
 
48 DEVELOPMENTS OF KELIGION 
 
 cern, a desire to lead a godly life, the inward mov- 
 ing principle of holiness. It was due to this import 
 of the word that the tracts written in rapid succes- 
 sion by Martin Luther on the topic of justification 
 — rather on the subject of religion — spread with 
 such lightning-velocity over Germany, and moved 
 the hearts of the people as the trees of the forest 
 are moved when blown upon by a mighty wind. 
 And so long as Luther continued to write in this 
 style of sentiment, setting forth "the law of the 
 spirit of life'' in contrast with "the law of dead 
 works," his pen was powerful. " They were not 
 able to resist the wisdom and spirit by which he 
 spake." The flame of the reformation spread like 
 fire over the ground in the time of drought. One 
 half of Germany and nearly one half of Europe 
 became illuminated and converted. But, when the 
 illustrious reformer came to settle his theology, he 
 affixed another signification to the term faith. It 
 now signified reliance ; reliance on the righteousness 
 of Christ for justification. He probably felt in a 
 manner compelled to this course in order to carry 
 out his doctrine of justification by grace, and to 
 keep as wide as possible from the Romish views on 
 the same su.bject. The Protestants thought that 
 they must have a theology and an organization ; 
 that they must all think alike, and think as diffe- 
 rently from the Papists as could well be. The 
 latter were tinctured with Pelagianism. Works had 
 some part to perform in the justification of believers. 
 Protestantism, therefore, would utterly exclude them. 
 It was unfortunately done ; and the doctrine put 
 
AND OF CHHISTIANITY. 49 
 
 forth by the Council of Trent, in the article of justi- 
 fication, is, in our view, far more reasonable and 
 scriptural than that of Martin Luther and John 
 Calvin. And the Protestant Reformation has gained 
 no ground in Europe, but has lost considerable, 
 since the character of their theology became defi- 
 nite and fixed. 
 
 The Reformation was an effort to gain spiritual 
 life and religious liberty. The reformers asserted 
 their right to interpret the Bible for themselves ; 
 their liberty to believe, profess, and practise reli- 
 gion according to their own convictions. And they 
 carried their point against the Romish Catholics; 
 and here they tried to stop. The liberty which they 
 had claimed as a Christian right for themselves, 
 they were very loth to accord to their Protestant 
 brethren. In many, and even in most cases, they 
 have denied it. The Lutheran Church denied it to 
 the Reformed Church ; the Calvinists have denied it 
 to the Arminians ; the Episcopalians have denied 
 it to the Puritans ; and Puritans have denied it to 
 Baptists, Antinomians, and Quakers. Spiritual do- 
 mination has strenuously endeavored to erect its 
 throne on Protestant soil ; and it has wrought much 
 of the diabolical work of persecution. But it cannot 
 prevail. The very first principle of Protestant- 
 ism forbids it. Every persecuted Protestant may 
 turn upon his persecutors, and say, — I do no more 
 than what you and your fathers have done. They 
 renounced Romanism because they judged it to be 
 a corrupted Christianity. At a later period, they 
 repudiated Episcopacy for the same reason; and 
 5 
 
50 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 on this very account do I repudiate your views. 
 And have I not the same right to renounce them 
 that you had to renounce the Church of Rome and 
 the Church of England ? 
 
 Protestantism has been constantly working out 
 its mission. New views and new sects are con- 
 tinually springing up. These things must needs be ; 
 and, where thought is free, the fact cannot be other- 
 wise. If all primitive Protestants had remained 
 fixed in the same position, and their descendants 
 imitated their example, we should now possess no 
 more religious liberty than was enjoyed in Europe at 
 the beginning of the sixteenth century. The longer 
 any sect or denomination remains quiet, undis- 
 turbed by doubters or seceders, the more intolerant it 
 becomes. The very fact of Protestants being split 
 up into hundreds of divisions is the seed of religious 
 liberty. And hence the fact that such liberty has 
 gained more in Great Britain than on the continent 
 of Europe, and more in America than in Great 
 Britain. The more our divisions, the wider the 
 sphere of our liberty. Every new sect puts forth an 
 additional claim to the charter of liberty ; every new 
 view challenges its right to toleration and charity. 
 It increases resistance against the arm of bigotry, 
 and debilitates it. Our religious liberty is greater 
 than that enjoyed by our fathers ; yet it is not per- 
 fect. No man should incur any stigma or depre- 
 ciation of esteem, in consequence of an opinion 
 deliberately formed, honestly entertained, and frankly 
 professed. 
 
 Protestantism will have accomplished its mission, 
 
ANT) OF CHRISTIANITY. 51 
 
 when every Christian shall be at liberty to express 
 his views of religion with the same freedom, unmo- 
 lested, that Martin Luther took to express his, at so 
 much inconvenience and peril. And Christianity 
 also will have accomplished its mission, when every 
 believer shall make the same distinction between 
 ceremonial and moral righteousness that was made 
 and taught by our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 Christianity and Protestantism both arose in the 
 world under similar circumstances of condition ; in 
 times of declension, en'or, and corruption. And 
 they have hitherto been as a light shining in a dark 
 place. Neither of them has been generally well 
 understood, nor duly appreciated, nor fully devel- 
 oped. " And the light shineth in darkness, and the 
 darkness comprehendeth it not." 
 
 Progress, however, is the great law of God's 
 work. This truth is indicated in the passage first 
 quoted : " First the blade, then the ear, afterward the 
 full corn in the ear. " The blade, the ear, and the full 
 corn, are metaphors of the three general states of 
 human society. There is, first, the natural state ; 
 second, the legal state ; third, the enlightened state. 
 In their natural state, men live without laws, rules, 
 or authority. In the legal state, they are guided 
 and bound by laws, rules, and authority. In the 
 enlightened state, they are freed from prescriptive 
 laws, and are governed and guided by the principles, 
 of equity and truth in their own minds. They 
 make their own rules for every occasion, and make 
 the right ones. No man does a wrong to his neigh- 
 bor. These three states are in advance, one above 
 
52 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGION 
 
 the other. The legal state is above the natural 
 state ; and the enlightened state is above the legal. 
 Men must pass through the legal, before they can 
 arrive at the enlightened. It is impracticable for 
 them to leap, at a single bound, from the state of 
 nature into that of enlightenment. " So God or- 
 dains." The law is in man's constitution and the 
 world's. 
 
 The three generic states, above described, are not 
 meted and bounded by narrow lines of demarca- 
 tion, but are separated by broad belts from each 
 other ; separated as day and night are by the dawn 
 and the twilight. They are rather things of de- 
 grees than of strict definition. 
 
 There are yet some of mankind in the natural 
 state ; but the great majority of them are in the 
 legal. They are under the bondage of law. And 
 some portions of men are now entering the condi- 
 tion of enlightenment. But the goal is far ahead. 
 It will probably be finally reached. The race of men 
 have been constantly making either direct or indirect 
 advances. The retrogradations are but partial, lo- 
 cal, temporary. We are not duly a-ware of the real 
 amount of advance which has been made by the 
 mind and powers of man. Compare the condition 
 of the people in Lord North's Island with that of 
 the best societies in Europe. What an immense 
 disparity ! A mere description of it would fill vol- 
 umes. And yet these poor people are a little above 
 the bare natural state. They have learned some- 
 thing by living in the world. The difference be- 
 tween the pure natural state and that to which the 
 
AND OF CHRISTIANITY. 53 
 
 most enlightened have arrived, is greater than that 
 which now separates any two examples of human 
 society. And all this difference has been learned. 
 It is ground which has been gained, acquired, made, 
 by the active and rational powers of the human 
 mind. 
 
 Christianity may be viewed and distinguished 
 according to the threefold distinction noted in this 
 discourse. In the times of Christ and the apostles, 
 the new religion was simple, unlearned, un philo- 
 sophical. It had no definitions, no dogmas, no plat- 
 form-creed, except the formula of baptism. This 
 was the blade; the comparatively natural state. 
 Then followed the legal state, which included the 
 Catholic and the Papal. It came as a matter of 
 necessity. When men's minds have become pos- 
 sessed of great truths, they will soon commence the 
 work of examining and analyzing them ; of defining 
 the words employed to express them. New occa- 
 sions for this will arise from the new relations which 
 come up. Christianity soon came in contact with 
 the ceremonial Jewish law. This occasioned the 
 controversy in which the apostle Paul took so great 
 a part and felt so great an interest. It next came 
 in contact with the Oriental philosophy, and the 
 Gnostic form of Christianity was developed. This 
 occasioned much disputation for two or three cen- 
 turies; and then Gnosticism seems to have died 
 out. Simultaneously with the Eastern, it came in 
 contact with the Westerp, philosophy, out of which 
 came the doctrine of the Logos, and the scheme 
 called the Economy, and afterward called the Trir 
 
54 DEVELOPMENTS OF RELIGiON 
 
 nity. New ideas were constantly coming up, which 
 could not be settled without controversy and schism. 
 The fault did not lie in the tendency to definition, 
 dogma, and system. All this was right. But it 
 was not right, but very "WTong, to set up the dogmas 
 of a few men as a standard of orthodoxy for all 
 others. This was bigotry and tyranny. It has been 
 the constant bane in the church, and will probably 
 be the last of the tares to be weeded out of it. 
 
 All the numerous varieties of religion which have 
 appeared in the world, have doubtless originated 
 from the same principle of human nature. Man 
 possesses a religious element in his constitution. 
 It must be the same in all ages, in all climates, 
 in all conditions of society. In its root it is good. 
 It must be so ; for it is a part of man, whom God 
 made in his own likeness. It is an egregious en-or 
 to say, as it has been said, that all true religion is 
 from God, and all other from the devil. Men's 
 errors in religion have not proceeded from blank per- 
 versity. Much more is due to their ignorance, their 
 blind zeal, their overweening self-confidence. They 
 might have outgrown their errors much faster than 
 they have, provided they had possessed a willingness 
 to be corrected. Multitudes of men, and even of 
 Christians, seem to set their faces against correction. 
 They seem resolved not to be convinced. They 
 pride themselves on their conservatism, as though 
 it were a virtue to be stationary, to come to a dead 
 stop in religious faith and knowledge. 
 
 Idolatry has been a prominent feature in the face 
 of the religious world ; though it be an error, yet 
 
AND OP CHRISTIANITY. 55 
 
 not of SO heinous a character as many seem to be- 
 lieve. It consists in the use of statues or images 
 in public worship. They are not considered gods, 
 but the representations of them. This is the cha- 
 racter given to them in the second commandment 
 of the decalogue : " Thou shalt not make unto thy- 
 self any graven image, or the likeness of any thing 
 in heaven above, or in the earth below." The image 
 is here described, not as being a pretended god, but 
 the likeness of one. Jehovah is represented as hav- 
 ing forbidden the use of images. No image could 
 represent him. If, therefore, an image were made 
 use of, it would represent some god other than 
 him. On this account chiefly was it that idolatry 
 is represented as being so intensely odious in the 
 sight of God. It was putting another in. his place. 
 The following statement may not be wide of the 
 truth, that the Jews and the Gentiles acknowledged 
 and worshipped the same absolute Divinity — so 
 far as they had an apprehension of one — under 
 different names, aspects, and relations. 
 
 The prophet Isaiah evidently misrepresents the 
 Gentile carpenter, when he says of him that betakes 
 a tree of the forest, and uses one part of it for fuel, 
 and of another part carves an image, and accounts 
 it of itself to be a real Deity. Idolatry, in its 
 primordial element, was a holy thing ; the very same 
 thing both in the Gentile and the Jew. 
 
 A question arises. In what directions does religion 
 improve and become better? It improves in pro- 
 portion as the true moral element is incorporated 
 into it. It also improves in proportion as polytheism 
 
56 rteVELOPMENTS OP RELIGION, ETC. 
 
 is eliminated out of it. It, moreover, improves in 
 proportion as it exhibits one God in his entire good- 
 ness and impartiality, without the smallest mixture 
 of injustice, unkindness, partiality, and arbitrary 
 despotism. The Jewish God was partial, jealous, 
 vindictive ; the Gentile gods were but fraU immor- 
 tals ; the Calvinistic God is a despot ; the Arminian 
 God has been pronounced weak, wanting in power. 
 Possibly, however, this judgment may be a mis- 
 take. The God of the Romish Church is arbitrary, 
 making distinctions where there is no difference ; 
 bestowing his grace and salvation according to the 
 accidents of birth, baptism, sacraments, and ecclesi- 
 astical organization. The God of theformalist is a 
 respecter of persons ; a stickler for precise ceremo- 
 ny ; making more account of rites and forms, than 
 of uprightness, benevolence, and love of truth. 
 
 When all religions shall set forth and adore the 
 true God in his true character of paternity, impar- 
 tiality, benignity, omnipotence, and wisdom; of 
 w^hom and from whom are all good things, but no 
 evil things ; then will there be one true, holy, catho- 
 lic church. The apostolic testimony of God is, that 
 he is light, and in him no darkness at all ; that evil 
 is not from him ; that God cannot be tempted to do 
 evil, neither tempteth he any man ; that a man is 
 tempted, when led away and enticed by his own 
 lust. 
 
67 
 
 THE DOCTRINE OF THE FALL EXAMINED 
 AND REPUDIATED. 
 
 " By one inan*s disobedience, many were made sinners." — Rom. v. 19. 
 "In Adam all die." — 1 Cor. xv. 22. 
 
 The doctrine of " the Fall of man " has long been 
 one of the prevalent and popular points of belief 
 among Christians; embraced by the Romish Church, 
 by the Greek Church, by the Nestorian and the 
 Armenian Churches ; by nearly all Protestants, in- 
 cluding Lutherans, Calvinists, Arminians, Quakers, 
 and Methodists. It has been accounted orthodox 
 and catholic for these fifteen hundred years. 
 
 Upon this dogma of the church have been erected 
 many other doctrines, now, and for a longtime past, 
 regarded as essential elements of Christian theology. 
 Of these are the doctrines of the Trinity, of the 
 vicarious atonement, of vicarious justification, of 
 supernatural regeneration, of individual election and 
 reprobation, of the saints' perseverance, and of in- 
 dulgences in the Romish Church. These doctrines, 
 in their theological sense, could not stand for a 
 day, nor would they be advocated, without the 
 doctrine of the " Fall " underlying them as a foun- 
 
58 THE DOCTRINE OF THE FALL 
 
 dation. Let this single article of theology be sub- 
 verted, and the others, above mentioned, will be 
 prostrated forthwith and for ever. 
 
 We propose to examine the foundations of this 
 doctrine. But, previously to doing it, we must ex- 
 plain and define the import of what is denominated 
 the Fall, the Lapse, the Apostacy, of man. 
 
 It presupposes man to have been created and 
 constituted pure, holy, good, happy. What brilliant 
 descriptions have been written of the perfection and 
 felicity of paradisiacal man ! His reason, appetites, 
 and passions were all perfectly harmonized. He 
 was in fuE communion with God. He loved truth 
 and moral excellence. All nature sympathized with 
 him, and he with nature. There were no storms 
 in the sky, no tempests on the sea, no thunderbolt 
 in the clouds, no quakes in the earth, no infection in 
 the air. But the moment when the first man — or 
 rather the first human pair — "plucked and ate" 
 the interdicted fruit in the garden of Eden, the 
 whole scene was reversed. Man's nature was 
 marred in its very core. He became a sinner in 
 character; and this sinfulness of character was in- 
 herent, immanent, constitutional, hereditary. It 
 descends to every individual of his posterity. 
 
 " She pluck'd, she ate ! 
 Earth felt the wound ; and nature from her seat, 
 Sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe, 
 That all was lost." 
 
 Such, briefly, is the doctrine of the Fall of man. 
 We think that none will accuse us of misstating 
 
EXAMINED AND REPUDIATED. 59 
 
 and misrepresenting it. Our design has been to 
 make a fair and a just statement. And we admit 
 that this doctrine has been the general belief of 
 Christendom, from the days of St. Jerome and St. 
 Augustine to the present time. It has been be- 
 lieved by such eminent men as John Wickliff, 
 Roger and Francis Bacon, and Sir Thomas More ; 
 also by John Milton, John Locke, and Sir Isaac 
 Newton. " The world has gone after it." We 
 venture, however, to pronounce the doctrine untena- 
 ble, — an entire mistake. "We repudiate it as a 
 gross and mischievous error. 
 
 For this our protest against the popular doctrine 
 of the Fall of man, we assign the following con- 
 siderations. Will you candidly ponder and weigh 
 them? 
 
 1. The entire silence of our Lord Jesus Christ on 
 this subject. He never taught this doctrine ; he 
 never recognized it; he never even alluded to it. 
 Manifestly he knew nothing of it. The doctrine 
 had not then been conceived. It was not born until 
 several centuries afterwards. And as our Lord did 
 not teach this doctrine, it of course makes no part 
 of Christianity. What Mahomet did not teach is 
 no part of Mahometanism ; what George Fox did 
 not teach does not belong to Quakerism ; and what 
 John Wesley omitted belongs not to Methodism. 
 Admit that Abubeker.or Omar taught certain things 
 upon which the Prophet of Mecca was silent, those 
 things are not Mahometanism ; or that Barclay 
 and Penn advanced sentiments which the founder 
 of the Quakers did not teach, those sentiments do 
 
60 THE DOCTRINE OF THE FALL 
 
 not belong to Quakerism. And if Paul the apostle, 
 or if any or all the apostles, inculcated doctrines 
 which Jesus Christ did not teach, those doctrines do 
 not belong to Christianity. If Paul taught the doc- 
 trine of the Fall, it does not even then become a 
 part of pure and proper Christianity. That alone 
 is Christianity which was uttered from the mouth 
 of the Lord Jesus himself. Whatever arrogance 
 and temerity be thought manifested in our dis- 
 claimer of a tenet which has been espoused, in a 
 manner, by the whole Christian world, it will be ad- 
 mitted as some extenuation of our offence, that this 
 tenet was never recognized in any of the instruc- 
 tions of the Lord Jesus, whom we all acknowledge 
 and adore as the author and finisher of our faith. 
 If the doctrine had been true, would he have 
 omitted the declaration of it? Did he omit any 
 other great and important truth? Was he not the 
 Way, the Truth, and the Life ? What of truth he 
 did not state in detail, he did in principle ; and thus 
 his instructions constitute a " complete '' code of 
 law and doctrine. "And ye are complete in him :" 
 so testified the apostle Paul to the Christians at 
 Colosse. 
 
 2. The fact of the Fall, technically understood, is 
 not necessary in order to account for the wickedness 
 which has occurred and prevailed among men. 
 Theologians have endeavored to prove the doctrine 
 now before vis, from the fact of the actual sinfulness 
 of human nature ; and they endeavor to prove the 
 sinful nature of mankind, from the fact of man's 
 outward wickedness. But the argument is lame 
 
EXAMINED AND REPUDIATED. Gl 
 
 and inconclusive. The fact that all men sin is no 
 proof that human nature is radically vicious. All 
 men do not always live in the commission of sin. 
 Their transgressions are only occasional. Habits of 
 wickedness are not natural to them. It is through 
 ignorance and temptation that men do wickedly; 
 and it is by repeating a wrong deed that a sinful 
 habit is contracted. Susceptibility to temptation is 
 not a sinful infirmity; peccability is not a crime. 
 Adam and Eve were peccable ; they were suscep- 
 tible of effective temptation ; they actually yielded 
 to the tempter. He conquered them. And yet it 
 is acknowledged on both sides of this question, that 
 they were constitutionally uncorrupt; no taint in 
 their nature, — no perversity in their hearts. And on 
 the same principle that the first sin is accounted for, 
 may all others also. A propensity to sin for the 
 sake of sin is not here requisite. Men may sin 
 without any such propensity. Adam sinned because 
 he loved fruit and desired knowledge. Yet these 
 were not evil propensities. It is the improper grati- 
 fication of feelings and desires, right in themselves, 
 that constitutes moral fault and guilty crime. There 
 is no primitive thing which is sinful. Every such 
 thing is from God, who, when " he beheld all things 
 he had made, behold, they were very good." 
 
 The innate corruption of mankind has been in- 
 ferred from the very atrocious crimes that have been 
 committed by men. But these heinous iniquities 
 are not stranger things than was the transgression 
 of Adam. When we take into consideration the 
 very great advantages enjoyed by the progenitors of 
 
62 THE DOCTRINE OF THE FALL 
 
 the human race ; that they, in a manner, were born 
 adults ; were endowed with a special enlightenment, 
 — an instinctive civilization, — which supplied the 
 want of experience and of parental care ; when we 
 consider the supernatural aids and instructions 
 afforded unto them, we may be greatly surprised at 
 their conduct ; we may as properly stand amazed 
 in contemplation of it, as at any atrocity ever 
 committed by the most ignorant, barbarized, and 
 conscience-hardened portion of human existence. 
 It is no stranger thing, nor a thing more inconsis- 
 tent with the innate innocence of human nature, 
 that some men should be murderers, parricides, and 
 sodomites, than that the sober, enlightened, and de- 
 vout Adam, with his no less enlightened help-meet, 
 should have fallen into the limbo of disobedience 
 and condemnation. 
 
 3. The doctrine of the Fall, theologically under- 
 stood, is anti-analogical ; it is, moreover, contradic- 
 tory and absurd. It is a maxim, " Order is Heaven's 
 first law ; Nature's first law." The tendencies of the 
 world have been constant and uniform. The first 
 lion, the first oak, the first dolphin, and the first pearl- 
 oyster, were types of all the lions, oaks, dolphins, and 
 pearl-fishes that have ever since been propagated from 
 them. A genus may run into species and varieties, 
 but it never changes its essential character. The 
 oak is an oak always and everywhere. The same 
 is fact in regard to the lion, the lamb, the olive, the 
 fig, &c.; and the same also in regard to man. 
 What the first man was, aU his posterity are. 
 What they are in nature and constitution, he also 
 
EXAMINED AND REPUDIATED. 63 
 
 must have been. God ordained in the beginning, 
 that every thing, every creature, animal and vegeta- 
 ble, should bring forth its own likeness, " every 
 creature after its kind." The processes of nature 
 are aU analogical : they proceed on the principle of 
 analogy. But the doctrine of the Fa^l is in total 
 violation of this universal law. Analogy says, that, 
 as Adam was made or born upright, his descend- 
 ants must likewise inherit the same description of 
 rectitude. But the doctrine under consideration 
 says that Adam was made or born holy, but that 
 all the long lineage of his body are begotten, con- 
 ceived, and born in sin ; that Adam was a seed, a 
 root, right, pure, and healthy ; but that all the scions 
 and stems and shoots which have g^own up from 
 it are unsound, impure, and poisonous. The doc- 
 trine, therefore, violates the great law of analogy, 
 by which the whole world is manifestly, governed. 
 And is not this sufficient ground for its entire and 
 devout rejection ? 
 
 Nor is this the whole. The doctrine is obviously 
 contradictory and absurd. It represents Adam as 
 acting in contradiction to his very nature. He was 
 holy, but his conduct was sinful. He possessed 
 the good treasure of a right heart, but out of this 
 treasure brought forth evil things. He loved holi- 
 ness and hated sin, yet freely preferred the latter to 
 the former. He devoutly loved the character and 
 service of God, yet voluntarily yielded himself up 
 to the will and service of Satan. Having a clear 
 knowledge of the distinction between right and 
 wrong, he put the one in the place of the other. 
 
64 THE DOCTRINE OF THE FALL 
 
 With a strong preference of holiness to sin, he 
 chose the latter, and turned his back upon the 
 former. The fountain was pure and sweet; but all 
 the water issuing from it is noxious and bitter! 
 And is not this contradiction and absurdity ? 
 
 We may fm'ther remark, that particular acts of 
 an individual of a genus, and the habits acquhed by 
 those acts, do not change the generical constitution, 
 nor are those habits hereditary. A wild beast may 
 be tamed, but the tameness is not hereditary. The 
 offspring of a tamed animal, unless domesticated, 
 will be wild and savage. A habit is not contracted 
 by a single act ; nor is the habit, when contracted, 
 constitutional. The constitution remains what it 
 was before. A man does not acquire a habit of 
 intemperance by a single instance of intoxication. 
 And, after he has become a confirmed drunlsard, his 
 constitution remains untainted; and his children, 
 if not corrupted by example and use, will never 
 hanker for the alcoholic draught. Adam's partici- 
 pation of the forbidden fruit could not have effected 
 any more change in his constitution than a single 
 act of a child's disobedience to parental authority. 
 A dutiful child may disobey in a single instance, 
 but never have a desire to repeat the transgression. 
 
 4. The apostle Paul does not teach nor endorse 
 the theological doctrine of the Fall. He does not 
 recognize such a character as that of paradisiacal 
 man. The Adam of Paul, and the Adam of theo- 
 logians, are very different characters. The Adam 
 of Paul was a fraU, errable, mortal man ; the 
 Adam of theologians was possessed of an incom- 
 
EXAMINED AND REPUDIATED. 65 
 
 parable degree of enlightenment, purity, holiness, 
 and strength of character. The apostle's Adam 
 was just as weak as other men ; the theological 
 Adam was as superior to his descendants as an arch- 
 angel is to a common man. The Adam of Paul is 
 the type of man in his infirmity, frailness, and 
 mortality. He set a bad example, which all men 
 imitate. He led the way in turning aside from 
 the right path, and they all follow him. He first 
 incurred the wages of disobedience, and in this 
 sense brought sin and death into the world; but 
 in no other sense. His constitution was mortal at 
 the beginning : " Dust thou art, and unto dust 
 shalt thou return." 
 
 According to the view of Paul, aU that was 
 lost by Adam is regained by Jesus Christ. In the 
 same sense that men die in the former, they are 
 made alive by the latter. In the same manner 
 that men were made sinners by the disobedience 
 of the one, they are made righteous by the obedi- 
 ence of the other. But such is not the doctrine of 
 theologians. According to this, Adam killed the 
 whole race of man, but Christ quickens only a 
 part. Adam incurred and communicates death to 
 men through the law of traduction. Christ redeems 
 them by paying the debt demanded of them by the 
 law of divine justice. But why is it that men die, 
 if Christ has redeemed them from this death? It 
 is manifest that theologians have misunderstood 
 and misinterpreted the apostle. He did not under- 
 stand their doctrine of paradisiacal man and his 
 fall. 
 
 6* 
 
66 THE DOCTRINE OF THE FALL 
 
 The real facts of the case, as stated by the apostle, 
 are not of very difficult comprehension. Adam was 
 the true type of all natural men. He represents 
 them in their weakness, sinfulness, and misery; and 
 Jesus Christ is the true type of all upright, regene- 
 rated, spiritual men. "What they have lost by being 
 frail, errable, sinful, and mortal, they may regain 
 by becoming penitent, converted, strong in faith, 
 and persevering unto the end. Adam, by his con- 
 duct and experience, has showed what men are in 
 their infirmity. The Lord Jesus Christ, by his 
 instructions, death, and example, has showed what 
 they might be in their strength ; that, by denying 
 ungodliness and worldly lusts and living righteously, 
 they may become children of God, and made meet 
 for the inheritance among the saints in the light of 
 heavenly glory. 
 
 5. It would manifestly be inconsistent with the 
 justice and goodness of God to treat men as he 
 is exhibited in doing by the doctrine of the Fall. 
 Christianity exhibits God, not only as a just and 
 righteous Governor, but also as a kind and merciful 
 Father ; as treating mankind as his children. But 
 what human father would treat his children as the 
 doctrine of the Fall represents God as treating man- 
 kind? Discard, pollute, hate, and ruin the whole 
 for a single offence of the first-born; and then 
 institute a mode of recovery that should be par- 
 tial, unequal, and of course inadequate ? Provide 
 a plaster which would not cover the whole sore ? 
 Designedly recover a few, but banish all the rest 
 beyond the limits of redemption? And are we 
 
EXAMINED AND REPUDIATED. 67 
 
 excusable in attributing to God what would be 
 dishonorable and wicked in a man ? 
 
 6. This doctrine of the Fall has exerted a bad 
 influence on mankind and in the church. In accor- 
 dance with it, young children, receiving their first 
 lessons of religious instruction, and whUe yet their 
 hearts are tender and guileless, have been taught 
 that they are apostates ; that they are enemies to 
 their Father in heaven; that they hate God, and 
 that God hates them; and that their hearts must 
 be changed by a power which is above all human 
 ability, before they can do any thing right and ac- 
 ceptable in his sight; that they are constantly 
 liable to death ; and, dying as they are unconverted, 
 they win be cast into heU, where the worm dieth 
 not and the fire is unquenchable. The impressions 
 made by such instructions cannot be good and hap- 
 py. They fill the mind with perplexity, torture, and 
 amazement. The child, lilte Job in his distressful be- 
 wilderment, wUl curse the day of his birth ; wUl earn- 
 estly wish that he had never been born. He cannot 
 be thankful for his existence. He must regard it as 
 a misery, not as a blessing. The chances are a 
 fearful odds against him. And, as this doctrine 
 dishonors God, it also misrepresents and disgraces 
 religion. It makes faith the substance of things 
 to be feared, instead of " things hoped for." Out 
 of this doctrine has grown up that of vicarious 
 atonement and vicarious justification. Responsi- 
 bility has thus been separated from personal charac- 
 ter and conduct. A man, in the sight of God, may 
 be adjudged to be what he is not, and to have done 
 
68 THE DOCTRINE OF THE FALL, ETC. 
 
 what he never did, and to deserve what he does not 
 deserve. Out of this principle came the doctrine 
 of indulgences, as practised in the Church of Rome ; 
 the commutation of punishment; the pardon of 
 sins, for money. It is manifestly impossible that 
 there should be a sound and consistent system of 
 Christian theology, until the doctrine of the Fall 
 of man, in its technical sense, be repudiated. It is 
 a leprous stone, and must mar and corrupt every 
 edifice into which it is wrought. It confounds 
 moral principles ; it darkens religious truth ; it 
 places reason and religion in the attitude of anta- 
 gonists against each other. This is a deplorable 
 evil. For both reason and religion are friends to 
 man ; and friends cannot be hostile. " Come now, 
 and let us reason together, saith the Lord." " Are 
 not my ways equal ? are not your ways unequal ? " 
 
69 
 
 THE INCORRUPTIBLE WORD : TRADITION : 
 THE INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 " The seed is the word of God." — Luke, viii. 11. 
 
 ** He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man." — Matt. xiii. 37. 
 
 Our Christian brethren of the Romish communion 
 hold that the true church of Christ — and they 
 claim to be this church — is virtually the living 
 body of Christ himself; that it supplies his place 
 on earth, possessing and communicating his holi- 
 ness and truth ; and that this saving holiness and 
 truth is perpetuated chiefly by tradition ; and, more- 
 ever, that the church is inerrable in doctrine. 
 
 We Protestants devoutly reject this broad claim 
 of ecclesiastical Rome. But there is an element of 
 truth contained in it. In a secondary sense, the 
 church of Christ is his body ; it is called such by 
 the apostle Paul. And it is also the depository of 
 Christian doctrine. " The seed is the word of God." 
 This seed was sown by the Son of man, by our 
 Lord Jesus Christ. He sowed it when he preached 
 the gospel of the kingdom of heaven. The me- 
 dium of communication was preaching. It was 
 promulgated oraUy in the numerous towns and 
 
70 
 
 THE INCORRUPTIBLE WORD : 
 
 cities of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee ; sometimes 
 in the synagogue, in the plain, on the mountain, in 
 the private house, and in the highway. His man- 
 ner was the popular. He sowed the seed broadcast. 
 He wrote nothing ; composed no book ; uttered no 
 creed ; gave no formula of worship and discipline. 
 The seed which he sowed was good. It was truth, 
 and was suited to the wants of the human heart : 
 it fell, more or less, on ground fitted for its recep- 
 tion. The seed caught; it rooted; it grew; it 
 ripened into harvest ; and this seed has never run 
 out. The Lord Jesus Christ has had disciples on 
 earth ever since the day when he attended the mar- 
 riage in Galilee. " The word of the Lord endureth 
 for ever." " And this is the word which by the gos- 
 pel is preached unto you." The tares, in the para- 
 ble, did not destroy the wheat. The wheat lived, 
 notwithstanding the intermixture of the tares : both 
 grew together. And thus also has it been in the 
 church of Christ. As in the parable the enemy 
 came and sowed tares, so in the Christian commu- 
 nion the adversary has introduced errors. These 
 have greatly multiplied. " Many false prophets have 
 gone out into the world." But the false Christs 
 and the false prophets have not subverted the church 
 of the Saviour. It is founded on a rock, and the 
 gates of heU cannot demolish it. There has been 
 Christian truth and a Christian spirit in every age 
 of the world. The corruptions of Christianity have 
 not been caused so much by the repudiation of true 
 doctrine as by the adoption of false. No important 
 truth of it has ever been lost. Not a kernel of wheat 
 
TRADITION : THE INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 
 
 71 
 
 was taken away when the tares were sown in the 
 same field. True, primitive Christianity is very 
 simple ; so simple that it seemed to most men to be 
 but foolishness. It was all comprehended in the brief 
 summary given of it by the apostle Paul, " Repen- 
 tance toward God, and faith in our Lord Jesus 
 Christ." And this doctrine of the world's life and 
 salvation has been propagated and perpetuated 
 mainly by tradition. It was many years after the 
 crucifixion of Jesus that any document recorded his 
 biography and discourses. The Gospels did not 
 appear until almost the middle of the latter half 
 of the first century. And it is by tradition that 
 we are taught to read and to interpret these Gospels. 
 Without tradition they would now be a dead, 
 meaningless letter to our eyes. We read them 
 and we interpret them by rules furnished from the 
 treasury of tradition. It is tradition which gives us 
 the Bible. It also gives us the interpretation of the 
 Bible. And as tradition has brought us the true 
 doctrines of Christianity, it has also brought us 
 many that are untrue. Christians, in every age, 
 have been called upon to do the work of discrimi- 
 nation ; to separate the tares from the wheat ; to 
 prove or test all things alleged to be true, and to 
 hold fast that which is good. The truth will abide. 
 Even the power of fire cannot destroy pure gold. 
 But error is not permanent : it may hold a long 
 reign, but not for ever. Its time will come, and then 
 it must die out. God has so constituted human 
 nature that truth is congenial to it. But en-or is 
 heterogeneal. It offends, it disagi-ees, somewhere. 
 
72 
 
 THE INCORRUPTIBLE WORD : 
 
 And for a long season it may not be perceived and 
 found out where and what the error is. " But 
 there is nothing covered which shall not be revealed ; 
 nothing hidden which shall not be made known." 
 
 The Lord Jesus committed his truth to the church, 
 and this chui'ch has also retained that truth. " The 
 church is the pillar and ground of the truth." What 
 the whole church has always believed may safely 
 be put dowji for truth, and what has been matter of 
 doubt and debate among Christians may be set down 
 as doubtful. There are Christian doctrines which 
 all believers in Christ have embraced ; and it is of 
 these that the kernel and substance of the gospel of 
 Christ consists. The doctrines which have been 
 disputed among Christians are, all of them, either 
 false or comparatively unimportant. There never 
 has been any controversy among them respecting 
 the truth of the doctrine of repentance. And this 
 doctrine covers the whole groimd of moral holiness, 
 of human duty. Just so far as a man repents, he 
 denies all iniquity, and fulfils all righteousness. We 
 have but little fault to find with the position so dis- 
 tinctly laid down and sti-enuously defended by St. 
 Vincentius, of Levins, that what has been believed 
 in the church at all times, and in all places, and by 
 all Christian professors, belongs to Christianity, and 
 constitutes the essence of it. This also is our 
 position. But we dissent from our brethren, the 
 Romanists, in the article of the church. Of whom 
 does the catholic church of Christ consist ? Is it 
 an organization ? An hierarchy ? Romanists affirm 
 this question, and so do the Enghsh Episcopalians ; 
 
tradition: the infallible church. 73 
 
 perhaps also the Greek Church. But we deny it. 
 Our Saviour did not institute an organism. The 
 Scriptures are totally silent on this subject. And 
 so likewise is reliable tradition. It is professed 
 faith in Christ which constitutes a visible Chris- 
 tian; and of all visible Christians does the visible 
 church consist; — the invisible, of all those whose 
 hearts and lives accord to their profession. This 
 distinction of the church into visible and invisible 
 is recognized both by Romanists and their oppo- 
 nents. The great centi'ai point of difference be- 
 tween them and ourselves may perhaps be thus 
 stated : — They hold that the invisible, spiritual 
 church grows out of the visible and organic. We, 
 on the other hand, hold that the visible church grows 
 up from the invisible. According to their view, the 
 outward church is first, and then the inward. Ac- 
 cording to our view, the inward is first, and then the 
 outward. Much depends on the right solution of 
 this problem. Which of these churches is the pa- 
 rent, and which the child ? 
 
 Think for a moment : what is the order of nature ? 
 Do men first profess and then believe, or do they 
 first believe and then profess ? Do they first seek 
 and then desire, or do they not first desire and then 
 seek? Which is the natural order? Did Chris- 
 tianity begin outwardly and work inwardly, or 
 begin inwardly and work outwardly ? How did 
 Christianity actually commence ? What is the his- 
 torical fact on this subject? 
 
 It commenced with the preaching of Jesus. He 
 sowed the good seed. Those who embraced his 
 7 
 
74 THE INCORRUPTIBLE WORD : 
 
 doctrine became his disciples. These disciples, 
 having multiplied, were called Christians. These 
 Christians constituted the Christian community, — 
 the church. They associated together ; they loved 
 one another ; they became a brotherhood ; they held 
 assemblies for religious and devotional exercises. 
 In process of time they grew into organized com- 
 munities, formal churches. And the question is, 
 Did these formal churches make the Christians of 
 which they were composed, or did the Christians 
 make the churches ? If the latter were the fact, 
 then the church was not first, nor is she properly 
 the mother of all Christians. The first disciples 
 became Christians by inward conviction, not by 
 outward conformity. Christianity made converts ; 
 and out of these came forth, and grew up, the out- 
 ward, the visible, the organic church. 
 
 Do Romanists assert that the first Christian 
 Church consisted of the apostles, and was consti- 
 tuted such by the Lord Jesus Christ himself? This, 
 however, is an assumption. He commissioned 
 them to preach the gospel ; but we have no intima- 
 tion that he instituted them a formal church. They, 
 together with those who joined them, soon acted as 
 a church, as an organized body. But this outward 
 church consisted of materials which previously ex- 
 isted. Materials are always first, and then the com- 
 position. The inward church preceded the outward. 
 The living stones of which the Christian temple 
 consists had a being before the temple itself. 
 
 Do they allege that Jesus Christ alone, when 
 he commenced the ministry, was himself the 
 
TRADITION : THE INFALLIBLE CHURCH. 75 
 
 church, and that those converted by his word be- 
 came members with him? — that as Christ alone 
 first constituted the church, so, in the sequel, the 
 church is the Christ upon earth ; — that the church, 
 having received the promised gift of the Holy 
 Ghost, the Comforter, the Paraclete, to be with it 
 and in it to the end of the world, acts the part, and 
 supplies the place, of the Saviour himself? Now, if 
 we admit all this, it does not evince nor prove 
 that the outward and visible church precedes the 
 inward and invisible. Jesus existed as a man be- 
 fore he was anointed with the Holy Ghost and with 
 power to be the Messiah. His mind was first illu- 
 minated on the great subject of his heavenly mis- 
 sion. His thoughts grasped the purpose, the plan, 
 and the end, before he commenced the outward 
 work. The thing was in him before its manifesta- 
 tion came forth from him. 
 
 Indeed, this is the order of nature. There must 
 be thought before its expression ; there must be will 
 before there can be voluntary action ; there must 
 be learning before there can be literature; there 
 must be a teacher before there can be pupils or 
 schools. Schools did not originate learning, but 
 learning originated schools. The latter promote and 
 propagate learning, but they could not commence 
 it. So, likewise, the outward church extends and 
 perpetuates Christianity ; but it is not the real and 
 primitive parent of it. 
 
 The question returns upon us. What is the 
 church ? We mean the church absolute and catho- 
 lic. And our answer is, that the visible church con- 
 
76 THE INCORRUPTIBLE WORD: 
 
 sists of all those among men who profess faith in 
 Jesus Christ ; and the invisible church consists of 
 all those professors whose hearts and lives accord to 
 their profession. A church which does not embrace 
 in its pale all Christians of every name, sect, and 
 nation, cannot be catholic. It is a misnomer when 
 it is so called. And as there is now no ecclesiastical 
 organization which includes all Christians, there 
 can, of course, be no organic Catholic Church in the 
 world ; and, as we have just said, it is a misnomer 
 so to describe it. 
 
 If the definition and distinction, above made, be 
 just, they cast light on the central question of prio- 
 rity relative to the visible and the invisible church. 
 There must be an inward before there can be an 
 outward ; a manifestation. The essential elements 
 of the true church are faith, reverence, uprightness, 
 benevolence, the love of truth and of goodness. 
 These are spiritual, and belong to the inward man. 
 Christianity must have first existed in the mind of 
 Christ. It was next developed in him ; then in those 
 who became his disciples. It was a collective, but 
 not an organic, body. Eventually it assumed an 
 organization ; but this was not essential to its be- 
 ing; still less was any particular form of organism. 
 There might be one organism in this place, and 
 another organism in that place. It is not the form 
 of godliness, but the power or spirit of it, which 
 constitutes its reality. 
 
 The visible church is the medium of tradition. 
 She educates her children ; communicates to them 
 her own sentiments, belief, customs, and character. 
 
tradition: the infallible church. 77 
 
 Thus the true doctrine of Christianity has been 
 preserved. But tradition has brought down errors 
 equally as truths. These are the tares of the field. 
 But they do not root out the wheat : the latter, all 
 of it, remains. It is overshadowed, choked, and 
 stinted in its growth ; but it is not killed out. There 
 is the essence of true Christian doctrine in the 
 Roman and the Greek Churches ; but it is mingled 
 with the doctrine of men. 
 
 Romanists claim for their church the attribute of 
 inerrability. The church, say they, cannot err. 
 They are compelled, however, to admit that indi- 
 viduals may err; that any individual — even the 
 holy pontiff who succeeds St. Peter — may err. 
 No individual is infallible. And Dr. Moelher com- 
 plains that Protestants have misrepresented Catho- 
 lics by imputing to them the doctrine of what he 
 terms "individualization." This doctrine he de- 
 voutly discards. But, in doing this. Dr. Moelher 
 virtually yields up the whole doctrine of the inen-a- 
 bility of the church. For the church consists of 
 individuals. Aside from individuals, the church is 
 nothing but an abstraction. It has no knowledge, 
 no judgment, no soul ; nothing but a name. If there 
 be not infallible members in the church, the attribute 
 of infallibility belongs not to it. For the collective 
 amount of aU that the church knows and believes 
 is the result of individual knowledge and belief. 
 
 It has been the doctrine of many Romanists, that 
 though the Pope might err, yet general councils 
 could not err in judgment in regard to any Chris- 
 tian doctrine. If so, then there must be a majority 
 7* 
 
78 
 
 THE INCORRUPTIBLE WORD '. 
 
 of individuals, of which the council is composed, 
 who are inerrable. And this must be made known 
 by the fact of their being the majority. But this 
 doctrine of the availability of the major number of 
 voices is the distinctive and efficient principle of 
 democratic governments. It is antimonarchical. 
 And monachists and autocrats have held it in devout 
 contempt. They allege that majorities have been 
 in the wrong as often as the opposing minorities. 
 And this allegation is, unquestionably, not far from 
 the truth. 
 
 It may now not be improper nor useless, in con- 
 clusion, to make up a brief summary of what has 
 been offered, or might be offered, in this discourse, 
 on the subject of the church, tradition, and the 
 incorruptible doctrine of Christianity. 
 
 1. The Catholic Church of Christ consists visibly 
 of all the professors of Christianity ; and spiritually 
 of all those professors who seek and strive to fulfil 
 the duties of their holy vocation. 
 
 2. The outward and visible church grows out of 
 the spiritual and invisible. It is its manifestation. 
 The spiritual is primary ; the external is secondary. 
 There could not be the latter without the former. 
 This underlies that, and is its basis and support. 
 There must be the spirit of mercy and alms-giving 
 in a people, before there wiU arise among them 
 humane and charitable societies. There must be 
 the spirit of philosophy in a nation, before there will 
 arise in it a " Royal Society," or a scientific " Na- 
 tional Academy." The body, in the order of nature, 
 always precedes the shadow and the portrait. 
 
tradition: the infallible church. 79 
 
 3. There is but one sense in which the attribute 
 of infallibility can be predicated of the Christian 
 church. It is this: The essence of the doctrine 
 which Christ taught can never be lost. It is the 
 "incorruptible seed of the word, which liveth and 
 abideth for ever." It is the leaven in the meal, 
 which ceases not until it leavens the whole of it. 
 The truth of this fact stands on the adaptation of 
 the doctrine of Christ to the moral and religious 
 nature and wants of man. The seed of the word, 
 when once caught, fosters its roots so deep that it 
 never can be eradicated. It is too important, too 
 interesting, ever to be given up or lost. If some 
 individuals lose it, others will not. And those who 
 possess, win communicate and transmit it to others ; 
 and thus they secure its perpetuity. 
 
 4. Though the good seed of the word is perpetu- 
 ated, yet it is not in its original purity. The enemy 
 sows tares in the field ; and these tares propagate 
 themselves side by side with the wheat. Tradition 
 hands down as many errors as — and probably 
 more, too, than — truths. Long and general tradi- 
 tion is no adaquate evidence of a doctrine that it 
 is true. " To the law and to the testimony : if it 
 accord not with these, there is no light in it." 
 
 Most of the great errors that have obtained a place 
 in the vehicle of tradition can be historically traced. 
 Such is the fact in regard to the doctrines of the 
 Trinity ; the piacular atonement ; the federal char- 
 acter of the fall and the recovery ; the millennium, 
 and the supremacy of St. Peter. Romanists allege 
 that these doctrines have been transmitted by unin- 
 
80 THE INCORRUPTIBLE WORD: 
 
 terrupted tradition from Christ himself. But their 
 f)osition is assumed and gratuitous. It is an un- 
 warranted assumption; and not only assumptive, 
 but false. For it can be evinced from authentic 
 history, that there has been a time, since the ascen- 
 sion of Christ, when these doctrines were not recog- 
 nized by Christians. 
 
 5. The claim of inerrability for any individual, 
 or for any denomination of Christians, is presump- 
 tuous and incredible. WiU Romanists themselves 
 name the individual or the individuals who were 
 inerrable in then- faith and opinions ? WUl they 
 affirm that St. Athanasius, or St. Augustine, or St. 
 Bernard, or Thomas Aquinas, or Duns Scotus, were 
 infallible men ? And, if they were not such, who 
 were ? And if no individuals were perfectly sound 
 in the faith, then surely the community to which 
 they belonged could not have been inerrable. 
 
 6. Among all the numerous Christian denomina- 
 tions which now exist, or which have existed, no 
 one of them can justly claim pre-eminence above all 
 others in point of true doctrine. They may make 
 the claim, but can they duly support it ? For how 
 can such a claim be duly sustained ? Only by one 
 test ; the one given by our Lord Jesus Christ : " By 
 their fraits ye shall know them." This is the 
 rule. 
 
 The question, therefore, is this : What denomina- 
 tion is there, or has there been, in Christendom, 
 which clearly and decisively excels all others in 
 the graces and virtues, the duties and the righte- 
 ousness, of the religion of Chiist? Our Saviour 
 
tradition: the infallible church. 81 
 
 said, " Let your light so shine before others, that 
 they may see your good works and glorify your 
 heavenly Father." Now, whose light shines con- 
 fessedly the sti-ongest ? Do the Romanists exhibit 
 a stronger light than the Protestants ? — the Epis- 
 copists than the Presbyterians ? — the Calvinists 
 than the Arminians? — the Orthodox than the Uni- 
 tarians ? All these denominations have their light ; 
 and doubtless their light is severally in proportion 
 to the measure of truth in their several doctrines. 
 And undoubtedly their lights are not all equal in 
 their lustre. But the difference is not so palpable as 
 to be generally acknowledged. And the plain infer- 
 ence is; that the true church of Christ is not confined 
 to any order or sect of Christians. Christianity 
 existed pure only in the mind of Christ. In aU 
 Christian denominations, a measure of it is appre- 
 hended, but not perfectly. But which of them 
 possesses the most ? They who have the best light? 
 But whose is the best light ? That which manifests 
 the most of that charity which is not puffed up, and 
 seeketh not her own ; rejoicing not in iniquity, but in 
 the truth. Where is there most of the benignity and 
 gentleness of Christ ? Brethren, be not puffed up 
 one against another. Judge nothing before the 
 time, until the Lord come, and make manifest the 
 counsels of all hearts; and then shall every man 
 and every sect have their deserved judgment and 
 due praise from God. 
 
82 
 
 THE EEAL AND THE APPARENT IN 
 BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 
 
 "Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.' 
 John, vii. 24. 
 
 A CAUTION against hasty and precipitate judgment ; 
 a judgment predicated on partial premises, on nar- 
 row views, on appearance, on first impressions. 
 
 Such judgments are often formed and long re- 
 tained. They become popular opinions, obstinate 
 prejudices. Such was the fact among the Jews. 
 Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. But the Jews 
 rejected this claim. And why ? Because he was 
 not a monarch. The prophets had predicted the 
 Messiah as a royal personage ; as a majestic king ; 
 as a strenuous conqueror, who should wield an iron 
 sceptre, and crush all refractory and rebellious na- 
 tions. This judgment, however, was predicated on 
 partial views, on appearance ; for the prophets 
 had also made other representations. They had de- 
 scribed the Messiah as an instructor ; as a reformer; 
 as a preacher of good news ; of deliverance to the 
 captives, the prisoners, the oppressed, the meek of 
 the earth. Now, which of these representations 
 
THE EEAL AND THE APPARENT, ETC. 83 
 
 was the most reliable ? Which was the real and the 
 true, and which only the apparent and the seeming ? 
 To determine this question, reason and considera- 
 tion were requisite. Comparison and reasoning 
 should be instituted; time for observation should 
 be taken. It was hazardous to come to a hasty 
 conclusion. A judgment formed on first impres- 
 sions, on appearance, might be altogether eiToneous. 
 And, indeed, such was the judgment which the 
 Jews passed upon the claim of Jesus to be the Mes- 
 siah. They did not take into consideration the vast 
 superiority of a moral Messiah over a poUtieal one. 
 The former acts by moral force; by dispensing 
 knowledge, persuasion, enlightenment, and hope; 
 by giving an example, a model. The latter depends 
 upon the sword, upon law, upon the infliction of 
 penalties, upon the stocks, the prison, and the gibbet. 
 And which of these Messiahs does reason decide 
 will be the most efficient and successful ? Appear- 
 ance is in favor of the military and political one; 
 yet reason and consideration will determine in 
 favor of the moral. And this, doubtless, is the righte- 
 ous judgment. 
 
 The Bible is pervaded by what, in loose language, 
 we may call two theologies, two doctrines. The one 
 may be described as the seeming and the apparent ; 
 the other, as the real and the true. The difference 
 between them, and the relation which one sustains 
 to the other, may be illustrated by certain facts in 
 nature, especially in astronomy. The sun and 
 the moon, for instance, to appearance are of equal 
 size, and at about the same distance from the 
 
84 THE HEAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 earth. This is the apparent fact ; but the real fact 
 is far different. The sun is more than a million 
 times larger than the moon, and many thousand 
 times farther from the earth. To appearance the 
 earth is vastly larger than the sun ; but in truth the 
 sun is incomparably larger than the earth. And it 
 was natural, and even inevitable, that mankind 
 should, for many ages, have entertained erroneous 
 impressions on this subject. They had not made 
 the observations requisite to correct appearances. A 
 long lapse of time was requisite, and the true result 
 could not be forcibly hastened. As nature contains 
 and presents all the phenomena necessary to the 
 construction of a true system of astronomy, so like- 
 wise we assume that the Bible contains all the 
 elements of a true theology. But in neither case 
 is the system made out to our hands. It must, in 
 both cases, be made out by patient study and care- 
 ful observation. We will now proceed to take 
 notice of certain instances of the general fact now 
 brought before us. 
 
 I. The Bible seems to represent God as liable to 
 similar passions and infirmities as men. It is de- 
 clared of him that he repented that he had made 
 man on the earth ; also that he repented that he 
 had made Saul king over Israel. And his repent- 
 ance is described as being very deep, and inducing a 
 total change of conduct. " It repented God that he 
 had made man ; it grieved him to his very heart." 
 " And God said, I will destroy man whom I have 
 created." And he is represented as actually do- 
 ing it ; as sending a flood of waters, by which all 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 85 
 
 in whom was the breath of life perished, one single 
 family excepted. Such appeared to be the fact to 
 the men who survived the flood. The writer of the 
 book of Genesis stated what he believed, and what 
 his cotemporaries believed. They formed their 
 judgment on appearances. Tradition related that 
 the generation immediately before the flood had 
 become excessively vicious and corrupt, so that the 
 earth was filled with disorder and violence. And, 
 as God reversed his conduct toward man, it seemed 
 as if he was disappointed and angry ; for he seemed 
 to act as one filled with vexation and wrath. 
 
 There are many other passages which represent 
 God as subject to anger, and as saying that he 
 would not do as he had done, and as he intended to 
 do. But there are other scriptural passages which 
 correct these representations. It is declared of God 
 that he is not a man that he should repent ; that he 
 is of one mind ; that none can change him ; that the 
 thoughts of his heart are the same throughout all 
 generations ; that he changes not. And the ques- 
 tion now comes up. Which of these classes of pas- 
 sages is the true and reliable? And it must be 
 determined by the candid, enlightened, and unbi- 
 ased judgment of human reason. No other umpire 
 in the case is possible. 
 
 II. The Bible seems to teach the doctrine of Di- 
 vine predestination and particular providence ; and 
 this doctrine is and has been extensively entertained. 
 It is a tenet of what is called orthodox Christianity, 
 that " God hath foreordained whatsoever comes to 
 pass." It is believed that God's decrees are particu- 
 8 
 
86 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 lar ; that every single event is individually predeter- 
 mined ; that God has plans as men have, combin- 
 ing a process of means to accomplish a particular 
 end. And there are many accounts given in the 
 Scriptures which seem to confirm this doctrine. 
 Such is the story of Joseph, of Ruth, of David, of 
 Esther, and many others. 
 
 But there are also passages of Scripture which 
 give a different view of Divine Providence. It is 
 declared that all things come alike unto all ; to the 
 good and the bad ; to the clean and the unclean ; 
 to the sober and to the profane. Here a general 
 providence is recognized. The sun shines for the 
 benefit of every man indiscriminately. The showers 
 fall on the grounds of the righteous and the unright- 
 eous without distinction. The thunderbolt is as 
 likely to strike the saint as the sinner. The pesti- 
 lential malaria poisons the breath and the blood of 
 the innocent and the guilty. The following is a re- 
 markable passage : " I know that whatsoever God 
 doeth, it shall be for ever ; nothing can be taken from 
 it, nor any thing added to it." What is the sense of 
 it ? Does it not plainly signify, that God instituted 
 his whole providence at once and in the beginning ; 
 that it is general and unchangeable ; that it never 
 needs or receives any new modification, revision, or 
 interference ; that God has no particular purposes, 
 no particular plans ; that it is one perfect whole, 
 and contains no combination of means to particu- 
 lar ends ; that it works right on, regardless of single 
 and separate events as such ; that God has one 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 87 
 
 great purpose, and does one great work ; and that 
 no alteration would render it better. 
 
 God's general providence brings to pass many 
 coincidences which seem to have been premedi- 
 tated. Such they were in the case of Joseph and 
 his brethren. He himself believed them to have 
 been special appointments of God ; that God even 
 instigated his brethren to hate him, to intend his 
 murder, and finally to sell him for a slave. David, 
 also, believed that his escapes and triumphs were 
 ordered and accomplished by the Lord. The Is- 
 raelites believed that their national fortunes, both 
 the disastrous and prosperous, were the work of 
 God. Yet, when we examine their history in 
 detail, every particular event — miracles alone ex- 
 cepted — wlU be found to be within the compass 
 of a divine general providence. The Israelites 
 were about four hundred years in conquering the 
 land and the nations of Canaan ; sometimes gain- 
 ing, and sometimes losing, ground. Thus the colo- 
 nies from Egypt and Phoenicia established them- 
 selves in Greece ; and the colonies from Greece 
 established themselves in Italy. All within the 
 compass of God's general providence. 
 
 There is an order and sequence in aU providen- 
 tial phenomena. Every event has its history, which 
 might be written, had we the requisite knowledge. 
 The fortunate and the unfortunate occurrences are 
 alike in this respect. We once heard a Doctor of 
 Divinity commence an ordination- sermon with the 
 following sentence : " For several thousand years 
 God has been preparing the way for the solemnities 
 
88 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 of this day." He intended the ordination then to 
 be solemnized. But his remark was as true in re- 
 pect to every other event of that day, and of all days, 
 as it was in respect to the ordination. One occur- 
 rence is preparatory to another ; and this is equally 
 the fact in regard both to the disasters and to the 
 blessings of life. 
 
 The general providence of God may, and doubt- 
 less does, accomplish all the good there is in the 
 world. No one can prove the contrary. What, 
 then, could be gained by having a particular provi- 
 dence ? Could it have prevented the dreadful ship- 
 wrecks, explosions, and other accidents, w^hich have 
 recently occurred? Not at all. What has been 
 done cannot be undone. 
 
 III. The Bible seems to teach the doctrine of the 
 divine institution of devotional, piacular, and vica- 
 rious sacrifices. The custom of offering sacrifices is 
 of immemorial antiquity. At first, and for a long 
 time, they appear to have been purely devotional ; 
 mere services of homage rendered to God ; acts of 
 divine worship. The first conception of them was 
 probably suggested by the custom of bringing dona- 
 tions of good things to their prince. In early times, 
 before the practice of taxation came into use, the 
 prince was, in part, supported by voluntary gifts. 
 There is an intimation of this in the history of Saul, 
 the son of Kish. It is related that there were some 
 men of Belial who said, " How shall this man serve 
 us ?" And then it is added, " They brought him no 
 presents.'' These voluntary gifts were acknowledg- 
 ments of the prince's sovereignty and justice; they 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY, 89 
 
 were expressive of loyalty and respect. And if they 
 thus honored their prince, why not do a similar 
 service to their Divine Sovereign and Benefactor? 
 Why not honor him with gifts ? And though he 
 had no need, no use, for them, yet they should thus 
 manifest their gratitude and piety. They would first 
 consecrate them to him, and then destroy them 
 that they might not be put to any secular use. It 
 was considered an enormous sacrilege to make a 
 secular use of any devoted thing. When the Cris- 
 seans ploughed up and sowed the consecrated field 
 about the temple of Delphos, a thrill of horror is 
 said to have seized all the states of Greece, which 
 forthwith united in waging an exterminating war 
 upon that oflFending people. 
 
 From being purely devotional, one kind of sacri- 
 fice came to be considered as piacular ; as expiatory 
 of the sin of the offerer. These were called burnt- 
 offerings for sin ; and it was believed that without 
 the shedding of blood there could be no remission. 
 And, after the introduction of Christianity, it came 
 to be a matter of belief that the death of Christ 
 was a real sacrifice ; that all the sin-offerings under 
 the Mosaical law were types of this sacrifice, and 
 prophetical of it. And this doctrine has been 
 accepted and accounted orthodox in the Christian 
 Church, in almost every century of its existence. 
 It has even been regarded as the pivot on which 
 hinges the very door of salvation. It has been 
 believed that the sacrificial death of Christ removed 
 an obstacle on the part of God, which prevented 
 him from making the overture of pardon to men 
 
90 
 
 aHE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 on condition of their repentance. Christ is said 
 by his death to have made an atonement for 
 the sins of men, and that this was the chief pur- 
 pose for which he appeared in the world. The 
 doctrine of the atonement, in this given sense of 
 tjje word, has been made the basis of what has 
 been called the new covenant, — the scheme of sal- 
 vation. It paid the debt which separated God from 
 men; it cancelled the sinner's liability to the de- 
 mands of divine justice, and made him a prisoner 
 of hope. 
 
 Our view, however, of the subject is different. 
 We regard the w^hole institution of sacrifice as 
 being a mistake from beginning to end ; as being 
 one of those human inventions which men have 
 sought out and vainly relied upon as instrumentali- 
 ties of good. To pronounce this whole system of 
 religious sacrifice a mistake, a mere human inven- 
 tion, groundless, and destitute of authority from 
 God, wUl be thought to be a bold and even a blas- 
 phemous position. We therefore proceed to assign 
 the reasons which have brought us to this conclu- 
 sion. And — 
 
 First, The consideration of the thing itself. What 
 is a religious sacrifice ? It is something first devo- 
 ted to God, and then destroyed. The devoted thing 
 must be something choice, good, the best of its kind : 
 a lamb or a bullock ; fine flour, mingled with oil ; 
 turtle-doves and young pigeons ; wine and incense. 
 These were good things and useful to men. Men 
 have need of them ; but God has not. They might 
 be useful to the former, but cannot be so to the lat- 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 91 
 
 ter. And is there any fitness or propriety in this 
 thing ? Can God desire it, or take any pleasure in 
 it? Can it please him that good things should 
 be wasted ? — that they should be diverted from the 
 use for which he designed them? 
 
 The fact that sacrifices are improper and worth- 
 less w^as perceived and declared by many of the He- 
 brew prophets ; by Isaiah, Micah, Jeremiah, and the 
 author of the 40th, the 50th, and the 51st Psalms. 
 They made the following avowals : " Sacrifice and 
 burnt-offerings thou dost not desire ; in burnt-offer- 
 ings and offerings for sin thou hast no pleasure. 
 Then said I, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God ! 
 Yea, thy law is within my heart." " I will not re- 
 prove thee for the neglect of sacrifices : they have 
 been continually before me. I would have no lamb 
 from the flock, nor he-goat out of thy stall ; for all the 
 beasts and the cattle are mine. Will I eat the flesh 
 of bulls or drink the blood of goats ? Offer unto 
 God thanksgiving, and pay thy vows unto the Most 
 High ; and call upon me in the day of trouble, and 
 I will answer thee, and thou shalt glorify me." 
 
 David, while smarting under compunction for 
 his great sin, and when he needed sacrifices as 
 much as man ever did, — provided there were any 
 particular efficacy in them, — said, "Thou desirest 
 not sacrifice, else would I give it. The sacrifices 
 of the Lord are a broken heart and a contrite spirit. 
 Create in me, O God! a clean heart, and renew 
 within me a right spirit." This was the thing he 
 needed. It would profit him, and be accepted of 
 God. 
 
92 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 The prophet Micah writes in the same style of 
 sentiment. " Wherewith shall I come before the 
 Lord? Shall I come with burnt-offerings and 
 calves of one year old ? Will the Lord be pleased 
 with thousands of lambs, and ten thousand rivers 
 of oU ? Shall I give my first-born for my transgres- 
 sion ; my own son for the sin of my soul ? " No : 
 such is not the right thing. " What doth the 
 Lord require of thee, but to do justly, to love mercy, 
 and to walk humbly with thy God ? " This is the 
 right thing. 
 
 The prophet Jeremiah, in the seventh chapter of 
 his book, goes so far as to deny the divine institu- 
 tion of sacrifices. " Thus saith the Lord, I spake 
 not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the 
 day when I brought them out of the land of Egypt, 
 concerning burnt-offerings and sacrifices ; but this 
 thing commanded I them, saying. Obey my voice, 
 and walk in all the ways that I have instructed 
 you, and it shall be well with you ; I will be your 
 God, and ye shall be my people." 
 
 We might adduce passages of similar import 
 from the prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel ; but for brevi- 
 ty's sake we omit them, and proceed to assign a 
 second reason. It is, that sacrifice makes no part 
 of C/iristianiti/. Our Lord Jesus Christ adopted 
 from the Old Testament all that was intrinsically 
 good. The Mosaic religion contained much that 
 was not intrinsically, but only relatively, good. Such 
 were all the ceremonies and outward forms. Our 
 Lord insisted only on those things which are good 
 of themselves ; things which implied real righteous- 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 93 
 
 ness. There was no real righteousness in the 
 various ablutions and sprinklings of the Mosaic 
 law ; therefore our Lord did not enjoin them. 
 There was no real righteousness in fasting, there- 
 fore he did not command it ; no real righteousness 
 in keeping the sabbath, therefore he did not incul- 
 cate it as a duty ; no real righteousness in offering 
 sacrifices, therefore he did not adopt that service 
 into his gospel. 
 
 Now, the very fact that sacrifices make no part 
 of Christianity is evidence that there never was 
 any intrinsic excellence in them. Had they been 
 good and efficacious in themselves, they would not 
 have been omitted and laid aside. You say, how- 
 ever, that they were laid aside because they ceased 
 to be prophetical; that they ceased to be of use 
 because their typical import had been fulfilled. 
 Our answer is, that they never were prophetical. 
 The Jews never regarded them as types. There is 
 no intimation in the Old Testament that they were 
 viewed in that light. The Jews did not expect 
 that their Messiah would be put to death. They 
 believed that he would live and reign in peace and 
 glory for ever, even for ever and ever. " We have 
 heard out of the law," said the disciples to Jesus, 
 "that Christ abideth for ever: how sayest thou, 
 then, that the Son of man must be lifted up ? "Who 
 is this Son of man ? " 
 
 That the Jewish sacrifices were not typical and 
 prophetical, appears plainly from the fact that the 
 death of Christ was not , a sacrifice, in the true, 
 common, and proper sense of the word. Every 
 
94 
 
 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 sacrifice was brought to the sanctuary, slain by 
 the priests, and its flesh burned on the altar. All 
 this was done solemnly ; as an act of religious wor- 
 ship; as a service rendered to God. But our Lord 
 was not put to death in this manner. He was not 
 brought into the sanctuary, slain by the priests, his 
 blood sprinkled and his flesh burned on the altar; 
 and all this done as a solemn religious service. The 
 circumstances of our Lord's death were totally 
 the reverse of all this. He was executed by soldiers 
 as a malefactor. His death was no more a proper 
 sacrifice than were the deaths of the two thieves 
 crucified with him. The apostle Paul, however, 
 calls it a sacrifice. And so are many things called 
 sacrifices which are not such in the true and proper 
 sense. A broken heart and a contrite spirit are 
 called sacrifices. So, likewise, doing good and com- 
 municating. But they are not such in a literal 
 sense. 
 
 Our Saviour, in all his discourses, never taught, 
 nor even recognized, what is now called the doctrine 
 of the atonement. He never spoke of his death as 
 being a sacrifice. He called himself a ransom for 
 many ; but a ransom is not a sacrifice. He said 
 also : " And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the 
 wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted 
 up." But the brazen serpent was not a sacrifice. 
 The doctrine of the atonement, in what is called 
 its orthodox sense, is not sustained by such expres- 
 sions. He said, " I am the good shepherd. The 
 good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep. I am 
 the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 95 
 
 known of mine ; and I lay down my life for the 
 sheep." In the death of a shepherd for the sake of 
 the sheep, there is nothing of the character of a 
 vicarious and expiatory sacrifice. While eating the 
 paschal supper, he said, " This bread is my body 
 which is given for you ; and this cup is my blood 
 which is shed for you, shed for many." But this does 
 not necessarily signify, that his body and blood were 
 given and shed in the way of expiation. There 
 are other ways in which one man gives his life and 
 his blood for the benefit of others. And, indeed, 
 there cannot probably, in the history of the world, be 
 found a single instance in which a man did die to 
 expiate the crimes of others. It is not the way by 
 which the guilt of misdeeds is removed, and penal 
 justice maintained. No government ever adopted 
 this principle. It is a perversion of the doctrine of 
 punishment. 
 
 If the doctrine of the atonement — so called — 
 be true ; if it be the basis and the nucleus of the 
 covenant of grace, as it is of the orthodox theology, 
 the silence of our Saviour on the subject is most 
 surprising and unaccountable. "Why did he not 
 announce it, and do it frequently and in strong 
 terms, as orthodox theologians have done ? There 
 can be but one satisfactory reason assigned : he did 
 not understand the doctrine ; it is not a truth. 
 
 The apostle Paul calls our Saviour a great high 
 priest ; a propitiation or mercy-seat ; a passover or 
 paschal lamb : but he did not intend that he was 
 such literally and properly. His death was a sacri- 
 fice in the same sense in which a broken heart, a 
 
96 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 contrite spirit, is a sacrifice. A penitent and a clean 
 heart is called a sacrifice, because it answers the 
 same purpose that a real sacrifice was believed to 
 accomplish : it procures reconciliation and accep- 
 tance with God. The Jews accounted their advan- 
 tages from the Mosaic law to be very great and 
 precious. The apostle Paul endeavored to persuade 
 them, that the very same advantages were found in 
 the gospel of Christ; they could obtain the same 
 assurance of divine mercy, the remission of sin, 
 justification unto eternal life ; that in the gospel 
 there is a propitiation, a sacrifice, a passover, an high 
 priest, a holy of holies ; not local and sensible as 
 in Judaism, but spiritual and real. He attaches 
 Jewisli names to Christian reafities. It is done on 
 the principle that what produces the same effect 
 may be called by the same name. 
 
 It is surprising that learned and sensible men 
 should affix such an unreasonable meaning to cer- 
 tain scriptural expressions ; that they should befieve, 
 when the apostles speak of the blood of Christ as 
 cleansing the believer's heart, and justifying him 
 before God, that the material blood of Christ is 
 intended. The thing is impossible. Material blood 
 has no efficacy to make the heart clean, or the per- 
 son righteous. It is the truth which produces purity, 
 and prepares the soul for righteousness and justifi- 
 cation. " Now ye are clean through the word which 
 I have preached unto you." " Sanctify them through 
 the truth : thy word is truth." " Sanctified by faith 
 which is in me." 
 
 We now proceed to give another reason why we 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 97 
 
 repudiate the doctrine that sacrifice is a divine in- 
 stitution. It is liable to the most atrocious abuse. 
 It leads not only to formality and superstition, but 
 to the most abominable cruelties and wickedness. 
 Its direct tendency is to human sacrifices ; to sancti- 
 fied murder and cannibalism. The practice will 
 not stop in common cases, until it has reached this 
 point. Nearly aU nations, not excepting even the 
 Jews, have immolated human victims. Abraham 
 lifted his son Isaac upon the altar. Jephthah offered 
 his daughter, his only chUd, a burnt-offering unto 
 the Lord. The Philistines, the Phcsnicians, the 
 Moabites, the Ammonites, the Carthaginians, the 
 Druids, whose worship prevailed over aU the North 
 of Ancient Europe, practised this horrid rite. But 
 the country in which it made its most horrifying 
 manifestation was Mexico in America. At the 
 time of the conquest of Mexico by the Spaniards 
 in the sixteenth century, they found the whole 
 A-ztec empire, as it were, reeking in the blood of 
 victimized men. In all the great cities, — and there 
 were hundreds of them, — there were some four, six, 
 eight, ten, or twelve temples. They were high, coni- 
 cal-shaped edifices, having, on the outside, winding 
 staircases leading to the upper floor, which was 
 an area of considerable space, protected by a balus- 
 trade on the parapet ; a great image of the war-god 
 standing on one side, and a large stone in the 
 centre, its upper surface smooth and a little convex. 
 Upon this stone the victim was stretched, naked, 
 and lying on his back. The high-priest then, with 
 a great sharp instrument, opened the side of the 
 
98 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 body, thrust in his hand, and tore out the heart and 
 lungs of the victim, and threw them at the foot of 
 the idol. The head was then cut off, and thrown 
 into a certain corner of the temple, whither also were 
 thrown the bones. The body was then served up 
 for the feast; men and women eating without 
 disgust the flesh of their own kind. Hundreds of 
 victims were sometimes thus disposed of at the 
 same festival. The Spaniards were struck with 
 horror at what they saw and found in these slaugh- 
 ter-temples : the quantity of heads and bones was 
 appalling. Mr. Prescott estimates the annual num- 
 ber of victims to have been as high as fifty thousand. 
 The whole land seemed to the Spaniards to be the 
 devil's territory, and a hell upon earth. Their reso- 
 lution was forthwith taken to put a stop to what 
 they called the worship of devils. As soldiers of 
 the Cross, they felt it to be their duty. They were 
 therefore decided and peremptory. They threw 
 down the idols, and cleansed the temples. The 
 Mexicans at first refused and resisted. But, when 
 they saw that their gods could not protect them- 
 selves, they gave up the contest, and quietly sub- 
 mitted, and soon cordially acquiesced, in having 
 the crucifix and the madonna take the place of their 
 idols, and the mass and holy water become sub- 
 stitutes for human blood and victims. And thus, in 
 the space of one year, the whole system of sacred 
 carnage was abolished throughout the wide extent 
 of the Mexican empire. 
 
 The fact of the broad prevalence of the custom 
 of immolating human victims has been urged as 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 99 
 
 an argument in favor of the doctrine of vicarious 
 sacrifice. It is maintained, that a sense of sin and 
 guilt must have sunk deep into the universal human 
 mind. It is assumed, that a feeling of guiltiness 
 before God must have moved men to offer sacri- 
 fices, and that this feeling must have been very 
 strong before it would compel them to make victims 
 of their own kind. But this argument is a gross 
 misrepresentation. It was not a deep sense of sin 
 and unworthiness that first moved men to offer gifts 
 to their Sovereign in heaven. It was gratitude for 
 past favors, and a desire to secure them for the 
 future. The Gentiles thought of no other way to 
 propitiate the gods but that of material sacrifices. 
 Hence they multiplied them, where they had some 
 doubts of the good-will of a particular deity. It 
 was to the god of war that human victims were 
 chiefly immolated. It was to Thor and Woden 
 that the Druids rendered this bloody homage. It 
 was to obtain relief in the extremity of a hard battle 
 turning against him, that " the king of Moab took 
 his own son, who should have reigned in his stead, 
 and offered him for a burnt-offering upon the wall." 
 2 Kings, iii. 27. All the human sacrifices in Mexico 
 were offered to the odious and terrible god of war. 
 It was believed that he gusted, and took great 
 pleasure in them. A sense of personal unworthi- 
 ness before the good God whose being they ac- 
 knowledged, though they rendered him no worship, 
 never touched their hearts. The Aztecs were not 
 worshippers, so much as sycophants, of the war-god. 
 They had poured out blood and eaten human flesh 
 
100 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 to such a degree, that theu* moral susceptibilities 
 were, in a manner, petrified. All their zeal and 
 ambition was for war. AH their religion consisted 
 in the worship of the grim deity of war. Nearly 
 all their prisoners taken in war were victimized and 
 devoured in their temples. It was not a sense of 
 sin and unworthiness, but, on the contrary, a desti- 
 tution of it, that loaded their altars with such 
 immense multitudes of human sacrifices. They 
 had become cruel by worshipping a cruel god. 
 
 We have now taken notice of three instances in 
 which the difference between the real and the appa- 
 rent in the Bible may be observed: the liability 
 of God to human infirmities and passions ; the 
 apparent testimony of the Bible to a particular 
 providence and predestination ; and the seeming 
 support which it gives to the divine authority of 
 material and piacular sacrifices. We intended to 
 illustrate several other instances. But our allotted 
 space is nearly exhausted. We must very briefly 
 and imperfectly give only one or two more. 
 
 Many passages of the Bible seem, and even pur- 
 port, to be prospective history. They are called 
 prophecies ; and some of them seem to have been 
 wonderfully fulfilled. A close attention, however, 
 will place the subject in a somewhat different light. 
 If a person were to undertake to write a real history 
 of, for instance, the Israelites, the Jews, the Egyp- 
 tians, the Tyrians, the Chaldeans, the Moabites, the 
 Idumeans ; and to write wholly from the biblical 
 prophecies; the writer, having no other light to 
 guide him, would manifestly realize but very little 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 101 
 
 success. In regard to the Israelites and the Jews, 
 he would, doubtless, state that they endured a long 
 dispersion under the Chaldean monarchy, but from 
 it, in due time, were gathered and restored to the 
 land and cities of their fathers; that they should 
 rapidly augment in numbers, increase in wealth, 
 grow in power, until they should overshadow all 
 surrounding nations, and even every land and peo- 
 ple; that Jerusalem would become the metropolis 
 of the world ; and the temple on Mount Zion would 
 receive rich offerings, bullocks, lambs, gold, incense, 
 and myrrh, from the very ends of the earth. He 
 would state these things with great confidence, 
 because they are so often and explicitly declared by 
 the prophets. This history would contain but very 
 little truth. And his attempt to write a history of 
 Tyre, of Egypt, of Idumea, and of Moab, could be 
 attended with little better success. And suppose 
 further, that he should undertake to write a history 
 of the fortunes of the Christian Church, taking the 
 book of Revelation for the basis of his story, but 
 having no historical lights for his guidance, what 
 would he relate ? He would, doubtless, affirm that 
 Pagan Rome, the Babylon of the Apocalypse, con- 
 tinued to persecute the church of Christ as long as 
 she existed; that Rome feU, as it were, by inches, 
 under the severe and special judgments of God, 
 until she sunk like a millstone in the midst of the 
 sea. He would write all this very confidently, be- 
 cause it is so explicitly and strongly declared in the 
 Revelation of St. John the divine. He would have 
 no idea that Rome ever became a Christian state, 
 
 9* 
 
102 TPE REAL AND THE APPARENT 
 
 and that a Christian bishop succeeded to the throne 
 of the Caesars. 
 
 In regard to biblical prophecies, the apparent and 
 real are different and distinct. We give but one 
 more instance, — the two doctrines, of eternal dam- 
 nation on the one hand, and of universal salvation 
 on the other. Among the proof-texts in support of 
 the latter doctrine, are the following : " The Son of 
 man shall send forth his angels, and shall gather 
 out of the kingdom all things that offend and do 
 iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace. There 
 shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." " The 
 Lord Jesus shall descend from heaven in flaming 
 fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God 
 and obey not the gospel of his Son ; who shaU be 
 punished with everlasting destruction from the pres- 
 ence of the Lord and the glory of his power." 
 " And whosoever's name was not found written in 
 the book of life, was cast into a lake of fire ; this is 
 the second death." " And these shall go away into 
 everlasting punishment." These passages do ap- 
 parently declare and sustain the position of the 
 interminable torments of the reprobate portion of 
 mankind. 
 
 On the other side are adduced such passages as 
 the following : " And I, if I be lifted up from the 
 earth, will draw aU men unto me." " Thou art the 
 Christ, the Saviour of the world." " As in Adam 
 all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive." " Our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in 
 heaven and earth is named." " That at the name of 
 Jesus every knee should bow, and every tongue con- 
 
IN BIBLICAL THEOLOGY. 103 
 
 fess, of things in heaven and in the earth, and things 
 under the earth." "Gather together all things in 
 him." " The Head of all principalities and powers." 
 Dr. Tholuck, of Germany, a celebrated professor 
 in one of the Universities, in a conversation, a 
 very few years ago, with Rev. Dr. Sears, of Massa- 
 chusetts, stated that the Bible-argument on each 
 side of the question seemed to be equal, the lan- 
 guage on both sides being strong and explicit ; and 
 that, if he must rely only on the language of Scrip- 
 ture, without considering the character of the doc- 
 trines asserted, he should be perplexed, not knowing 
 which doctrine to accept. " But," continued he, 
 " when I make use of my reason, my moral nature, 
 I do not hesitate a moment. I know that words 
 and expressions in the Bible may be justly under- 
 stood differently from their literal significance. My 
 reason is to judge which is the best doctrine ; which 
 is most accordant with the true character of God ; 
 which does him the most honor. And, in doing 
 this, I have no hesitancy or misgivings. My judg- 
 ment is fixed, that Christ is the actual Saviour of 
 all men." The one is the real Bible-doctrine ; the 
 other, only the apparent. The rule which we have 
 laid down for the determination of conflicting doc- 
 trines contained in the Scriptures is the only one 
 that can be safe and reliable. Enlightened and un- 
 biased reason must decide all such questions. If 
 some texts of Scripture represent God as instigat- 
 ing men to the commission of sin, there are others 
 which declare the direct contrary ; and reason can 
 easily decide which doctrine is the real and true, 
 
104 THE REAL AND THE APPARENT, ETC. 
 
 and which the apparent but unreal. Nor is it 
 strange that such discrepancies should be found in 
 the Bible. The writers of the different books of 
 the Holy Scriptures were but children in scientific 
 knowledge. They were unacquainted with the 
 principles of close analysis and criticism. And 
 such writers will fall inevitably into more or less 
 of mistake and self-inconsistency. We must read 
 and interpret them from the stand-point of their 
 own times. Thus we read other writers of olden 
 time. It is doing justice both to them and to 
 ourselves. 
 
105 
 
 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 " The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream ; and he that hath my 
 word, let him declare my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat ? saith 
 the Lord." — Jer. xxiil. 28. 
 
 " Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth from 
 the mouth of God." — Matt. iv. 4. 
 
 If we should contemplate aU the opinions, beliefs, 
 and cognitions of mankind, as if they were mate- 
 rial things, the aggregate of them might resemble a 
 great heap of unwinnowed grain, wheat and chaff" 
 commingled together. But the wheat and the chaff" 
 may be separated by winnowing and fanning ; and 
 so may the other heap of truths and errors. And 
 it is the office of the human understanding and 
 conscience to do this work, — to separate the true 
 from the false; the chaff from the wheat. We 
 may next contemplate the heap as separated into 
 three parcels : one containing pure wheat, the sym- 
 bol of known truths; another consisting of chaff", 
 the symbol of acknowledged errors; and a third 
 consisting of the remains of the original heap, 
 wheat and chaff yet unseparated. This may be 
 the symbol of the dreams. A dream may be true 
 to nature and fact, or it may be untrue. Its charac- 
 ter, as true or false, will, or may be, determined by 
 
106 
 
 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 observation, trial, and experience ; and the various 
 opinions, beliefs, and theories entertained by men, 
 may and will, in due time and by fair and assidu- 
 ous investigation, be resolved into their proper cha- 
 racters as either true or false. 
 
 All truths are, originally, in God ; all known 
 truths have been revealed of God to men. Now, 
 all truth came from God. The mode of revelation 
 is not essential. If known, they have been revealed. 
 They are God's word ; they constitute the food for 
 man's higher and true life. " He doth not live by 
 bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth 
 from the mouth of God doth man live." Deut. viii. 3. 
 
 We have now before us the three parcels or cate- 
 gories : one consisting of known truths, — words of 
 God ; another consisting of known falsehoods, 
 though once beUeved to be truths ; and a thkd 
 consisting of opinions now believed by some, yet 
 disbelieved by others, and whose real character is 
 not yet determined. We shall attempt to take 
 some imperfect survey of this field of human be- 
 liefs, opinions, and cognitions ; and, though we 
 can do but Little, it may not be altogether unpro- 
 fitable. 
 
 The first category is that of known truths, — the 
 revealed words of God. Though many things are 
 uncertain and unknown, though doubt and incerti- 
 tude pervade a large portion of the hemisphere of 
 human thought, yet some things may be regarded 
 as certain. Otherwise, man's intellect would be of 
 no use to him. For it is man's cognitive faculty ; 
 it is the organ of knowledge. As the eye is the 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 107 
 
 organ of sight, and the ear the organ of sound ; as 
 the feet are the faculty for walking, and the hands 
 the faculty for working; so is the human under- 
 standing the organ of knowledge. These several 
 organs accomplish their purpose. Man can really 
 see, and hear, and walk, and work. Though his 
 eyes and his ears sometimes make mistakes, yet 
 these mistakes are the exception, not the rule. 
 
 But what are some of those truths which may 
 be regarded as known, fixed, certain ? 
 
 1. The reality of the material world. We mean 
 the world of phenomena, the sensible world, the 
 world of sense; including all things that can be 
 seen, heard, or felt : the sun, the moon, the clouds, 
 showers, storms, sea and land, mountains and 
 plains, plants and trees, reptUes and fishes, birds 
 and beasts, little children and grown men. It was 
 once held by certain learned men, that the ma- 
 terial world had no objective existence ; that it 
 existed only in idea; that its being was whoUy 
 subjective ; entirely in the man who thinks that he 
 sees the sun, hears the wind, feels the softness of 
 velvet and the hardness of rock. But this skepti- 
 cism is now extinct ; repudiated by those who once 
 professed it. The evidence of the reality of the 
 objective world is irrefragable ; for what one man 
 sees, another man also sees. The same figure, the 
 same color, the same size, the same position ; and 
 all this invariably, with the exception of a very few 
 cases of illusion from diseased organs of sense. If 
 the doctrine of a merely ideal world had been true, 
 then, of course, there never was such an event as 
 
108 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 creation. For, according to this doctrine, no world 
 existed at all until there were men to have an idea 
 of it. But we now have the history of the creation 
 of the world, written in the strata, the minerals, the 
 petrifactions, the fossils of the earth ; and it is as- 
 certained that the earth must have existed many 
 thousand years before the birth of the human race. 
 It may, therefore, be laid down as a fixed fact, an 
 indubitable and certain truth, that the material and 
 phenomenal world is a reality. This is one certain 
 truth. 
 
 2. The reality of an inward, invisible, and spiri- 
 tual world. We see, for example, such things as a 
 bud expanding into a flower ; the flower giving 
 birth to unripe fruit, and this growing into full size 
 and ripeness. Now, there must be something in 
 that flower which we cannot see ; something be- 
 sides color, shape, and tangibility ; something which 
 we cannot see nor feel nor smell ; something which 
 caused its being, which made it generate the unripe 
 fruit, and this to grow and to ripen. "We see that 
 the grass and the trees grow : there must be some 
 power in them which makes them to grow. We 
 see the water running in the rivers : there must 
 be some invisible power which makes it run. We 
 see that day and night succeed each other : there 
 must be something which causes this succession. 
 We perceive a circle of constant changes in the phe- 
 nomenal world ; cycles of revolutions in the hosts 
 of the heavens ; rotations of changes on the face of 
 the earth ; winter and summer ; seed-time and har- 
 vest; growth and decay; the circulation of the 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 109 
 
 waters ; one generation passing out of the world, 
 and another generation coming into it ; and this in 
 its turn giving place to a subsequent one. Now, 
 there must be some great, mighty power on which 
 all this multiform and varied movement depends. 
 No change can take place without an adequate 
 power to produce it. And this power must be in- 
 telligent. It has a purpose in what it does. It is 
 constantly aiming at ends, and accomplishing them. 
 And these ends are desirable and good. The 
 power, therefore, which produces them must be 
 benevolent and good. And as all the innumerable 
 movements in the world are manifestly unitary, 
 parts of one great whole, it results that the great 
 Almighty Power which causes them must also be 
 unitary, — be one. We hold it, therefore, as a fixed 
 fact, as a truth of absolute science and certainty 
 that there is a God, and that God is one; one 
 Divine Intelligence, one Divine Will ; and that this 
 one God is holy, benevolent, good ; that he is also 
 omnipresent, being neither confined to any one 
 place, nor excluded from any other. This is an- 
 other certain truth. 
 
 3. That all the work of God is done in the way 
 of order. It is manifest that the whole world is a 
 connected and compact system ; that a great law 
 of universal analogy runs through the whole ; that 
 the forces which actuate it, act in a continued line 
 or chain, every link of which is connected by the 
 law of sequence and dependence ; so that, when 
 some parts are known, others may be safely pre- 
 sumed. One phenomenon follows another as its 
 
 10 
 
110 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 result; or it precedes another as its cause. God 
 makes day and night ; but he does it in the way of 
 order, and constructively. The presence of the sun 
 makes the day ; the absence of the sun occasions 
 the night. God produces the various generations 
 of vegetables, animals, and men. But he does it in 
 the way of order. Each plant, animal, and man is 
 an outbirth from others which preceded it. Every 
 individual has a parent or parents; and not only 
 individuals, but whole kingdoms of nature, sustain 
 a similar relation. The vegetable kingdom is an 
 outbirth from the mineral; the animal kingdom, 
 from the vegetable ; and the human kingdom, from 
 the animal. The human could not exist alone ; it 
 stands upon the animal and vegetable kingdoms 
 which underlie it; and these upon the mineral 
 which underlies them ; and this upon the chaotic 
 earth which preceded it. 
 
 When we see the rain falling in copious showers, 
 we know that the ground will be saturated; that 
 the streams will swell, and that the fountains wiU 
 be filled. When we see the sun running low 
 toward the South, we know that winter is at hand, 
 and that there will be frost, ice, and snow. When 
 we see the sun rising high in its meridian, we know 
 that summer is near, and that there will be growth 
 in the pastures, in the fields, and in the forests. 
 When we perceive that the fields are well cultivated, 
 we foresee that there will be a good harvest. When 
 we witness that a people are industrious, temperate, 
 and discreet, we feel assured that they are growing 
 in prosperity and riches. And we arrive at these 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. Ill 
 
 conclusions, because the law of order lies at the 
 foundation of all nature and of all providence. All 
 nature consists ultimately in certain materials and 
 forces ; and these are uniform, unchangeable in 
 their substance, tendency, and direction. Fire al- 
 ways produces the same effects when brought into 
 the same relations. And so does water; and so 
 does wind ; and so likewise gravitation, electricity, 
 and magnetism. It is within the power of man to 
 produce and to apply these natural forces to the 
 accomplishment of his desires and purposes. He 
 can devise and construct machines, mUls, engines, 
 and instruments, to facilitate his labors and attain 
 his ends. Thus, to a certain extent, are the forces 
 of nature subjected to the control of man. And 
 it is so because order is the great law of God's 
 whole work. He is often called an Arbiter, a 
 Sovereign. The fact, however, is that God is less 
 arbitrary than man. He conducts his whole work 
 on the principle of unchanging law. Of every phe- 
 nomenon and thing it may be affirmed, that there 
 was something which underlay and preceded it, 
 and which caused it to be what it is. God's whole 
 work is through the medium of his laws. "His 
 ways are everlasting." 
 
 4. The reality of moral distinctions in human 
 conduct. This is one of the veritable words of 
 God. It is, to the mind of every reasonable man, 
 an undeniable truth. Its denial would violate one's 
 own conscious conviction ; for every person, young 
 and old, above the state of infancy, does make the 
 distinction. He distinguishes human voluntary ac- 
 
112 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 tions into right and wrong. He decides that to 
 utter the truth is right ; to utter falsehood is wrong : 
 that kindness and mercy are right; that unkindness 
 and cruelty are wrong: that to deal justly is right, 
 but to deal unjustly is wrong ; that religious faith, 
 profession, and worship, are right ; but that infidelity 
 and irreligion are wrong. These distinctions do not 
 stand chiefly upon instruction, but they are sponta- 
 neous and natural.. The child makes them before 
 he is taught them. The law of his mind which 
 makes them is a part of his constitution. It is, it 
 was, written on his heart by the finger of his Creator. 
 It is the word of God, and heaven and earth may 
 sooner pass away than this. " Thy law, O Lord ! 
 is for evermore." The doctrine of moral distinc- 
 tions, therefore, is a truth. It is one of the words 
 of God. 
 
 5. The moral freedom of man. This is a fixed 
 fact, a known truth, a veritable word of God. We 
 aU know, that when we have uttered falsehood, 
 instead of truth ; done acts of cruelty, instead of 
 acting kindly ; been fraudulent and unjust, instead 
 of honest and upright ; practised infidelity and 
 irreligion, instead of piety and worship, — we feel 
 the compunctions of blame and guilt. Our hearts 
 smite us ; our consciences shame and distress us. 
 But they would not do this, unless we were con- 
 scious of having acted freely. We never feel the 
 pang of guilt for what we do by necessity. It is 
 only for doing that which we might have avoided 
 that we feel guilty. Every man is conscious that 
 he is not under the necessity of committing sin. 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 113 
 
 There are things to which a man is necessarily sub- 
 jected. He is under the necessity of growing old ; he 
 cannot possibly help it ; but he does not have any 
 feeling of blame for growing old. He is also un- 
 der the necessity of becoming weary and weakened 
 by long-continued labor ; but he does not feel guilty 
 on this account. He is, moreover, under the neces- 
 sity of taking rest, sleep, and occasional relaxation ; 
 but his conscience charges him with no blame for 
 these things. What a man does of necessity is 
 not imputed him as a sin. But, when he has com- 
 mitted acts of cruelty, falsehood, injustice, or im- 
 piety, he has the sentiments of guilt ; and it is 
 because he has done them freely that he feels him- 
 self to be blameworthy. He is conscious that he 
 was able to avoid them ; and so ' far as a man may, 
 or may not, do a thing, he is free. Every man is 
 free to avoid unkindness, untruthfulness, unfaithful* 
 ness, injustice, profanity, and irreligion. He is not 
 under the necessity of doing such things. K we 
 were not free in doing wrong acts, we should not 
 feel guilty for having committed them. Our sus- 
 ceptibility of blame is proof of our moral freedom. 
 When a man confesses blame, he virtually acknow- 
 ledges and asserts his moral freedom. 
 
 6. It is a revealed truth, a veritable and known 
 word of God, that a mmUs welfare and happiness 
 are promoted and secured by right-doing, but' en- 
 dangered and defeated by doing wrong. The man 
 whose rule it is always to act right, to discharge 
 duty, to deal kindly, to do justly, to walk humbly 
 and devoutly before God, secures the peace and 
 
 10* 
 
114 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 approbation of his own mind, the good will of his 
 neighbors, the warm affections of his friends, the 
 good opinion of aU his acquaintance and fellow- 
 men. The apostle puts a significant question 
 when he says, " And who will harm you, if ye be 
 followers of that which is good ? " It is true there 
 may be exceptions ; but these do not disannul the 
 general rule. And this rule is often asserted in the 
 Bible : " The ways of wisdom are ways of plea- 
 santness, and all her paths are those of peace." 
 " Exalt her, and she shall promote thee : she shall 
 bring thee to honor, when thou dost embrace her." 
 " For he that will love life and see good days, let 
 him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that 
 they speak no guile. Eschew evil, and do good ; 
 seek peace, and ensue it. For the eyes of the 
 Lord are over the righteous." " So shalt thou dwell 
 in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed." " But the 
 face of the Lord is against them that do evil." 
 " He saith. There is no peace to the wicked." " They 
 are like the troubled sea, whose waters cast up mire 
 and dirt." " God rendereth to every man accord- 
 ing to his works." " Eternal life to them who 
 patiently continue in well-doing." 
 
 7. It is a veritable fact, that good men hope for a 
 better life beyond the termination of the present. 
 This hope is not confined to Christians, but exists, 
 in more or less strength, among the different nations 
 of mankind. When the patriarchs died, they were 
 said to be gathered to their fathers ; gone and joined 
 to the great congregation of those who had died 
 before them. The dead, even in the Old Testament, 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF.. 115 
 
 are represented as speaking to, and conversing with, 
 each other. The Lord Jesus Christ declared that 
 the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are rep- 
 resented by Moses as being now alive : though their 
 gross tangible bodies had fallen into corruption, yet 
 their imponderable, intangible, spiritual bodies re- 
 mained alive. These bodies have sometimes been 
 seen by the living, and thoughts exchanged between 
 them. The living have thus obtained important 
 information from them who had died. Living men 
 have sometimes gone out into the spiritual world, 
 and, having witnessed occurrences at a distance, 
 came back and reported them circumstantially and 
 correctly. The evidence of such facts has been 
 irrefragable within the circle of those who could, 
 and who did, examine, sift, and canvas them. 
 They indicate that men live in another and in a 
 higher sphere, after they have departed from the 
 present. Though the fact cannot be scientifically 
 proved, yet it can be hoped for ; though not proved 
 as our past birth, childhood, and growth can be 
 proved, yet it can be strongly believed. We have 
 therefore many and strong reasons for entertaining 
 such a hope. Why is it that all men have believed 
 more or less distinctly in the reality of a spirit- world ? 
 that even barbarous and savage nations have be- 
 lieved that men's dead bodies left living spirits 
 behind them ? Why do all men, both the enlight- 
 ened and the unenlightened, entertain a confident 
 hope of heaven ? What all other creatures hope 
 for, they are also capable of enjoying. Would God 
 have given human nature these strong desires, these 
 
116 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 high aspii'ations, this confident and joyful hope, if 
 it have no other than a subjective foundation ? 
 Must there not be a corresponding objective to all 
 that is subjective in man ? It is so in aU other 
 cases : why not, then, in this also ? 
 
 When we consider the immensely long process 
 and progression of life, vegetable and animal, which 
 preceded the birth of man, we feel impelled to in- 
 quire. Is the process here to stop ? Naturalists 
 inform us, that, from the lowest vegetable up to the 
 highest, there are some thousand links, and each 
 link an improvement upon its predecessor ; and 
 that millions of centuries must have rolled away, 
 while this progression was going on ; and that, from 
 the lowest order of animal life up to the highest, 
 there are also several thousand distinct kinds, one 
 rising higher than the other in the order of the time 
 of its birth ; and that a duration of incomputable 
 ages must have been spent while aU this process 
 and progression was taking place ; — that man is the 
 ultimate of this vast process. Every other creature 
 and thing has something above it, and to which it 
 is subservient. But man finds no being in this 
 world above himself, no higher order of creature, 
 unless we admit the idea of a spirit-world ; the idea 
 that men become spirits, — conscious, intelligent, 
 active, and free spirits, angels, when they die. Ad- 
 mit this fact, and we obtain a satisfactory view of 
 man's destiny. It is happy and important. We 
 can feel reconciled to our condition. We can bless 
 and thank God for our being. As it is a fact of 
 nature that all nations of men do hope for some 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 117 
 
 description of heaven beyond the present life, and 
 as the very existence of this hope is a ground and 
 reason that the hope itself stands on a firm founda- 
 tion, we may justly attach great importance to 
 this hope as an evidence of immortality. It is a 
 most precious hope. It is the best blessing which 
 man enjoys. The apostle Paul so appreciated it : 
 he said, " We are saved by hope." It was then* hope 
 which saved them. And he thus describes it : " We 
 have fled for refuge to lay hold on the hope set be- 
 fore us ; which hope we have as an anchor of the 
 soul, sure and steadfast, and which entereth that 
 [apartment of heaven which is within the veil, — 
 the Holy of Holies] whither the Forerunner is 
 for us entered, even Jesus, made an High Priest 
 for ever after the order of Melchisedek ; not a priest 
 of forms, rites, and carnal ordinances ; but of those 
 moral sacrifices with which God is well-pleased. 
 For he is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, 
 nor is that circumcision which is only outward in 
 the flesh ; but he is the true Jew who is such in- 
 wardly, and the true circumcision is that of the 
 heart, in the spirit, not in the letter ; whose praise 
 is not of men only, but of God also." 
 
 We have now mentioned seven distinct truths, 
 generally, if not universally, acknowledged as such 
 by men, both the enlightened and the unenlightened. 
 They are God's words ; the food on which men's 
 souls may feed, thrive, and live. This is the wheat ; 
 not the whole of it, but a few of its parts and speci- 
 mens. 
 
 We shall now pass to the chaff. And here, as 
 
118 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 in the first category, our time and space limit our 
 notices to a few particulars. 
 
 1. Different and numerous superstitions. It was 
 once long and extensively believed, that such phe- 
 nomena as eclipses of the sun and moon, and the 
 redness of these luminaries as seen through a smoky 
 atmosphere, were omens, symbolical predictions, of 
 great national disasters ; that the descent of great 
 meteors, caUed falling stars, were indications and 
 forerunners of the fall of princes and monarchs ; 
 that all unusual appearances in the sky, i.e. the 
 atmosphere, were ominous and fearful ; that all un- 
 usual and unpleasant dreams possessed the same 
 portentous character ; that a certain and large class 
 of diseased persons were actually inhabited, seized 
 upon, and possessed, by evil demons, whose business 
 and privilege it was to vex and torment mankind. 
 It was believed that our whole vast atmosphere, 
 together with the deep places of the sea, and aU the 
 caverns and dens of the wilderness, were full of 
 wicked devils, watching and improving opportuni- 
 ties to annoy and to curse the children of men. 
 The doctrine of witchcraft, the art by which ugly 
 old women could possess themselves of the power 
 of hellish demons, was long accounted a doctrine 
 of the Bible and of truth. Many other supersti- 
 tions have prevailed among civilized men and Chris- 
 tians ; but the whole body and amount of them are' 
 now fast going to their own place, the depot of the 
 chaff, where they ought ever to have remained. 
 The day of superstition has begun to wear away. 
 Its sun aheady declines, and will set for ever. 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 119 
 
 2. Popular maxims and customs of false morality. 
 One of them was substantially this : " We may do 
 evil that good may come. We may exercise the 
 utmost severity toward every description of offend- 
 ers." And they did it, — mangled their backs with 
 stripes, cropt off their ears and noses, branded their 
 foreheads and their hands with red-hot iron; pun- 
 ished, sometimes, petty thefts with the death-penalty. 
 A curse was once pronounced upon the man who 
 withheld his sword from blood. When a case of 
 manslaughter happened (it might be by the merest 
 accident, — no malice prepense), the nearest rela- 
 tive of the slain man became, by the custom of 
 olden time, the avenger of his kinsman. He did 
 not ordinarily, if ever, institute any inquiry about 
 the manner and the motive. But girding on his 
 sword, and arming himself perhaps with arrows, 
 battle-axe, and javelins, he rushes forth in hot pur- 
 suit. He feels as if it were his highest duty to kiU 
 the manslayer. He works himself up into an in- 
 tense frenzy. Nothing can appease his wrath but 
 the shed blood of the man, who might be entirely 
 innocent of having perpetrated the crime of inten- 
 tional murder. Revenge was accounted to be very 
 sweet and very meritorious. And persecution for 
 opinion's sake has in time past been esteemed 
 right, and even obligatory. Once a man's life was 
 put in jeopardy by his happening to fall a little on 
 the wrong side of the line which separates the 
 heretical from the orthodox. The forgiveness of 
 injuries was accounted a weakness ; not a virtue, 
 not a duty. And the true mode of reformation was 
 
120 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 considered to be the use of the most harsh and 
 severe means. The rod was the sovereign correc- 
 tive for all childish and juvenile delinquencies. And 
 the only way in which a whole people could be 
 corrected, and the land cleansed, was to kill, slay, 
 and cause to perish, all the wicked, and spare the 
 righteous to live. The very life of a man was ap- 
 preciated at a very low rate. It was to most 
 persons a matter of small importance that thou- 
 sands of men should be killed in battle, and millions 
 of them reduced to a condition of brutal bondage 
 and chattel-slavery. 
 
 The Israelites thought themselves very unjustly 
 used by the Egyptians, who compelled them to 
 make brick, to construct pyramids, and to build 
 store-cities for Pharaoh. And so they were. But 
 these Israelites, having taken forcible possession of 
 Palestine, inflicted the same injustice upon the 
 aborigines of the country. " As to all the people 
 left of the Canaanites whom the children of Israel 
 consumed not, them did Solomon make to pay 
 tribute unto this day. But of the Israelites did 
 Solomon make no servants for his work ; but they 
 were men of war and chief captains, captains of 
 chariots and horsemen. And Solomon numbered 
 all the strangers in the land of Israel, and they were 
 found to be an hundred and fifty and three thou- 
 sand and six hundred. And he set threescore and 
 ten thousand to be bearers of burdens, and fourscore 
 thousand to be hewers in the mountain, and three 
 thousand and six hundred overseers to set the peo- 
 ple at work." Of course, the Israelites subjected 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 121 
 
 the Canaanites to the same kind of bondage which 
 the former had endured in Egypt. They justified 
 themselves probably on the ground that they were 
 God's people. The Egyptians, said they, had no 
 right to compel us to be bondmen, because we are 
 God's people. And it is right for us to make bond- 
 men of the Canaanites ; for they are not God's 
 people, and we are. — All this is chaff; and vastly 
 more of the same description of thing. But we 
 have not space for further particular notices. And 
 we will now pass from the parcel of chaff to the 
 remaining heap of unwinnowed grain, in which the 
 wheat and the chaff are yet commingled together. 
 
 What, then, are some of the questions that re- 
 main unresolved, undetermined ? 
 
 1. Is the Bible a production of plenary inspira- 
 tion ? Is it throughout inerrable and authoritative ? 
 Many take the affirmative side of this question : 
 many also take the negative. The former allege 
 that men who wrought miracles, and claimed to 
 speak in the name of the Lord, must speak with 
 authority, and speak infallibly. The latter allege 
 that a book containing so many apparent discre- 
 pancies, extravagances, exaggerations, improbabili- 
 ties, and things unnatural, together with somewhat 
 of unsound morality, superstition, and defective 
 theology, cannot be accounted a work of uniform 
 divine inspiration throughout and in aU its parts. 
 Such accounts as those given of Samson, of Jo- 
 nah, of Balaam, of Lot and his daughters, cannot 
 have been dictated by the spirit of God. On the 
 other hand, it is urged that a book so superior to 
 11 
 
122 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 all other books ; a book which first taught the 
 sublime doctrine of monotheism, of one almighty 
 and perfect God, in opposition to the polytheism of 
 the learned Egyptians, Chaldeans, and the Greeks ; 
 a book containing such inimitable devotional com- 
 positions as the Psalms of David, and such noble 
 effusions as those of Isaiah and other prophets ; 
 such discourses as those of Jesus Christ ; and such 
 epistles as those of Paul, Peter, James, and John, — 
 must have been a product of God's special provi- 
 dence, and must be most perfect. The doctrine of 
 the plenary inspiration of the Bible may therefore be 
 referred to the category of dreams, which are things 
 that may prove to be either true or false. 
 
 2. There is the doctrine of the Divine Trinity, in 
 contradistinction from the Divine Unity. Trinita- 
 rians hold that the one only living and true God 
 exists in three distinct persons, each possessing aU 
 the attributes of personality, intelligence, wUl, and 
 consciousness. Unitarians hold that the only liv- 
 ing and true God exists in but one person, and that 
 there is but one divine will, intelligence, and con- 
 sciousness. The former — Trinitarians — urge the 
 consideration that the Divine Father, and the Di- 
 vine Son, and the Holy Ghost, are each called God 
 in the Bible ; and, being each God, they must be 
 equals. The latter — Unitarians — deny the infer- 
 ence of equality, and contend that the Son is, in the 
 Scriptures, represented uniformly and always as 
 subordinate to the Father and dependent upon him. 
 That the Father is identified with the Godhead, in 
 such instances as the following : " That they may 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 123 
 
 know thee, the only true God." " To us there is 
 one God, the Father." But that the Son is never 
 identified with the Godhead. That though he is 
 called God, as angels, magistrates, and prophets are 
 also called gods, it cannot mean God in the high- 
 est sense of the word, but in a secondary. That 
 when the Son is called God, there is in the connec- 
 tion arnother God who is above him, as in the fol- 
 lowing : " Thy throne, O God ! is for ever and ever. 
 The sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. . . . 
 Therefore God, even thy God, hath exalted thee 
 above thy fellows." Unitarians, moreover, allege 
 that all the definitions and descriptions of the Tri- 
 nity imply that the Father only is supreme. The 
 names. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, indicate a 
 difference, not an equality. The Father is unde- 
 rived, unbegotten, independent ; the Son, as his 
 name implies, is begotten of the Father and derived 
 irom him ; that being dependent, therefore, can- 
 not be equal to him. The divine persons are 
 sometimes distinguished as first, second, and third. 
 But, if all the divine persons are equal, then no 
 one of them can be first ; neither can any of them 
 be second or third. Trinitarians have answered, 
 that the distinctions are merely official ; one person 
 holding the first office, and the others subordinate 
 ones, while personally they are equal. Unitari- 
 ans respond to this by saying, that, if one divine 
 person hold an office higher than the others, there 
 must be a reason for it. And the reason is ma- 
 nifest. The first divine person is the Father of 
 the second, gave him his existence, endued him 
 
124 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 with all his powers, and assigned to him his proper 
 work. 
 
 3. And there is also what is called the doctrine 
 of the hypostatical union ; the combination of two 
 natures — the divine and the human — in the one 
 single person of Christ, constituting him the God- 
 man. This is stUl a contested doctrine, and must 
 be put in the category of dreams. Trinitarians 
 allege that this is a reasonable and scriptural doc- 
 trine. Unitarians, on the other hand, pronounce it 
 unscriptural and palpably absurd ; urging that the 
 Scriptures declare the Son to be the man Christ 
 Jesus ; never the God or angel, Christ Jesus ; — that 
 the thought and theory of two hypostases, sub- 
 sistences, persons, making but one person of two 
 understandings, — a divine and a human ; of two 
 wills and two consciousnesses, amalgamated to 
 one understanding; one wUl and one conscious- 
 ness, and this both divine and human ; — such a 
 thought, such a theory, is inconceivable and most 
 absurd. The idea of person is necessarily that 
 of a unit. No person can be either more or less 
 than one person. He must possess the power of 
 intelligence, of volition, and of self-reflection. But 
 that he should possess twofold powers of this de- 
 scription is a most unnatural and preposterous idea. 
 Two intelligences and two wills may be in coinci- 
 dence with each other, but not in personal combina- 
 tion ; for two wills must belong to two persons, not 
 to one. 
 
 There is a contradiction, says the Unitarian, in the 
 language of Trinitarians, in definitions of the Tri- 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 125 
 
 union, and of the hypostatic union. In the former, 
 one nature contains three distinct persons ; in the 
 latter, one person contains two natures. In the doc- 
 trine of the threefold Godhead, the term nature is 
 generic, comprehending three different specific per- 
 sons. In the doctrine of the hypostatic union, 
 the word person is generic^ the term nature is 
 specific. In the one case, the word nature is more 
 comprehensive than person, and takes in three of 
 them ; in the other case, the word person is more 
 comprehensive than nature, and takes in two na- 
 tures. The generic and the specific mutually and 
 diametrically change their character and relations. 
 Now, all this is palpably a contradiction in terms. 
 Yet so long as a large class of Christians continue 
 to profess belief in the doctrine of the hypostatic 
 union, it may not be consigned to the heap of chaff, 
 but referred to the category of dreams. 
 
 We have not space and time for further details, 
 and will conclude the discourse with a few inferen- 
 tial and miscellaneous remarks. 
 
 Men, in our age and country, enjoy great privi- 
 lege for acquaintance with truth. If we lay out of 
 account all the unsettled questions, and confine our 
 view to those which are decided and certain, the 
 amount is great and invaluable. It comprises all 
 essentially important truth. Though it be desirable 
 to know more, yet it is not material to our welfare. 
 We know enough already to live dutifully and 
 happily. If we know that the material and phe- 
 nomenal world is a reality ; that there is an invisible 
 n* 
 
126 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 world, containing all the intelligence, power, and 
 benignity reqmsite to the production of the harmo- 
 nious and beautiful universe ; that all the works of 
 God and of nature are done in the way of order ; 
 that there is the distinction of moral right and 
 wrong in human conduct ; that this distinction is 
 made by every one's own conscience ; that a man 
 secures his true welfare by living conscientiously 
 and virtuously ; that all men are free, and able to 
 do the right and avoid the wrong ; that the hope 
 of a personal identity and happiness in a future 
 and higher sphere of being is a known fact of 
 human nature; and that this hope may be in- 
 creased to a joyful assurance; — if we may know all 
 this, know it for a certainty ; if the truths just men- 
 tioned are the words of God, and constitute the 
 food on which men's souls are to live, then are 
 men under no necessity of " perishing for lack of 
 vision." In their Father's house is bread enough 
 and to spare ; both milk for babes, and strong meat 
 for men. If they famish, the fault lies at their own 
 door. If they despise the food provided for them, 
 it is their folly, not their wisdom. God may be 
 justly said to have revealed to men all those truths 
 which, by right use of their mental powers, they are 
 capable of knowing. The apostle Paul speaks on 
 this principle when he says, " For what may be 
 known of God is manifest among them [the Gen- 
 tiles] ; for God hath showed unto them." Men, 
 therefore, even the Gentiles, have no just cause to 
 complain of the want of revelation from God. No 
 people are left destitute of it. The voice of it hath 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 127 
 
 gone out into all the earth ; its words unto the end 
 of the world. There is no speech nor language in 
 which it is not heard. 
 
 The foUowing complaint has often been made : 
 " There are so many beliefs and opinions among 
 us, that we do not know what to believe." But 
 this complaint is impertinent. No one who' is a 
 mature man should ever make it. Every mature 
 person should form his own opinions. His under- 
 standing is his own, and he should make use of it. 
 It is unmanly to rely on the authority of others for 
 all our views and beliefs. It behooves us all to 
 inquire, to investigate, to examine, to think, for our- 
 selves. We should be wUling to take the trouble 
 of it, and the responsibility of it, upon ourselves. 
 A man should be ashamed of having no opinion 
 of his own, because there are so many different 
 opinions on particular points. Let him study and 
 examine with impartiality, and he will soon have 
 an opinion ; certainly if the point be of any great 
 importance. 
 
 It is a great mistake to conclude that every thing 
 is uncertain, because men's opinions are so various. 
 Notwithstanding the great variety and differences 
 of men's beliefs and opinions, yet they think alike 
 upon more points than differently. And the points 
 on which they agree are those of the greater impor- 
 tance. In proportion as a truth is important and 
 practical, it is plainly revealed. A belief in the 
 doctrine of moral distinctions in human conduct is 
 a first truth in the scale of importance. And this 
 truth is universally believed. Some may pretend to 
 
128 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 deny it, but they never carry out such a principle 
 of disbelief. If a man injure them, they are sure to 
 blame him for doing it. But it is said that men do 
 not make the same moral distinctions. Within 
 a limited extent, this allegation is true ; but it is 
 not true generally, or even extensively. All men 
 justify kindness, truthfulness, fidelity, prudence, 
 generosity; and they all condemn cruelty, false- 
 hood, unfaithfulness, carelessness, and narrow self- 
 love. They all do this spontaneously and instantly. 
 Yet it is in this as in all other departments of human 
 knowledge and agency, advances and improvement 
 can be made. Those who are enlightened and 
 experienced make moral discriminations more cor- 
 rectly than others. It is a distinctive of man that 
 he can improve in every work. He can do it better, 
 the longer he studies and pursues it. It is on this 
 principle that the world makes progress ; that every 
 generation is wiser than its immediate predecessor. 
 It wiU be so, if every generation perform its duty 
 equally well. On a general scale, this has been the 
 fact in the past ages of the world. In the age of 
 the apostle Paul, moral discrimination was made 
 more accurately than in the age of Moses. It had 
 outgrown polygamy, arbitrary divorce, and capital 
 punishment for a slight violation of the sabbath. 
 Christians of the present age make moral distinc- 
 tions more justly than the early Christians of the 
 first three or fom- centuries. In those days, impos- 
 ture, if done for the promotion of Christianity, was 
 accounted venial and justifiable. In those centuries, 
 a multitude of what are called pious frauds were 
 
THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 129 
 
 committed. Many false miracles "were got up, and 
 were believed. Many false titles were affixed to 
 books, and palmed off' for genuine : such as the 
 Book of Enoch ; the Ascension of Isaiah ; the 
 Epistle of Barnabas ; the Shepherd of Hermas ; 
 the Second Book of the Maccabees ; and a hundred 
 others. Such impostures were deemed justifiable, 
 on the principle that the end sanctified the means. 
 The science of moral distinction is in a more heal- 
 thy condition with us now than it was two hundred 
 years ago with our Puritan forefathers, — men of 
 blessed memory. They were persecutors, and even 
 constructive idolaters. They vexed and banished 
 the Antinomians ; and suspended innocent and 
 good men and women on the gallows, until they 
 were dead, for the imaginary crime of witchcraft. 
 They also superstitiously worshipped the Bible 
 and the sabbath-day, transferring to each of these 
 an attribute which belongeth only to God. — We 
 are, moreover, taught by this discourse to take cour- 
 age for the future, and to live in charity with our 
 fellow-men. We regard many of them to be the 
 dreamers of dreams, and calling their dreams the 
 wheat of truth, the word of God. And as we think 
 of them, so perhaps they think of us. Ought we not, 
 then, to walk charitably ? Charity covereth a mul- 
 titude of sins. We have need of its kindly and 
 softening influences, lest, being tempted, we should 
 bite and devour one another. Our Saviour has 
 taught us not to look too much at the mote which 
 is in our brother's eye. And the apostle Paul has 
 admonished, •- Judge nothing before the time, until 
 
130 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. 
 
 the Lord come and bring to light the things now 
 concealed, and make manifest the motives of all 
 hearts ; and then every man shall have the praise 
 to which he is entitled from God." 
 
131 
 
 THE TRINITY. 
 
 " Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
 Ghost." — Matt, xxviii. 19. 
 
 This is the prescribed formula of baptism ; the 
 primitive platform of the Christian faith ; the ori- 
 ginal confession and creed of the church. By bap- 
 tism the early disciples professed their belief in the 
 Father, in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost. 
 This is the Scriptural Trinity ; — not a Trinity 
 of divine persons, subsistences, hypostases, but of 
 three points of faith, having for their objects two 
 persons and one personified influence. The first 
 member of this Trinity is God, the Father; the 
 only true God. He is styled such, John xvii. 3, 
 and 1 Cor. viii. 6. The Father is identified with 
 the Godhead. The second member of this Trinity 
 is the Son ; the man Christ Jesus, born of Mary, 
 and crucified under Pontius Pilate ; who died and 
 was buried, but raised from the dead by the 
 glory of the Father, and exalted to heaven and 
 seated at the right hand of God. The third mem- 
 ber of this Trinity is the Holy Ghost ; the Para- 
 clete, the Enlightener, the Cbmfortfer, which pro- 
 
132 THE TRINITY. 
 
 ceedeth from the Father, and which the Son prom- 
 ised to send to his followers to aid them in their 
 work, and to convince the world of sin, of righte- 
 ousness, and of judgment. It is nowhere said in 
 the Bible that these three are one God. The Holy 
 Ghost is manifestly God in his influences, grace, 
 power, but not a person distinct from God. The 
 Son, the man Christ Jesus, was " anointed with the 
 Holy Ghost." " God was with him." He cast out 
 devils and performed other miraculous works " by 
 the finger and power of God." " Of myself," said 
 he, " I can do nothing ; the Father in me doeth the 
 work." 
 
 A Trinity of divine persons is, however, and has 
 long been, an article of Christian theology. We 
 shall endeavor in this discourse to take some his- 
 torical view of this doctrine. It has two historical 
 lines : — 1. That of the Trinity proper ; 2. That of 
 the deification of the Son, " the man Christ Jesus." 
 Some germs of this doctrine appear in the second 
 century of the Christian era. Athenagoras, a Chris- 
 tian father of this century, makes use of the word 
 Trius. In the third century, the word Economy 
 was much employed in much the same sense as the 
 more modern word Trinity. It was designed to 
 express the plan, the arrangement, of the three 
 agencies concerned in the work of redemption. It 
 was not, however, believed that these agents were 
 equal, nor was it universally believed that each 
 of them was a person. Many Christians, as late 
 as the fifth and sixth century, declined to profess a 
 belief in the personality of the Holy Ghost. The 
 
THE TRINITY. 133 
 
 doctrine was not sanctioned by the vote of a gene- 
 ral council until it was done at Toledo, in Spain, 
 not far perhaps from the year of our Lord 500. 
 Nor even then was the equality of these divine 
 persons recognized. The Son was declared to be 
 subordinate to the Father, and the Holy Spirit sub- 
 ordinate to both the Father and the Son. That 
 very extraordinary man, Origen of Alexandria in 
 Egypt, the most learned and talented of all the Chris- 
 tian fathers, declares the Son to be at a vast dis- 
 tance below the Father, and the Holy Spirit to be 
 vastly inferior to the Son, though immensely supe- 
 rior to the highest archangel. He teaches the im- 
 propriety of offering prayers to the Son, and that 
 the Father alone should be thus worshipped. Such 
 was the Trinity of the third century. In the fourth 
 century sat the famous council of Nice. It decreed 
 that the Son was God from God ; Light from 
 Light ; begotten, not made : consubstantial with 
 the Father. But against the doctrine of consub- 
 stantiality there was a strong opposition in the 
 councU itself. Not more than half the churches 
 approved and accepted the doctrine of consubstan- 
 tiality ; and even those who accepted did not 
 recognize the Son's equality with the Father. They 
 believed and represented the Son to be derived 
 from the Father, as light is derived from the sun, 
 and as the stream is derived from the fountain, 
 and as the body of a tree is derived from the root. 
 But the stream is not equal to the fountain, nor is 
 the ray of light equal to the' sun whence it came. 
 The fountain does not depend upon the stream, but 
 
 12 
 
134 
 
 THE TRINITY. 
 
 the stream does depend upon the fountain. There 
 is not equality between them. The fact is the 
 same in relation to the sun and its radiance ; also 
 in relation to the root and the tree. 
 
 In the process of the times, however, the consub- 
 stantiality of the Father, Son, and Spirit, was gene- 
 rally admitted ; for it could not be avoided without 
 denying the proper Divinity of the Son. The Son 
 and Spirit were allowed to be of the same substance 
 as the Father, yet not of the same identical sub- 
 stance. They were consubstantial in the same sense 
 as all men are consubstantial ; of the same kind of 
 substance. Of course, there were three Gods ; three 
 divine hypostases, each possessing its own intel- 
 ligence, will, and consciousness. This is Tritheism. 
 The fact was so obvious that it could not remain 
 concealed, could not be honestly denied. The 
 resort for refuge, then, was to a Modal Trinity. 
 This has existed in two forms, ■ — one of them open 
 and avowed ; the other, mystified and concealed. 
 The former of these commenced as early as the 
 third century, and was expounded and maintained 
 by men whose names were Praxeas, Noetus, 
 Beryllus, Sabellius, and probably by Paul of 
 Samosata. God, said they, is one; the Monas. 
 He has revealed himself gradually ; first, as Creator 
 and Upholder of the world j second, as Redeemer 
 of mankind ; third, as Enlightener and Sanctifier of 
 men. God, acting as Creator and Upholder of the 
 world, is the Father ; as Teacher and Redeemer, he 
 is the Son ; as Enlightener and Sanctifier, he is the 
 Holy Spirit. Though this doctrine has not been 
 
THE TRINITY. 135 
 
 openly and extensively avowed, yet it has been 
 much, though indistinctly and mystically, resorted 
 to and confided in. All those theologians who 
 affirm, as the authors of the Assembly's Catechism 
 affirm, that the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, 
 are one God, the same in substance and equal in 
 power and glory, are and must be either Tritheists 
 or Modalists. If by the term, " the same in sub- 
 stance," they mean identical substance, they are 
 Modalists. To them there is but one personal God ; 
 one divine intelligence, will, and consciousness. 
 But if the term, " same in substance," signify to 
 them only the same genus or kind of substance, 
 then are they Tritheists. Their three hypostases 
 are necessarily three Gods. The divines of the 
 "Westminster Assembly were, if they had any defi- 
 nite views on the point, either Tritheists or Sabel- 
 lians ; yet, doubtless, they would all deny that they 
 were either. Ask them, one by one, to define their 
 position, and they could not do it so as to fall into 
 neither one category nor the other. And there is not 
 a Trinitarian theologian in all Christendom who 
 will not, in defining his view of the Trinity, virtually 
 declare himself either a Tritheist or a Sabellian. 
 The fact, however, is that very few entertain any 
 definite view at all: they either oscillate between 
 Tritheism and Modalism, or they take refuge in 
 mystery. This is the more usual resort. And some 
 of them have explicitly declared that no definition 
 of the Trinity ought ever to be attempted ; because, 
 say they, every such attempt must be a failure. And 
 they have comforted themselves with the reflection, 
 
136 THE TRINITY. 
 
 that the doctrine itself of the Trinity has never been 
 refuted, although every definition were shown to be 
 an absurdity ; of course, that a profession of belief 
 in that dark and unintelligible doctrine was a mere 
 verbal confession, consisting of words whose sig- 
 nificance was beyond the ken of human intellect. 
 [See an article in the " Christian Spectator," 1834 ; 
 the review of Winslow on the Trinity.] 
 
 We shall now attempt to trace the other histori- 
 cal line, that of the Deification of the Son. While 
 the Lord Jesus Christ was on earth, no one thought 
 of ascribing to him the attribute of Godhead. He 
 called God, the Father ; and himself the Son. He 
 as plainly distinguished himself from God as from 
 other men. He declared that of himself he could do 
 nothing ; that the Father in him did the work ; that 
 there was a close intimacy between the Son and the 
 Father; that the Son and the Father were one, — one 
 in the same sense as the Son and his true disciples 
 are one. He thus prayed: " And now, O Father! 
 glorify thou me with thine ownself, with the glory 
 which I had with thee before the foundation of the 
 world." But this glory did not amount to deifica- 
 tion. The Father was ever the only true God: 
 " That they may know thee the only true God, and 
 Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." After the 
 resurrection, the views of the apostles respecting 
 their divine Master were greatly extended and 
 raised ; but they did not deify him. " Let the 
 house of Israel know that God hath made that 
 same Jesus, whom ye crucified, both Lord and 
 
THE TRINITY. 137 
 
 Christ," — not God, but Lord, Christ: hath mani- 
 fested him to be the Messiah. 
 
 The apostle Paul is generally understood to have 
 called him God; but it is obviously and always 
 in a subordinate sense. " Who, being in the form 
 of God, did not aspire to be as God, but took on 
 himself the form of a servant, and became obedient 
 unto death, even the death of the cross ; where- 
 fore God hath highly exalted him," &c. The apos- 
 tle could not mean to say that God exalted God ; 
 neither here nor in the passage of the epistle to 
 the Hebrews : " Thy throne, O God! is for ever and 
 ever ; thy sceptre is a right sceptre ; thou iovest 
 righteousness and hatest iniquity ; therefore God, 
 even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of glad- 
 ness above thy fellows." The God who anoints and 
 exalts must be far above the God who is anointed 
 and exalted. The God who is "received up into 
 glory " could not be equal to the God who thus 
 received him. The word God in the Bible is often 
 used as a common and generic term, as much so as 
 the word Lord. It is not peculiar to the Supreme 
 Being. Angels, magistrates, and prophets are called 
 gods. " There are lords many and gods many." 
 The Supreme Being is as often in the Bible called 
 Lord as he is called God. The fact, therefore, of 
 the Son's being called God no more proves him to 
 have been Jehovah than the fact that he is called 
 Lord. The Epistles of Peter and James furnish 
 none of the proof-texts in support of the doctrine, 
 that the man Christ Jesus was the God of Abra- 
 ham, Isaac, and Jacob. 
 
 12* 
 
138 
 
 THE TRINITY. 
 
 In the second century of the Christian era, many 
 learned men embraced the faith of Christianity. 
 They had previously learned the philosophy of 
 Plato, through the medium of Philo and the Alex- 
 andrian school. Philo was a Jew, and a great ad- 
 mirer of the Athenian philosopher, Plato. Though 
 cotemporary with Jesus and the apostles, he does 
 not appear to have had any knowledge of them. 
 He wrote a celebrated book which had an immense 
 influence on the early ages of Christianity, and 
 laid the foundation for the Trinitarian theosophy. 
 Philo described and detailed the points of the Pla- 
 tonic theosophy, particularly the Logos. This 
 word, signifying reason and speech, Plato employed 
 in a technical and a new sense, to signify the intel- 
 ligence, the ideas, the word, of God. He personi- 
 fied the Logos in bold metaphor, as Solomon per- 
 sonified wisdom in the eighth chapter of the book 
 of Proverbs. He spoke of it as being the compa- 
 nion, coadjutor, of God in the "w^ork of creation. 
 Yet it is doubtful whether Plato intended really to 
 hypostatize it, — to make it a real person. Philo, 
 however, did hypostatize the Logos. So likewise 
 did the early Christian fathers, Justin, Athenagoras, 
 Aristides, and Tatian, each of whom, in the second 
 century, wrote apologies for Christianity, contain- 
 ing an account of its doctrine ; and they identify 
 the Logos with Jesus Christ. They even thought 
 they found the Logos recognized in many passages 
 of the Old Testament : — In the light which God 
 spake into existence in the beginning. Gen. i. 3. 
 God said, " Let there be light, and there was light." 
 
THE TRINITY. 139 
 
 Then, said they, was the Logos born. What had 
 previously been an attribute of God, now became 
 an hypostasis, a person. Hence they made a dis- 
 tinction between the Logos endiathetos [in God], 
 and the Logos prophoricus [manifested]. As endia- 
 thetos, the Logos was eternal, without beginning ; 
 but as prophoricus, he had a beginning, and was only 
 sempiternal. Also in the various theophanies of the 
 Old Testament, in the angels that appeared to Abra- 
 ham, to Moses, to Joshua, to Manoah, and to others ; 
 in the Shekinah, in the tabernacle and the temple ; 
 in the visions which were had by Isaiah, Ezekiel, 
 and Daniel. They also recognized it in such pas- 
 sages as the following : " By the word of the Lord 
 were the heavens made." " The Lord revealed him- 
 self to Samuel in Shiloh by the word of the Lord." 
 " The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his 
 way, before his works of old. I was set up from 
 everlasting, or ever the earth was. When he pre- 
 pared the heavens, I was there ; when he set a 
 compass upon the face of the depths ; when he 
 established the clouds above ; when he strength- 
 ened the fountains of the deep, then I was by him, 
 as one brought up with him ; I was daily his de- 
 light, rejoicing always before him, rejoicing in the 
 habitable parts of the earth ; and my delights were 
 with the sons of men." 
 
 All this, however, amounted to but a partial 
 deification. As a person, the Son was born ; had 
 a beginning ; was " the first-born of every creature." 
 Justin declares him to be far inferior to the Father ; 
 and Origen, as we have already noted, in the third 
 
140 
 
 THE TRINITY. 
 
 century, taught the impropriety of addressing 
 prayers to the Son ; that the Father only was the 
 God to whom Christians should pray. The prac- 
 tice of praying to the Son, however, had now begun 
 to prevail ; and this fact was probably the occasion 
 of Origen's remarks on the subject. Artemon, an- 
 other writer of the third century, complains that 
 many Christians were beginning " to theologize 
 Christ." By this term he meant that they wor- 
 shipped him as if he were God. He represents 
 this worship as being a new thing, and wrote a 
 treatise giving his view of Christ as a man divinely 
 endowed far above all other men. Artemon and 
 Theodotus, who in opinion sympathized with him, 
 were Humanarians : their theory, by re-action, seems 
 to have produced the modahstic doctrine, which 
 in this century was put forth and advocated by 
 Praxeas, Noetus, Beryllus, and Sabellius. They 
 made a distinction between God revealed and God 
 unrevealed. God unrevealed is one, the Monas. 
 He first revealed himself as Creator in the work of 
 creation and providence ; he subsequently revealed 
 himself as man's Redeemer, Enlightener and Sanc- 
 tifier. He, therefore, sustains three relations to the 
 world : that of its Creator and Upholder ; that of 
 its Redeemer and Saviour ; and that of its En- 
 lightener and Sanctifier. And this threefold rela- 
 tion of God to the world did, according to them, 
 constitute the Trinity. The one God, acting in 
 three modes or characters, becomes triune. The 
 divine in Jesus Christ was the same as the God- 
 head ; was identical with the Father and the Holy 
 
THE TRINITY. 141 
 
 Spirit. The Monas, the Autotheos, the Godhead, 
 is one ; and the Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier, 
 are derivatives from it. This doctrine had the me- 
 rit of preserving entire the Divine Unity. But it 
 diminished the importance of the Son ; concealing 
 him, as it were, in the shade, or rather in the light, 
 of the Godhead. It was therefore vehemently 
 opposed by the Catholics, the reputed orthodox of 
 that time. TertuUian, of Carthage, wrote against 
 Praxeas; Hippolyius wrote against Noetus; and 
 Origen made a journey to Bostra in Arabia, and is 
 said by Eusebius to have converted BeryUus from 
 his error, (But this conversion is doubted by 
 Schleiermacher.) Dionysius, Bishop of Alexan- 
 dria, wrote against Sabellius. The perplexing 
 point, both with Tertullian and Dionysius, was to 
 give the Son a divine personality distinct from 
 God. In order to do this, they asserted that there 
 was a time when the Son was not. This was 
 Arianism before Arius. Dionysius, finding himself 
 in danger, seems to have retracted his assertion ; 
 but Arius, one of his presbyters, adopted the point 
 which his bishop had recanted. He boldly advo- 
 cated the doctrine that the Son is a created being ; 
 " the beginning of the creation of God ; " " the first- 
 born of every creature." This new theory seems 
 to have spread with great rapidity, and to have soon 
 become the faith of nearly half of all Christendom. 
 The council of Nice, the first and the greatest of 
 all the oecumenical synods, was convoked by the 
 Emperor Constantine to determine the question 
 raised by Alius, whether the Son was created or 
 
142 
 
 THE TRl.VITY. 
 
 born. The council consisted of more than six 
 hundred bishops, from every section of the Roman 
 empire. The question was strenuously debated, the 
 antagonistic parties being apparently of nearly equal 
 strength and numbers. At length the vote was put ; 
 and it was determined, probably by a small majori- 
 ty, that the Son was " begotten, not made ; " that he 
 was of the same substance, not like substance, with 
 the Father ; that he was " Light from Light ; very 
 God from very God." This decision did not give 
 unanimity and peace to the church. Arianism con- 
 tinued to abound. It held the ascendancy in Con- 
 stantinople and in nearly aU the East. Arianism 
 and Athanasianism so equally divided the church 
 for an hundred years, that it was difficult to know 
 which of them was really uppermost. 
 
 The Nicene doctrine, however, did not raise the 
 Son to equality with the Father. It made him 
 dependent and subordinate. As the fountain pro- 
 duces and supports the stream, and as the sun 
 originates and emits the light ; as the fountain is 
 superior to the stream, and the sun to the light; 
 so the Divine Father is above the Son in power 
 and in glory. The Athanasian Creed, composed 
 probably by Hilary, the Bishop of Aries, in the fifth 
 century, is the first Christian document in which 
 is recognized the co-equality of the Father, Son, 
 and Holy Ghost. 
 
 We have, as yet, omitted to make mention of the 
 Apollinarian theory. This was put forth by Apol- 
 linaris. Bishop of Antioch, in the fourth century. 
 It was no other than high Arianism, assuming that 
 
THE TRINITY. 143 
 
 the Logos supplied the place of the human soul in 
 the man Christ Jesus. The first council called to 
 adjudicate on this doctrine acquitted Apollinaris. 
 StiU, however, there was dissatisfaction. Another 
 council was convened, by which he was condemned 
 and banished. His doctrine, however, continued to 
 be held by many. 
 
 In the fifth and sixth centuries, the doctrine which 
 nominally deifies the Son seems generally to have 
 been assented to and professed. But that of the 
 hypostatic vmion was still unsettled. Are there 
 two natures in Jesus Christ, or only one ? If there 
 be two natures, are there not, of course, two wills, 
 two persons ? Those who held to one nature only 
 were called Monophysites, and by decree of council 
 were pronounced to be heretics. Those who held 
 the doctrine of one will were called Monothelites ; 
 and these, likewise, were decreed to be heretics. 
 At length the Catholics settled down upon the 
 manifest contradiction, that in Jesus Christ there 
 are two whole natures, and but one single person ; 
 that he is the real God-man, perfectly God and 
 perfectly man ; that as God he possesses a divine 
 intelligence, a divine will, a divine sensibility, a 
 divine person ; and as man, a human and a finite 
 intelligence, will, sensibility, consciousness, and per- 
 son ; that he has a human person and a divine 
 person, and yet but one person ; that he knows aU 
 things, and yet does not know all things ; that he 
 is almighty, and yet not almighty ; that he is at 
 once a dependent and independent being. 
 
 Here is found the very Gordian knot of Trinita- 
 
144 THE TRINITY. 
 
 rianism. That two perfect persons, as distinct from 
 each other as a divine and a human, should be but 
 one person ; that two understandings should be but 
 one ; two wills, two sensibilities, two conscious- 
 nesses, should be but one ; and aU this " without 
 mixture or confusion," — is surely the hardest thing 
 to be believed by an intelligent and reflective mind ; 
 the hardest which such a mind ever did believe. And 
 yet such minds have believed it, and verified in 
 themselves what the apostle of the Gentries alleged 
 before the Athenians : " I perceive, men of Athens, 
 that in many things ye are too superstitious." The 
 cloud of bias and prejudice has exceedingly ob- 
 scured your mental vision. 
 
 It has often been justly said, that every thing 
 has a reason and a cause. What, then, has been 
 the reason and the cause of the conception and 
 the prevalence of the doctrine of the Trinity in the 
 Christian Church ? It was natural that the early 
 Christians should have a strong desire to exalt the 
 character of the founder of their religion. They 
 deeply felt the reproach of worshipping a crucified 
 man, — a malefactor ! They did not deny that he 
 had been an obscure man, nor that he was cru- 
 cified. But against this reproach they alleged that 
 he had not only been raised from the dead, but 
 also exalted to the highest place in the universe ; 
 that all things had been si^bjected under him. He 
 only excepted who had put all things under him. 
 The apostle Paul affirmed that he had ascended far 
 above aU heavens, that he might fUl all things. Yet 
 this apostle never placed him on the throne of the 
 
THE TRINITY. 145 
 
 Eternal. This throne was always above him, and 
 himself a subject under it. The deification of 
 the Son was not the leading point. The thought 
 of such a thing would startle a Jew; for monothe- 
 ism was the first article in his religious creed. It 
 was, however, very different with the Gentile, who 
 had lords many and gods many. The primitive 
 Gentile Christians had been familiar with polythe- 
 ism. The idea of plurality in the Godhead did not 
 appal them. At length the sentiment was avowed, 
 that the Christian theosophy was an eclecticism 
 from the Pagan and the Jewish. John of Damascus, 
 in the eighth century, taught in explicit terjns that 
 " the theosophy of Christianity occupied a midway 
 point between the monotheism of the Jews and 
 the polytheism of the Gentiles ; that the latter con- 
 tained one element of truth, of which the former 
 was lacking ; " that, of course, Jewish monotheism 
 was not true theosophy : it needed to be impreg- 
 nated with an element from Gentile polytheism ; 
 to be reduced to tritheism in order to approach 
 nearer to the truth. And this doctrine of the Da- 
 mascene bishop was endorsed by the Basils and the 
 Gregories of those times, and became current ortho- 
 doxy through the mediaeval ages of the church. 
 
 The fact is fairly undeniable, that the doctrine of 
 the Trinity is of Pagan origin. It came from the 
 Gentiles. There is not a particle of it in Judaism. 
 The author of the Gospel according to John intro- 
 duced the Logos into Christianity. He received it 
 from Plato and PhUo. Though not a new word, 
 yet he employs it in a new sense. He hypostatizes 
 
 13 
 
146 
 
 THE TRINITY. 
 
 the word, or rather what the word signified ; a thing 
 which no other sacred writer had ever done. And 
 he did this in imitation of the Platonic philosophers. 
 The whole doctrine of the Logos is Greek philoso- 
 phy. But it does not deify the Logos in the 
 highest sense. It does not identify him with the 
 Supreme God. The first verse of the Gospel might 
 be thus translated : " In the beginning was the 
 Logos, and the Logos was with the God [the Su- 
 preme God], and the Logos was god." No article 
 before this word, nor is it written with any capital 
 letter, but with small ones throughout. The word 
 T/ieos, God, is first used in its primary sense, 
 having the definite article before it, and is begun 
 with a capital letter. But, in the end of the verse, 
 it is manifestly used in its secondary sense, having 
 no article before it, and is begun with a small 
 letter. 
 
 The doctrine of the Trinity has never been fixed 
 and stationary in its theory. At some times it has 
 been the subordination-theory ; at other times it 
 has been the consubstantial theory ; at other times 
 it has been the identical-substance theory. The 
 one last mentioned is real, though not acknow- 
 ledged, Modalism, — Sabellianism. And the con- 
 substantial doctrine is real, though not avowed, 
 tritheism. If each three of the divine persons be 
 only consubstantial, possessed of the same generic 
 substance, but not identical, then there are three 
 Gods as truly as three divine persons ; for each 
 person must possess an intellect, a sensibility, a 
 self-reflection, and a will, of its own. Otherwise it 
 
THE TRINITY. 147 
 
 cannot be a personal being. But if the substance 
 of each be identical, and have but one intellect, 
 consciousness, and will, then the one God must be 
 one person only. Where there is but one assem- 
 blage of personal attributes, there can, of course, be 
 but one person. 
 
 Very few Trinitarians are fixed in their adhesion 
 to either of the above-mentioned schemes. They 
 take one of them for to-day, and another for to- 
 morrow. But neither the one nor the other will 
 bear scrutiny. Hence the constant oscillation, the 
 shifting of one for the other ; and this being done 
 often backward and forward. Then they plunge 
 into the dark dungeon of mystery, and confess that 
 the doctrine can neither be explained nor under- 
 stood. 
 
 The Trinitarian hypothesis is labelled all over 
 with contradictions. The names and words by 
 which it is described and defined are self-conflict- 
 ing. The names Father and Son contradict the 
 sentiment that they are equal in power and glory. 
 A son cannot, in all respects, be equal to his father. 
 The son depended upon his father for his existence ; 
 but the father was not thus dependent upon the 
 son. The names imply inequality and subordi- 
 nation. Sometimes the terms, first, second, and 
 third persons, are employed to designate the three 
 members of the Trinity. But if these members be 
 equal in power and glory, then no one of them can 
 be first person : each one of them is as much first 
 person as the other. No one of them can be second 
 to the first, nor third to the other two. 
 
148 THE TRINITY. 
 
 But it may be alleged, that these are only names 
 of office. If so, then there must be some reason 
 for it. If one of the divine three have an office 
 above the other two, there must be some reason for 
 this distinction. Offices are assigned on account 
 of merit and fitness. The different offices held by 
 the several members of the Divine Trinity indicate 
 their inequality. The servant is not greater than 
 his lord, nor he that is sent greater than he who 
 sent him ; but the contrary. 
 
 The doctrine under consideration started with an 
 absurdity, — the absurd sentiment that the attribute 
 of intelligence in God became changed into a per- 
 son, possessing aU the perfections requisite to 
 personality, yet leaving God in possession of aU 
 the intellect which he had before ; and, having pro- 
 duced a second divine person from the attribute of 
 reason, it became easy to produce a third from the 
 divine spirit or power. In the course of a few 
 centuries, the activity of God grew into a personal 
 being, under the appellation of the Holy Ghost. It 
 was consummated by the council of Toledo, Spain, 
 in the fifth or sixth century from the birth of 
 Christ. 
 
149 
 
 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : HIS 
 ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 
 
 "Then cometh the end.' 
 
 The end of what ? Not of the kingdom of God, 
 but of the administration of the Messiah. This is 
 obvious from the connection. " Then cometh the 
 end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom 
 to God, even the Father; having put down all 
 opposition. For he must reign until he hath put 
 all things under his feet." Having accomplished 
 the purpose of his commission, the Son will resign 
 it ; as Washington did his, at the close of the war 
 of the American Revolution. " And when aU things 
 shall have been subdued, the Son also himself shall 
 be subject to Him who put all things under him : 
 and God will continue all in all." 
 
 The Messianic Idea and Advent have been the 
 most wonderful phenomena which have ever ap- 
 peared in all the history of mankind. Its influence 
 has wrought out the most important effects. It 
 has produced Christianity, and vastly extended and 
 elevated the pale and the standard of Gentile civili- 
 zation. AU this, we think, will become apparent 
 
 13* 
 
150 
 
 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 from an historical survey of the Messianic idea, in 
 its inception, growth, and successive manifestations. 
 The word Messiah, Christ, signifies anointed; an 
 anointed one; the Lord's anointed. There have 
 been successive Messiahs, and successive Messianic 
 ideas. The first Messiah — bating the sacerdotal 
 anointment of Aaron — was Saul, the son of 
 Kish, anointed by Samuel the prophet, pursuant 
 to divine direction, to be king over Israel. Saul, 
 therefore, is called the Lord's anointed. " Who can 
 stretch forth his hand against the Lord's anoint- 
 ed, and be guiltless ? " Saul, though possessed of 
 some manly, heroic qualities, did not give entire 
 satisfaction. Another, therefore, was appointed. 
 And the second Messiah was David, son of Jesse, 
 of Bethlehem-Judah. This man more than equalled 
 all the anticipations of his friends and patrons. He 
 consolidated the twelve tribes of Israel into a strong 
 nation, and exalted it above all adjacent neighbors 
 and peoples. Eminent for his discretion, superior 
 in military tact, incomparable in piety, and inimi- 
 table in devotional composition, his equal has never 
 since sat on the throne of Israel. 
 
 In the latter part of his life, David entertained 
 the design of building a magnificent temple, to be 
 a substitute for the tabernacle which had hitherto 
 been the house of God. He communicated this 
 thought to Nathan the prophet, who at first ap- 
 proved the king's purpose ; but on the next day he 
 came to the king, and delivered the following mes- 
 sage : " Thus saith the Lord, Thou who hast been 
 a man of war, and shed blood, shalt not build me 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 151 
 
 a house to dwell in. But after that thy days have 
 expired, and thou hast been gathered to thy fathers, 
 I will raise up thy seed after thee, which shall be of 
 thy sons ; and I wUl establish his kingdom. He 
 shall build me an house, and I will establish his 
 throne for evermore. I wUl be his father, and he 
 shall be my son. And I will not take away my 
 mercy from him, as I took it from Saul that was 
 before thee. I will settle him in my house and in 
 my kingdom for ever : his throne shall be estab- 
 lished for evermore." 
 
 On the reception of this message, David's soul 
 was deeply moved. He forthwith " came and sat 
 before the Lord," pouring out his full heart in de- 
 vout expressions of love and thankfulness. " Who 
 am I," said he, " O Lord God ! and what my fa- 
 ther's house, that thou hast brought me hitherto ? 
 And yet this was but a small thing in thine eyes 
 [my own personal prosperity and distinction], O 
 God ! but thou hast spoken of thy servant's house 
 for a great while yet to come, and hast regarded me 
 as a man of high degree, O Lord God ! And what 
 can David say more ? Thou knowest thy servant. 
 O Lord ! according to thine own heart hast thou 
 done all this greatness, in making known all these 
 things. Therefore, now, O Lord! let the thing 
 which thou hast spoken concerning thy servant, and 
 concerning his house, be established for ever, and 
 do as thou hast said. Now, therefore, let it please 
 thee to bless the house of thy servant, that it may 
 be before thee for ever; for thou. Lord, blessest, 
 and it shall be blessed for ever." 
 
152 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 In this account we may find the inception of 
 the Messianic idea. David was promised a son, a 
 Messiah, whose throne should be established for 
 evermore. The seventy-second Psalm purports to 
 have been composed on this or a like occasion. It 
 is entitled, " A Psalm for Solomon." " Give the 
 king thy judgments, O God! and thy righteous- 
 ness unto the king's son. He shall judge thy 
 people with righteousness, and the poor with 
 judgment. He shall break in pieces the oppressor. 
 He shall come down like rain upon the mown 
 grass, as showers that water the earth. In his days 
 shall the righteous flourish, and abundance of peace 
 so long as the moon endureth. He shall have do- 
 minion from sea to sea, and from the river to the 
 ends of the earth. They that dwell in the wilder- 
 ness shall bow before him, and his enemies shall 
 lick the dust. Yea, all kings shall fall down before 
 him, and all nations shall serve him. He shall live, 
 and to him shall be given of the gold of Sheba. 
 Prayer also shall be made for him continually, and 
 daily shall he be praised. His name shall be con- 
 tinued as long as the sun ; and men shall be blessed 
 in him. All nations shall call him blessed." 
 
 Such was the Messianic idea in the mind of 
 David. And there is an additional development 
 of it in the second Psalm. It has special reference 
 to adversaries and opposition. " The kings of the 
 earth take counsel together, and conspire against 
 the Lord, in the person of his Messiah. They say, 
 Let us break the bands asunder, and cast the chains 
 from us. The Lord shall speak to them in his 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 153 
 
 wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. I 
 have set my Son upon my holy hill of Zion. I 
 have said to him. Thou art my Son ; this day have 
 I begotten thee. I will give thee the heathen for 
 thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the 
 earth for thy possession. Thou shall break them 
 with a rod of iron ; thou shalt dash them in pieces 
 like a potter's vessel. Be wise, therefore, now, O 
 ye kings! be persuaded, ye rulers of the earth. 
 Serve the Lord with fear. Kiss the Son, lest he be 
 angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath 
 is kindled but a little. Blessed are aU they who 
 put their trust in him." 
 
 With such prospects in his own mind, and in 
 the minds of other pious Israelites, did David, the 
 son of Jesse, close his earthly course, and go down 
 to the grave. His son Solomon — or rather the 
 dynasty of the line of David — was to sit on the 
 throne for ever, and stand at the head of all other 
 kingdoms. Solomon did succeed his distinguished 
 father ; and, standing as it were on his father's 
 shoulders, he did seem to be, and he was, a great 
 prince. He possessed abundance of riches and 
 honors. He caused to be builded a superb temple, 
 and formed a royal establishment, on a scale of 
 splendid magnificence. His biographer says that 
 Solomon exceeded all the kings of the earth in 
 riches and in wisdom ; that all the kings of Ara- 
 bia, and governors of the country, brought gold and 
 silver to Solomon; and that all the kings of the 
 earth sought the presence of Solomon, to hear his 
 wisdom which God had put in his heart. And that 
 
154 THE MESSIAH I THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 they brought every man his present : vessels of sil- 
 ver and vessels of gold, and raiment, and harness, 
 and spices, and horses, and mules, a rate year by 
 year ; that he made silver to be as plenty in Jerusa- 
 lem as stones, so that nothing but gold was made 
 account of in the days of Solomon. 
 
 But, after all this flourish on the part of the his- 
 torian, and all this promise on the part of the pro- 
 phet Nathan, Solomon appears to have been rather 
 a weak than a strong man. While the riches left 
 to him by his illustrious father, and while the com- 
 manding reputation of David, sustained him, his 
 position was high and magnificent ; but, as these 
 became exhausted, the position of Solomon waned. 
 In the latter part of his reign, his affairs tended to 
 deterioration and disorder ; and, immediately after 
 his death, this great kingdom was sundered in twain. 
 Ten tribes revolted from the house of David, and 
 became a distinct kingdom under Jeroboam, the son 
 of Nebat. The glory was now departed. The 
 neighboring nations gradually ceased to do homage 
 and to pay tribute to the Israelitish throne. And 
 this schism was not healed. The affairs of Israel 
 continued to decline until the people of both king- 
 doms became tributaries and captives under the 
 kings of Assyria and Chaldea. 
 
 Yet the Hebrew saints and prophets did not 
 despair. 
 
 " Hope springs eternal in the human breast." 
 
 They believed that the promises of God given 
 to David were not made in vain, and that they 
 would yet be fulfilled; that though Solomon had 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 155 
 
 proved himself incompetent to be the glorious 
 monarch of nations, yet that the true Messiah in 
 due time would be raised up ; that the divine cove- 
 nant made virith David was well ordered in aU things 
 and sure ; that it was " the sure mercies of David." 
 They prospected the time when the law should go 
 forth from Zion and the word of the Lord from 
 Jerusalem ; when this holy city should become the 
 beauty of perfection, the joy of the whole earth. 
 " Glorious things are spoken of thee, thou city of 
 our God." " The Lord of hosts shall reign in 
 Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, and before his an- 
 cients, gloriously." " The Gentiles shall come to 
 thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising." 
 " And thou, O tower of the flock, strong-hold of the 
 daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the 
 first dominion ; and the sceptre shall not depart 
 from the daughter of Jerusalem." " The sons of 
 strangers shall build thy walls, and the sons of the 
 alien shall be thy vine-dressers, thy ploughmen, 
 and thy husbandmen. The nation and kingdom 
 that will not serve thee shall perish ; yea, shall be 
 utterly wasted." " For unto us a child is born, 
 unto us a son is given : and the government shall 
 be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be the 
 Wonderful, the Counsellor, the Mighty Potentate, 
 the Father of the age, the Prince of Peace. Of 
 the increase and peace of his kingdom there shall 
 be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his 
 kingdom, to order it and to establish it with judg- 
 ment and with justice from henceforth, even for ever. 
 The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this." 
 
156 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 The dark night of Jewish depression has been 
 long and tedious. Century after century has rolled 
 over them, and over their desolations. From the 
 sway of the Chaldeans they were transferred to 
 that of the Medo-Persians ; from these to that of 
 the Syrian Greeks; and from the latter to that 
 of the Romans. But the Messianic idea did not 
 die out. On the contrary, it was constantly aug- 
 menting in magnitude and perfection. Though 
 the morning star did not rise, yet they saw it with 
 the eye of faith ; and it was constantly acquiring 
 fresh splendor. Around its nucleus clustered all 
 the elements of greatness and excellence : " Beau- 
 tiful as Tirzah, comely as Jerusalem, terrible as an 
 army with banners ; yea, altogether lovely " and 
 glorious. 
 
 This anticipation was not only deep and univer- 
 sal in the Jewish mind, but it had also taken pos- 
 session of many of the Gentiles among whom the 
 Jews lived. This fact is attested by three cele- 
 brated historians of that period. These are Jose- 
 phus, Suetonius, and Tacitus. They each employ 
 nearly the same words, and say that " all over the 
 East there prevailed the belief that some one from 
 Judea would soon rise, and take possession of the 
 empire of the w^orld." And they add, that an ora- 
 cle to this effect was said to be contained in the 
 sacred books of the Jews. This wide-spread doc- 
 trine and expectancy was the real " voice crying in 
 the wilderness, preparing the way of the Lord, 
 making smooth an highway for our God, filling up 
 the valleys, levelling down the hills, smoothing the 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 157 
 
 rough places, and straightening the crooked roads ; 
 so that all flesh might see the salvation of God. 
 
 It was near one thousand years from the time of 
 David, the archetypal Messiah, that Jesus of Naza- 
 reth was born. At about thirty years of age, he 
 commenced his public ministry. He did not at 
 first, and openly, declare himself to be the Messiah, 
 but did it cautiously and gradually. The nation 
 generally rejected his claim to that high distinction, 
 because he was not a monarch ; not such a Mes- 
 siah as their prophets had described him. His own 
 few select and devout disciples believed, that though 
 he was then obscure and lowly, yet he would soon 
 become illustrious and imperial. His crucifixion 
 perplexed them ; but his revival on the third day 
 redintegrated their confidence that he would soon 
 restore the kingdom to Israel. As he ascended, and 
 a doud received him out of their sight, two men 
 appeared in white apparel, who said, " This same 
 Jesus, who is taken up, shall so come again in like 
 manner as ye have seen him go up into heaven." 
 From that time the doctrine of the return-advent 
 of Jesus our Lord has been devoutly believed by 
 aU Christians. The apostles, and others with them, 
 not only believed that Jesus their Master would 
 return in person, but that he would come speedily. 
 It was the great exciting doctrine among the primi- 
 tive disciples of the cross ; their first thought in the 
 morning, their last thought at night. Hence the 
 firequent mention of it in the apostolical Epistles : 
 " The Lord is at hand." " The coming of the Lord 
 draweth nigh." " Behold, the Judge standeth at the 
 
 14 
 
158 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 door." This was a new feature in tlie Messianic 
 faith. The Jews had long believed that the Mes- 
 siah would come ; but they had not thought of his 
 coming twice: they had never distinguished his 
 coming into first and second advents. As Jesus 
 did not fulfil, in his life and ministry, all that the 
 prophets had foretold of the Messiah, his followers 
 believed that he would come again personally and 
 bodily, so that whatever had been wanting in the 
 first advent would find its complement in the se- 
 cond. 
 
 But what did they regard as being the proper 
 purpose and business of the second advent of 
 Christ ? Was it to be a king or a judge ? Was 
 it to reign or to adjudicate? The Hebrew pro- 
 phets ascribed both these offices to the Messiah. 
 He was to rule and govern the people in great pros- 
 perity, righteousness, and peace. He was also to 
 dispense awful retribution. His rod was an iron, 
 that would dash wicked nations and peoples into 
 " shivers." " But who may abide the day of 
 his coming ? Who stand when he appeareth ? 
 For he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver." 
 " Behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven ; 
 and all the proud, all that do wickedly, shaU be 
 as stubble : the day shall burn them up, leaving 
 them neither root nor branch." But although the 
 pre-Christian prophets attributed to the Messiah 
 the office both of a king and a judge, yet they 
 usually spake of him in his royal character. They 
 dwelt, in their descriptions of him, upon his peace- 
 ful and happy government, under which the poor 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 159 
 
 and oppressed, the prisoner and the captive, the 
 bruised and the broken-hearted, the low and the 
 injured, would all be saved; would be righted of 
 their injuries, relieved from their burdens, and 
 raised to a condition of freedom, enjoyment, and 
 honor. 
 
 On the other hand, the Christian prophet dwelt 
 chiefly upon his official work of retribution. When 
 the Lord should return, it would be to act as a 
 Judge ; he w^ould judge both the quick and the dead. 
 The scene and the work are described in the para- 
 bles ; that of the virgins ; also in that of the sheep 
 and the goats ; and in those of the pounds and tal- 
 ents, of the wheat and the tares, and of the net 
 cast into the sea. It would take place at the end 
 of the world, when the whole business of human 
 affairs would be wound up and finished. The 
 apostle Paul believed that the bodily resurrection 
 of all the dead in Christ would then take place ; 
 and that the revived saints, together with the 
 changed saints, then living, would be taken up " to 
 meet the Lord in the air, and so would be for ever 
 with him." 
 
 The apostle Peter believed, that the earth and aU 
 things in it would then be burned up : " All these 
 things shall be dissolved." And both these apostles 
 declare, that this great catastrophe in relation to the 
 wicked, and consummation in relation to the righ- 
 teous, was near, — was daily impending. . It might 
 come at any moment. It would come soon. Some 
 who were cotemporaries with the Lord Jesus would 
 live to see it. Time moved on; but the second 
 
160 
 
 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 advent and the dissolution of the world did not 
 arrive. And then, moreover, appeared scoffers, say- 
 ing, " Where is the promise of his coming ? The 
 fathers have fallen asleep, and all things continue 
 as they were from the beginning of the world." 
 And another difficulty was soon perceived, to which 
 we have aheady alluded. If the end of all things 
 was so near at hand, and if the chief and almost 
 the only work of the coming Messiah was to act as 
 an adjudicator and a rewarder, what then becomes 
 of aU the beautiful and splendid descriptions, in 
 the prophetic Scriptures, of the Messiah's kingdom 
 and reign on earth, — when the bear and the lamb, 
 the Hon and the kid, should lie down together, and 
 a little child should be their keeper ; w^hen the 
 people should be all righteous, and the fruit of 
 righteousness should be peace and quietness for 
 ever? 
 
 It seems to have been for the purpose of sur- 
 mounting this difficulty, that the doctrine of Chi- 
 Haism was conceived and propagated to some 
 extent in the period of the apostolic age. This 
 doctrine is put forth in the Revelation of St. John 
 the divine, probably not St. John the apostle. It 
 announces a personal reign of Christ and the saints 
 on earth of a thousand years in duration. It has 
 been called the Millennial Day, — the seventh of the 
 seven thousand years, which many have assumed 
 to be the full age to which the world will have ar- 
 rived immediately before its disintegration. At the 
 commencement of this millennium, the second, the 
 fearful, and the glorious advent of the Messiah, in 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 161 
 
 connection with the resurrection of the saints, will 
 take place. Then wiU follow the thousand years of 
 the Messianic reign of Christ. At the close of this 
 millennium, it was declared that the wicked dead 
 would be raised, or rather that they would be 
 judged, and cast into a lake of fire ; that, after this 
 judgment, the holy city, the New Jerusalem, would 
 come down from God out of heaven, and the taber- 
 nacle of God would be with men. 
 
 This doctrine of a Messianic millennium on earth, 
 though it removed some difficulties attending the 
 usual belief, yet it created others ; and it seems 
 never to have been gener^iUy received among the 
 early Christians. The Chiliasts, so called, were 
 but a fraction of the church. And after a few 
 centuries they ceased to be even that : they disap- 
 peared from the page of ecclesiastical history. This 
 new doctrine of the millennium, limiting the reign 
 of Christ to a thousand years, — a reign which had 
 hitherto been regarded and described as endless and 
 everlasting, — was probably the principal reason 
 which long prevented the reception of the Apoca- 
 lypse as an inspired book. The canonization of it 
 was delayed for the space of some hundred years, 
 and was not consummated untU the convention of 
 the council of Toledo, Spain, in the fifth or sixth 
 century. 
 
 This council, however, did not endorse, in its 
 ojiginal sense, the doctrine of the thousand years' 
 reign of the Messiah. The literal interpretation of 
 that part of the Apocalypse had now faded out, 
 and was repudiated. Christians had now ceased 
 
 14* 
 
162 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 to live in constant expectation of the visible and 
 glorious appearance of the great God and our Sa- 
 viour. They had begun to put a new construction 
 upon many prophetic portions of the Sacred Scrip- 
 tures. The terms Zion, Jerusalem, Israel, and the 
 house of Jacob, were not now accepted in their 
 primitive and literal sense, but in one that is secon- 
 dary and figurative. So likewise the terms, kingdom 
 of God and kingdom of heaven. They had begun 
 to account the Christian Church to be the kingdom 
 of God. It was the correspondent of the Jewish 
 Church. Through the medium of the Mosaical in- 
 stitutions, the Israelites were constituted a kingdom 
 of God ; their government, a theocracy. God was 
 their king, and governed them by means of his laws, 
 prophets, oracles, and invisible supervision. And 
 it was conceived and taught, that, as the Christian 
 Church corresponded to the Jewish ; the latter being 
 the archetype of the former, which, of course, must 
 be equally, and more than equally, the kingdom of 
 heaven, — in this, and over this, was the reign of 
 Christ. The evangelical kingdom of God was 
 upon earth. Its peculiar character is recognized in 
 the Lord's Prayer: "Thy [God's] kingdom come; 
 thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." The 
 locality of what in the Gospels is called the king- 
 dom of God is on earth. The kingdom of heaven is 
 here, below ; but heaven itself is there, above. And 
 as the Jewish church had an hierEirchy, consisting of 
 high priest, chief priests, and ordineiry priests, so 
 must the Christian Church, on the principle of cor- 
 lespondence, have one universal bishop, a number 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 163 
 
 of metropolitan bishops, and a multitude of local 
 and laboring priests, elders, ministers. As the 
 Messiah is God's vicegerent now in heaven, so the 
 universal bishop, now on earth, is Christ's vicege- 
 rent for the government of the church. The Holy 
 Catholic Church is the kingdom of God. Jesus, 
 the Messiah, has come into possession of this king- 
 dom. He was invested with authority to govern 
 it w^hen he ascended from earth to heaven, and sat 
 on the right hand of God. That was the proper 
 beginning of his reign ; and his reign will continue 
 until all nations are evangelized, until all men be- 
 come Christians. Thus they taught and argued. 
 
 Although the Christian fathers changed the mean- 
 ing of those scriptural passages which describe the 
 reign of Christ, from a primary and literal to a 
 secondary and correspondential sense, yet they did 
 not do the same thing in respect to those passages 
 which describe the judgment. These they con- 
 tinued to accept in their literal import. The work 
 of the day of judgment was to be strictly that of 
 an assize, a court of trial; of adjudication. 
 
 It is no other than a fair question to inquire, if 
 the kingdom and reign of Messiah, when announced 
 and described in the New Testament, are to be un- 
 derstood spiritually and metaphorically, why should 
 not the judgment be regEirded in the same light? 
 Why should not the judgment-scenes be as meta- 
 phorical and spiritual as those of the reign and 
 kingdom of the Messiah ? 
 
 There is one marked difference between ancient 
 and modern interpretation of the Holy Scriptures in 
 
164 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 respect to the judgment. The ancients placed the 
 judgment first; the reign after it. With those of 
 old time, the judgment was introductory ; but with 
 ■ the moderns, it is terminatory and closing. Those 
 believed that the " last days " commenced with the 
 judgment: these believe the judgment closes and 
 concludes them. 
 
 There have been Adventists in perhaps all the 
 ages and centuries of Christendom. The Chris- 
 tians of the apostolic age were Adventists. The 
 Chiliasts of the second and third centuries were 
 Adventists. Half the Christians of Europe, in the 
 tenth and eleventh centuries, seem to have been 
 Adventists. This doctrine, it has been thought, 
 started and impelled those great movements of the 
 medieeval ages, — the crusades. There were Adven- 
 tists in the time of Martin Luther. That remarka- 
 ble denomination of Christians called Shakers are 
 Adventists. They believe that the Messiah made 
 his promised advent in the person of Ann Lee. 
 The Swedenborgians are a description of Adven- 
 tists ; for they believe that Christ, in the character 
 of the Paraclete, fulfilled his promised mission by 
 illuminating the mind of Immanuel Swedenborg. 
 
 It is obvious, from statements already made, that 
 the Messianic idea has taken different phases and 
 modifications. The Messiah of one age and gene- 
 ration has not been the same as the Christ of 
 another. What was the Messiah of the Hebrew 
 prophets ? He was a' human monarch, wielding 
 an iron sceptre, crushing down refractory nations, 
 and consolidating them in one great imperium, 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 165 
 
 before he dispensed to them the precious blessings 
 of peace. This was the Messiah of the Old Tes- 
 tament. And what was the Messiah of the Gospels ? 
 It was the man Jesus of Nazareth, anointed with 
 Holy Ghost and with power; who went about 
 doing good, healing the diseased, dispossessing 
 demoniacs, and preaching the doctrine of repent- 
 ance and forgiveness of sins to all, even to publicans 
 and sinners ; a man who, though approved of God, 
 was arrested and crucified by the Jews ; was dead 
 and buried, yet was revived on the third day, and 
 afterward received up into heaven. Such is the 
 Messiah of the gospel. And what was the Messiah 
 of the apostolic age? It was this same Jesus of 
 Nazareth exalted to a kingly throne in the heavens; 
 Monarch, not only of this world, but of all worlds ; 
 ascended up far above all heavens, that he may fill 
 all things. And what was the Messiah of the early 
 Christian fathers? He was a great celestial war- 
 rior; Michael marshalling and leading forth the 
 sacramental host; conducting the war in heaven, 
 as weU as on earth ; fighting the dragon and his 
 legions of angels; wrestling against principalities 
 and powers, the rulers of the darkness of this world, 
 spiritual wickedness in high places. He was the 
 Captain of salvation. He saved his people by fight- 
 ing and overcoming their enemies. And what the 
 Messiah of the members of the Holy Catholic 
 Church ? He was a great High Priest, offering up to 
 God, on the altar of the cross, his body and life as 
 a literal, piacular, atoning, and vicarious sacrifice ; 
 and thus purchasing the pardon and justification of 
 
166 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA : 
 
 all orthodox believers. And such the Messiah of all 
 so-called orthodox Christendom, — including with 
 Romanists, Greeks, Nestorians, Armenians, and 
 Protestants. And what the Messiah of those de- 
 nominated liberal Christians ? It is the man Christ 
 Jesus ; teaching the way of God truly ; living the 
 spiritual life of God in his own soul ; beseeching 
 sinners to renounce their wicked way, and become 
 reconciled to God ; relieving the diseased, and com- 
 forting the bereaved; bearing injustice and abuse 
 with perfect meekness and patience ; and dying as 
 a martyr to the cause of redemption and truth ; — 
 the First-begotten from the dead, and our Fore- 
 runner ; having entered that Holy of Holies which 
 is above, and thus opened the doors of the heaven 
 of heavens to all true believers. 
 
 There has been, in the abstract and virtually, 
 though not in the concrete and objectively, a suc- 
 cession of Messiahs. The Messianic ideas have 
 necessarily been subjective. They were at first a 
 thought in some mind; and no person or people 
 can conceive and entertain a thought or an idea 
 which is above that state of enlightenment to which 
 they have arrived. The Hebrew prophets could 
 not have entertained such a Messianic idea as was 
 entertained by the apostles ; nor could the early 
 Christians have conceived such an idea of Christ 
 as was entertained of him in the later and middle 
 ages. Each of the successive Messianic ideas have, 
 on the whole, been an improvement upon its pre- 
 decessor. The disciples of Jesus could not receive 
 from him his true and full ideal of goodness, because 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 167 
 
 their minds were not sufficiently enlightened to 
 hold perfect sympathy with his. All the Messianic 
 ideas, we repeat it, have been radically subjective ; 
 and each succeeding one has corrected some of the 
 imperfections of that which went before it. Such 
 a Messiah as the Hebrew seers and poets foresaw 
 and described did not come ; but a better one did 
 come. Such a Messianic advent and kingdom as 
 the primitive Christians looked for has not been 
 realized ; yet one of far superior glory has become 
 a reality. Such a millennium as the Chiliasts and 
 Adventists have with so much assurance expected, 
 has not come, nor probably ever will come ; yet 
 one of far transcendent worth is doubtless yet to 
 bless the habitation of men. 
 
 As- the several Messianic ideas have each been 
 the best which the existing condition of the human 
 mind admitted, they have all been highly useful. 
 The old Jewish ideal was useful. It preserved the 
 nation, kept them from despair, inspirited them 
 with deep and noble aspirations. It opened and 
 paved the road for the chariot of Christianity. 
 The apostolic ideal of a militant and conquering 
 Saviour — a Michael at the head of the armies of 
 heaven — was useful. It inspired Christians -with 
 indomitable courage, gave intensity to resolution, 
 and urged them on to the most persevering effort. 
 The idea of the speedy advent of the Son of man 
 was also useful. It enabled the early Christians to 
 renounce earthly possessions, and to imitate the ex- 
 ample of Moses in accounting the sufferings of Christ 
 to be better riches than the treasures of Egypt. 
 
168 
 
 THE MESSIAH: THE MESSIANIC IDEA: 
 
 Every Messianic idea has contai ned much truth ; 
 and this the best truth to which the mind of man 
 had then attained. And it is the truth, in all cases, 
 which -works benefits. It is not the property of 
 falsehood to do good, but exclusively the office of 
 truth. It is on this fact, as a principle, that civili- 
 zation and Christianity mutually aid, advance each 
 other. Modern civilization could not have come 
 without the aid of Christianity ; and it is equally 
 true, that modern Christianity could not have come 
 without the aid of civilization. Civilization, at 
 bottom, is enlightenment ; Christianity, at bottom, 
 is faith. And it is only by the united influences of 
 enlightenment and faith that a right religion and 
 a right civilization can be attained. 
 
 It is apparent, from what has been stated in 
 this discourse, that all the divine predictions and 
 promises- are conditional. And only so far as 
 the conditions are fulfilled will the predicted and 
 promised blessings be conferred. God made great 
 and precious promises to Abraham. And he also 
 said, " I know Abraham that he will command his 
 children and household after him, that they keep 
 the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment, 
 that the Lord God may bring upon Abraham the 
 things spoken of him." This passage is very sig- 
 nificant. It signifies that the promises made to the 
 patriarch were conditional, and that the faithful- 
 ness of Abraham would insure their fulfilment. 
 Very numerous and splendid were the promises 
 made by Moses to the Israelites : " Happy art thou, 
 O Israel ! what nation is Hke unto thee ; a people 
 
HIS ADVENT, REIGN, AND KINGDOM. 169 
 
 saved of the Lord, who is the shield of thy help, 
 and the sword of thine excellency ! Thine enemies 
 shall be found liars unto thee, and thou shalt tread 
 on their high places." Yet aU this was conditional ; 
 and only so far as the terms were complied with, 
 were the benefits accorded. 
 
 And what could have been more express, specific, 
 and magnificent, than the promises made to David 
 and Solomon ? Yet they were, manifestly, con- 
 ditional; and the neglect to fulfil the conditions 
 caused the failure of the promises. Yet even those 
 blessings themselves were but the shadows of the 
 better things which a due and attainable amount 
 of enlightenment and faith can confer upon man- 
 kind. These, we believe, wiU come ; and those will 
 surely follow in the train. 
 
 It was, manifestly; a mistake in the Jewish pro- 
 phets to apprehend, as they evidently did, that a 
 potent military monarch like David could be the 
 Saviour of the world ; that a rod of iron could be 
 the instrumentality of a true moral reformation. 
 It might compel men to live orderly. It might 
 coerce them from acts of violence. But, until duly 
 enlightened and renovated, the tendency to resist- 
 ance would remain in them ; and, when the oppor- 
 tunity came, they would resist and rebel. There 
 would be actual rebellion. The necessity of the 
 sword, the bailiff, and the prison, always presuppose 
 a tendency to do injustice. And moral force, that 
 of truth, is the only antidote to evil. 
 
 It was also an equal mistake to believe, as they 
 likewise did, that the true mode of reformation was 
 
 IS 
 
170 THE MESSIAH : THE MESSIANIC IDEA. 
 
 to destroy and kill all the wicked, but save the 
 righteous alive. Thus they might bring up a new 
 and perhaps a better generation. The reform, 
 however, would be only temporary. Corruption 
 again wotdd soon return. Men must be morally 
 regenerated before they wiU aU live righteously. 
 The prophet had a right conception on this subject : 
 " Behold, the day cometh, saith the Lord, when I 
 will make a new covenant with my people : I will 
 write my laws upon their heart ; and then wiU they 
 be my people, and I will be their God." 
 
171 
 
 CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 
 
 " For even Christ, our passover, is sacrificed for us." — 1 Cor. v. 7. 
 
 In many passages of the New Testament, the death 
 of Christ is spoken of as being a sacrifice. On this 
 point there is no controversy ; but it is an open and 
 controverted question whether it be so called in a 
 literal or a constructive sense. There are, there- 
 fore, two issues on this subject. First, What is a 
 literal sacrifice ? Second, "Was the death of Christ 
 a sacrifice in the primitive, or only in the secondary 
 and figurative, sense of the word ? 
 
 What, then, is a sacrifice in the most proper and 
 original import of the term ? A majority of Chris- 
 tian theologians and commentators attach to it 
 the idea of a vicarious equivalent; an expiatory 
 compensation ; a substitute for punishment or pe- 
 nalty. A sacrifice — as to the material of it — 
 being something offered to God, a part or the whole 
 of which was destroyed, usually by fire, it has been 
 BBterpreted as a symbol of that death which is the 
 legal penalty and wages of sin. The death of 
 Christ has been viewed as being the only proper 
 and efficient sacrifice for sin, and all others as 
 
172 
 
 CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 
 
 being but types and prefigurations of it. This, if 
 we mistake not, is the current, the long-prevalent, 
 and the so-called orthodox view of sacrifice. We 
 regard it, however, as a misconception and an error. 
 The purpose of sacrifice, under the patriarchal and 
 legal dispensations, was homage, worship ; not a 
 penal equivalent, not a substitute, not a compensa- 
 tion. To our mind, the truth of the proposition, 
 above stated, appears manifest and clear from the 
 following considerations : — 
 
 1. A large proportion of the things sacrificed 
 were bloodless and inanimate. Though the lamb, 
 the bullock, and the goat were prominent articles 
 for the altar, yet they were far from being the ex- 
 clusive ones. Flour, sheaves of wheat, incense, 
 wine, oil, and parched corn, were often the substance- 
 matter of sacrifice. These, having no life to lose, 
 could not have been the symbol and representative 
 of a death-penalt}". They were not, therefore, fit 
 and admissible materials. They had no signifi- 
 cance on the vicarious principle : while, on the 
 principle of worship, they were equally significant 
 as the slain victims. 
 
 2. The sacrifices were called offerings, oblations, 
 gifts, donations. The things consecrated and 
 brought to the altar are as often called offerings as 
 sacrifices. These tw^o terms are employed inter- 
 changeably and synonymously. There was no dif- 
 ference between an offering and a sacrifice. The 
 slain bullock was an offering ; and the bloodless oil, 
 wine, incense, and flour were sacrifices. And the 
 reason of it is obvious. They were all and equally, 
 
CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 173 
 
 when duly made, acts of worship ; of homage ren- 
 dered to God. But, if the purpose of sacrifices had 
 been the expiation of sin, compensation for trans- 
 gression, they could not have been properly denomi- 
 nated offerings, oblations, gifts, donations. They 
 rather possessed the character of debts; and the 
 liability incurred by sin is, in Scripture, sometimes 
 denominated a debt : " Forgive us our debts, as we 
 forgive our debtors." But the payment of a debt 
 is not a gift. If the object of sacrifices had been 
 to make amends for past delinquencies, they could 
 not have possessed the character of oblations, gifts, 
 free-will offerings ; and they surely would never 
 have been so denominated. 
 
 3. There are passages of Scripture which express 
 clearly the latrial character of sacrifices. " Honor 
 the Lord with thy substance and with the first-fruits 
 of thine increase ; so shall thy barns be filled with 
 plenty, and thy presses shall burst forth with new 
 wine." And the prophet Isaiah thus reproves the 
 people of his nation : " But thou hast not called 
 upon me, O .Jacob ! thou hast been weary of me, 
 O Israel ! Thou hast not brought me the small cattle 
 of thy burnt-offerings ; neither hast thou honored 
 me with thy sacrifices. Thou hast bought me no 
 s'weet cane with money ; neither hast thou filled me 
 with the fat of thy sacrifices ; but thou hast made 
 me to serve with thy sins, and wearied me with 
 thine iniquities." 
 
 The conceptions which men entertained of God 
 in the early ages of the world were anthropomor- 
 phitic. They conceived God to be like an elevated, 
 
 16* 
 
174 CHRIST A" SACRIFICE. 
 
 all-knowing, and almighty man. And as it was the 
 duty of children to honor their parents, and espe- 
 cially their presiding patriarch and king, by minis- 
 tering to their wants ; by contributions of the 
 necessaries and comforts of life ; by donafions of 
 the choicest portions from their flocks, herds, fields, 
 and vineyards, they felt the desire of rendering a 
 similar service to Him above who was the dispenser 
 of all the good things of life. But how could they 
 do it? He did not need their contributions, — 
 their corn, their wine, their oil, their bullocks, or 
 the lambs of their flocks. He had no use for the 
 flesh of beasts, nor for wine, nor for incense. Yet 
 it would express the sentiment of their hearts to 
 give them to him ; to consecrate them to his use ; 
 to devote them as his, and withdraw them from 
 every other use. Hence a consecrated thing could 
 not be otherwise appropriated : it was sacrilege to 
 use it for any secular purpose. It was, therefore, 
 burned or poured upon the ground or into the sea. 
 It was destroyed, that it might not be applied to 
 any profane use. It being God's, no man might ap- 
 propriate it to any earthly use whatever. And it is 
 easily perceived, that the idea of honoring God lies 
 at the foundation of this thing. Once the devoted 
 article was a man's own ; but, after he had given it 
 freely to God, it was no longer human property. It 
 was therefore destroyed, that it might never be any 
 other's than God's. When the field at Delphos, 
 devoted to Apollo, was ploughed and sown by the 
 Crisseans, a sacrilege was committed which, it is 
 said, " sent a thrill of horror through the whole of 
 
CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 175 
 
 Greece." The Mosaica] law ordained the devotion 
 of all the firstlings of the flocks and herds. If 
 suitable for the altar, they might be either sacri- 
 ficed or redeemed. If unsuitable, they must be 
 redeemed. A certain sum of money would ransom 
 them. But, if the owner did not redeem the first- 
 ling of the horse or the ass, the injunction is ex- 
 press, " Thou shaft break his neck." 
 
 We may obtain the central idea of a sacrifice 
 from the account given of Jephthah and his vow : 
 " And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and 
 said, If thou shalt deliver the children of Ammon into 
 my hand, then it shall be that whatsoever cometh 
 forth of the doors of my house to meet me in peace 
 shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for 
 a burnt-offering." The peculiar attribute of a sac- 
 rifice was, that it should be " the Lord's ; " — not the 
 Lord's in the universal sense of divine possession ; 
 as " the earth is the Lord's, and fulness of it ; " but 
 in an appropriate sense, as having been given to 
 him by the human owner. 
 
 David, on a certain occasion, being very weary 
 and athirst, exclaimed, " Oh that one would give 
 me to drink water from the well of Bethlehem!" 
 On hearing this ardent language from their beloved 
 chief, three men, at the imminent peril of their lives, 
 broke through the ranks of an hostile army, and 
 took water from the well of Bethlehem, and brought 
 it to the king; but he refused to drink it. It was 
 too precious to be drunk : it had cost too much to 
 be used for a secular purpose. He, therefore, gave 
 it to the Lord ; making of it a sacrifice. David 
 
176 
 
 CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 
 
 "would not drink of it, but poured it out unto 
 the Lord." In this account, as in the other, we 
 perceive what was the true distinctive of a sacrifice. 
 It was being freely and deliberately consecrated and 
 given to God. This was the first act of the offerer : 
 the second was to destroy it. This was usually 
 done by fire ; but, if the thing was a liquid, it was 
 poured out upon the ground or into the sea. 
 
 We have given, we think, the radical idea of a 
 sacrifice. It has two elements ; that of dedication, 
 and that of destruction. A thing merely dedicated 
 was not a sacrifice. Samuel was dedicated to the 
 Lord by his mother before his bii-th. But this 
 did not amount to a sacrifice. David and the tri- 
 bal princes dedicated an immense sum of silver 
 and gold for the erection of the temple : but it was 
 not a proper sacrifice; for it was not destroyed, 
 but appropriated to a sacred use. There were 
 usually in the temples, both of the Gentiles and 
 the Jews, many dedicated things : these were called 
 anathemas, not sacrifices. The Crissean field was 
 not a sacrifice, but an anathema. 
 
 Under the Mosaical law, there was a ritual by 
 which sacrifices were regulated. Things dedicated 
 to the Lord for sacrifices must be disposed of in a 
 regular way. They were to be offered by the priests, 
 — a consecrated order of men, — and burned on 
 the altar. Among the early patriarchs, the man 
 built his own altar, and acted as his own priest. 
 
 There was a difference between a sacrifice and 
 martyrdom. Zechariah, the son of Jehoida, was a 
 martyi-. His death in the sanctuary, by the hands 
 
CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 177 
 
 of an infuriated mob, was a martyrdom ; but it was 
 not a sacrifice. His death was never thus denomi- 
 nated. 
 
 The distinction between the priesthood of Christ 
 and that under the Mosaical law is distinctly and 
 largely noted in the Epistle to the Hebrews. So 
 great was the difi'erence that the apostle asserts, 
 that, "if Christ were now on earth, he should not be 
 a priest," Heb. viii. 4. Of course, he could not 
 have been a Mosaical priest, while he was on earth. 
 His priesthood was of a different character. It was 
 more like that of the priests under the patriarchal 
 dispensation ; " after the order of Melchisedec," 
 who was one of the patriarchs. In those times, 
 there was no priest, in the legal and proper sense 
 of the word. The priesthood had not then been 
 instituted. The patriarch ministered at his own 
 altar: he performed the part which was afterward 
 devolved upon the priesthood. Melchisedec, there- 
 fore, was caUed a priest ; yet he was not such in 
 the technical sense of the term. And Christ is a 
 priest after the order of Melchisedec ; i.e. a differ- 
 ent kind of priest from that of the Levitical order ; 
 but in reality as different from that of Melchisedec 
 as he was from that of Aaron. 
 
 That the priesthood of Christ was wholly of a 
 moral description, entirely separate from ceremo- 
 nials, may be fairly inferred from the manner of his 
 appointment. " No man taketh this honor upon 
 himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. 
 So Christ glorified not himself to be made an high 
 priest ; but he who said to him, Thou art my Son, 
 
178 
 
 CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 
 
 to-day have I begotten thee." Christ, therefore, 
 seems to have had no special appointment to be a 
 priest. He was appointed — declared to be, recog- 
 nized as — "the Son of God." His whole office, 
 then, was of a moral description. And the correct- 
 ness of this view of the subject further appears 
 from the account given by the apostle of the cha- 
 racter of the covenant under which he ministered. 
 It was not such a covenant as that instituted for 
 the Israelites, immediately after their exodus from 
 Egypt. It did not, like that, consist in meats, drinks, 
 ablutions, the flesh and blood of lambs, goats, and 
 bullocks ; in cardinal ordinances, imposed until the 
 time of reformation. The covenant is thus described 
 in language taken from the prophet Jeremiah : — 
 " This is the covenant which I wUl make with the 
 house of Israel, saith the Lord : I will put my law 
 into their hearts, and write it upon their inward 
 part ; and I will be their God, and they shall be my 
 people." It is a manifest fact, that the new cove- 
 nant, of which Christ is the mediator, possesses a 
 purely moral character. It is wholly spiritual. Its 
 object is " reformation.'' It aims at the conversion 
 of individuals, and the rectification of human so- 
 ciety. The heart of man is the seat of its action. 
 And as the covenant is spiritual, so likewise are 
 the means and agencies by which it acts, Truth 
 is the medium of its operation. It is by the agency 
 of truth that men are reclaimed and sanctified. 
 The " end " for which Christ was born and came 
 into the world was to bear witness unto the truth." 
 " He that is of the truth heareth his voice." The 
 
CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 179 
 
 temple in which he officiates is spiritual. It "is 
 not of this building," the Mosaical. Here, not ri- 
 tual but "spiritual gifts and sacrifices are offered 
 up." The blood which cleanses the conscience 
 from sin and dead works to serve the living God is 
 not the material blood of Christ, but the moral in- 
 fluences which flow from his being obedient unto 
 death, even the death of the cross. The purpose 
 of his death was, not to persuade God to make 
 overtures of reconciliation to men, but to persuade 
 men to become reconciled to God; to enlighten 
 their darkness, to correct their misconceptions, to 
 subdue their obduracy, to regenerate them into the 
 divine image, to make them the " sons and daugh- 
 ters of the Lord Almighty." 
 
 We now return to the two questions at issue : 
 First, What was a literal sacrifice ? and, second. Was 
 the death of Christ a sacrifice of this description ? 
 
 A literal sacrifice, if our preceding statements 
 have been correct, consisted in consecrating a thing 
 to God, and destroying it. It was destroyed for the 
 reason that God had no use for it, and it would be 
 sacrilege to put it to any human use. Sacrifice 
 stood on the principle of divine worship. It was 
 latrial, not expiatory. That the death of Christ 
 was not a real sacrifice is a point most palpably 
 manifest. Did the Jews who slew him first dedi- 
 cate him to God, and slay him as an oblation for 
 the holy altar ? Did they intend his death as a 
 service of homage rendered to God ? Was he their 
 sacrificial victim ? It was requisite that every sac- 
 rifice should be pure and unblemished. Did the 
 
180 
 
 CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 
 
 Jews so regard Jesus of Nazareth? Was he not, 
 in their view, a notorious, guilty malefactor ? And 
 further, let it be remembered that human sacrifices 
 were forbidden in the Jewish law, and held in de- 
 vout abomination. 
 
 Will it now be alleged, that the sacrifice was not 
 made on the part of the Jews, but by Christ him- 
 self? But when did, or how could, such a fact ever 
 take place ? A man make a literal, rehgious sacri- 
 fice of himself! How is such a thing possible? 
 Can the priest and the victim, the offerer and the 
 thing offered, be one and the same ? Did such an 
 instance ever occur ? Besides, what were the facts 
 of the case ? Did Jesus dedicate himself to God 
 for the express purpose of being slain as an immo- 
 lated victim ? Did he desire to be put to death ? 
 Did he give orders to this effect to those who cruci- 
 fied him ? None of these things obtained. How, 
 then, could his death have been a literal sacrifice ? 
 
 It was not the purpose of his mission to propi- 
 tiate the heart of God, but to bear witness unto the 
 truth. In the prosecution of this purpose, he in- 
 curred the displeasure of the Jewish rulers. On 
 account of the testimony which he bore to the 
 truth, they devised his death. For a season, Jesus 
 avoided exposure to their malice ; but he would not 
 desist from his work. He again appeared in public 
 as an instructor. He knew the danger ; but he did 
 not order it, nor justify it, nor wish it. He did not, 
 in any proper sense, cause his own death. Of 
 course, he could not have literally made his life a 
 bloody sacrifice. 
 
CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 181 
 
 K the question be,- Why is the death of Christ 
 called a sacrifice ? the answer must be the same as 
 that given to other similar inquu-ies ? Why is 
 Christianity called a circumcision ? Why is the 
 Christian Church called Zion and New Jerusalem ? 
 The obvious fact is, that Jewish terms — words 
 belonging to the religious vocabulary of the Jews 
 — are transferred into the language of Christians. 
 It was perfectly natural that such should be the 
 fact. Hence it is, that in the New Testament we 
 have a circumcision, a priesthood, a laver, a sprink- 
 ling of blood, a sacrifice, an atonement, a propitia- 
 tion, a mercy-seat, a covenant, a law, &c. But the 
 Christian circumcision, atonement, propitiatory, 
 springing of blood, washing with water, and sacri- 
 fices, are entirely different things from the Jewish. 
 The latter were literal ; but the former, metaphorical . 
 Those were outward and carnal : these are inward 
 and spiritual. It is because that the gospel secures 
 to believers the same advantages that the law did to 
 its observers, that the same language is employed. 
 The law^ prescribed the way of obtaining justifica- 
 tion, and so does the gospel. The Jew obtained the 
 righteousness by which he was justified, by keeping 
 the letter of the law, and by ritual observances : the 
 Christian obtained it by believing in Jesus Christ. 
 He is, therefore, said to be justified by faith. The 
 law prescribed a way of obtaining pardon for trans- 
 gressions : so, likewise, does the gospel. Under the 
 law, the blood of victims and pure water were 
 employed, and supposed to be indispensable and 
 efficacious ; but, under the gospel, the Christian law 
 
 16 
 
182 CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 
 
 of repentance was competent to secure forgiveness. 
 To sanction this law, Christ had sufTered and died. 
 His blood, therefore, might be referred to as though 
 it were the medium of expiation. Under the law, 
 there was a mercy-seat, a place of reconciliation : 
 so, likewise, under the gospel. The Christian can 
 obtain as firm an assurance of the favor of God, 
 without a local mercy-seat, as the Jew could with 
 it. Christ, therefore, is called a propitiation, a pro- 
 pitiatory, a mercy-seat. As the believer in Christ 
 obtains from God all the advantages which the law 
 of Moses secured to the Jew, he is therefore said to 
 have in Christ a high priest, a sacrifice, a pass- 
 over, a propitiation, an atonement, a sprinkling, 
 a lavcr, &c. The use of such names was an 
 accommodation to the Jewish mind. They could 
 not easily conceive of reUgjous realities, without 
 connecting them with these familiar and sacred 
 terms. It 'seemed to them impossible that they 
 could be God's accepted people, without circumci- 
 sion, without burnt-offerings, without the shedding 
 and the sprinkling of blood, without ablutions and 
 baptisms with water. On this account, Jewish 
 terms are transferred into the language of Chris- 
 tians. But they are divested of their Jewish signi- 
 fication. It is wholly on account of the end, the 
 advantages secured, that these terms are thus 
 employed. The apostle declares, " We are the 
 circumcision that worship God in sincerity, and 
 rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in 
 the flesh ; " — a very different circumcision from 
 that of the Hebrews ; yet it secured the same great 
 
CHRIST A SACRIFICE. 183 
 
 end, the same invaluable advantages. And the 
 Christian passover, blood, laver, priesthood, and 
 propitiatory, are equally distinct and different. 
 They agree "with the Jewish only on one point, — 
 the blessings enjoyed. 
 
 The law secured to the diligent Jew, as he thought, 
 every needful blessing. The gospel did the same 
 for the Christian believer. " Now to him that 
 worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth 
 the ungodly, his faith is counted to hini for right- 
 eousness.'' Such is the Christian circumcision. 
 " For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, bat he 
 is a Jew who is one inwardly ; and circumcision is 
 that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter ; 
 whose praise is not of men, but of God." 
 
184 
 
 CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 
 
 " For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man 
 Christ Jesus," — 1 Tim. ii. 5. 
 
 In this passage, our Lord Jesus Christ is exhibited 
 in two aspects of his character ; his nature and his 
 office. His nature is human : he is a man. His 
 office is mediatorial : he is the one great Mediator 
 between God and men. The consideration of these 
 points of fact and doctrine ^vill occupy the sequel 
 of this discourse. 
 
 I. His nature. — All the creatxires of God have 
 been made in the way of order. Every creature is 
 made after some type. It belongs to some genus, 
 kind, class. Every tree belongs to some kind of 
 tree. Every animal belongs to some genus. We 
 always presume it ; and when we see a creature or 
 a plant which is whoUy unknown to us, our first 
 inquiry is for its generic type, — of what kind is it? 
 We presume with certainty that it belongs to some 
 genus. And we are correct in entertaining this 
 impression ; for there is not a beast, nor a bird, 
 nor a fish, nor an insect, nor a tree, nor a plant, nor 
 a stone, that does not belong to some generic class. 
 
CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 185 
 
 Nor can any creature or thing belong to more 
 than one genus. It may be very extraordinary and 
 superior. A lion, for instance, may be far more 
 strong and beautiful than any other lion. Yet it 
 cannot be any thing more than a lion. That is its 
 type. A real Hon cannot be any thing more or 
 any thing less than a lion. Every genus has some- 
 thing by which it differs from all other genera. It 
 has a distinctive. But it is impossible for it to 
 have two distinctives. It would imply a contradic- 
 tion. The supposition of it would be an absurdity. 
 A creature cannot be a real, perfect lion, and at the 
 same time a real and perfect unicorn. For, if it be 
 the former, it cannot be the latter. Nor can it 
 be both. 
 
 There has been much controversy among Chris- 
 tians about the nature of our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 All this dift'erence and altercation, however, has 
 been needless and most irrational. Common sense 
 and reason have been laid aside. For, so long as 
 a man exercises his reason and common sense, he 
 can have no doubt as to the kind of being to which 
 Jesus of Nazareth belonged. The apostle Paul 
 had no doubts. He pronounces him to be "the 
 man Christ Jesus." He was known to be a man, 
 by the same points of proof as other men. He was 
 born as other men are born. He grew from being 
 an infant to be a child, and from childhood to man- 
 hood, as other persons do. He had the features 
 and limbs of a man. He made the same use of 
 food and drink and clothes as other men do. He 
 had the same liabilities as others. He was liable 
 
 16* 
 
186 CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 
 
 to hunger, thirst, cold, heat, sickness, and death. 
 As it is the lot of all men to die, so it was his lot. 
 He did die, and was buried. He was liable to 
 injury, abuse, persecution, and the death of the 
 cross. He was, moreover, subject to like passions 
 and infirmities as all men are. He sometimes took 
 offence, and spake unadvisedly ^vith his lips. So 
 he did to his mother, at the marriage-banquet in 
 Cana of Galilee, because she had made, perhaps, 
 an improper suggestion to him : " Woman, what 
 have I to do with thee, or you to do with me ? I 
 know better than you A\rhat, and when to do a thing." 
 Jesus said this because he was a man, and subject 
 to the infirmities of human nature. Another in- 
 stance of this kind of thing occurred in our Lord's 
 retort upon Simon Peter, who, from a feeling of 
 friendship and love to his dear Master, had said : 
 " No, no ! far be it from thee. Lord, to be kUled in 
 Jerusalem! " Jesus had just said he should be put 
 to death in that city. Peter did not intend to con- 
 tradict Jesus. He meant only to express his hope 
 of something better. Jesus, however, resented it 
 as a contradiction : " Get thee behind, Satan ! 
 thou art an offence unto me ; for thou savorest not 
 the things that be of God, but those which be of 
 men." Such resentment seems to have been im- 
 moderate and unjust. 
 
 The apostle Paul teaches that such an high priest 
 became us, — one that could be touched with the 
 feelings of our infirmities ; being tempted in all 
 points as we are, yet without sin. There are moral 
 infirmities which are not sins. And it is by means 
 
CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 187 
 
 of these infirmities that his tranacendent virtues 
 shine with the greater splendor. A soul that is 
 incapable of feeling any displeasure and resentment 
 at personal and malicious injuries and abuse can 
 very easily overlook and forgive them ; but, if it be 
 alive with a sense of the injustice done to it, forgive- 
 ness and charity must cost it something. There 
 must be an effort. Grace must conquer nature. Our 
 Lord could be made angry. He could be grieved at 
 perverseness. These were the workings of his na- 
 ture. Yet over these he could triumph. He could, 
 and he did, bless his persecutors ; pray for his mur- 
 derers ; supplicate for their pardon and salvation ; 
 and weep over the impending desolation of Jerusa- 
 lem, the city in which he was soon to be crucified. 
 A man's virtues never appear so luminous as when 
 he is constantly doing good to those who are as 
 constantly rendering evil to him. 
 
 Our Lord was a man in all the sinless aspects of 
 humanity. And it is on this account that he is so 
 perfectly fitted to be our Mediator and Saviour. It 
 is on this account that his example and life are so 
 apt and impressive. If he had been an angel, and 
 possessed a higher nature than the human, his ex- 
 ample and life could be of little use to men. He 
 could not, with propriety, be placed before them as 
 a model for their imitation. He could not have 
 sympathized with them in their trials of temptation 
 and enticement. The fact is plain and indubitable 
 that he was a man, and nothing more than a man. 
 The theory is absurd which declares him to have 
 been a perfect man, and yet something more than 
 
188 
 
 CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 
 
 a man. If more than a man, he could not have 
 been perfectly a man. A creature that is more 
 than a lion is not perfectly a lion. It would not 
 be an absurdity to say that a certain lion was in- 
 comparably stronger, fleeter, more intelligent and 
 generous, than any other lion in the world ; but to 
 say this lion was something more than a lion, and 
 yet was a lion, would be a palpable absurdity. And 
 it is equally absurd to say, that our Saviour Jesus 
 Christ was a real man, and yet something more 
 than a man. As every plant and tree must be of 
 some genus, so lilcewise every rational being must 
 belong to some order of being. A naturalist will 
 never speak of a lamb-lion or of a lion-lamb, signi- 
 fying two natures in but one creature, until he has 
 become insane. And Christian theologians never 
 seriously spoke of a God-man, or of a man-God, or 
 of a Loganthropos, or of an Eoa-man, or an angel- 
 man, until they had lost their reason on that par- 
 ticular point. Men never declare an absurdity to_ 
 be only a wonderful mystery, until they have repu- 
 diated their reason. 
 
 II. The Lord Jesus Christ is the Mediator be- 
 tween God and men. — This is his high office. 
 Moses was the mediator between God and the 
 Israelites. He received the law from him, and com- 
 municated it to them. Moses mediated between 
 God and one inconsiderable people. The Lord 
 Jesus Christ mediates in behalf of the whole hu- 
 man race. Moses communicated a law which 
 contained some "statutes which were not good, 
 and judgments by which the people could not live." 
 
CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 189 
 
 It was tinctured with the prejudices and customs 
 of barbarism. It prescribed rules and ritual institu- 
 tions. It " made nothing perfect." The gospel of 
 Christ inculcates principles, rather than rules. Its 
 aim is to educate the mind, rather than to train 
 and to drill the outward man ; to culture the intellect 
 and the heart. The human race were sunk in a 
 sea of ignorance, prejudice, error, oppression, vice, 
 and wretchedness. The mission of the Lord Jesus 
 was to raise them out of this abyss ; to deliver them 
 from this condition of " sin and misery." And, in 
 order to accomplish this great purpose, the proper 
 means must be employed ; the right instrumen- 
 talities must be put into use. There is a divine 
 order, or way, by which all the works of God are 
 brought about. If men are saved from their sins, 
 and the consequences of them, they must be enlight- 
 ened. They must be enabled to understand the 
 immediate causes of their unhappiness and suffer- 
 ings. Our Lord made the luminous and compre- 
 hensive declaration before Pilate the governor : 
 " For this cause was I born, and for this end came 
 I into the world, that I should bear witness unto 
 the truth." And on another occasion he said to 
 the people about him, " And ye shall know the 
 truth, and the truth shall make you free." The doc- 
 trine implied in these declarations is, that when 
 men know the truth, the whole truth in relation to 
 themselves, they wiU embrace and obey it, and by 
 this means obtain deliverance from the slavery and 
 damages of sin. When a man clearly understands 
 the whole truth, he will perceive that it is for his 
 
190 
 
 CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 
 
 own advantage to obey it ; that his personal welfare 
 demands that duty should be discharged in all eases, 
 and iniquity avoided. And every man always does 
 what it seems to him that his welfare requires. The 
 fact is, that wicked men commit their sins under 
 the false impression that their own advantage will be 
 promoted by them. It is under this impression that 
 the thief steals, the robber plunders, the swindler 
 cheats, and the man of power oppresses. Convince 
 all these men that they are in a mistake ; and theft, 
 robbery, cheating, and oppression will cease. Every 
 man will become honest, kind, charitable, merciful, 
 and will do to others as he would have others do 
 unto him. 
 
 The Lord Jesus understood his work, and how it 
 was to be done. He commenced it \\-ith instruc- 
 tion. He aimed to enlighten and persuade men. 
 He assured them that God was ready and willing 
 to be reconciled to them, on condition that they 
 ceased to be sinful, and became holy ; that he 
 required no great expiatory sacrifices, no painful 
 penances, no previous payment of a great penal 
 debt, as the preparatory step to reconciliation ; 
 that his will was, that they should forthwith repent, 
 seeking above all other things the righteousness of 
 the kingdom of heaven. He said, " Ask, and ye 
 shall receive ; seek, and ye shall find ; knock, and it 
 shall be opened unto you." He assured them, that 
 their Fatht;r in heaven was more kind and merciful 
 than earthly parents are toward their own children. 
 And, in the parable of the prodigal, he illustrated 
 this doctrine. The father of the prodigal waited 
 
CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 191 
 
 for no propitiatory advances to be made on the part 
 of the son, for the pm-pose of repairing the dishonor 
 done him by the young man's misconduct. The 
 father readily and joyfully forgave and embraced 
 his son, on the simple condition of his return to his 
 senses and to dvity. 
 
 Our Lord taught his hearers how they might be 
 saved and happy, both in this and the future world ; 
 that they must be humble and meek, pure in heart, 
 merciful, peaceful, and steadfast under persecution ; 
 that they must not expect much in this world, but 
 place their hope on the incorruptible inheritance 
 of heaven ; that they must not be troubled and 
 vexed with fears of falling into a state of want and 
 poverty ; that they should labor and seek for good- 
 ness, rather than for wealth and worldly distinc- 
 tions ; that they should trustfully confide in the 
 providence of God, and never be disheartened and 
 in despair ; that they should not feel envious toward 
 those above them, nor revengeful toward those who 
 had done them injustice and injury. " Love your 
 enemies," said he, " and forgive them. Forgive, 
 and ye shall be forgiven." He taught them in prayer 
 to say, " Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those 
 who have sinned against us." 
 
 The character of the gospel of Christ is repeat- 
 edly described in a few comprehensive words. 
 Some of them are found in the following passages : 
 " That repentance and remission of sins should be 
 preached unto all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." 
 " Through this man is preached unto you the for- 
 giveness of sins." " To him give all the prophets 
 
192 CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 
 
 witness, that, through faith in this name, whosoever 
 believeth in him shall receive the remission of sins." 
 The forgiveness of sins is the great blessing w^hich 
 men need. And this may be obtained by repent- 
 ance, — by ceasing to live wickedly, and learning 
 to live soberly, righteously, and godlily. 
 
 Let men be brought into this state of mind, and 
 they are saved. And to bring them into it is the 
 great purpose and object of the gospel. It is the 
 high and glorious mission of the Mediator and of 
 Christianity. The gospel of Christ has been always 
 acting and tending to this end. And in due time 
 this great end will be accomplished. But the world 
 of mankind is, and has long been, so replenished 
 with errors, prejudices, false maxims, wrong habits, 
 and vicious customs, that it requires a long course 
 of ages to accomplish its enlightenment .and refor- 
 mation. Something was done in Judea by the 
 Lord Jesus himself. In a sense, the whole was 
 then done; for the principle was laid down, the 
 movement was started, and it went into successful 
 operation. Much was done by the apostles, who 
 planted churches from Arabia to Spain. The work 
 became wonderful in the fourth century, when the 
 colossal empire of Kome bowed to the standard of 
 the cross. Much was done during the middle ages, 
 when all the semi-barbarous nations of Europe be- 
 came nominally Christian. Much has been done 
 in modern times in Germany, England, and Ame- 
 rica, to purify the creed, and to extend the borders 
 of Christianity. It probably never progressed more 
 rapidly than it has in this nineteenth century. It 
 
CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 193 
 
 never possessed so much real strength as it now 
 possesses. The time is approaching when the king- 
 doms of this world will become the kingdom of our 
 Lord and of his Christ. 
 
 Professional Christianity, however, is oftentimes 
 nothing more than an outline of the pure, the entire, 
 the true. And such has been the real fact in all 
 the past centuries of the church. The people, pro- 
 fessing and calling themselves Christian, have been 
 but very imperfectly the disciples of the Lord Jesus 
 Christ. A great "work is yet to be accomplished in 
 making up the full complement of the true Chris- 
 tian doctrine, practice, and life. There are yet in 
 the church much false doctrine, unholy customs, 
 and worldly life. These are to be removed, before 
 the face of Christianity can look forth, fair as the 
 moon and clear as the sun. There is, for instance, 
 w^hat is called the doctrine of the atonement. It 
 assumes that the death of the Lord Jesus was a 
 real piacular sacrifice ; that it was the payment of 
 an infinite debt exacted by God from sinful men, 
 on account of their transgressions of his law. They 
 sometimes represent the atonement, the death of 
 Christ, not as removing the penalty, the curse, of 
 the law, but rendering it removable ; not as saving 
 any of mankind, but as placing them in a salvable 
 state. And sometimes they represent that Christ 
 performed the whole work of the sinner's salvation : 
 as suffering the death which they deserved to suffer, 
 and suffering it in their stead ; also as obeying the 
 divine law vicariously, obeying it in their stead, so 
 that his obedience is accounted to them. The 
 17 
 
194 CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 
 
 Rev. Matthew Mead explicitly declared, that the 
 righteousness of the law and that of the gospel dif- 
 fered in this great point : The law required a person- 
 al righteousness, but the gospel accepts a vicarious 
 righteousness ; that it accounts Christ's personal 
 righteousness to the believer. And this is, in sub- 
 stance, the orthodoxy of more than nine-tenths of 
 all Christendom. Yet it is a false doctrine. It 
 was not taught by Jesus Christ, nor by his apostles. 
 They require of believers a personal righteousness, 
 and assure them that without it they will be denied 
 admission into the kingdom of salvation. It is 
 a groundless assumption, that the death of Christ 
 was a real, proper sacrifice. Every such sacrifice 
 is offered at the sanctuary, laid on the altar, burned 
 with fire ; and all this done solemnly, as a religious 
 service,-— as an act of homage before God. But 
 Jesus was executed as a malefactor on Mount Cal- 
 vary, not sacrificed as a holy victim in the Jewish 
 sanctuary. His death, therefore, could have been 
 a sacrifice only in a figiuative sense. It is only 
 figuratively that prayer, praise, alms-giving, a bro- 
 k(Mi heart, and a contrite spirit, are called sacrifices 
 in the Bible. And the apostle Paul speaks of his 
 own death as a sacrifice : " I am ready to be of- 
 fered, and the time of my departure is at hand." 
 It was to accommodate Jewish prejudices that the 
 apostles spake of Christ as a High Priest, and as 
 offering himself a sacrifice to God. It is a mani- 
 fest mistake to believe, that the legal, ritual sac- 
 rifices were types and prophecies of the death of 
 Jesus Christ. The reality of the case is, that the 
 
CHRIST THE MEDIATOR. 195 
 
 whole system of ritual sacrifice was a mistake. 
 God never instituted it ; he never approved it. It 
 was not a fit and acceptable mode of worshipping 
 him. Several of the Jewish prophets perceived 
 this fact: Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezeldel, and the au- 
 thors of the fortieth, the fiftieth, and the seventy- 
 second Psalm. " Thou desiredst not sacrifice, else 
 would I give it." " In sacrifices and burnt-offerings 
 for sin, thou hast no pleasure." " I spake not 
 unto your fathers, in the day that I brought them 
 out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt-offer- 
 ings and sacrifices ; but this one thing commanded 
 I them, saying. Obey my voice." Keep my moral 
 precepts. Be just, merciful, and devout. " For in 
 these things I delight, saith the Lord." 
 
196 
 
 CHARACTER OF FAITH. 
 
 " Now, faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things 
 not seen." — Ueb. xi. 1. 
 
 In this passage the apostle gives two definitions 
 of faith. They have been pronounced rhetorical, 
 rather than philosophical. Perhaps, however, the 
 philosophy is equal to the rhetoric. Our definition 
 of faith would be this : Faith is that power of the 
 soul by which it apprehends realities in the invisi- 
 ble world ; that world which lies beyond the sphere 
 of sense and science ; — realities which cannot be 
 demonstrated by scientific proof: we believe them 
 on the evidence of faith. 
 
 This power or principle of faith is a constitu- 
 ent element of man ; it is a prominent feature of 
 human nature ; it is common to all the different 
 races and descriptions of mankind ; it is possessed 
 by the savage and the barbarian, by the civilized 
 and the enlightened. All belief respecting God 
 and eternity, respecting heaven and hell, respect- 
 ing angels and demons, comes of it. Faith itself 
 is distinct from all particular beliefs. The faith is 
 the same in all men ; but the beliefs which grow 
 
CHARACTER OF FAITH. 197 
 
 out of it are diflerent, — different as the vegetables 
 which grow from the earth's soil. The ignorant 
 savage of Central Africa believes in his Fetich : he 
 identifies divinity with a particular rock, moun- 
 tain, cavern, or bog ; sometimes with a living crea- 
 ture, a serpent, an owl, or a raven. The faith of 
 this ignorant savage is of the same principle of 
 human nature as is the faith of a Leibnitz, a New- 
 ton, a Channing, and a Chalmers : he is no more 
 an infidel than they. 
 
 There is moral worth, merit, in faith. Every 
 one possessing faith is a better man with it than 
 he would be without it. But there is no merit in 
 any particular belief The merit is not in the belief, 
 but in the faith which lies below it. The particu- 
 lar religious belief of almost every man is a con- 
 tingency: he believes what those believed among 
 whom he was brought up, and by whom he was 
 educated. He has not searched, inquired, and 
 labored after his particular religious belief, and 
 thus gained it as a man acquires an estate. It 
 came to him, and he only received it, as it were, 
 passively. With the majority of men, such is the 
 precise fact. They believe just what they have 
 been instructed to believe ; and they can justly as- 
 sign no better reason for the faith which they enter- 
 tain than the instructions ani examples of their 
 teachers. Some, however, are inquisitive and en- 
 lightened: they search for grounds and reasons. 
 But, in doing this, they examine the subject only 
 on one side. They come to. the examination with 
 their conclusions already formed. It is not to find 
 17* 
 
198 CHARACTER OF FAITH. 
 
 the ground of a right belief, but to fortify an opi- 
 nion already embraced. They do not proceed on 
 the assumption that their old belief may be wrong, 
 and, if found to be such, to reverse and renounce it. 
 They entertain no doubts from the beginning to 
 the end of their investigation. The fruits of it are, 
 that they have become expert in the adduction of 
 arguments and the refutation of objections. It still 
 remains as true as it was before, that this man's 
 religious belief stands on the authority of his early 
 religious instructions ; and there can surely be no 
 personal merit, no moral worth, in a belief thus 
 received and entertained. One man is no better 
 than another man, merely and simply for believing 
 a particular dogma ; for being a Jew, not a Mahome- 
 tan ; for being a Christian, not a heathen ; for be- 
 ing a Protestant, not a Catholic ; for being what is 
 called orthodox, not a heretic. The man is, as to 
 religious belief, just what his tuition and training 
 has made him. It was by a contingency that he 
 was educated a Jew or a Mahometan, a Catholic 
 or a Protestant, an orthodox or a heretic. He did 
 not choose his religious belief It is not, therefore, 
 a moral virtue : it is an accident of his life, and 
 may be either a happy or an unhappy one. For 
 certain religious beliefs are adapted to much better 
 uses than others. 
 
 There are, however, some comparatively few 
 men who do manifest much impartiality and inde- 
 pendence in searching out grounds and reasons for 
 religious belief And these men, though they have 
 done right and nobly in withdrawing their adhesion 
 
CHARACTER OF FAITH. 199 
 
 from the faith of their fathers because it seemed 
 to be gi'oundless and untrue, do nevertheless stand 
 on the same level with others in regard to the 
 meritless character of the belief which they have 
 adopted. Why have they adopted it ? Because 
 it seemed to them to be true. They, therefore, be- 
 lieved, not as a matter of choice, but of necessity. 
 And surely there is no merit in such belief. And 
 yet all belief is of this character. Of course, there 
 is no moral virtue in any man's religious belief. He 
 may be a Fetich, an Idolater, a Brahmin, a Ma- 
 gian, a Druid, and yet be a righteous man ; or he 
 may in belief be an Israelite, a Christian, a Calvin- 
 ist, a Unitarian, a Universalist, and yet be an 
 unrighteous man. What, then, is it that constitutes 
 the difference between the righteous and the un- 
 righteous ? It is that precious thing which the 
 apostle Paul calls charity : " And now abideth faith, 
 hope, charity, these three ; but the greatest of the 
 three is charity." This is the essential thing. It is 
 that which imparts to the other two all their moral 
 beauty and worth ; also to zeal, courage, diligence, 
 steadfastness, perseverance, friendship, &c. These 
 are moral goods, so far as they are seasoned with 
 charity ; but, without it, are but as sounding brass 
 and tinkling cymbals. 
 
 We have already said, that one is no better than 
 his neighbor on account of his particular religious 
 behef. We have also said, that some religious 
 beliefs are adapted to better uses than others. 
 The inference is, that a person's religious belief is 
 not a matter of indifference. Some dogmas of 
 
200 
 
 CHARACTER OF FAITH. 
 
 religious belief are more true than others ; and 
 generally they are useful in proportion as they are 
 true. Truth is useful : error is hurtful. It therefore 
 behooves every man to make due use of his reason, 
 to cultivate knowledge, to study the works of God, 
 and thus learn truth. It is a great mistake into 
 which many have fallen, that it is a virtue and a 
 duty to be stationary in their religious belief. We 
 were taught, say they, in our childhood, the doctrine 
 of the Westminster Catechism. We then imbibed 
 that doctrine as being " the pure milk of the word." 
 We have held it ever since ; and we will, God 
 helping us, hold it so long as we live. It is our reli- 
 gious patrimony, the inheritance from our fathers ; 
 and God forbid that we should ever part with it ! 
 There are many who pride themselves on this stiif, 
 stationary conservatism. But it is not rational. 
 Every Jew, Mahometan, Hindoo, Idolater, and 
 Fetich might make the same boast. He is now 
 what he always has been, and intends henceforth 
 to be. But it ought not so to be. A man should 
 be growing wiser while he lives. It is in his power 
 to increase his stock of knowledge as the days of 
 his life multiply. And as knowledge increases, 
 opinions will change. A man speaks to his own 
 dishonor, when he declares the unchangeable stead- 
 fastness of his religious views. The apostles 
 enjoin religious growth. But this cannot be made 
 without the instrumentality of the understanding 
 and knowledge. There can be no growth where 
 the intellect is dormant and idle. 
 
 According to the definition which we have given, 
 
CHARACTER OF FAITH. 201 
 
 faith, while existing in its root, is independent of 
 the understanding. But, as soon as a branch grows 
 out of this root, faith comes in contact with the 
 intellect. The latter examines and judges of all 
 the beliefs which spring up from the radical princi- 
 ple of faith. It judges of their consistency and 
 propriety, of their use and tendency. When faith 
 afSrms that there is an unsensible world, contain- 
 ing infinite intelligence, love, and power, the under- 
 standing puts no questions. But, when faith affirms 
 that a part of God's creatures were made to be 
 the victims and the vessels of divine and eternal 
 wrath, the understanding wiU question its consis- 
 tency. Is it consistent with perfect goodness to 
 give existence to creatures whose very being is 
 a curse, and was designed to be such? As all 
 truths are harmonious, so must all true beliefs be 
 in agreement with each other. Under the super- 
 vision of the understanding, the soul will refuse and 
 repudiate those opinions which disagree from estab- 
 lished principles of truth. It will seek to put down 
 discord and discrepancy. 
 
 When faith affirms that God made the first 
 generations of men and of angels, the understand- 
 ing acquiesces ; but, when it proceeds to declare 
 that they were made perfectly holy and highly 
 enlightened, but forthwith they changed character, 
 and became rebels against the throne of God, the 
 understanding questions the propriety of this belief. 
 Is it consistent to believe that any creattire will act 
 contrary to its real character ; that an enlightened 
 friend of God will suddenly turn, and become an 
 enemy ? 
 
202 CHARACTER OF FAITH. 
 
 Faith is capable of starting a thousand forms of 
 particular belief. It has actually done it. But it 
 is the office of the understanding to pass judgment 
 upon them ; to pronounce them either consistent 
 and true, or inconsistent and false. And though it 
 cannot do this infallibly, yet it can do it reasonably 
 and intelligibly. It can do it deliberately, and while 
 knowing what it is about. Men are capable of 
 approximating to a standard-creed, which shaU be 
 to them as an oracle of God. They can advance 
 from faith to faith, from strength to strength, until 
 the win of God, so far as human duty is concerned, 
 may be known " on earth as it is in heaven." 
 
 The uses of belief is a point of great importance. 
 He who believes the truth has stronger motives to 
 uprightness, and is more firmly mailed and guarded 
 against iniquity, than his neighbor who believes 
 error. The more ignorant a man is, the less does 
 he know what he should do. He may be acting 
 against his own interest, while he thinks and aims 
 to act for it. And erroneous belief is a form of 
 ignorance. It is, therefore, very desirable that our 
 religious belief should be correct and true. It is 
 only by enlightenment that w^e can escape the delu- 
 sions and degradation of superstition. Supersti- 
 tion makes men formalists and idolaters. Why 
 does a man pray to a dead saint or martyr ? It is 
 superstition. Why do men place great merit in 
 making a pilgrimage, in repeating short forms of 
 prayer, in undergoing penances, and in a punctual 
 performance of the rites and ceremonies of the 
 church? It is superstition. The Jewish Church 
 
CHARACTER OF FAITH. 203 
 
 had accumulated a great amount of superstition. 
 On this account, the apostle declared it to be " a 
 yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to 
 bear." There are two errors on the subject of faith 
 to which we are liable. The one consists in mak- 
 ing too much, the other in making too little, of it. 
 They commit the former who regard themselves as 
 better men, and in a state of acceptance with God, 
 on account of their distinctive religious belief. The 
 Jew commits it when he believes himself to be one 
 of the peculiar and accepted people of God, because 
 he believes in the institutions of Moses, and en- 
 deavors to keep them. The Mussulman commits 
 it when he believes himself to be one of the elect 
 of God, because he believes in the divinity of the 
 Koran, and aims to observe its precepts. The Ro- 
 manist commits it when he trusts his salvation to 
 the care and keeping of the Holy Catholic Church. 
 The Protestant commits it when he believes him- 
 self to have almost or quite made his calling and 
 election sure, because he is not a member of the 
 papal communion. The self-styled orthodox man 
 commits it when he congratulates himself because 
 he is not a heretic, not an Arminian, not a Uni- 
 tarian, not a Universalist. The man immersed in 
 this error trusts to a cobweb-righteousness ; and 
 this prevents him from employing that earnest 
 diligence which is requisite to subdue sin, and to 
 overcome the world. 
 
 The other error is committed by those who think 
 and say that it is a matter of small importance 
 what a man's religious belief is ; whether he be a 
 
204 CHARACTER OF FAITH. 
 
 Jew or a Mahometan, a Romanist or a Protestant, 
 a Unitarian or a Trinitarian, a Partialist or a Uni- 
 versalist. There is much difference in the creed of 
 these different denominations ; and there must be 
 more truth in some of their creeds than in others 
 of them. Of course, there is more error in some of 
 them than in others. And the use of a religious 
 creed depends upon the measure of truth which it 
 embraces. And it is the truth which does a man 
 good -f which enlightens him, reforms him, sanctLfies 
 him, and encourages him to fulfil all righteousness. 
 It is, therefore, a man's duty, and it is for his 
 interest, to believe truth. He suffers, in some way, 
 either less or more, by the belief of error. He 
 should be aware of this, and be anxious to know 
 the truth ; should divest himself of prejudice and 
 undue prepossession, and open his heart to the 
 reception of all the evidence with which any belief 
 may be urged upon his attention. When a man is 
 willing to look all the objections against his par- 
 ticular belief in the face, and to examine both sides 
 of the question impartially, he is in the more likely 
 way to avoid eiTor and attain the truth. Bigotiy 
 and prejudice are pernicious things. They have 
 done immense injury to souls. The Christian 
 Church cannot be exonerated from its errors, until 
 the force of bigotry be reduced, and that of candor 
 takes its place. Faith is a principle of human 
 nature which needs attention and culture. Some 
 neglect it. The consequence is, that they become 
 skeptical and undevout. They have little faith in 
 immortality, in accountability to God, in the use 
 
CHARACTER OF FAITH. 205 
 
 of prayer and religious exercises. It is by use that 
 the faculties of a man are strengthened. He be- 
 comes a cripple, if he does not walk ; an incapable 
 drone, if he does not work. It is an insufficient 
 excuse in a man to say, that he cannot believe all 
 that is accounted orthodoxy; therefore he is in- 
 different whether he belieTe any part of it. A 
 man's faith is his treasure, his inheritance, in re- 
 gard to God and immortality. Without it, he must 
 be poor indeed. The thought of losing it should 
 alarm him. " Hold fast what thou hast received, 
 that no man take thy crown." The apostle Paul 
 congratulated himself in the near prospect of death, 
 that he had « kept the faith," 
 
 18 
 
206 
 
 SIN A THING OF DEGREES. 
 
 " Sir, didst thou not sow good seed in thy field? Whence, then, hath it 
 lares ? " — Matt. xiii. 37. 
 
 To account for the origin of sin and its introduction 
 into the world, has long been to men a subject of 
 great wonder and extreme perplexity. No other 
 problem has been of such difficult solution. And, 
 generally, it has been left unsolved, and referred to 
 as wholly mystery ; a mystery past being found 
 out. The fact, however, is that men have made 
 the difficulty and the mystery chiefly for them- 
 selves. They have assumed previous and false 
 positions, which have created the difficulty. They 
 have assumed that sin is a substantive thing ; a 
 thing which exists by itself and alone ; which can 
 to-day be in one place, and to-morrow in another. 
 So they think and speak of it as a thing which 
 comes and goes. 
 
 Another assumption has been, that the first hu- 
 man generation was very highly enlightened and 
 sanctified ; that paradisaical man, as he has been 
 called, was elevated in knowledge, purity, and holi- 
 ness, far above what has since been realized, and 
 cannot now be adequately conceived. 
 
SIN A THING OF DEGREES. 207 
 
 Both these positions are manifestly erroneous. 
 Sin is not a substantive thing : it does not and it 
 cannot exist by itself and alone. It is an attribute 
 of human agency. It cannot come and go where 
 this agency is not. It is a thing of degrees. The 
 very thing which is right in one degree may be 
 wrong in another. Light, air, wind, and w^ater, in 
 a certain measure and degTee, are a good : beyond 
 or aside from this degree, they are an evil. The 
 sensation of warmth in a certain degree is pleas- 
 ant, but in another degree it is painful ; and in 
 both cases it is the same sensation. The sensation 
 of sweet in one degree is agreeable, but in a higher 
 degree it is disagreeable and disgustful ; and yet it 
 is the same sensation. The passion of anger and 
 resentment in a certain degree is right; in another 
 degree it is wrong. The feeling of self-compla- 
 cency, when moderate, is pure from vice ; but, when 
 immoderate, it becomes pride, and is a vice. A 
 certain sense of uneasiness, in view of one whose 
 condition is better than om- own, may be useful in 
 stimulating to effort and enterprise ; but in another 
 degree it becomes envy, and is vicious. A certain 
 amount of self-regard is proper and useful, but in a 
 higher degree it becomes odious selfishness. A 
 certain amount of reserve and concealment may be 
 discreet and justifiable, but in a different amount it 
 becomes base hypocrisy. There is nothing im- 
 practicable in resolving all sin into a thing of de- 
 grees. It is not a substantial thing. It makes no 
 part or portion of man, either of his body or his 
 mind. If it were a constituent part of his body. 
 
208 
 
 SIN A THING OP DEGREES. 
 
 anatomists would have discovered it. But they 
 have never found it. If it were a constituent of 
 the human mind, metaphysicians would have de- 
 tected it. But neither naturalists nor psychologists 
 have found that thing in natural man called sin. 
 And the reason is, that sin constitutes no part of 
 human nature. It is not a substance, but a quality ; 
 not a constituent element, but a thing of degrees. 
 
 The other assumption, that the first man was 
 highly enlightened and incomparably holy, is ma- 
 nifestly a gross error. It is reversing the order 
 of God. This order proceeds from the less to the 
 greater ; from the lower to the higher ; from the 
 less perfect to the more perfect. The theory which 
 sets up the first human generation far above all 
 those which have succeeded it is most unnatural. 
 It is the conti'ary of every thing else in the animal 
 world. It is also self-inconsistent ; for this most 
 perfect man speedUy became a transgressor. The 
 account given of Adam, in the book of Genesis, 
 represents him to be but a child in moral strength. 
 He was dealt with as a child. The law under 
 which he was placed was but a rule of external 
 conduct, — a rule fitting the state of childhood. In 
 the discipline of a chUd, one of the first lessons he 
 is put to learn is to regulate his appetite ; to keep 
 his fingers away from the platter and the fruit-dish ; 
 not to help himself, but wait to be helped. When 
 he has become a man, it is expected that he will 
 govern himself by principles, rather than rules. The 
 latter are for children, for novitiates and appren- 
 tices. The great Adamic law — as it has been 
 
SIN A THING OF DEGREES. 209 
 
 considered — was an external precept; a rule which 
 a child might understand and keep. And yet he did 
 not keep it. And the fact of his defection, under 
 such a light yoke, proved his moral imbecility. 
 
 Some bold theologians, such as the high Calvin- 
 ists and the Hopkinsians, have attempted to ac- 
 count for the existence of sin. It comes, say they, 
 from God. He is the author of aU sin. It must be 
 so, said they, because all power is from God. He 
 gives to every sinner both the power and the heart 
 to do evil. So the Bible teaches that he did in the 
 case of Pharaoh ; and our reason teaches that the 
 fact must be the same in all other cases. God, they 
 maintained, caused sin, in order to turn it to a good 
 account. He does evil that good may come. And 
 they contend that he has a right to do it. This, 
 however, is a doubtful position. The law of moral 
 fitness extends, and is the same, throughout the 
 moral universe. God has no more right to do 
 wrong than a man has. His incomparable power 
 invests him with no right to violate the laws of 
 moral fitness, " Might cannot create right." It 
 would be equally wrong in God to utter falsehood, 
 and to commit wanton cruelty, as in man. Why 
 not? 
 
 But, again, sin is not a means of producing good. 
 It is wholly evil; and from a pure evil no good 
 can be extracted. Sin never has done any good, nor 
 will it ever do it in future; no more than sweet 
 water can be drawn from a salt-water fountain. 
 
 All the sin there has been in the world deducts so 
 much from the average good, and so much from the 
 
 18* 
 
210 SIN A THING OF DEGREES. 
 
 value of human life. If the sin could have been 
 avoided, the world would have been the better, and 
 human life more valuable. But the fact, doubtless, 
 is, that sin, in a manner, is unavoidable. It is acci- 
 dental and necessary. It results from the imperfec- 
 tion of man. It is unavoidable in the same sense as 
 are mistakes, indiscretions, failures, unfortunate ac- 
 cidents, &c. More knowledge and discretion would 
 have enabled men to avoid many mistakes which 
 they have committed. It would also have enabled 
 them to escape many sins into which they have 
 fallen. But man is imperfect. He commences in 
 ignorance and weakness, but is capable of acquir- 
 ing knowledge and strength. He is a being of 
 progress ; of progress indefinite in extent. This is 
 his peculiarity : it is the crowning feature of his 
 being. Had man been constituted instinctively 
 holy, as the beasts and birds are instinctively pru- 
 dent and industrious, his sins would have been few ; 
 but his virtues and prospects would have been 
 equally small. 
 
 There are those among Christian theologians, 
 who, startled at the doctrine of the divine author- 
 ship of sin, adopt that of permission. God permits, 
 say they, those sins which he can overrule for 
 good, and permits no more of sin than he can thus 
 dispose of. This, however, seems to be a shallow 
 and a lame hypothesis. It does account for thfe 
 existence of sin, and assumes the fact that sin 
 may be the cause of good. We have already 
 denied this doctrine. We are aware, that good 
 results have often occurred from the conflict of 
 
SIN A THING OF DEGREES. 211 
 
 good and evil. But the good in the results have 
 come from the good in the conflict. A man burns 
 his fingers or breaks his leg in doing a certain 
 thing ; and the accident makes him so careful, that 
 he avoids — what would else have befallen him — 
 the breaking of his neck, and burning himself to 
 death. But in this case it was not the burnt fin- 
 gers and the brojjen leg that caused the man's 
 escape, but his reason, his discretion, his. thought- 
 fulness, which wrought up the requisite caution and 
 cajefulness in him. 
 
 But did not God ordain the existence of sin ? 
 Our answer is. No. He ordains no evil. He has 
 no pleasure in it ; no use for it. 
 
 But could not God prevent sin ? He cannot pre- 
 vent it without staying the laws of his general 
 providence ; without altering the order of his work. 
 This he wiU not do, because his order is the best, 
 and cannot be improved. 
 
 The progress of man in gaining knowledge and 
 learning wisdom tends to the diminution of the ills 
 of life. They will gradually lessen as human pro- 
 gress advances. Wars will be less frequent, and 
 probably cease. Slavery will decline and become 
 extinct. The gallows and wantonly cruel punish- 
 ments will be abolished. Arbitrary government 
 and oppression will be done away. All the various 
 forms of injustice in the relations and intercourse of 
 men will disappear. When men understand the 
 whole truth, they will conform to it, and become up- 
 right, kind, and orderly. They will see it to be for 
 their own advantage. Their self-love would prompt 
 
212 SIN A THING OF DEGREES. 
 
 them to it. But, in addition to this, the love of their 
 neighbor will spring up in their hearts. For the 
 susceptibility of this love is an element of human 
 nature ; and the knowledge of truth will bring it 
 into action. 
 
 It is the part of man to stay the prevalence of 
 sin ; and the work will be accelerated as men 
 learn the precepts and imbibe the spirit of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ, They will then love one an- 
 other, and be brethren ; live in the unity of the spirit 
 and the bond of peace. 
 
 There is no more real difficulty in accounting for 
 the sin of the first man, and for sin in the gross 
 or abstract, than there is in accounting for the first 
 transgression of any child. Why does a child utter 
 his first falsehood? It is temptation. He thinks 
 that he shall avoid an inconvenience, and is not 
 aware that he is bringing upon himself more harm 
 than benefit. It is the lack of knowledge and dis- 
 cipline. And the increase of these will fortify the 
 child against future delinquencies. And the fact 
 is the same with all transgressors. They enter- 
 tain erroneous vicv\'s of "what their own welfare 
 demands of them. " The eyes of their understand- 
 ing are darkened through the ignorance that is in 
 them, on account of the blindness of their hearts." 
 But they are susceptible of enlightenment and 
 reformation. And the sacred declaration is : " All 
 the ends of the earth shall understand and turn unto 
 the Lord ; and they that know his name will put 
 their trust in him." 
 
 But did not God often afflict the Israelites, and 
 
SIN A THING OF DEGREES. 213 
 
 bring them to repentance by means of their punish- 
 ment? The punishment might be the means of 
 bringing them to consideration and reflection. It 
 was the occasion, rather than the cause. This must 
 have been in themselves, in their conscience and 
 moral nature. Here are the sources and springs of 
 repentance. Punishment without them is of no use. 
 But did not God educe infinite good from the 
 enormous wickedness of the Jews who crucified 
 the Lord Jesus Christ ? Did he not thus bear the 
 world's punishment, and pay the sinner's debt ? 
 The exceeding injustice of the Jews toward the 
 Lord Jesus gave occasion for the brighter manifes- 
 tation of his pure and holy spirit. But it created 
 no new instrumentality for the salvation of men. 
 Christ never did bear the world's punishment, and 
 pay the sinner's debt. He assured men that God 
 was placable, and ready to pardon the penitent ; but 
 he did nothing to render God merciful. He was 
 lifted up and exhibited to the world as a Saviour, 
 to whom men might look, and on whom believe, 
 so as to receive the remission of sins. His material 
 blood and corporeal sufferings possess, in them- 
 selves, no atoning and propitiatory virtue. God 
 never frowned upon his Son in the garden of Geth- 
 semane and on the cross, in order to create in his 
 soul a load of expiatory pain and suffering. The 
 mere sufferings of his Son gave the Divine Father 
 no satisfaction. The mere death of the Son gave 
 him none. Mere sin and misery have no direct 
 agency in reforming and saving the world of man- 
 kind. 
 
214 
 
 GRACE AND MERIT. 
 
 ' By grace ye are saved, through faith." — EpHEsiiNs, ii. 8. 
 
 The great controversy which has been long waged 
 on the subject of faith and works, of merit and 
 grace, as concerned in the justification and salva- 
 tion of men, might perhaps have been, in some 
 considerable measure, compromised by fixing certain 
 points upon which all of both parties were agreed. 
 These points are, — First, that eternal life is ex- 
 pressly called a gift., — the gift of God through 
 Jesus Christ our Lord ; and the saved are said to be 
 justified freely by God, through the redemption of 
 Christ. All Christian theologians, therefore, will 
 assent to this fact. On this point there is union, 
 agreement. — Second, Another equally plain scrip- 
 tural fact is, that eternal life and salvation are called 
 a reward. This fact occurs often in the New Tes- 
 tament. " Thou shalt be rewarded at the resur- 
 rection of the just." " Thy heavenly Father shall 
 reward thee openly." " There is laid up for me a 
 crown, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall 
 give me in that day ; and not to me only, but to 
 all who love his appearing." " Be thou faithful 
 
GRACE AND MERIT. 215 
 
 until death, and I will give thee — will reward thee 
 with — a crown of life." "Blessed are the dead 
 whadie in the Lord : they do rest from their labors, 
 and their works follow them." " When the Son of 
 man shall come in his glory, he wiU reward every 
 man according to his works. Them who have 
 patiently continued in well-doing, he will reward 
 with eternal Efe." 
 
 This point is so clear that none of the abetters of 
 the doctrine of grace will deny it. The case, then, 
 stands thus : Eternal life is declared to be a gift 
 of God, and justification is ascribed to the grace of 
 God. This on the one hand; while, on the other, 
 the divine acceptance and eternal life are called the 
 reward of the righteous. All of both parties must 
 admit this. What, then, is the plain and undenia- 
 ble inference ? It is this, — and all must admit it, 
 — that eternal life is not a gift in such a sense as to 
 hinder its being a reward, nor is it a reward in 
 such a sense as to hinder its being a gift. It is 
 both a gift and a reward ; not a gift in the most 
 absolute sense, nor a reward in a common and com- 
 plete sense. 
 
 That salvation is not entirely gratuitous is mani- 
 fest from this fact, that it is conditional. There is 
 a condition for a man to comply with in order to 
 salvation. It is faith. So teaches our text : " By 
 grace ye are saved, through faith." A free gift, one 
 entirely gratuitous, is unconditional. When a con- 
 dition is annexed to a gift, its entirely gratuitous 
 character is lost. That the Christian salvation is 
 conditional on faith is abundantly testified : " God 
 
216 
 
 GRACE AND MERIT. 
 
 SO loved the world that he gave his only-begotten 
 Son, that whosoever believeth in him may have 
 eternal life." " As Moses lifted up the serpent in 
 the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be 
 lifted up, that whosoever beUeveth in him may not 
 perish, but have eternal life." " He that believeth 
 shall be saved." " Whosoever believeth in him shall 
 receive the remission of sins." 
 
 Again : faith implies righteousness in itself. It is 
 a thing morally and intrinsically good. A wicked, 
 impenitent, graceless man cannot be a believer in 
 the Lord Jesus Christ. As soon as a man believes 
 in Christ, his heart softens ; a spiritual pulse begins 
 to beat in his soul ; a fountain of contrition is 
 opened within him ; the love of God begins to per- 
 vade his whole inner man ; he is in a state of tran- 
 sition from the old creature to the new. It is on 
 this principle that the apostle Paul answers the so- 
 phism, " Let us continue in sin that grace may 
 abound." He replies, " How can we, who are dead 
 to sin, live any longer therein ? " This reply signifies 
 that faith itself is righteousness ; that it constitutes 
 deadness to sin. And men cannot live in con- 
 tradiction to their inward principles, — their real 
 character. 
 
 The advocates of the exclusive scheme of grace 
 have assumed several positions that are inconsistent, 
 unscriptural, and untenable. They have assumed 
 that believers are justified, not by the moral force of 
 faith, but " by the righteousness of Christ, imputed 
 to them, and received by faith." They represent 
 faith as the arbitrary instrument, deriving all its 
 
GRACE AND MERIT. 217 
 
 efficacy from divine appointment, and nothing 
 from its own intrinsic moral virtue. This is incon- 
 sistent. It supposes that to be a condition which 
 is not a condition ; that there is nothing morally 
 fitting in faith itself, which renders it effectual in 
 securing justification ; that its virtue results wholly 
 from an arbitrary divine appointment; that God 
 has no respect to the worth or worthiness of the 
 faith of a believer, when he judges him to be just; 
 — of course, that God judges him to be different 
 from what he reaUy is, and from what he knows 
 him to be. But this cannot be a truth. God al- 
 w^ays judges right. He never accounts a man to 
 be what he is not. He perfectly knows what every 
 man is, and accounts him accordingly. He never 
 judges with partiality; he never commits a mis- 
 judgment. 
 
 The position so strongly and earnestly taken, 
 that the personal righteousness of Christ is ac- 
 counted to the believer, involves an absurdity. 
 Personal qualities cannot be transferred. The thing 
 is impossible. A person's acts are his own, and 
 cannot be another's. A man's guilt and merit are 
 his own, and cannot be another's. There is not a 
 single passage of Scripture sustaining the popular 
 doctrine, that believers are clothed with the personal 
 righteousness of Christ. The apostle Paul affirms 
 of himself, that he had suffered the loss of all things, 
 and counted them but dross that he might win 
 Christ, and be found in him ; not having on his 
 own righteousness, which is of the law, but that 
 righteousness which is of the faith of Christ ; the 
 
 19 
 
218 GRAQ^ AND MERIT. 
 
 righteousness of God by faith. If the apostle had 
 understood and entertained the doctrine of imputed 
 righteousness, he would have signified it in this 
 passage. It was the very occasion for it. But he 
 does not say that he hoped to be found having on 
 the righteousness of Christ, but the righteousness 
 which is "of the faith of Christ;" — the righteous- 
 ness w^hich consists of faith in Jesus the Saviour of 
 men ; the righteousness which God commands men 
 to possess, and has appointed to be the means of 
 their salvation. This was a personal righteousness, 
 and a better one than that of the law. " Except your 
 righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and 
 pharisees, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of 
 heaven." 
 
 The Revelator, as he is called, relates that he saw 
 persons clothed in garments clean and white, which 
 is " the righteousness of saints ; " not the personal 
 righteousness of Christ, but the righteousness of the 
 saints. Of course, he — St. John the divine — did 
 not, any more than Paul the apostle, understand 
 and entertain the doctrine of a transferred righteous- 
 ness. 
 
 Calvinists have contradicted themselves, when 
 with one breath they have affirmed that men are 
 justified by faith, and with the next breath have 
 denied that faith is the ground of the believer's jus- 
 tification. For if they are justified by faith, then, 
 of course, faith is the ground of the justification : 
 it is the very thing itself, on account of which they 
 are accounted just, righteous. And if it be not the 
 ground of justification, then believers are not jus- 
 
GRACE AND MERIT. 219 
 
 tified by faith. The celebrated and excellent Dr. 
 Fuller, in his tract, solving " the great question," 
 What shall I do to he saved? shows his exceeding 
 embarrassment and perplexity when he attempts to 
 specify what is the office and character of faith in 
 the sinner's salvation. We think that he could not 
 have been satisfied with his own account. And 
 yet this account is probably as good a one as 
 the Calvinistic theory admits. It is adapted to per- 
 plex more than to enlighten. 
 
 It is strongly urged by those who call themselves 
 orthodox, that a perfect righteousness is requisite 
 to justification ; that a single- defect in a person's 
 righteousness " spoils the whole." But this is not a 
 scriptural sentiment. There is not a text in the whole 
 Bible which teaches it ; but there are many texts 
 which teach the contrary. All those texts in which 
 pardon and salvation are promised to the penitent, 
 the regenerated, the believer in Christ, are of this 
 description. The reformed man is accounted a 
 righteous man. " If the wicked will turn from all 
 his sins and keep aU my statutes, he shall surely 
 live : all his transgressions shaU not be mentioned 
 unto him : in his righteousness which he hath done 
 he shaU Uve." Ezek. xviiL 21, 22. 
 
 The apostle Paul affirms, that we are justified 
 freely by his grace through the redemption there is 
 in Christ Jesus our Lord. What, then, is the sig- 
 nificance of the term justified? It signffies to be 
 righteous ; to be made righteous ,; to become right- 
 eous. And how is it that Christians do become 
 righteous ? how are they made righteous ? It is by 
 
220 GRACE AND MERIT. 
 
 faith in Christ : by believing that Jesus is the Sa- 
 viour of men ; that he saves them from their sins ; 
 that repentance is the first commandment of his 
 gospel. As soon as men believe in Christ, they feel 
 the force of his first injunction : " Repent ; for the 
 kingdom of heaven is at hand." They heed his 
 warning admonition : " He who heareth my sayings, 
 but doeth them not, is like a man who built his 
 house upon the sand. And when the winds blew, 
 and the rain descended, and the flood, and beat 
 upon the house, it fell ; and great was the fall of 
 it." This faith wUl not be inactive and dead. It 
 will work out effects. The believer wiU break off 
 from his sins, by doing righteousness. He will 
 hunger and thirst after goodness ; will learn humi- 
 lity, meekness, purity of heart, peaceableness, merci- 
 fulness, and charity. It is thus that he becomes 
 justified; thus is he made righteous. And the 
 opportunity and the means of thus becoming right- 
 eous are furnished by the gospel of Christ; furnished 
 freely. The gospel came to him unsought for: it 
 found him, rather than he it. " Not by works of 
 righteousness which we had done, but by his mercy, 
 he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and the 
 renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us 
 abundantly in Christ Jesus our Lord." 
 
 Again, the apostle teaches that " by the deeds of 
 the law shall no flesh be justified." In this instance, 
 as in many others, our apostle employs the term 
 the law in the sense in which his Jewish brethren 
 usually interpreted it ; which was, according to the 
 letter; as a prescription of rules for outward con- 
 
GRACE AND MERIT. 221 
 
 duct. Now, every precept of the decalogue might 
 be outwardly and even honestly observed, while the 
 heart remained selfish and worldly. And if the com- 
 mands of the decalogue might be literally and 
 outwardly kept, and yet the keeper of them remain 
 destitute of that higher righteousness which the law 
 of the gospel demands, much more might the forms 
 and ceremonies of the Mosaic ritual be observed. 
 The righteousness of the scribes and pharisees was 
 of this description. It embraced only obedience 
 to the letter of the moral law, and the observance 
 of the forms of the ceremonial. This description of 
 righteousness the apostle calls his own : " Not hav- 
 ing on my own righteousness, which is of the law." 
 He had carefully and punctually observed the whole 
 letter of the Jewish institutes ; but it had not made 
 him righteous in the Christian sense. It had not 
 filled his heart with that charity which forgives ene- 
 mies, loves all men, thinketh no evil, is not puffed 
 up, hopeth all things and endureth all things. The 
 righteousness demanded by the letter of the law 
 was defective. And on this account it could not 
 justify; could not make a man righteous, in the 
 Christian sense of the word. 
 
 It is a mistake to say, as is often said, that the 
 law could not justify men because they could not 
 obey it ; that obedience to the law is above the fac- 
 ulties of fallen man ; that God in his law demands 
 of men what it is impossible for them to render. 
 This must surely be a false doctrine. It represents 
 God as unjust and tyrannical. But the representa- 
 tion is not true. God requires of men according to 
 
 19* 
 
222 GRACE AND MERIT. 
 
 the ability they have ; not according to what they 
 have not. Nor is there any thing in the Mosaic 
 law, which, according to the letter, is impracticable. 
 Every man educated by Jewish parents can easily 
 keep the first of the ten commandments. It merely 
 forbids him to acknowledge and worship any of the 
 Gentile gods. And the second is as easily obeyed 
 as the first : it forbids the use of images in religious 
 worship. The third forbids the profane use of sa- 
 cred and divine names. The fourth forbids all 
 secular labor on the sabbath. Nothing impractica- 
 ble in these two precepts. The fifth requires respect 
 and reverence to parents, but nothing onerous or 
 intolerable. The sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth 
 are literally fulfilled by mere abstinence, and may 
 be, and have been doubtless, thus fulfilled by the 
 majority of Jews. The tenth possesses more of a 
 spiritual character, but is not a command of impos- 
 sible obedience. It was not, therefore, because the 
 Jewish law was impracticable that righteousness 
 could not be obtained by it. The defect was in 
 the righteousness itself, even after the law had been 
 literally obeyed. 
 
 Our apostle, in a certain passage, says, that " if 
 righteousness come by the law, then is Christ dead 
 in vain." And in another passage : " If a law 
 could have been given that would have given life, 
 verily righteousness had been by the law." His 
 meaning is doubtless this, — that no law consisting 
 of mere rules can reach the character and the heart. 
 And all laws do consist of rules. No person be- 
 comes eminently good and distinguished for wisdom, 
 
GRACE AND MERIT. 223 
 
 while he lives by rules, and depends upon them. 
 He must rise above rules, and govern himself by 
 principles. There is life in principles, but not in 
 rules. Om- Saviour's instructions did not consist 
 chiefly in giving rules of conduct, but in inculcating 
 principles. Hence he said, " The words which I 
 speak unto you, they are spirit ; they are life." 
 
 The prophet Jeremiah gives a happy account of 
 what we may call evangelical righteousness, in dis- 
 tinction from legal : " It shall come to pass, saith 
 the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with 
 the house of Israel; different from that which I 
 made with their fathers in the wilderness, which 
 covenant they brake. I will write my laws upon 
 their hearts ; and thus they will become my people, 
 and I their God." 
 
234 
 
 AN IDEAL OF GOD. 
 
 ' Who is the Lord ? '* — Prov. xxx. 9. 
 
 This may be the language of either unbehef and 
 irreverence, as it is in this text, or of sober and 
 devout inquiry, as we would employ it in this dis- 
 course. Who is God ? what his essence and 
 attributes ? What, in our minds, would be a just 
 ideal of him ? 
 
 We are aware that this inquiry has respect to 
 the infinite, and that our limited intelligence is 
 incompetent to a proper solution of such a problem. 
 The finite cannot comprehend the infinite. None 
 but God himself can comprehend infinity. Yet we 
 may understand something of the Great Power 
 above. The human mind, in all ages, has enter- 
 tained some conception of it. In the early and 
 patriarchal ages, men conceived God to he a supe- 
 rior kind of man, having a body lUie the human. 
 Hence they spoke of his hands, his feet, his face, 
 and his eyes ; also of his sword, his bow, his tem- 
 ple, and his throne. His eyes could see beyond the 
 ends of the earth, and to the bottom of the sea. 
 
AN IDEAL OP GOD. 225 
 
 He sat on the circle of the earth, weighed the moun- 
 tains as in scales, the hills as in a balance, and 
 took up islands as a very little thing. As the hu- 
 man intellect has gradually, by increased experience 
 and reflection, developed more of its power, a more 
 just and consistent conception of God has been 
 attained. The idea of a human-shaped body has 
 been repudiated. He has been called a Spirit, 
 omnipresent and invisible. In the Old Testament, 
 his knowledge and power are his cardinal attributes ; 
 in the New Testament, his mercy and love. Yet, 
 even here, he is not consistently and justly repre- 
 sented, but described as a competitor and a warrior, 
 acting both' on the defensive and aggressive, having 
 for adversaries " principalities and powers," " the 
 prince of the power of the air," " spiritual wicked- 
 nesses in high places." There is " war in heaven ; " 
 and, although God in the issue will be conqueror, 
 yet he and his cause sustain great damages, and 
 even some defeats. This belligerent conception of 
 God has long been on the decline, but has not yet 
 disappeared. Though the problem. What is God? 
 cannot be completely solved by man, yet it is worthy 
 of his close and persevering attention, of his ear- 
 nest and devout study. Man can become what he 
 ought to be, only in proportion as he becomes god- 
 like ; and, in order to this, he must have some just 
 knowledge of God. They who are utterly ignorant 
 of God are like the brutes which perish. It is they 
 who know him that put their trust in him. They 
 who do know their God shall be strong, and do ex- 
 ploits. It is when the knowledge of the Lord shall 
 
226 AN IDEAL OF GOD. 
 
 cover the earth, as the waters do the seas, that the 
 people shall be all righteous, wars cease to the end 
 of the world, and every man sit in his own seat, 
 without fear or molestation. 
 
 The question before us is this : What should be 
 our ideal of God ? How may we justly conceive 
 of him as the Source of all finite being, as the Crea- 
 tor of the world, as the Giver of all intelligence 
 and life ? To prove the existence of God is an 
 easy task ; but to ascertain the relation which he 
 sustains to nature is more difficult. Are God and 
 nature identical, as some men have asserted; or 
 are they distinct, so that one may exist without the 
 other? Is God on the outside of nature, or is he 
 within ? Almost every man will admit that all 
 things are of God. But in what sense ? Are they 
 of God as the contents of the stream are of the 
 fountain ; or only as the house is of the builder, 
 and as the garment is of him that made it? These 
 are the perplexing questions. 
 
 The word nature is employed in different senses : 
 sometimes in a universal sense, signifying the 
 whole of whatever exists ; but more frequently to 
 signify the principal creature of God, — the organic 
 creation. In the former of these two senses was the 
 word understood by the celebrated John Scotus Eri- 
 gena, the most prominent man of the ninth century. 
 He wrote an extraordinary book, entitled " The Divi- 
 sions of Nature." He distinguished four divisions 
 or departments. The first contained what is crea- 
 tive, but is uncreated. Of course, it contained God, 
 and him only. . The second division contained what 
 
AN IDEAL OF GOD. 227 
 
 is both created and creative. Of course, it con- 
 sisted of the laws and tendencies of the organic 
 creatioa ; of what is commonly understood by na- 
 ture, as a creature of God. The third division 
 consisted of what was created, but was not creative. 
 This division contained the various forms of organic 
 life ; such as angels, men, beasts, birds, and fishes. 
 These are creatures : they cannot create, except in 
 a secondary sense, that of construction. The fourth 
 division of nature, in Erigena's book, consists of 
 what neither creates nor is created. It contained 
 creation in its perfected state. It will obtain when 
 all the forms of organic life shall have either worn 
 out and ceased to exist, or shall have amved at 
 their consummation, and shall live in harmony with 
 the laws and attributes of God ; shall thus live in 
 God, so that, as all things proceeded from God, they 
 will thus return to God, and he again be all in all. 
 
 The doctrine of Erigena was accounted heresy 
 by his cotemporary Christian brethren. He was 
 excommunicated by Pope Nicholas, and his writ- 
 ings prohibited and burned. But his " Division 
 of Nature" could not be utterly destroyed. The 
 monks concealed copies of it in secret corners of the 
 monasteries; and there they were kept and read 
 until the dark ages had passed away. The book 
 was choice food to those of the Platonic or tran- 
 scendental school. Among the moderns, different 
 views have been entertained of Erigena's doctrine. 
 Some regard it as pantheism; and it seems to 
 come to it in the end. But the admirers of Eri- 
 gena deny that he was a pantheist, oj that his doc- 
 
228 AN IDEAL OF GOD. 
 
 trine implies it. They insist upon the import of 
 the symbols which he employed to illustrate his 
 views, — that of the air filled with light, and that 
 of iron heated to a red-hot flaming heat. Though 
 the air be filled with light and exists in the light, 
 yet it remains air, and as such is distinct from the 
 light. And though the red-hot sparkling iron exist 
 in the fire, yet the iron remains iron, and is distinct 
 from the fire. So, when all souls shall be so ab- 
 sorbed in God as to live in him, they will stUl re- 
 tain their individuality, and be distinct from the 
 personality of God. 
 
 It has been charged against Erigena, that he was 
 extravagantly bold and adventurous, and that he 
 attempted to comprehend the infinite. The justice 
 of this charge, however, is not apparent. Erigena 
 himself virtually and very positively denies it. He 
 strongly avows his inability to define or to describe 
 God. God, said he, cannot be described ; for he is 
 above every thing. The meaning of words cannot 
 reach him. To say that God is good is not saying 
 all the truth ; for he is more than good : he is more 
 than great, more than wise, more than perfect, 
 more than almighty. This language, whether it 
 be proper or not, is at least a disclaimer of an 
 attempt to comprehend the divine infinity. He 
 may have attempted to explain what to man is in- 
 explicable ; but this was not the infinity of God. 
 
 Erigena represents that the time wiU come when 
 God will cease to create ; when the work of crea- 
 tion and providence will be finished, and the great 
 concern wouq^ up. But this is a doubtful doctrine. 
 
AN IDEAL OF GOD. 229 
 
 We cannot very consistently conceive that God will 
 ever be idle ; that he ever was, or ever will be, in the 
 rest of inactivity. How can infinite love, wisdom, 
 and power be inactive ? — lie still and do nothing ? 
 Whence can come the motive for inactivity ? If 
 we look forward millions of millions of ages, will 
 there be nothing for God to do? — no room then, 
 in the infinity of space, for the creation of new 
 worlds ? Or, if we look back millions of centuries 
 into the past, was not God then active ? Who can 
 tell how long a time God has been employed in 
 constracting the immense universe which lies all 
 around us in the boundless bosom of infinite space ? 
 Surely God cannot be idle, when there is any thing 
 worthy for him to do ! 
 
 We now retutn to the question, What relation 
 does God sustain to nature ? Is he within nature, or 
 on the outside ? — within, as the soul of man is within 
 his body ? — as the life of a tree or of a bird is with- 
 in its visible form ? Or is he out of it, and no part 
 of it, as the maker of a machine is distinct from the 
 machine, and no part of it? 
 
 The Jewish doctrine, obviously, was that which 
 places God on the outside of nature, and makes 
 him no part of it. The sacred writers represent 
 God making the world as something extrinsic to 
 himself. What they intended, however, was to 
 describe God as the Maker, the Superior, the Sove- 
 reign. K God within nature be equally the Maker, 
 the Superior, the Sovereign, of the world, the sacred 
 writers are not gainsaid or contradicted. If God 
 in nature be as efficient as God on the outside of 
 
 20 
 
230 AN IDEAL OF GOD. 
 
 nature ; if he be equally intelligent, kind, just, and 
 merciful, — we, then, sustain no loss in accepting 
 the former, instead of the latter. But, in forming 
 our ideal of God, Ave may overlook the distinction 
 of in or out of nature, and let that distinction come 
 in as a corollary in the conclusion. We therefore 
 again put the question, "What may reasonally be 
 our ideal of God ? 
 
 We all believe that there is an infinite intelli- 
 gence, now existing, which has devised the whole 
 plan of the world ; that this intelligence exists in 
 connection with love or goodness ; and that they 
 have always existed, and are self-existent and in- 
 dependent. We may also believe, that a material 
 substance has always existed, and is self-existent. 
 And this material substance is the substratum of 
 infinite intelligence and love. We cannot conceive 
 of intelligence or of love without a substratum. 
 Indeed, we cannot conceive of any thing without 
 a substratum, without something on which it rests 
 and acts. Where there is motion, there must be 
 something which moves ; where there is thought, 
 there must be something which thinks ; where there 
 is an attribute, — as love, wisdom, power, life, — 
 there must be some substantive subject, or substra- 
 tum, in which the attribute adheres, and to which 
 it belongs. We cannot conceive of a purely im- 
 material being, — of a spirit which has no connec- 
 tion with matter. The ghosts which men's imagi- 
 nations have created are not wholly immaterial. 
 Matter is, manifestly, indispensable to all substan- 
 tive existence. We may talk of an immaterial 
 
AN IDEAL OF GOD. 231 
 
 world, of immaterial men, of immaterial angels, 
 and of a God wholly disconnected with material 
 siTbstance ; but we can have no distinct conception 
 of them. God could not have made the world, nor 
 angels, nor men, nor beasts, nor birds, nor fishes, 
 without matter. We all acknowledge, we know, 
 that God does make use of matter in his creations. 
 And why does he do it? He uses it because it is 
 needed, becaiise it is indispensable. It is indispen- 
 sable to human existence ; and why not indispensa- 
 ble to divine existence ? 
 
 We conceive of man as a being consisting of 
 two parts, — body and soul : the body is the sub- 
 stratum of the soul. And man is an image of God. 
 As the human soul pervades the human body, and 
 constitutes its Ufe, so we can conceive of God per- 
 vading all parts of the world and of the universe, 
 and being the life of them. We often think of God 
 as being in the wind, and causing it to blow ; in 
 the sun, and causing it to shine ; in the waters, and 
 causing the current to flow, and the waves to roU ; 
 in the trees, and causing them to grow and live ; in 
 the fruits, and causing them to ripen. 
 
 You will perhaps say, that this language is pan- 
 theistic ; but you cannot justly say, that it is atheis- 
 tic. St. Paul used pantheistic language : " God, 
 who is over all, above all, and in you all." And we 
 would now ask, Do not infinite intelligence, love, 
 and consciousness, existing without dependence on 
 any prior existence, and imparting of themselves to 
 all creatures according to their capacity to receive 
 them, constitute an all-efficient and perfect God? 
 
232 AN IDEAL OF GOD. 
 
 Can we conceive of one more efficient and perfect ? 
 And, if material substance be the substratum of his 
 attributes, the fact by no means degrades or mars 
 his transcendent greatness and perfection. God is 
 what he is. God is what his works indicate and 
 declare him to be. He has constructed this world 
 and this universe. He is the Source and the Au- 
 thor of all the good contained in it. AH beauty, 
 all order, all enjoyment, and all holiness, is from 
 him. If you place God on the outside of nature, 
 the universe becomes no better. God, inside of 
 nature, can do for his creatures all that is or has 
 been done for them. You cannot prove the con- 
 trary. If you insist that God has no material 
 substratum, you gain nothing. He remains what 
 he is, and what he always has been. The charac- 
 ter of God is determined by his works ; and these 
 declare him to be incomparable and matchless in 
 power and goodness. God, in our view, could do 
 no work, without a material substratum. He could 
 have no being without it. An empty universe with- 
 out a particle of substance in it, — substance that 
 can occupy space, — is a thing inconceivable. You 
 may try to have such a conception ; but it can be 
 no other than a phantom. God is a reality, a sub- 
 stantive and substantial reality. The universe never 
 has been empty, nor wUl it ever be ; for God is, and 
 ever has been, " over all, above all, and in you aU." 
 He is " all in all." 
 
233 
 
 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, SENSA- 
 
 TION, FAITH. 
 
 " What is truth ?" — John, xviii. 38. 
 
 Truth is the objective of knowledge, as know- 
 ledge is the subjective of truth. They are correla- 
 tives : the one presupposes the existence of the 
 other. Any reality becomes a truth when it is 
 known, conceived of, or believed. UntU then, 
 though a real entity, it is not properly a truth. 
 
 The whole world is fuU of realities, and is divisi- 
 ble into two great departments, — the sensible and 
 the unsensible ; or the physical and the metaphysi- 
 cal ; or the natural and the spiritual. With realities 
 in both these worlds, men are capable of becoming 
 acquainted. They become acquainted with the 
 realities of the sensible world by the organism of 
 sensation and reason ; with the realities of the unsen- 
 sible world by faith and reason. Reason, intellect, 
 understanding, is man's cognitive faculty. He can- 
 not know any thing until his reason acts in the case. 
 His sensations, of themselves, give him no know- 
 ledge. He hears a sound; but he does not know 
 
 20* 
 
234 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 what it means until his understanding interprets it. 
 He sees things ; i. e. he has sensations of light, 
 color, shape, &c. ; but they are unmeaning until his 
 reason extracts from them a significance. A man 
 also has impressions of faith ; but these impres- 
 sions are not reliable until they are brought under 
 the supervision of his intellect. This alone is the 
 organ of knowledge. As much as a man can hear 
 nothing, except by the instrumentality of his ears, — 
 as much as he can see nothing, except by the instru- 
 mentality of his eyes, — even so he can know 
 nothing, except by the instrumentality of his under- 
 standing, reason, intellect. 
 
 We explore the sensible world by means of our 
 senses and reason. This department of the uni- 
 verse contains what is visible, audible, tangible, 
 measurable, numerable. It embraces the whole 
 immense field of all the sciences, — all the facts and 
 truths of geography, asti'onomy, geology, philoso- 
 phy, and the mathematics. Such facts and truths 
 are susceptible of scientific proof: they can be 
 demonstrated. But the facts and truths of the un- 
 sensible, the spnitual, the metaphysical world, are 
 not susceptible of this description of evidence. 
 They cannot be scientifically proved and demon- 
 strated. Some of them, however, may be known. 
 They are known by the instrumentality of faith, 
 supervised by human reason. By his senses, man 
 cannot penetrate beyond the precincts of the sensi- 
 ble, the natural, the physical world. He cannot 
 confirm, by scientific proof and demonstration, any 
 of the truths of the invisible world. How, then. 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 235 
 
 can he penetrate into it? How can he know any 
 thing of what is unseen, unheard, unfelt, unmea- 
 sured, and unnumbered ? It is done by faith. 
 
 " Faith is the brightest evidence 
 Of things beyond our sight ; 
 Breaks through the veil of flesh and sense, 
 And dwells in heavenly light." 
 
 " Through faith, we understand that the worlds 
 were framed by the word of God, and that the 
 things which are seen were not made of things 
 which are now visible." But it is not every tfeing 
 which a man believes that is true. Mere faith is 
 not reliable evidence. No more is it than mere 
 sensation is in regard to the facts of the natural 
 world. As the one must be subjected to the domi- 
 nion of reason, so Hkewise the other. As human 
 sensations, when pondered, examined, sifted, and 
 weighed in the balance of reason, furnish grounds of 
 knowledge, so do impressions of faith. Men believe 
 a thousand things belonging to the invisible world. 
 Some of these must be true, because reason ap- 
 proves, justifies, and sustains them. Men believe 
 that the spiritual world contains God, angels, and 
 the spirits of the dead. But is this faith justified 
 by reason ? In respect to the existence of God, it 
 certainly is. Though we have no sensible and sci- 
 entific proof and demonstration pf the being and 
 attributes of God, yet we have reliable and irref- 
 ragable evidence, — evidence as satisfactory and 
 reliable as that of sense and scientific demonstra- 
 tion. 
 
236 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 It is a fact, most obvious on reflection, that the 
 visible world stands on the invisible as its basis. 
 The former consists of sensible phenomena. And 
 these are constantly undergoing change. And 
 every change is an effect which must have a cause. 
 Take any living creature as an example for illustra- 
 tion, — a tree or an animal. The tree starts from 
 a seed. This seed sprouts and springs forth. It 
 sends down a root, and sends up a blade. The tree 
 grows ; puts forth branches, leaves, and blossoms. 
 It comes to maturity, and bears fruit. These phe- 
 nomena are visible. We see them. But there is 
 obviously something which we cannot see ; some- 
 thing which constitutes its life, which makes it 
 grow, and grow according to order. It so grows 
 as to be a regular tree, and bear fruit. It is evi- 
 dent that the real essence of the tree is invisible ; 
 that the outward of the tree is dependent upon 
 what is inward. What is inward constitutes its life 
 and strength. If this fail, the tree stops its growth. 
 It languishes, drops its leaves, and dies. It soon 
 ceases to be a tree. As soon as the inward life de- 
 parts, the outward phenomena decKne and soon 
 disappear. The invisible part of the tree, therefore, 
 was its principal part. Upon it the outward and 
 visible whoUy depended. The latter stood upon 
 the former as on its basis and foundation. 
 
 Look now at an animal. It grows from a germ. 
 It gradually increases, and develops, in order, aU 
 the parts, organs, and powers of the kind to which 
 it belongs. We can see all these phenomena. But 
 there must be something of this animal which we 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 237 
 
 cannot see; something which we cannot feel; 
 something which caused it to grow, to develop, and 
 complete its maturity. And this is the principal 
 part of the animal. In it consists the animal's 
 essence, life, and power ; and, when this departs, the 
 animal is dead. It is no more. 
 
 Now, as it is with a tree and an animal, such 
 also is the fact with the whole sensible world. 
 This whole world consists of phenomena. They 
 appear and disappear in a continuous line and, cir- 
 cle of changes. They must, therefore, have a cause ; 
 and on this cause they are entirely dependent. The 
 cause or power on which they depend is invisible. 
 The phenomena are sensible ; but the causal and, 
 supporting power is unsensible. We can see, hear, 
 touch, and smell the former; but the latter is 
 wholly beyond the reach and sphere of our corpo- 
 real senses. But, though unsensible, it is mani- 
 festly the principal reality. It is the life, essence, 
 and strength of the whole. The visible world, 
 therefore, stands on the invisible as its basis, conr 
 tainer, and firmamentum. 
 
 There is nothing of which we feel more certain 
 and sure than of the necessary and indispensable 
 relation between cause and effect, — between any 
 change or phenomena, and some power which pro- 
 duced it. We witness, for instance, that a stone is 
 now in a different locality from what it was yester- 
 day. We feel assured that somebody moved it. 
 We say, with aU possible confidence, that the stone 
 could not move itself. It may be very difficult to 
 account for the stone's removal. This circum- 
 
238 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 stance, however, does not in the least abate our 
 assurance that some power, external to the stone, 
 caused its locality to be changed. Whenever any 
 thing is done, we think and say that somebody did 
 it. Changes do not take place without a cause. 
 Of this we feel as strong an assurance as we do of 
 our own existence. The sun does not rise, and ap- 
 parently revolve from the east to the west, without 
 some acting power. The clouds do not condense 
 in the atmosphere, and pour down rain upon the 
 earth, without some causal agency in the case. The 
 winds do not blow, the waves of the sea do not roU, 
 storms and calms do not alternate with each other, 
 nor do summer and winter come and go, without 
 the action of some invisible power. We see the 
 phenomena ; but the power is beyond our ken. It 
 is, however, the principal reality. The spiritual 
 world contains the foundations and the pillars of 
 the universe. 
 
 The fact of the invisible world being confirmed, 
 the next inquiry is. What does it contain ? Com- 
 mon belief, as we have already said, answers, — 
 " God, with all his infinite attributes ; angels, high 
 and low, good and evU ; also the souls of the dead 
 of all the past generations of mankind." 
 
 We might, however, make a different distinction 
 and analysis, and say that the unsensible world 
 contains infinite power, intelligence, and goodness ; 
 in other words, omnipotence, omniscience, wisdom, 
 love, and life. This we believe, and our belief is 
 justified by our reason; for in the phenomenal 
 world we perceive the unmistakable manifesta- 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 239 
 
 tions and proofs of these attributes of God. Every 
 phenomenon is a manifestation of his power. 
 These phenomena are so innumerable, and some of 
 them so immensely great, as to indicate the im- 
 mensity of the power which produces them. There 
 are also the plain indications of design. Uses 
 were manifestly intended. Air and water, day and 
 night, summer and winter, answer important pur- 
 poses of use. Of course, they must have been de- 
 signed. And design implies intelligence : it proves 
 a Designer. And this Designer must have been 
 kind, benevolent, good : for such are the uses ac- 
 complished. They are good. By them the welfare 
 of creation is served and promoted. There is noth- 
 ing evil in the w^ork of God. It is, therefore, said 
 that God looked upon all things which he had 
 made, and, behold, all of them were very good. It 
 would imply an absurdity to suppose a different 
 fact; to suppose that God ever made a bad crea- 
 ture, or ever did an evU work. 
 
 But are there not such things as sin and misery 
 in the world? And did not God make them ? At 
 least, did he not make the sinner who does make 
 them ? Answer : sin and misery are not substan- 
 tive things. They are not creatures. They consti- 
 tute no part of creation or of man. They are but 
 states and degrees. The very same thing which, 
 in one state and degree, is called an evU, in an- 
 other state and degree is a good. The very same 
 sensation — that of heat, for instance — which in 
 one degree is pleasant, in another degree is painful. 
 The same fact may be afl&rmed of other sensations ; 
 
240 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 that of cold, of acid, of sweet, and even of bitter. 
 In certain degrees they are grateful ; in the oppo- 
 site, they are disgustful. And the two apparent 
 opposites depend on the same sensibility. To the 
 very same taste, one degree of sweet, of acid, of 
 bitter, of cold, of heat, &c., is pleasant ; but another 
 degree is painful. The same sensibilities which 
 render a man's body an organ of pain do also con- 
 stitute it an organ of pleasure. Remove all his 
 sensibility, and he will never more suffer pain ; 
 neither will he ever more enjoy bodily pleasure. 
 He wiU purchase his exemption at a great price, 
 incomparably more than its worth. 
 
 The same doctrine is applicable also to his mind. 
 The same mental passions which in certain degrees 
 are bad, in other degrees are good. Self-love, 
 worldly love, resentment, anger, and sexual love, 
 are not of themselves wicked: they only become 
 such by being inordinate. Nor are kindness, com- 
 passion, generosity, modesty, and veneration, neces- 
 sarily and under all cirdumstances virtuous : they 
 all need to be exercised with judgmen1?and enlight- 
 ened discretion. Indiscreet kindnesses, charities, 
 and modesty, are not useful, but injurious. The sin 
 on the one hand, and the virtue on the other, of an 
 action or a passion, depends chiefly on the intelli- 
 gence and discretion with which it is timed, adapt- 
 ed, and modified. The meritorious man is he who 
 acts wisely in discharging all the offices and duties 
 of life. God makes no man a sinner. The man 
 makes himself such by his eccentricities, his indis- 
 cretions, his ignorance, his extravagances, his in- 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 241 
 
 justice. This doctrine, in the germ of it, is so 
 reasonable that it is affirmed by all Christians. 
 Hence their avowed belief, that the first human 
 pair and all the angels of heaven were created in a 
 state of perfect holiness. 
 
 There is not a faculty in man's body or mind 
 but what was given him for a good use. This doc- 
 trine is justified by reason, attested by creation and 
 piovidence, and confirmed by the Bible. The per- 
 fect goodness of God, therefore, is an illustrated 
 and confirmed truth. It is a truth that there is a 
 God, and that his character is love. It is a scrip- 
 tural maxim, that the character of a man, as right- 
 eous or wicked, may be inferred from his works. 
 "By their fruits ye shall know them." On the 
 same principle we learn the attributes and cha- 
 racter of God. We learn his goodness from the 
 fact, that he does good, and his tender mercies are 
 over all his works. On the same principle we learn 
 his amazing power, his ineffable wisdom and intel- 
 ligence ; also his transcendent and superabounding 
 life. He is the living God. Animals and men are 
 only the recipients or the receptacles of a measure 
 of life. Their lives begin, and seem to come to an 
 end. But life in God is underived, self-existent, 
 inexhaustible, and eternal. He giveth to all, life 
 and breath and all things ; yet his resources sire no 
 more diminished than is the great ocean by the va- 
 pors which are daily exhaled from its broad bosom. 
 
 We have now, as we think, ascertained some 
 truths of the invisible world : The existence of God, 
 who is incomprehensibly powerful, wise, and good ; 
 21 
 
242 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 who is life, and the source of all life in creatures ; 
 who lives in them as the human soul lives in the 
 human body, and as the life of trees and brutes 
 lives in their external forms ; — that there is an invi- 
 sible world, and that the visible world came of it, 
 is dependent upon it, and stands upon it as a build- 
 ing does upon its foundation. And, although of 
 aU this we can furnish no scientific demonstration, 
 yet we have reliable and irrefragable evidence. The 
 principle of faith occupies a place, in regard to the 
 spiritual world, similar to that occupied by sensa- 
 tion in regard to the natural world. Neither of 
 them are safe and infallible, until their impressions 
 are acted upon by reason, and their conclusions 
 justified by it. The human intellect is the cogni- 
 tive faculty of man. It is the organ of knowledge 
 as solely as the ear is the organ of sound, and as 
 the eye is the instrumentality of sight. Man 
 knows nothing until his understanding acts and 
 decides. In many cases, it must act gradually, 
 progressively ; by a long process of examination, 
 experience, and observation. Reason has thus cor- 
 rected many popular beliefs derived from sensual 
 impressions. It was long and universally believed, 
 that the sun and moon were bodies of nearly or 
 exactly the same size, both of them radiating lu- 
 minaries, much smaller than the earth ; and actu- 
 ally revolved around it, as they appear to do, from 
 east to west, every day. It was once, and for 
 many ages, believed that the earth was an extended 
 plain, its bottom in the water, and all its border 
 washed by the sea ; that its shape was flat, not 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 243 
 
 round ; that it was supported by foundations, and 
 that these were " the floods, the seas," Psalm xxiv. 2. 
 It was believed that real stars often started from 
 their fixed places, and descended toward the sur- 
 face of the earth. Hence the oft-occurring phrase, 
 " The stars shall fall from heaven." These, and a 
 thousand other popular mistakes in the sensible 
 world, reason has detected, and they are now ex- 
 ploded. And an equal number of misbeliefs re- 
 specting things of the spiritual world have likewise 
 been exposed and corrected. The human intellect, 
 growing in enlightenment as the race advances in 
 age, has effected revolutions in the world of faith 
 and metaphysics ; in spirituals as in naturals. It 
 was once believed, that God was a great, omnipo- 
 tent man, residing in a magnificent palace on the 
 upper surface of that huge, solid structure, over- 
 hanging the whole earth, called the firmament; 
 that this firmament not only sustained the sun and 
 moon, but also about one half of all the water of 
 the world ; and that the clouds were supplied from 
 these " upper springs." It has been generally be- 
 lieved, that there is an order of beings superior to 
 man, belonging to some department of this world, 
 called angels, daimons, demons, and devils ; and who 
 have much agency in the management of human 
 affairs. This popular doctrine has now become 
 doubtful in eye of human reason. For where does 
 this order of beings belong? Not to this earth, 
 which is appropriated for the residence of man. 
 The ancients assigned them a home on the upper 
 surface of the firmament. But, since the explosion 
 
244 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 of the doctrine of a platform-firmament, they have 
 been destitute of a proper residence, except the 
 atmosphere. Their chief has been styled, " the 
 prince of the power of the air." But the atmo- 
 sphere cannot be the proper home of a race of 
 superior intelligent beings. God must have given 
 to every such race a solid globe, like our earth, for 
 their use and accommodation. There is, dou]?tless, 
 such a race upon every planet in our solar system, 
 and in all the stellar systems. But these angels of 
 the popular belief are a description of vagabond : 
 they have no proper home. Reason cannot sustain 
 and justify the belief of any rational beings reside 
 ing in the atmosphere of the earth, except the 
 spirits of the dead, which have been divested of 
 their ponderable bodies, and invested with bodies 
 so ethereal and rarified that the atmosphere may be 
 a suitable place for them. You may call them 
 a/ngels, if you please ; but they are not of the kith 
 and kindred of the Jewish angels. And they, doubt- 
 less, can answer all the ends and purposes for which 
 a race of angels has been wanted. 
 
 The Greeks and Romans spake and wrote about 
 three orders of celestial beings. These were the 
 gods, the daimons, and the heroes. But they were 
 embarrassed to find a location for them. Some- 
 times they were posited in the tops of the highest 
 mountains, and sometimes in the ceruleum. But 
 where the ceruleum was, but few, or none, could 
 tell. These gods, daimons, and heroes had no sub- 
 stantial home ; and reason pronounces aU such to 
 be but imaginary beings. 
 
SENSATION, FAITH 245 
 
 DIVINE PROVIDENCE. 
 
 On the subject of divine providence the belief of 
 men has been discrepant and various. Many hold 
 the doctrine of a particular providence, including 
 the foreknowledge and predestination of whatso- 
 ever comes to pass. God, say they, foresaw the 
 catsastrophe which befell the ship Mexico, the Pre- 
 sident, the Lexington, the Atlantic, and the Light- 
 house on Minot's Ledge. He not only foreknew 
 those distressing disasters, but he purposed them, 
 he ordained them ; and he had particular ends to 
 accomplish by means of them. Others hold the 
 doctrine of a general divine providence : they be- 
 lieve that God has no particular purposes, no par- 
 ticular plans, no solitary ends ; that his whole work 
 is a unity ; that his whole design, purpose, and end, 
 is one. Evils occur, but they are accidents : he 
 did not intend nor ordain them. No good has 
 come of them ; therefore, they could not have been 
 designed as the means of good. 
 
 Some men, unwilling to affirm that God designs 
 and produces evils, take the ground of permission. 
 He, say they, permits them ; but he will permit none 
 which he cannot turn to a good account and over- 
 rule for good. These men take a very loose and 
 inconsistent position. Whom does God permit to 
 do evil ? Has any wicked man such a permission 
 from God ? And is it a fact that God does turn 
 evils to a good account ? What good was brought 
 about by the St. Bartholomew massacre in France ? 
 What benefit was brought to pass by the great 
 
 21* 
 
246 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 earthquake at Lisbon ? — by the late famine in Ire- 
 land ? By the experience of disappointments and 
 misfortunes, men are made more cautious, more 
 discreet, more correct in their calculations and the 
 use of means. Their discretion is rendered more 
 ready and efficient. And to this fact is their better 
 future success to be ascribed. Out of evil, properly 
 speaking, no good ever comes. It is impossible. 
 For there is no good in evil ; therefore, none can 
 come out of it. 
 
 Reason, when enlightened and impartial, decides 
 that God's providence must be general; that evils 
 are undesigned and accidental ; that God has no 
 particular purposes, no plans consisting of a com- 
 bination of means to accomplish a particular end, 
 as men have ; that his whole providence is a sys- 
 tem of uniform tendencies, working out a general 
 end. Such a divine providence as this brings to 
 pass all the good there is in the world. Every par- 
 ticular good may be traced to the tendencies of 
 God's general providence. It is the belief of many 
 persons, that divine providence could not be so good 
 as it actually is, unless it were particular ; that, if 
 all providence was general, there would be more 
 disasters and fewer benefits than we have. But 
 this belief stands on no satisfactory basis. It is a 
 mere assumption. There is but one way in which 
 the point assumed can be substantiated. It is by 
 adducing actual instances either of good conferred 
 or of dangers escaped, or of both, which could not 
 have been the work of a general providence. But 
 what instances of this description can be adduced ? 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 247 
 
 What instances — miracles excepted — does the 
 history of the world furnish ? We are not aware 
 of any. It is a mere assumption to allege, that a 
 paxticular providence would be better than a gen- 
 eral one. It is, as we think, a more reasonable as- 
 sumption to say, that there could not be a better 
 providence than is the one which presides over the 
 world ; that a more perfect providence is impossi- 
 ble. Let any change be made in it, and, instead of 
 being improved, it would doubtless be deteriorated. 
 " Whatsoever God doeth, it shall be for ever : no- 
 thing can be taken from i^ nor added to it." 
 
 But what are the evidences of a general divine 
 providence ? There is a basis in divine providence 
 for human calculation and foresight. Things which 
 do not now exist may be foreseen. The astronomer 
 foresees eclipses ; the changes and the quarterings 
 of the moon, the position of the planets, the rising 
 and the setting of the sun and moon. These things 
 could not be, except on the basis of a general provi- 
 dence. Other phenomena, though less certain, may 
 be foreseen and produced with a great degree of 
 probability. The husbandman knows how to pro- 
 duce good crops ; the mariner how to make good 
 voyages ; the carpenter knows how to build a good 
 house ; the teacher how to have a good school. And 
 the basis of all this foreknoA\rledge is a divine pro- 
 vidence which works by fixed and uniform laws. 
 This is the evidence we have that divine providence 
 is general; and to candid, reflective, and enlight- 
 ened minds, this evidence is irrefragable. It is ac- 
 knowledged, — acknowledged even by sticklers for 
 
248 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 a particular providence, that the greater part of the 
 phenomena of the world come of a general divine 
 providence. But, say they, this does not constitute 
 the whole. There is a particular providence co- 
 working with the general. We are willing that 
 these persons should enjoy their opinion. But, in 
 our view, if God sometimes gives a special direc- 
 tion to the tendencies of his providence, the occur- 
 rence, every year, of ten thousand such disasters as 
 shipwrecks, steamer-explosions, the collision of rail- 
 road cars, devastating storms and conflagrations, 
 would not take place : th^y conflict with the doctrine 
 of divine goodness. If God could consistently pre- 
 vent them, would he not do it ? We have already 
 said that in our view, and according to our theory 
 of providence, they are unavoidable and accidental ; 
 that God has no direct agency in producing them. 
 
 man's early estate. 
 
 It has been commonly believed, that the early 
 generations of the human race were very highly 
 enlightened and virtuous ; that there was then but 
 little difference between gods and men. The my- 
 thology of the Greeks runs back to the time when 
 gods and men had intimate intercourse, and some- 
 times had amalgamated offspring. The ancient 
 Egyptian historiographers teach, that the first dy- 
 nasty of government in Egypt was that of the gods; 
 the second, that of the demigods; the third, that of 
 kings. Hence the prevalent doctrine, that the first 
 was the golden age of the world. It was perhaps 
 natural that such should have been the common 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 249 
 
 belief. The primitive human generations had not 
 learned to be vicious and wicked. They lived on 
 the spontaneous fruits of the forest. They were 
 exempted from the toil of tilling the ground. Their 
 manners and customs were simple, artless, and 
 honest. As the race multiplied, and labor became 
 requisite to provide the means of sustenance, the 
 people looked back to the times of the Eden-state. 
 They saw it through the magnifying medium of 
 time and tradition. The Eden-state seemed to 
 them to be most happy and desirable. And they 
 conceived that it had been lost by men's becoming 
 wicked; that thus they had incurred the cur.se of 
 tilling the ground and obtaining bread by the sweat 
 of the brow. All this was natural, but it was a 
 mistake. The true philosophy of~ labor was not 
 then correctly understood. "When thus understood, 
 it is seen to be a blessing, not a curse. While 
 men had but few wants, and these were easily sup- 
 plied, the motives and temptations to injustice 
 would also be " few, and fax between." The first 
 generations were innocent, rather than virtuous. As 
 their circumstances changed, so did their customs. 
 They learned to be dissemblers, injurers, oppressors, 
 and murderers. But that they ever stood high in 
 enlightenment and holiness is a preposterous as- 
 sumption. It is contrary to the order of God's 
 whole work. This order is from the small to the 
 great, from the low to the high, from the weak to 
 the strong. Every high tree was once a low one ; 
 every strong animal was once a feeble one ; every 
 great city was once a small one ; every enlightened 
 
250 
 
 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 and holy man was once destitute of knowledge and 
 holiness. And as men have been learning vice 
 and wickedness, on the one hand ; so, on the other, 
 they have learned wisdom, virtue, self-denial, and 
 philanthropy. And they will doubtless continue to 
 learn such lessons. We place the golden age in 
 the future ; and so did the bards of ancient Judea : 
 " The mountain of the Lord's house shall be higher 
 than other mountains, and all flesh shall be gath- 
 ered to it." 
 
 man's immortality. 
 
 It has been matter of popular belief in all na- 
 tions, that a man's mind survives his body ; that 
 his ethereal part outlives his corporeal part; that, 
 when the gross body falls to decay, there escapes 
 from it an aerial form, — a shade, a ghost, a spirit, 
 possessing all the intelligence and character of 
 the man ; that it is the man himself redintegrated 
 in a new form of a existence. Our Saviour, in his 
 discourse with the Sadducees, recognizes and sanc- 
 tions this doctrine as the truth on the subject of 
 the resmTection. He represents that the patriarchs 
 lived after the death of their bodies. This was 
 the resurrection. The doctrine of the reconstruc- 
 tion and -re-animation of the gross body, after its 
 decomposition, does not appear to have been the 
 original doctrine of the resurrection. It was not 
 entertained either by the Gentiles or the Jews. As 
 soon as the Athenians understood Paul to declare 
 the doctrine, they kept silence no longer. Nor had 
 the Jews much, if any, more confidence in it than 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 251 
 
 the Gentiles. Hence the astonishment of the dis- 
 ciples, when Jesus announced to them that he 
 should rise from the dead on the third day. " They 
 questioned one with another what the rising of the 
 dead should mean." They were ignorant of a cor- 
 poreal resurrection ; nor did they understand it, 
 until it was explained to them by the actual — as 
 they believed — resurrection of Jesus. Here origi- 
 nated the doctrine of the resurrection of the body. 
 But, notwithstanding its almost universal reception 
 in the Christian Church, the doctrine, in the view 
 of reason, is embarrassed with insuperable diffi- 
 culties. It is not in accordance with the order of 
 God's works. God never does a thing, and then 
 undoes it, and afterward does it up again. If God 
 intended that man's immortality should be in the 
 body, why should he give the body over to perish ? 
 Would he cause it to perish, if he intended it should 
 be immortal ? Is it worthy the wisdom of God to 
 destroy a thing, and then reconstruct it ? Men 
 may do it for the purpose of amending their work, 
 but not so with God. 
 
 But can man's immortality be maintained with- 
 out the doctrine of the resurrection of the body ? 
 Our answer is affirmative. Men are immortal pre- 
 viously to the resmrrection. So teaches the Assem- 
 bly's Catechism. The souls of believers do, at their 
 death, immediately enter into glory. Of course, 
 the death of their bodies does not interrupt their 
 being and their peace. They immediately enter 
 into glory. They have no need of the resurrection 
 of the body. Their residence is probably the atmo- 
 
252 TRUTH, KNOWLEDGE, REASON, 
 
 sphere ; and such residents cannot have gross, pon- 
 derable bodies. They can only make use of ethereal 
 ones. Such an one had Jesus after the third day. 
 It was a body that could appear and vanish in- 
 stantly ; could enter a room, and leave it, without 
 passing the doors. This could not have been what 
 the apostle Paul calls a natural body, but a spiri- 
 tual. The bodies of all the dead can be no other 
 than aerial or spiritual. Reason can justify no 
 other doctrine. 
 
 But what are the evidences of man's immortali- 
 ty? Death does not annihilate the human mind. 
 There is no proof that it does. And it has been a 
 matter of belief among aU nations, — the rude and 
 the improved, the savage and the enlightened, the 
 barbarous and the learned : all unite in their desire 
 and expectancy of a future life. But why should 
 they all so strongly desire and expect a further 
 state of existence ? Did not God place this power- 
 ful instinct within them ? And, in all other cases, 
 has not God made the subjective of the world 
 within, and the objective of the world Mdthout, to 
 correspond to each other ? Whatever man strongly 
 covets — we mean, the kind of thing which he 
 wisely desii-es — he is capable of attaining. Shall 
 he, then, be disappointed in his anxious search for 
 glory, honor, and immortality ? 
 
 Without an immortal existence, how imperfect 
 appears the work of God ! What an imperfect des- 
 tiny is that of man ! To what great and important 
 purpose was man made ? How slender and uncer- 
 tain is his life ! He often Lives but a few days. 
 
SENSATION, FAITH. 253 
 
 Most men die prematurely. If there be no future 
 life, what a perplexity is man ! Made in the image 
 of his Creator, endowed with high intellectual and 
 moral powers, — all to be lost, wasted ! Can such 
 be the fact ? Must there not be a better destiny 
 for man? Will he not outlive the mortal body? 
 WiU he not survive the material world ? Was not 
 the poet inspired with the spirit of truth, when he 
 wrote, — 
 
 " The stars shall fade away, the sun himself 
 Grow dini with age, and nature sink in years ; 
 But thou shalt flourish in immortal youth, 
 Unhurt amid the war of elements, 
 The wreck of matter, and the crush of worlds " ? 
 
 22 
 
254 
 
 THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 
 
 * Search the Scriptures." — John, v. 39. 
 
 The Bible has wrought all its great and good 
 work by means of its truths. The work of truth 
 is good; but the work of error is not good. If 
 there be parts and passages of the Bible which are 
 not true, the detection and repudiation of them 
 wiU do no harm. We lose nothing valuable by 
 giving up what is untrue ; and, in retaining all the 
 parts of the Bible which stand on the basis of 
 truth, we hold on to the whole of what has done 
 good and is now useful. No truth contained in 
 the Holy Scriptures can ever be eliminated out of 
 them. No man can injure them by search and 
 examination. For, if he do it candidly, he will 
 know better what the Bible is ; and, if he do it 
 uncandidly, there are those who wUl correct his 
 errors. The investigation of every subject is the 
 only true mode by which to comprehend and 
 master it. 
 
 It is the judgment of many, that the Bible, being 
 a book of matchless excellence and utility, cannot 
 be too highly appreciated, cannot be overrated ; that, 
 
THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 255 
 
 if it have defects and blemishes, they should not be 
 exposed, but kept as much as possible out of sight ; 
 that to expose them would diminish its influence 
 and power of doing good. 
 
 This argument is not solid and conclusive. It is 
 deceptive and false. It supposes ignorance of the 
 real character of the Bible to be useful But this 
 is a false position. It is useful to know the whole 
 truth in respect to every writing, document, book, 
 w^hich comes into our hands. If it be all true, it 
 is useful to know it ; if there be mistakes, it is use- 
 ful to beware of them. The more we understand 
 of the history of any book, the better prepared we 
 are to avaU ourselves^ of whatever advantages may 
 be derived from it ; also to avoid the disadvantages 
 it might otherwise bring. 
 
 If there be mistakes in the Bible, they are 
 adapted to do harm. Indeed, the Bible has done 
 much evU, as well as much good. It has furnished 
 sustenance to the wicked customs of war, of sla- 
 very, and of needless sanguinary penalties. The 
 warrior, the slaveholder, and the cruel legislator, 
 have appealed to the Bible for justification. The 
 Bible, say its adulators, imparts such benefits to 
 the afflicted, such hope to the dying, such courage 
 to the disheartenedj so much consolation to the 
 bereaved, so much comfort to the outwardly mis- 
 erable, that it becomes an act of inhumanity and 
 injustice to cast any suspicion upon its divine au- 
 thority. Our answer is, that the hope, the courage, 
 the consolation, and the comfort, which are gained 
 by misunderstanding the Bible, are illusive and of 
 
256 THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 
 
 little worth. We should first ascertain what are 
 the truths of the Bible, and from these only derive 
 our hopes and consolations. It is no uncommon 
 thing for persons to be elevated with false hopes. 
 But of what real benefit are they ? It is upon the 
 rock of truth that the wise man's house is builded. 
 Truth is worth being sought and possessed. To 
 understand the truth about the history of the Bible 
 is exceedingly important ; as much so, at least, as 
 the history of any other book. We acknowledge 
 this in regard to other books : why, then, not ac- 
 knowledge it in regard to the Bible ? 
 
 Our present method of searching the Scriptures 
 will be in the way of collating and comparing dif- 
 ferent parts and passages of them. Their agree- 
 ment will confirm the truth, and their discrepancy 
 will manifest the mistakes. We repeat, that no 
 injustice and injury can be done to the Bible and 
 to the cause of truth by examination, by research ; 
 for it is in proportion to its truth that the Bible is 
 a treasure to men. The mistakes, if any, contained 
 in it, are not things of utility and worth. 
 
 With these premises, we will proceed to examine 
 those passages of the New Testament which relate 
 to the manifestations made by our Lord Jesus 
 Christ to his disciples, between the time of his 
 resurrection from the dead and that of his ascen- 
 sion into heaven. Of these, Matthew mentions 
 two ; Mark, three ; Luke, three ; and John, four. 
 The two appearances recorded by Matthew are not 
 mentioned by the other evangelists. The first of 
 these two was made to the women returning from 
 
THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 257 
 
 the sepulchre, on the morning of the resurrection. 
 The accounts are given by him as follows : " And 
 as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus 
 met them, saying. All hail ! . . . . Go, tell my bre- 
 thren that they go into Galilee, and there they 
 
 shall see me Then the eleven disciples went 
 
 away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus 
 had appointed them. And when they saw him, 
 they worshipped him ; but some doubted." Per- 
 haps some, besides Thomas, had doubts at first. 
 No other appearance is mentioned by Matthew. 
 And the one made to the eleven occurred in Gali- 
 lee. And, according to this evangelist, the commis- 
 sion given to the apostles, and the ascension into 
 heaven, took place at the mountain in Galilee. 
 
 The three manifestations related by Mark are 
 thus given : " Now, when Jesus was risen, early the 
 first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary 
 Magdalene. And she went, and told them that 
 had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 
 And they, when they had heard that he was alive 
 and had been seen of her, believed not. After that, 
 he appeared in another form to two of them, as 
 they walked, and went into the country. And they 
 went, and told to the residue ; neither believed they 
 them. Afterward, he appeared to the eleven, as 
 they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their 
 unbelief, because they believed not them which 
 had seen him after he was risen." Then immedi- 
 ately follows the commission and charge to preach 
 the gospel to every creature. 
 
 The three manifestations recorded by Luke were 
 
 22* 
 
258 
 
 THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 
 
 — 1. That made to the two travellers at Emmaus. 
 2. That made to Simon Peter. 3. The one made 
 to the eleven disciples in the evening of the day 
 of the resurrection. The details of the interview 
 with the two travellers are given at length in chap, 
 xxiv., ver. 13 — 31. Those of the interview with 
 the eleven apostles are related in the same chap- 
 ter, from verse 35 to 50. The evangelist then 
 proceeds to say : " And he led them out as far as 
 Bethany ; and he lifted up his hands, and blessed 
 them ; and, whUe he blessed them, he was parted 
 from them, and carried up into heaven." 
 
 Of the four appearances recognized by John, the 
 first was made to Mary Magdalene. The other 
 three were to the eleven disciples in company : two 
 of them at Jerusalem ; the last at the Sea of Tibe- 
 rias in Galilee. The first appearance of him to 
 the eleven was on the evening of the day of his 
 resurrection. The details of this are recorded in 
 XX. 19 — 24. The second took place eight days af- 
 terwards, and in the evening. The particulars are 
 given in xx. 26 — 30. 
 
 The four evangelists, in conjunction with Paul, 
 recognize nine manifestations : — 1. That made to 
 Mary Magdalene. 2. That made to the women as 
 they were on their way returning from the sepul- 
 chre. 3. That made to Simon Peter. 4. That to 
 the two travellers. 5. That to the eleven on the 
 evening of the day of the resurrection. 6. That 
 to the eleven, eight days afterward. 7. That made 
 at the mountain in Galilee. 8. The appearance 
 made at the Sea of Tiberias in Galilee. 9. The 
 
THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 259 
 
 appearance made to five hundred brethren at once, 
 stated by St. Paul. The account of the appearance 
 made to Peter is not given by any writer, though 
 mentioned both by the evangelist Luke and by the 
 apostle Paul. The one made to five hundred 
 stands solely on the testimony of Paul. 
 
 The differences in these accounts are irreconci- 
 lable with the fact of the plenary inspiration of 
 each of the different writers. Had they been thus 
 inspired, they must have each given a full and per- 
 fect account. There could certainly have been no 
 discrepancy, nor should we expect even any varia- 
 tion. For there can be no difference in two narra- 
 tives which are both entire and perfect. 
 
 As two of the evangelists, Matthew and John, 
 were of the eleven apostles, it is a most surprising 
 and unaccountable fact that they should so widely 
 disagree in the accounts they give of such extraor- 
 dinary and thrilling scenes as must have been those 
 of the re-appearance of Jesus to his disciples after 
 his death and burial ; that John should give four, 
 and Matthew but two ; that Matthew should make 
 no mention of the two which took place at Jerusa- 
 lem, and John should be silent about the manifesta- 
 tion in the mountain of Galilee, and Matthew equally 
 silent about the one at the Sea of Tiberias. 
 
 We wiU now take some notices of the accounts 
 given of the women who visited the sepulchre. 
 Matthew mentions two ; " Mary Magdalene and the 
 other Mary." Mark mentions three ; the two Maries 
 and Salome. Luke names three ; the two Maries, 
 Joanna, and other women. John names but one ; 
 
260 THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 
 
 Mary Magdalene. Matthew represents that the 
 "women saw an angel sitting on the " very great " 
 stone which he had rolled from the door of the 
 sepulchre, who announced to them that Jesus was 
 risen from the dead, and directed them to carry 
 intelligence of this to his disciples. Mark and 
 Luke represent, that, ^\rhen the women arrived at 
 the sepulchre, they found it open, and entered it. 
 The body of Jesus was not there. They were 
 surprised and perplexed. Mark says that they 
 now saw a young man sitting on the right side of 
 the tomb. Luke says that they saw two men. 
 The women were informed that Jesus was no 
 longer dead, but alive, and directed to go and tell 
 his disciples "that he goeth before you into Gali- 
 lee : there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.'' 
 John relates that Mary Magdalene went, and found 
 the tomb open ; that she returned hastily, and, 
 having found Simon Peter and the other disciple 
 whom Jesus loved, informed them that the body of 
 the Lord had been abducted from the tomb, and 
 she knew not where it had been laid ; that these 
 two disciples ran very speedily to the place, found 
 the sepulchre open, went into it, saw the grave- 
 clothes, but no dead body ; that they believed that 
 this had been stolen, " For as yet they knew not 
 the Scripture, that he must rise again from the 
 dead." 
 
 But there are not only omissions on the part of 
 the evangelists, but also some conflict. Matthew 
 declares that the women, on their return, met the 
 risen Jesus, and both saw him and heard him 
 
THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 261 
 
 speak. Luke reports that the women saw " a 
 vision of angels, but him they saw not." Matthew 
 and John represfent that the women did not enter 
 into the sepulchre ; Mark and Luke say that they 
 did enter into it. Luke represents that Peter went 
 alone to the sepulchre, and, " stooping down, looked 
 into it, beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, 
 and departed." John says that he went in company 
 with another ; and that, immediately on his arrival, 
 he went into the sepulchre. Matthew represents 
 that the women saw the angel roll the stone from 
 the door of the tomb ; Mark, Luke, and John say 
 that they found the stone already rolled away. 
 John says, " Then," immediately after it was ascer- 
 tained that the tomb was open, and the body of 
 Jesus not in it, " the disciples went away again to 
 their own home." And this seems to accord with 
 the command recorded by Matthew, " Go, tell my 
 brethren that they go into Galilee, and there shall 
 they see me." Also with the fact which he states, 
 " Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, 
 into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them." 
 Luke, however, says nothing of Galilee. On the 
 contrary, he says that they were directed to " tarry 
 in the city of Jerusalem, until they should be endued 
 with power from on high." According to Matthew, 
 our Lord took his final leave of the disciples on a 
 mountain in Galilee. According to Luke, he did 
 it on the Mount of Olives, in Bethany, near to Jeru- 
 salem. 
 
 There is, we think, but one hypothesis by which 
 these discrepant and conflicting statements and 
 
262 THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 
 
 representations can be accounted for. It is this, — 
 that the authors of the four Gospels wrote on the 
 authority of tradition ; and that this authority, 
 in many points, was not reliable, but erroneous. 
 Many of us may be unwilling to adopt this con- 
 clusion ; but we must, all of us, eventually come to 
 it, whether we will it or not. The event is inevi- 
 table. 
 
 And what loss do we sustain by it? Does it 
 falsify the ministry and the crucifixion of the Lord 
 Jesus Christ ? Not at all. That Jesus lived and 
 taught and died are facts inscribed on the history 
 of the world. How he lived, and what he taught, 
 are facts which depend not on the inerrable ac- 
 curacy of his biographers. They may have fallen 
 into many mistakes. But they did not misrepresent 
 his life and doctrine. These were already known. 
 Christianity was established in the world before 
 the Gospels were written. The religion of Jesus 
 does not depend on Scripture ; but this depends 
 upon that. If the material Bible, every copy of it, 
 were this day to perish, the religion of Christ wo,uld 
 remain. Not a particle of it would be lost. Not 
 a single element thereof would perish. That spirit 
 of man, which is made in the image of its Maker, 
 is the depository of it. Christianity is the religion 
 of Jesus. It came out from him as truly as he 
 came out from God. " My doctrine is not, origin- 
 ally, mine, but His who sent me. As my Father 
 hath given me commandment, even so I speak." 
 The Lord Jesus did not write a book. He 
 " preached the way of God." The seed is the 
 
THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 263 
 
 word of God. He that soweth the good seed is the 
 Son of man. He sowed it by preaching, not by 
 writing. Some of this seed fell into good ground, 
 into honest and good hearts ; and by such hearts it 
 is perpetuated. And it is an incorruptible and un- 
 dying seed, " which liveth and abideth for ever." 
 
 It is a mistake to beHeve, that the material Serip- 
 tm-es are the inerrable word of God itself. They 
 are but an imperfect record of that word. They 
 are a very important aid, an invaluable instrumen- 
 tality ; but they are not the basis of Christianity. 
 This is not written with ink, but by the finger of 
 the living God on the susceptible tables of human 
 hearts. 
 
 Revealed truth is God's word. AU truth is from 
 God. He is its fountain, its eternal source. Wher- 
 ever and howsoever made known, truth comes from 
 him. There is truth in the Bible, and it came from 
 God. There is truth in other books, and it came 
 from God. But no book contains all truth ; nor, 
 probably, is any book pure from all error. The 
 Bible contains some manifest mistakes. No man 
 believes all which is asserted for fact in the Bible. 
 It asserts that God made a firmament to separate 
 the waters which were above it, from the waters on 
 the earth. This doctrine accorded w^ith the philo- 
 sophy of the age when the book of Genesis was 
 written. But a different philosophy has since been 
 learned, and now prevails. No enlightened man, 
 however orthodox, now believes that the earth is 
 the centre of the world, and that there is a solid 
 structure overhanging the earth, and sustaining, as 
 
264 THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 
 
 on a platform, the sun, moon, and all the visible 
 host of heaven. 
 
 It is asserted in the Bible, that God hardened the 
 heart of Pharaoh, king of Egypt, and did it for the 
 purpose of preventing him from doing right, and 
 instigating him to do wrong ; also that he deter- 
 mined other persons to commit wickedness. This 
 doctrine likewise harmonized with the philosophy 
 which then prevailed. But what man, even among 
 the abetters of plenary inspiration, now believes 
 that God ever instigates any of his rational creatures 
 to the perpetration of iniquity? The doctrine is 
 now obsolete, and is repudiated, though contained 
 in the Bible. 
 
 The evangelists of the New Testament are re- 
 garded in the character of witnesses. They testify 
 to facts in the life of our Lord and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ. In the cases wherein their testimony agrees, 
 there can be no reasonable doubt of its truth. But 
 if the testimony of one conflict with that of another, 
 either directly or indirectly, either in statement or 
 by omission, some doubt may reasonably be enter- 
 tained. All the evangelists concur in affirming, that 
 the names of the parents of Jesus were Joseph and 
 Mary ; that he was brought up in Nazareth ; that 
 he was baptized by John in Jordan ; that he itine- 
 rated and preached in Galilee, Judea, and Samaria ; 
 that he chose twelve of his disciples, and appointed 
 them to be his apostles ; that one of these betrayed 
 him ; and that he was crucified, under Pontius 
 Pilate, on the hill of Calvary, in one of the suburbs 
 of Jerusalem. These, therefore, and many other 
 
THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 265 
 
 facts concerning which there is no deficiency or 
 conflict of testimony, are to be readily accepted and 
 believed. But, in cases wherein deficiency or con- 
 flict does obtain, some doubts may naturally arise. 
 St. Luke, for instance, asserts the visible ascension 
 of the Lord Jesus. But no other evangelist asserts 
 such a fact. St. Mark aflirms, that he was received 
 up into heaven, and seated on the right hand of God ; 
 but he does not aiBrm, that this was done visibly, 
 in the presence of men. Neither Matthew nor John 
 mentions the fact of the ascension. Our Lord him- 
 self declsired his ascension ; but he does not declare 
 that it should take place visibly. This fact stands 
 on the single testimony of Luke. No doubt that 
 he had been so informed, and that he so believed. 
 But, as the other evangelists do not mention the 
 visible ascension, may we not reasonably conclude 
 that they were unprepared to affirm it ? 
 
 The flight of the holy family into Egypt, and 
 the slaughter of children in Bethlehem, are not 
 recognized by any writer in the New Testament, 
 except Matthew. This evangelist is strongly ad- 
 dicted to find passages in the Old Testament which 
 have a fulfilment in the person of Jesus the Mes- 
 siah. It seems to have been a passion in him. 
 Doubtless it was so in many others at that time. 
 The passage in Hosea, " Out of Egypt have I 
 called my Son," seemed to them very significant. 
 It must have reference to the Messiah, for he only 
 is God's Son. Hence may have been got up the 
 story of the temporary sojourn of Joseph and Mary 
 in Egypt. And there was another pathetic passage 
 23 
 
266 THE BIBLE A BOOK TO BE EXAMINED. 
 
 in Jeremiah : " In Rama was a voice heard, weep- 
 ing and lamentation ; Rachel weeping for her chil- 
 dren, and would not be comforted, because they are 
 not : '' they are lost, dead. Herod was a notori- 
 ously cruel and bloody man. He caused the mur- 
 der of many of his own family. And what more 
 natural than that he should command, that aU the 
 young children in Bethlehem should be slaughtered, 
 in expectation that the young child who was said 
 to have been born there, and styled the King of the 
 Jews, would be included among them? Hence 
 may have come the story of the massacre of the 
 innocents ; and the mind of Matthew was prepared 
 to receive and to credit it. 
 
 The credulity of this evangelist is apparent in 
 the account he gives of the resurrection of Jesus. 
 He says that there was a great earthquake, and 
 that an angel, whose face was lilie lightning, de- 
 scended from heaven, and rolled away the stone 
 from the door of the sepulchre, and sat down upon 
 it. But the other evangelists are silent on this 
 head, — like the other earthquake which Matthew 
 says occurred immediately after Jesus expu'ed on 
 the cross. They make no mention of the rending 
 of the great veil of the temple, the rent rocks, and 
 the opening of the graves, and the uprising of many 
 bodies of dead saints. The very extraordinary 
 character of these events, in conjunction with the 
 silence of all other authorities, furnishes cause to 
 doubt, not the veracity, but the discretion, of our 
 evangelist. 
 
267 
 
 HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 
 
 " The commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes.'* — Fsalh 
 xix. 8. 
 
 Much has been said and written about the inte- 
 rior and occult meaning of Holy Scriptures. It 
 is desirable to understand the import of this lan- 
 guage. What is the fact which it asserts ? Is it 
 that the Bible contains figurative language ? This 
 fact is universally recognized. All readers of the 
 sacred pages understand much of their language in 
 a fiignrative sense. All those forms and varieties of 
 the figures of speech, taught in manuals of gram- 
 mar and rhetoric, — the metonymy, the metaphor, 
 the hyperbole, the ellipsis, the parable, the alle- 
 gory, &c., — are admitted and observed. As every 
 other book contains figurative language, so likewise 
 the Bible. We can understand this fact. But it 
 does not probably fulfil the doctrine of the " hid- 
 den sense of the word." In addition to the gram- 
 matical figures of speech, Christian theologians 
 have superinduced the typical, — types, antitypes, 
 and archetypes. Great use has been made of this 
 
268 THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 
 
 principle of scriptural interpretation. The fathers 
 of the second and third centuries employed it abun- 
 dantly; and their example has been followed, 
 though not always with equal license, by their suc- 
 cessors down to the present time. But does this 
 principle of typical representation fulfil the theory 
 of the " hidden sense of the word " ? We suspect 
 that it does not ; that the latter is much deeper 
 and more extensive than the former ; that the 
 Scriptures have two distinct meanings, — the exte- 
 rior and the interior: the former of these can be 
 comprehended by the human senses and intellect, 
 but the latter only by the opening of a spiritual 
 eye in the soul. Thus the account of the creation 
 in Genesis has two distinct significations, one of 
 which describes the formation of the material world ; 
 the other, the spiritual. Such was the doctrine 
 of Mr. John Hutchinson, and of Baron Emanuel 
 Swedenborg. Mr. Hutchinson says that "the Scrip- 
 tures (written in Hebrew, the language of Paradise, 
 each root of which represents some idea of action 
 or condition, suggested by the sensible object it ex- 
 presses, and is further designed to signify spiritual 
 things), rightly translated and understood, comprise 
 a perfect system of philosophy, theology, and re- 
 ligion." But of " the Greek, that language of 
 erring Heathen, he says that Christ and his apos- 
 tles knew too well its imperfections and unfitness 
 to give ideas of the divine economy, to make use 
 of it for that purpose." He also observes, that 
 " as the material machine is primarily suited to the 
 service of the body, so its secondary but most im- 
 
THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 269 
 
 portant use is to treasure up ideas for the immortal 
 soul by affording types and evidences of the other- 
 wise unutterable attributes of the Deity." 
 
 Baron Swedenborg, we believe, did not adopt ex- 
 actly the theory of Mr. Hutchinson, yet one much 
 resembling it. Mr. Hutchinson seems to have 
 placed his on the basis of types. Swedenborg made 
 little or no use of this word, but abundantly em- 
 ployed that of correspondence. The details of each 
 theory of these two celebrated masters — mystics 
 — may be intelligible and clear to their respective 
 disciples ; but to us they are too obscure to be un- 
 derstood. We win not, therefore, presume to pro- 
 nounce them peremptorily either true or false. It 
 would seem to be presumption to sit in judgment 
 upon what we do not understand. 
 
 On one point, however, our mind is fixed and 
 definite. It is this, that every writer and speaker — 
 with the exception of the composer of riddles and 
 paradoxes — always intends one thing only when 
 he utters a sentence. His aim. is to use words in 
 some one certain sense. Such is the purpose and 
 use of language. The idea of double meaning is 
 preposterous. It defeats the end for which words 
 are employed. The designed use of equivocal 
 language presupposes this thing. For, if he de- 
 sign that his words should be understood differently 
 from that sense in which they are true, he is a de- 
 ceiver, and perverts the true end of language. AH 
 historians, preachers, lecturers, public speakers, de- 
 baters, pleaders, and didactic writers, aim at one 
 thing, which is to be understood in a certain sense ; 
 
 23* 
 
270 THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 
 
 the sense entertained in their own mind. On this 
 point, the authors of the different documents of the 
 Bible are doubtless in accordance with all other 
 writers. They -wrote for the purpose of communi- 
 cating information, declaring truth, administering 
 counsel, uttering rebulve, giving encouragement, 
 warning, and instruction. They wrote for the im- 
 mediate use of their fellow-creatures about them. 
 They did not look forward to future generations, 
 who should put a sense upon their language differ- 
 ent from that of their cotemporaries. What is 
 common to all men who write and speak must be 
 a fact with the sacred WTriters. 
 
 This point needs not a labored proof or illustra- 
 tion. But it is a question of some importance to 
 inquire. Why and whence has it happened, that 
 such a theory — the theory of a double sense of 
 Scripture-language, the doctrine of a hidden sense 
 of the sacred word — was conceived and got up 
 among Christians ? The ground and cause of it, 
 we think, can be traced. The Hebrew Scriptures 
 are very ancient. They were composed when the 
 langiiage was in an immature and unripened con- 
 dition. Words were comparatively few ; and many 
 of these were unsettled in their import. The same 
 words are often used in different senses. Of course, 
 the language would be loose, and its import in par- 
 ticular applications doubtful and uncertain. Hence 
 it is that so many different interpretations are by 
 commentators given to hundreds of texts in the 
 Old Testament. 
 
 The known fact is, that the Hebrew documents 
 
THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 271 
 
 of the Bible were ■written in a comparatively dark 
 age. The contents of them could be believed and 
 received as divine truth by the people of the age 
 and country when and where they were produced. 
 Afterward came another age more enlightened. 
 The doctrine of the divine inspiration of these 
 writings had come down by tradition from time 
 immemorial: it was still firmly held. But some 
 of the narratives seemed to be incredible. Some of 
 the institutions seemed improper. To relieve these 
 difficulties, the theory of types was invented. This 
 doctrine answered a great purpose, and was exten- 
 sively improved. The Old Testament became 
 filled with types. By this means it was converted 
 into a gospel, whose light was little less clear and 
 bright than the sun of Christianity. 
 
 At length, bold adventurers in this line appeared. 
 Such, certainly, were Swedenborg and Hutchinson. 
 They changed narratives into prospective histories. 
 The first chapter of Genesis did not relate the man- 
 ner and stages of the material creation, but foretold 
 the reconstruction of the human race under the 
 Messiah. The six days' work intended and de- 
 scribed the six stages of regeneration. And the 
 accoimt in the sixth, seventh, and eighth chapters, 
 of the sons of God, — the angels who left their first 
 estate -in the fixmamental heavens, being smitten 
 with the beauty of the daughters of men, whom 
 they married, and fi-om which unnatural amalgama- 
 tion came a race of giants, tyrants, and oppressors, 
 such as the world could not bear, but became utterly 
 corrupted, man unfitted to be an habitant of the 
 
272 THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 
 
 world, and God took the resolution to destroy him 
 utterly from off the face of the earth. The conse- 
 quent flood caused by an incessant rain of forty 
 days' continuance, so that the waters rose eight or 
 ten miles above the usual level of the sea, and 
 added more than two thousand millions of square 
 cubic miles to the size of the earth ; the waters 
 rising more than thirty feet, on an average, every 
 hour ; and finally the stranding of the ark on the 
 peak of Ararat, a place of perpetual snow, and such 
 intense cold that every creature from the ark must 
 have perished the very day, if not the very hour, 
 when it came into the open air ; — these alleged 
 facts, says Swedenborg and his disciples, are in- 
 credible ; for they are palpably impossible. They 
 are out of the sphere of God's order of working. 
 Therefore the account of them is not post-history, 
 but prospective and prophetic. The real facts are 
 not in the natural but in the spiritual world. It 
 foretells the corruption and ruin of the Christian 
 Church. It is a flood of false doctrine, pernicious 
 institutions, and moral death. The fallen angels 
 are the bishops of the church, such as Gregory of 
 Cappadocia, who converted heathen festivals into 
 saints' days, putting the martyrs in the place of the 
 pagan gods and goddesses, altering the name and 
 face of the thing without changing the substance 
 of it. The Christian Church, say they, is now on 
 the very eve of its " consummation," by which term 
 they mean its ruin. Thus they expound the ac- 
 count of the flood. Such is a specimen of the 
 
THE HIDDEN SENSE OP THE WORD. 273 
 
 doctrine of Swedenborg in respect to the interior 
 and occult sense of the Hebrew Scriptures. 
 
 But though we repudiate the doctrine of a double 
 sense, to be explained by the theory of types and 
 correspondence, we do, nevertheless, hold to what 
 may be termed a secondary and constructive sense 
 of many passages of the Holy Scriptures. They 
 contain a sense in the principles which underlie 
 them ; and this sense, for a long time, may not be 
 distinctly understood. Every law and every rule, 
 every maxim or proverb, stands on certain princi- 
 ples. If the law be a good law, there must be 
 something that makes it good. And this some- 
 thing is always good. The law itself, as a form, 
 may become obsolete and worthless; but those 
 elementary principles which once rendered it good 
 and useful remain unchanged, good and true as ever. 
 It was once the law or custom of society to return 
 blow for blow, stripe for stripe, and to take life for 
 life. There was then no magistracy. A man must 
 be his own defender and avenger. This bad law or 
 custom was, nevertheless, based upon right princi- 
 ples. And these principles remain now what they 
 were then. They are right and good. It is right 
 that injury, injustice, and abuse should be resisted, 
 and that the author of the injustice should suffer for 
 what he has wrongfully done. 
 
 At the time the Bible was written, it was believed 
 that God supervised all human affairs by a particu- 
 lar and special providence ; that he sent showers 
 and harvests as the people deserved such blessings; 
 that he sent drought and frost and caterpillars and 
 
274 THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 
 
 mildew, in accordance to their demerit and wicked- 
 ness ; that, when two armies met in battle, God, 
 as he pleased, gave victory to one, and defeat to 
 the other. And it was expressly promised to a 
 people or a nation, that, if they obeyed God's laws, 
 they should be prospered and built up ; but, if they 
 disobeyed these laws, they should be distressed and 
 diminished, Jer. xviii. 5 — 10. It was believed that 
 the seven thraldoms which the Israelites endured, 
 during the times of the judges, were incurred and 
 brought upon them by their undue indulgence and 
 participation in the customs and worship of the 
 pagan people of Canaan, among whom they lived. 
 It was believed that the captivities, that of the ten 
 tribes by the king of Assyria, and afterwards that 
 of Judah by the king of Babylon, were punishments 
 of the people for not duly sanctifying the seventh 
 day of the week as the Lord's sabbath ; for building 
 altars, planting groves, and eating sacrifices, on the 
 mountains, instead of confining their worship to 
 the sanctuary at Jerusalem ; and for, sometimes, 
 rendering homage to God under the denomination 
 of Baal, instead of Jehovah. But though there 
 was a manifest mistake in the letter of these beliefs, 
 yet the spirit of them, the principles which under- 
 lay them, were true. Though the doctrine of a 
 particular divine providence is but imaginary, yet 
 it is a ti-uth that God's general providence contains 
 all those tendencies which do usually protect and 
 prosper the righteous, and disappoint and frustrate 
 the schemes and designs of the wicked. A general 
 providence, such as God has instituted and such as 
 
THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 275 
 
 he maintains, does bring to pass all the prosperity 
 and enjoyment which attend and follow industry, 
 discretion, uprightness, and piety. We lose nothing 
 by foregoing the doctrine of a particular divine 
 providence, and adopting that of a general. For 
 aU the good there is in providence remains the 
 same. The amount of the good is what it is : it 
 is neither increased nor diminished by our theory 
 respecting it. We have the same encouragement 
 to live soberly, righteously, and devoutly; to deal 
 justly, to love mercy, and humbly to acknowledge 
 God in aU our ways, as though God did specially 
 order aU the allotments of our lives. The mis- 
 fortunes which befall an unrighteous man, and the 
 success which follows the labors of an upright man, 
 administer to us the same instructive lessons, whe- 
 ther divine providence be particular or general. 
 
 There was, we conceive, an undue importance 
 attached by the Jews to ceremonial righteousness, 
 to sacrifices, and to the place and manner of offer- 
 ing them ; to the rigid observance of the sabbath ; 
 to the name by which the great Power above should 
 be recognized and adored. We believe them to 
 have been mistaken in ascribing the cause of their 
 thraldoms and captivities to their failures in the 
 due observance of the outward forms of their reli- 
 gion. But they were doubtless right in ascribing 
 them to something wrong in themselves. There 
 might be as much iniquity in them as they suspect- 
 ed ; but it did not chiefly lay where they placed it. 
 The root of their belief was sound and true ; but 
 some of the branches which grew from it were wild 
 
276 THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 
 
 and unsound. The accounts which they give of 
 the causes of their good and ill fortunes are true in 
 the spirit of them, though not in the letter. There 
 is, therefore, a hidden sense in which they should 
 now be read and understood. 
 
 The doctrine which we have proposed and en- 
 deavored to illustrate is not new. It has, in the 
 essence of it, been known and made use of in past 
 ages of the Christian Church. Yet it has not often 
 been distinctly and correctly recognized and avowed. 
 Christian theologians have, almost from the begin- 
 ning, given a Constructive sense to those portions 
 of the Old Testament which predict the character 
 and times of the Messiah. The prophets describe 
 him as a potent and magnificent monarch, wield- 
 ing an iron sceptre, and crushing all nations who 
 do not immediately yield to his sway. They declare 
 the glorification of the temple on Mount Zion, and 
 the exaltation of .Jerusalem to be the metropolis 
 of the world. And Christian writers have given a 
 new and constructive sense to all such passages of the 
 Hebrew Scriptures. They understand the monarch 
 and king to mean a Reformer, a Teacher, a Ran- 
 som, a Saviour ; and by Zion, Jerusalem, the Lord's 
 house, and the Lord's people, they understand 
 the Christian Church. The prophet said that the 
 set time to favor Zion should come ; that, when 
 the Lord should build up Zion, he would appear in 
 his glory ; that Zion was beautifully situated on the 
 sides of the North; and it was, or would be, the 
 beauty of perfection, and the joy of the whole earth. 
 And all this is by theologians applied to the 
 
THE HIDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 277 
 
 Christian Church. But they have not done this 
 consistently and understandingly. They have as- 
 sumed, at once and in the outset, that the prophets 
 meant what Christian interpreters understand them 
 to mean ; that, when they wrote Zion, Jerusalem, 
 and the daughter of my people, they intended the 
 Gentile people of the Messiah. This, however, was 
 not the fact. By Jerusalem the prophets intended 
 the local city of David ; by Zion they intended the 
 elevation on which the temple was builded; and 
 by the house of the Lord they intended the material 
 temple. Thus the people understood them. This 
 literal sense was so deeply enstamped upon the 
 Jewish mind that it has never been effaced. The 
 people for whom the prophets wrote must have un- 
 derstood what the writers intended. It is wholly a 
 gratuitous assumption, that the prophets did intend 
 the sense which Christian commentators have at- 
 tached to their language. 
 
 And there is no necessity for this assumption. 
 We attain all the advantages of a constructive 
 sense by means of the principles-theory. And this 
 theory is natural and easy. It has been adopted 
 in the ages which are past. Our Saviour adopted 
 it in his exposition of the sixth and seventh precepts 
 of the decalogue ; also when he said, " Think not 
 that I am come to destroy the law and the pro- 
 phets ; I am come, not to destroy, but to fulfil." He 
 carried out the principles on which the Mosaic in- 
 stitutions had been built. In no other sense did he 
 sustain and confirm them. 
 
 The prophecies of the New Testament, as well 
 
 24 
 
278 THE HrDDEN SENSE OF THE WORD. 
 
 as those of the Old, are true, and have been or will 
 be fulfilled, only in what we have called the princi- 
 ples-sense. In no other sense has the kingdom 
 of God come, and that of the saints commenced 
 on the ruins of the old worldly kingdoms. St. John 
 the divine distinctly foresaw the fall of Babylon, 
 the great and terrible antichrist. He intended Pa- 
 gan Rome. No reasonable doubt on this point. 
 This arch-enemy would fight against Christianity, 
 so long as he had a breath to draw, or a particle of 
 strength to use. But he would be gradually crushed 
 and annihilated by the special judgments of the 
 Almighty. The Revelator — as he has been called 
 — had no conception that Pagan Rome would be- 
 come Christian Rome. He believed that, so long 
 as Rome existed, the Church would be persecuted. 
 In this he was in a great mistake ; one similar to 
 that of the prophets who foretold a splendid, secu- 
 lar, military Messiah. The Revelator's prophecy 
 is fulfilled, as that of the Hebrew oracles were, 
 only in that constructive sense which is obtained 
 by employing the theory of principles; — making 
 the proper distinction between the letter and the 
 spirit. 
 
 Thus there is a hidden sense of the word. But 
 it is not discovered by a tact to spell out the lines 
 of symbolical imagery and correspondential rela- 
 tions. It requires not the flights and labors of the 
 imagination. It is obtained by enlightenment and 
 sober reflection. It is the spirit, in distinction from 
 the letter. I would speak as to wise men : judge 
 ye what I have said. 
 
279 
 
 THE HEBREW RECORDS. 
 
 •' Hilkiah the priest found a book of the law of the Lord, given by Moses." — 
 3 Chrok. xxxiv. 14. 
 
 The Israelites had hitherto conducted the affairs of 
 their religion by precedent, tradition, and perhaps 
 some small written doctiments. The law of Moses, 
 as it is in the Pentateuch, was probably unknown 
 to them. Their doctrinal and ceremonial system, 
 like aU other institutions of the kind, grew up gra- 
 dually, and from small beginnings. Such was the 
 fact in relation to the Romish and Papal hierarchy. . 
 This institution, so complicate and complete, could 
 not have been the work of one day, nor of a single 
 age. It had the growth of centuries. And so, 
 doubtless, had the Jewish hierarchy. ' In the early 
 times of their judges and kings, their irehgious forms 
 were few and simple. In the days of Eli, the people 
 held one annual festival, and evidently but one. 
 1 Sam. i. 3 and 21 : " The man Elkanah went up 
 yearly, and offered a yearly sacrifice." No inti- 
 mation is given of the celebration of a passover 
 from the time of Joshua to that of Solomon ; nor 
 of another until the time of Hezekiah ; nor, again, 
 until the time of Josiah. If the passover had been 
 
280 
 
 THE HEBREW RECORDS. 
 
 annually and regularly kept, the three particular 
 ones above mentioned would not have been such 
 extraordinary occurrences as to have been matter 
 of historical record. 
 
 The law of Moses, the Pentateuch edition, ex- 
 pressly and severely forbids intermarriages between 
 circumcised Hebrew^s and uncircumcised Gentiles. 
 This prohibition could not have been known in the 
 times of the judges, nor in those of David and 
 Solomon. The practice of intermarriages could not 
 have grown up in the face and eyes of such a law 
 as that in the Pentateuch. David married two or 
 three Gentile women : one of them a Geshurite, 
 another an Ammonitess ; a third, probably, a Hittite. 
 David himseK came within the pale of exclusion 
 from the sanctuary. The law, as we now have it, 
 declares that a Moabite shall not enter the sanctuary 
 of the Lord, even unto the fourth generation ; and 
 David was of the foxKth generation, a descendant 
 of Ruth the Moabitess. So pious a man as David 
 would not have knowingly and dehberately violated 
 the plain and palpable provisions of a sacred law. 
 
 The Pentateuchal law ordains, that there should 
 be but one national altar and sanctuary, to which 
 all sacrifices and offerings should be brought. But 
 this law obviously was not understood in the days 
 of the judges, nor of the kings of the line of David ; 
 for, in these days, altars were raised and sacrifices 
 offered in other places. Gideon and Manoah of- 
 fered sacrifices on or near their own premises. 
 David built an altar at the threshing-floor of Arau- 
 nah the Jebusite. Solomon offered sacrifices in 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 281 
 
 Gibeon. Elijah built an altaj and offered sacrifice 
 on Mount Carmel. Such things could not have 
 been done, provided they had been knovsrn to be 
 unlawful. 
 
 In the times of the judges, the Israelites appear to 
 have been in a very loose and dislocated position. 
 They were dispersed over the face of the country ; 
 some of them in Gilead, on the east of Jordan ; some 
 of them in Palestine and Canaan, on the west. 
 They were intermingled with the aboriginal popu- 
 lation. The author of -'■ Judges " says that " the 
 children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, 
 Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites ; 
 and they took their daughters to be their wives, 
 and gave their daughters to their sons, and served 
 their gods." The national character remained un- 
 formed and unfixed. There was no proper national 
 government; no legislative power; no supreme 
 tribunal ; no national head : except in times of 
 war, no military chief Their judges were little, if 
 at all, more than advisers and arbitrators, who had 
 obtained distinction by some warlike exploits, as 
 Othniel, Ehud, and Jephthah ; or by their wealth, as 
 Jair, Ibzan, Abdon, and Elon. " In those days there 
 was no king in Israel, and every man did what 
 was right in his own eyes." — And, even after the 
 establishment of the kingdom, the former loose 
 condition, in many respects, still continued. The 
 circumcised and the uncircumcised lived inter- 
 mingled together. The war of the two races had 
 ceased. During the four hundred years of the time 
 of the judges, a state of war and peace had alter- 
 
 24* 
 
282 
 
 THE HEBREW RECORDS. 
 
 nated. The separate tribes often made war on their 
 own account, Judah, assisted by Simeon, gained 
 advantages over the Canaanites and Perizzites in 
 Bezek, Hebron, Debir, and Jerusalem : Judges, i. 
 4 — 8. Simeon, assisted by Judah, overcame the 
 inhabitants of Zephath and Hormah. Benjamin 
 was unsuccessful in his attempts to expel the Jebu- 
 sites from Jenisalem. " The Jebusites dwell with 
 the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this 
 day." Joseph conquered Luz, and changed its name 
 to Bethel. Manasseh struggled long, and without 
 success, against Bethshean, Dor, and Megiddo ; 
 " but the Canaanites would dwell in that land." 
 Neither did Ephraim diive out the Canaanites from 
 Gezer ; nor Zebulon, those of Kitron and Nahalol : 
 nor Asher, those of Accho and Zidon ; nor NaphthaH, 
 those of Bethshemesh and Bethanath: but the 
 Canaanites of all those places continued to dwell in 
 them. Yet in time they were reduced to the condi- 
 tion of tributaries. But such a state of things could 
 not have obtained after the written law of Moses 
 had been promulged among them. This law ex- 
 pressly forbade any intercourse with the people of 
 Canaan : " Thou shalt consume all the people which 
 the Lord thy C4od shall deliver thee ; thine eye 
 shall have no pity upon them." " Ye shall utterly 
 destroy all the places wherein the nations, which ye 
 shall possess, served then gods, upon the high moun- 
 tains and under the green trees. Ye shaU overthrow 
 their altars, and break their pillars, and hew down 
 the graven images, burn their groves, and destroy 
 the names of them out of that place : " Deut. xii. 2, 3. 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 283 
 
 But the fact of " the book of the law, given by 
 Moses," being found during the reign of Josiah, is 
 proof conclusive that such a document had not been 
 previously known. To the king and the people this 
 event was a matter of great surprise. They had 
 never heard of such a book before. The Mosaical 
 law had hitherto existed in tradition, usage, remem- 
 brance, and probably some inscriptions, like that of 
 the decalogue, on tablets of stone ; and that of the 
 blessings and curses on the plastered pillars upon 
 the Mounts Gerizim and Ebal. But a Scriptiu-e of 
 this description had not been heard of. It was a 
 new thing. Had it ever been known, the fact would 
 not have been forgotten. Had the book ever been 
 suppressed, as Prof. Stuart thinks it had been by 
 Manasseh, or disappeared and been lost, this fact 
 also must have been remembered. The book was 
 manifestly new : it now, for the first time, saw the 
 open light of the sun. 
 
 Let it now be remembered, that God directed 
 Moses to cause a copy of the law to be deposited 
 in the most holy place by the side of the ark of 
 the covenant, and there kept ; and further, that this 
 copy of the law should be taken out, on every sab- 
 batical year, and read in the hearing of all the 
 people. Once in seven years, the law was to be 
 publicly read at one of the great gatherings of the 
 people. If these directions had been followed, — 
 and they doubtless would have been followed, had 
 they really been given, — the contents and provi- 
 sions of the law would have been kept fresh in the 
 minds of the people, and there never could have 
 
284 
 
 THE HEBREW HECORDS. 
 
 come a time when the finding of the book of the law 
 would have produced such surprise, nor the reading 
 of it caused such alarm and consternation. 
 
 But in what form did this Mosaic code now ap- 
 pear ? We cannot now obtain a certainty in answer 
 to this question. We can, however, hazard a con- 
 jecture. We will say it was the so-caUed second 
 law, — the book of Deuteronomy. The Pentateuch 
 has three principal parts : the book of Genesis, 
 which has been called the introduction ; the books 
 of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers, which contain 
 the history and legislation of the Jewish law ; and, 
 third, the Deuteronomy, or second version of this 
 law. Deuteronomy has not the character of an 
 appendix, or addenda, or a supplement. It is the 
 whole thing itself. It covers the same ground. 
 The same materials constitute its substance. Like 
 the other version, it includes and interweaves history 
 and legislation. The difference between the two 
 versions is, that Deuteronomy is the rough draft ; it 
 has less of particular and detaU ; its language is 
 more redundant; it abounds in declamation and 
 appeals. It purports to have been delivered per- 
 sonally by Moses, in an address, or a series of 
 addresses, to the whole congregated family of Is- 
 raelites. It is in a form adapted to be read and 
 rehearsed before a great assembly, like those to 
 which the law of Moses is said to have been read 
 in the times of Josiah and Ezra. The whole book 
 is interspersed with declamatory and solemn exhor- 
 tation, adapted to make the impression which was 
 made on those occasions. " And it came to pass, 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 285 
 
 when the king had heard the words of the law, 
 that he rent his clothes. And he gathered all the 
 elders of Judah and Jerusalem, and went up into 
 the house of the Lord, and all the people, great and 
 small ; and he read in their ears all the words of the 
 book of the covenant found in the house of the Lord. 
 And the king stood in his place, and made a cove- 
 nant before the Lord, to keep his commandments, 
 with all his heart, to perform the words of the cove- 
 nant written in this book. And he caused all that 
 were present to stand to it. And they did according 
 to the covenant of God." 2 Chron. xxxiv. 19, 29. 
 
 " And all the people gathered themselves as one 
 man, and spake unto Ezra the priest to bring the 
 book of the law of Moses. And he brought the 
 book before the congregation, upon the first day of 
 the seventh month. And he read therein from morn- 
 ing untU mid-day ; and the ears of the people were 
 attentive to the book of the law. And Ezra stood 
 upon a prdpit of wood, and opened the book in the 
 sight of all the people. And when he opened it, all 
 the people stood up. So they read in the book, and 
 gave the sense, and caused the people to under- 
 stand. And Nehemiah the governor, and Ezra the 
 priest and scribe said unto the people. This day is 
 holy unto the Lord your God: mourn not, nor 
 weep. For aU the people wept, when they heard 
 the words of the law. And on the second day, they 
 found written in the law, that the children of Israel 
 should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh 
 month. So the people went forth unto the mount, 
 and brought olive-branches and pine-branches, myr- 
 
286 THE HEBREW RECORDS. 
 
 tie and palm-branches, and branches of thick trees, 
 to make booths, as it is written. And they made 
 booths every one, either upon the roof of his house, 
 or in the courts of their houses, and in the courts 
 of the house of God, and in the streets of the city. 
 And they sat under the booths : for since the days 
 of Joshua, the son of Nun, unto that day, had not 
 the children of Israel done so." — But why had 
 they not done so ? They did not know that there 
 was such a provision in the law. And this is strong 
 presumptive evidence that such a law did not pre- 
 viously exist. 
 
 It is the opinion of biblical commentators, that 
 Ezra revised the literature of the Hebrews, and com- 
 piled the sacred canon ; that he interpolated many 
 passages, such as the account of the death and 
 burial of Moses, and that of the dukes of Edom 
 down to the time of the kings of Israel ; together with 
 such as declare the continued existence of certain 
 monuments ; " and there they are unto this day." 
 Now, if Ezra and his companions, " the members of 
 the great synagogue," took the liberty to interpolate 
 and make additions, they might also take the liberty 
 to compose new books from the materials which 
 they possessed. They might thus have composed 
 the books of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers. The 
 groundwork of these would be furnished by the 
 book of Hilkiah, and by the traditions which had 
 come down to their own time. There seems to 
 be an intimation of something like this in 2 Es- 
 dras, xiv. 41 : " And my mouth was opened and 
 shut no more. And the Highest gave understand- 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 287 
 
 ing unto the five men, and they wrote the wonder- 
 ful things of the visions of the night which were 
 told ; and they sat forty days, and they wrote in 
 the day, and at night they ate bread. In forty days 
 they wrote two hundred and four books. And the 
 Highest spake, saying. The first written books pub- 
 lish openly, that the worthy and unworthy may read 
 them. But keep the seventy last written, and deli- 
 ver them only to such as be wise among the people. 
 . . . Fear not the imaginations against thee ; let not 
 the incredulity of them trouble thee ; for aU the un- 
 faithful shall die in their unfaithfulness." Though 
 this be apocrypha, yet there must have been some 
 cause for its having been written. 
 
 The books of Genesis, Joshua, Samuel, Kings, 
 and Chronicles were probably prepared about this 
 time. The materials for their preparation might 
 have been afforded from the books of Jasher, of 
 the wars of the Lord, of Nathan the prophet, Iddo 
 the seer, Shemaiah the prophet, Gad the seer, 
 and Isaiah the prophet ; others, also, of which no 
 mention is made in any Scripture now extant. That 
 the books above mentioned were ever read or seen 
 previously to the restoration from the Chaldean 
 exile, there is no evidence. And this declaration 
 may likewise be made concerning the books of 
 Esther, Job, the Psalms, the Proverbs, the Canticles, 
 Ecclesiastes, and most of the minor prophets. The 
 materials for their preparation doubtless were af- 
 forded. No evidence that some of these had ever 
 yet been seen, but evidence that some of them had 
 not been known. It had not been known that the 
 
288 THE HEBREW RECOEDS. 
 
 feast of the seventh months should be kept in 
 booths or tabernacles, nor that intermarriages be- 
 tween Hebrews and Gentiles had been prohibited 
 in the law of Moses. " On that day they read in 
 the book of Moses, in the audience of the people ; 
 and therein it was found written, that the Ammo- 
 nite and the Moabite should not come into the con- 
 gregation of God for ever. Now it came to pass, 
 when they heard the law, that they separated from 
 Israel all the mixed multitude." " Now, when 
 these things were done, the princes came to me, 
 saying. The people of Israel and the priests and 
 the Levites have not separated themselves from the 
 people of the lands of the Canaanites, the Hittites, 
 the Perizzites, the Jebusites, the Ammonites, the 
 Moabites, the Egyptians, and the Amorites. For 
 they have taken of their daughters for themselves 
 and for their sons, so that the holy seed have 
 mingled themselves with the people of those lands : 
 yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been 
 chief in this trespass." " Now, therefore, let us 
 make a covenant with our God to put away all the 
 wives, and such as are born of them, according to 
 the counsel of my lord, and let it be done accord- 
 ing to the law. Arise ! for this matter appertaineth 
 unto thee : we also will be with thee ; be of good 
 courage, and do it. Then arose Ezra, and made 
 the chief priests and the Levites and all Israel to 
 swear that they would do according to this word. 
 And they sware." " And Ezra the priest, with cer- 
 tain of the fathers, were separated and sat down, 
 on the first day of the tenth month, to examine the 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 289 
 
 matter. And they made an end with all the men 
 that had taken strange wives by the first day of first 
 month." Then follows a long catalogue of the 
 names of those implicated in this transgression. 
 
 It is apparent, from the statements given above, 
 that Ezra, Nehemiah, and their associates, had the 
 zeal, confidence, and tact to produce new provisions 
 of the Jewish law, and to make the people beheve 
 that statutes, which they had never known before, 
 had been ordained by Moses, and were, of course, 
 some seven or eight hundred years old. And, as 
 they did this, they might have done much more. 
 The account of the two hundred and four books, 
 written by the five scribes from the dictation of -Ezra, 
 possesses significance. It signifies that this emi- 
 nent man produced many books ; more than some 
 people about him believed to be authentic and 
 genuine. The prophet, therefore, is exhorted not to 
 be disturbed by " the incredulity " of the unbelieving 
 and « unfaithful." 
 
 That theje had been, even firom the time of Abra- 
 ham, a sentiment, more or less entertained, of the 
 impropriety of intermarriages between the circum- 
 cised and the uncircumcised, is manifest from pas- 
 sages in Jewish history. But if any known law,^ 
 invested with divine authority, had forbidden them, 
 we may feel sure that such men as David and Solo- 
 mon, together with many other kings, princes, and 
 priests, would not have violated it. It is, moreover, 
 manifest that the multitude, in the time of Nehe- 
 miah and Ezra, found to have oifended in this thing, 
 were taken by surprise. Their trespass had been 
 25 
 
290 THE HEBREW RECORDS. 
 
 the sin of ignorance. And, it is distinctly stated, 
 the hand of princes, priests, and rulers, had been 
 chief in this trespass. 
 
 Can we readily believe, that the law of Moses, 
 as we have it in the Pentateuch, had been in the 
 hands of the people during the principal part of a 
 thousand years, containing the injunction for the 
 use of booths on the festival of the seventh month, 
 and prohibition of the admission of Gentiles into 
 the sanctuary, and that of intermarriages with them, 
 and yet that this injunction and prohibition should 
 have remained all this time an unknown and a 
 dead letter ? 
 
 The distinctive Jewish character manifestly did 
 not become fixed until after the time of Ezra and 
 Nehemiah. These men and their associates took 
 especial pains to fix it. Until now, the intercourse 
 between the difl'erent races in the land had been 
 comparatively free. They had intermarried, and 
 had worshipped each other's gods. It was now de- 
 termined that a non-intercourse should be observed ; 
 and the means employed proved very effectual. It 
 required a strenuous effort to make the separation. 
 It seems to have commenced. with the refusal to 
 permit the Samaritans to unite with the Jews in 
 rebuilding the temple at Jerusalem. This prepared 
 tlie way for establishing a closer isolation. 
 
 But would so pious a man as Ezra have acted 
 the part of an impostor? Impostm-e of this des- 
 cription was not then accounted sinful and criminal. 
 It was but a " holy fraud." It was only doing a 
 nominal evil that real good might come. The end 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 291 
 
 sanctified the means. And this principle, among 
 the elect, has scarcely died out, even to this day. 
 •Hence the thousand and one apocryphal books, 
 and the ten 'thousand falsely reported miracles. 
 The men who wrote the books of Esdras, the se- 
 cond book of the Maccabees, the story of Susanna, 
 of Bel and the Dragon, the Song of the Three 
 Holy Children, the book of Enoch, the Ascension of 
 Isaiah, and the Epistle of Barnabas, thought them- 
 selves justified in the endeavor to pass off their own 
 scripture for that of sainted and prophetical men. 
 
 The name of Ezra has always been venerated 
 among the Jewish E-abbis as being the head man 
 of the " great synagogue " which revised and settled 
 their canonical Scriptures. And, in doing so much, 
 he might have done more. His opportunity was 
 extraordinary and without a parallel. The common 
 people had no sacred writings in their hands; nor, 
 if they had, could they have read them, having lost 
 their knowledge of the pure Hebrew dialect. Their 
 vernacular was now the Syriac. Hence, when 
 Ezra read from the book of the law, it was needful 
 to explain, " to give the sense, and cause the people 
 to understand." They had opportunity to prepare 
 and read just what they pleased; consequently to 
 prepare and compile just such a canon as they 
 thought most conducive to their desired object. 
 
 About this time, — not far from the time of the 
 restoration, — four distinct Jewish canons of Scrip- 
 ture were put forth ; the Babylonian, the Jerusalem, 
 the Samaritan, and the Alexandrian. The Sama- 
 ritan contained the Pentateuch only. A schism 
 
292 THE HEBREW RECORDS. 
 
 between the Jews and the Samaritans was created, 
 and became a sharp one, from the time that the 
 latter were refused as coworkers and fellow-wor-* 
 shippers in rebuilding the temple at Jerusalem. This 
 fact — the fact of their rejection — indicates that 
 they had aU worshipped together. We read in 
 2 Chron. xxx., that " Hezekiah the lung sent to all 
 Israel, and wrote letters to Ephraim and Manasseh, 
 that they should come to the house of the Lord at 
 Jerusalem, to keep the passover unto the Lord God 
 of Israel. ... So they established a decree to make 
 proclamation throughout all Israel, from Dan to 
 Beersheba, that they should come to keep the pass- 
 over." This invitation was differently received. 
 " But they laughed them to scorn and mocked 
 them. Nevertheless, divers of Asher and of Ma- 
 nasseh and Zebulon humbled themselves, and came 
 to Jerusalem." It is manifest, that, though the 
 union was loose, there was no open schism. 
 
 That a Rabbinical school had been formed in 
 Chaldea, previously to the time of Ezra and Nehe- 
 miah, is apparent from the fact that the former of 
 these men is said to been " a ready scribe in the 
 law of Moses, which the Lord God of Israel had 
 given." Of course, he must have learned his pro- 
 fession in Babylon, in the country of his exile. It 
 was probably in this school that the rule of non- 
 intercom'se and exclusiveness was agreed upon and 
 determined. As a consequence, the proposal of the 
 Samaritans to unite with the Jews, under Zerubba- 
 bel and Joshua, in rebuilding the temple, was re- 
 jected. " And they came to Zerubbabel, and said, 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 293 
 
 Let US build with you ; for we seek your God, as ye 
 do ; and we have done sacrifice unto him since the 
 days of Esar-haddon, king of Assur, who brought 
 us up hither. But Zerubbabel and Jeshua, and the 
 rest of the chief of the fathers of Israel, said unto 
 them, Ye have nothing to do with us to build a 
 house unto our God ; but we ourselves together will 
 build to the Lord God of Israel." The consequence 
 of this refusal and the resultant schism was the 
 building of the rival temple of the Samaritans on 
 Mount Gerizim. From that time forward, "the 
 Jews had no dealings with the Samaritans." 
 
 Between the Rabbinical schools of Babylon and 
 Jerusalem there was a friendly correspondence and 
 intercourse, yet not entire harmony. The canons 
 which they compiled were nearly, but not entirely, 
 alike. One accepted the book of Judith, the other 
 did not; one the book of Esther, the other not; 
 one the Canticles, the other not. The books of 
 Tobit and of Daniel had a similar lot. The two 
 canons, however, were almost the same. 
 
 But the Alexandrian — probably a little later in 
 its origin — was more copious than the others, and 
 contained all, or nearly all, the books accounted 
 apocryphal. This canon was translated into the 
 Greek language, some two hundred years anterior 
 to the Christian era. And this translation, called 
 the Septuagint, contains aU the contents of what is 
 called the Apocrypha, except the book of Daniel. 
 The Daniel now in the Septuagint is a translation 
 made four or five hundred years afterward. 
 
 Soon after the compilation of the Palestine and 
 
 26* 
 
294 
 
 THE HEBREW RECOEDS. 
 
 Chaldean canons, the Targuras were produced. 
 Of these there were two ; one by Onkelos, and the 
 other by Jonathan ; the former for the use of the 
 Palestine Jews, and the latter for the use of the Ba- 
 bylonian. They have been called versions, rather 
 than translations ; being only a change from one 
 dialect to another. 
 
 All the documents comprised in the Palestine 
 canon were composed in the old, genuine Hebrew 
 language, except some parts of Ezra and Daniel. 
 Of course, none of them can be later than the time 
 of Ezra. The book of Malachi was last written. 
 Its composition is real Hebrew ; not Rabbinical 
 Hebrew, like the Talmudic writings. It was proba- 
 bly composed in the time of Ezra. Its aim is to 
 rivet the ceremonial law. It makes the highest 
 possible account of the prescribed forms and rites, 
 of the sacerdotal office, and of ceremonial righteous- 
 ness. The older prophets had spoken in a very dif- 
 ferent tone, and had administered many reproofs 
 and charges against the priests ; whom Malachi 
 styles " the messenger of the Lord of hosts, arid 
 whose lips keep knowledge." They had depre- 
 ciated ceremonial holiness in comparison with 
 moral, and complained rather that there was too 
 much of it than too little. " I am fuU of the sacri- 
 fices of rams and fed beasts. Bring no more vain 
 oblations : incense is an abomination unto me. . . 
 Your hands are fuU of blood." But this prophet 
 charges it as a crime upon the people, that they 
 had Avithholden the tithes, and brought the " blind, 
 and the lame, and the sick," as offerings for the 
 altar. 
 
THE HEBREW RECORDS. 295 
 
 The Jewish ceremonial did not become stringent, 
 nor did the Jewish character become fixed, until 
 after the time of the restoration. Up to this time, 
 many of the provisions of the Mosaical law were 
 unobserved, and consequently, as we judge, were 
 unknown. There had been but one annual festival. 
 The Passover seems to have been kept but four 
 times : first, in the time of Joshua ; second, in the 
 time of Solomon ; third, in the time of Hezekiah ; 
 and, fourth, in the reign of Josiah. And the feast 
 of Tabernacles, as we have seen, had never been 
 kept at all. 
 
 The Pentateuch may be divided into three very 
 distinguishable parts: the book of Genesis, extended 
 through sixteen chapters of Exodus ; the remainder 
 of Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers ; the Deutero- 
 nomy, or second law. This, we judge, must have 
 been the first in the order of the time of composition. 
 Its literary character is much inferior to that of the 
 La'w, properly so called, continued in Numbers, 
 Leviticus, and twenty-five chapters of Exodus, be- 
 ginning with the seventeenth chapter. Genesis is 
 the introduction, and probably was last written. 
 
 We have already expressed our conviction, that 
 the book of Judges was composed at an earlier 
 period than the book of Joshua. The latter book 
 is a better- written history. It is more compact and 
 connective. It probably has a quotation from the 
 book of Judges. We refer to the account of 0th- 
 niel and Achsah, in Joshua, xv. 16 — 20 ; also in 
 Judges, i. 10 — 15. One author must have quoted 
 from the other, or both from a common document. 
 
296 
 
 THE HEBREW RECORDS. 
 
 The account in Joshua is out of place ; for the 
 transaction narrated did not take place under the 
 administration of Joshua, when all the twelve tribes 
 are represented as united under one national leader, 
 but at a time each tribe was contending separately 
 for the acquisition of territory, — Judah fighting the 
 Canaanites and the Perizzites in Bezek, Hebron, 
 and Debir ; Simeon fighting them in Zephath and 
 Hormah; Benjamin fighting the Jebusites in Jeru- 
 salem, but without success until he is aided by 
 Judah ; the house of Joseph invading the city of 
 Luz, and taking it by stratagem ; Manasseh striv- 
 ing in vain to drive out the inhabitants of Beth- 
 shean. Dor, and Megiddo ; Ephraim, with no better 
 success, malting war \vpon Gezer ; Asher unable to 
 force the Canaanites from Accho, Helbah, Aphik, 
 and Rehob ; NaphthaH playing the same successless 
 game against the Canaanites in Bethshemesh and 
 Bethana. 
 
297 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 " All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, 
 for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness." — 2 Tm. iii. 16. 
 
 The Bible being acknowledged to be the best book 
 which was ever written, and to have had more in- 
 fluence than any other book in producing the modern 
 Christian civilization, which is so much superior to 
 the ancient and Pagan, — it becomes, of course, an 
 interesting object of inquiry and knowledge. It is 
 desirable to know all the facts, so far as they can 
 now be learned, about the composition and compi- 
 lation of the Bible ; of the men who wrote the dif- 
 ferent documents of which it consists, and of the 
 occasions which caused them to be written ; and of 
 the manner and circumstances of the compilation 
 of the several sacred canons, — the Babylonian, the 
 Palestine, the Alexandrian, and the Christian. 
 
 The Bible cannot be injured by examination. 
 Free discussion can do it no damage. The ten- 
 dency of discussion is to elicit truth. The freer 
 and abler the discussion is, the greater will be the 
 result in the detection of error and the manifestation 
 of truth. It is truth, and truth only, which does 
 good. It is the truth contained in the Bible which 
 
298 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 has wrought all the good of which it has been the in- 
 strumentality. And it makes no difference w^hether 
 this truth pervade the whole volume of Scripture, or 
 only a part of it. If the former, it does not increase 
 the amount of good done by the Bible ; or, if the 
 latter, it does not diminish it. It is, therefore, 
 perfectly safe to subject the Bible to the freest 
 investigation ; for its truths, by such means, must 
 become more manifest and undeniable. And if 
 there be any thing contained in it besides truth, it 
 will probably be detected. And yet this detection 
 will detract nought from the good which the Bible 
 has WTOught in the world ; for the whole of this 
 good has been done by those truths which are in 
 the Bible. Retain these truths, and the Holy Book 
 is uninjured, whatever number of errors be found 
 out and exploded. 
 
 The popular views entertained respecting the 
 composition and compilation of the Holy Scriptures 
 are like the following : that Moses, by inspiration of 
 God, wrote the five books called the Pentateuch, 
 which was most carefully and sacredly kept by 
 the side of the holy chest, denominated the ark of 
 the covenant^ in the most holy apartment of the 
 tabernacle and temple ; that the other books, those 
 of Joshua, Judges, &c., were subsequently composed 
 by inspired men, and written for the express pur- 
 pose of being added to the Pentateuch and used as 
 Holy Scripture, and called the Word of God ; that 
 Malachi was the last of these prophetical men who 
 preceded the Christian era ; that thus w^as composed 
 and compUed the book of the Old Testament ; the 
 
THE SCKIPTURE RECORDS. 299 
 
 several portions, as they successively appeared, were 
 'added to the Pentateuch, having been written for 
 that very purpose ; that the writers claimed inspira- 
 tion, and had it readily accorded to them by the 
 people. Such, for substance, we suppose are the 
 prevalent views on this subject. But, in our opi- 
 nion, they are not wholly correct. 
 
 Moses manifestly did not compose the Penta- 
 teuch in its present form. It contains accounts of 
 some things which did not occur until after his 
 death, nor until the establishment of monarchy 
 among the Israelites. In these books it is not Moses 
 who speaks and writes, but he is spoken of and 
 written about. Neither the writer of these books, 
 nor the writer of any book in the Old Testament, 
 claims inspiration. They do not allege, that God 
 commanded them to write a book, or dictated to 
 them the contents with which it should be filled. 
 There is no intimation, that the authors of the many 
 different documents of the Old Testament had any 
 expectation, or even the least thought, that there ever 
 would be such a compilation as the Bible, and that 
 their contributions would make part and parcel of it. 
 The Pentateuch seems to have been written for 
 deposit in or near the sacred chest, — the ark. But 
 not the other books. Not one of them enjoyed 
 such distinction. It was manifestly the Pentateuch 
 which contained the law, the testimonies, and sta- 
 tutes of the Lord, which ai'e celebrated in the psalms 
 and prophecies of the Old Testament. 
 
 From time to time, historical documents were 
 put forth by scribes and prophets. Mention is 
 
300 THE SCRIPTUEE RECORDS. 
 
 made of " the book of Jasher," and " the book of 
 the wars of the Lord." These may, or they may 
 not, be the names of one and the same book. We 
 also find mention of the books of Shemaiah and 
 of Nathan, the propliets ; and those likewise of 
 Iddo and of Gad, who are styled seers. These 
 probably consisted of annals and chronicles of the 
 times in which the writers lived. The book of 
 Judges is probably the oldest document contained 
 in the Bible. Learned men inform us, that this 
 book contains more barbarisms of expression than 
 are found in all the other sacred books. This fact 
 strongly indicates its earlier composition. The 
 book also describes the Israelites as being in their 
 most loose, unsettled, rude, and dislocated con- 
 dition. They had no national magistrates or gov- 
 ernment. There existed among them no legislative 
 power; no king, no senate, no patriarch, except 
 the heads of the several tribes. The judges ob- 
 tained their distinction chiefly by their military 
 services. They had no definite jurisdiction, com- 
 mission, or term of office. They merely acted as 
 arbitrators in cases voluntarily brought before them. 
 A single tribe made war on its own responsibility. 
 Sometimes two or more tribes united in prosecut- 
 ing a war for the extension of their territory. 
 Whatever of authority existed among them was 
 ti'ibal or patriarchal, not national. A partial ex- 
 ception, perhaps, for a short period obtained in the 
 times of Jephthah and Abimelech. The people did 
 not become consolidated as a nation until the days 
 of Saul and David. Previously, " there was no 
 
THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 301 
 
 king in Israel, and every man did what was right 
 in his own eyes." 
 
 At what time this book of Judges was composed 
 cannot now be determined. The author must have 
 depended on tradition, and some documents which 
 have long perished. This book was never deposited 
 in the ark ; nor were the books which were subse- 
 quently written. But, after the return of the Jews 
 from Babylon, and the pure Hebrew tongue ceased 
 to be vernacular, pains were taken to collect and 
 preserve all the Hebrew manuscripts. This collec- 
 tion constituted the sacred canon, or the Bible. Of 
 these there were three : the Babylonian, made by 
 the Rabbis in Chaldea ; the Jerusalem, made by the 
 Jews in Palestine ; and the Alexandrian, made by 
 those in Egypt. But these canons were not all 
 alike. Some of them contained the books of Es- 
 ther, Judith, Wisdom, Canticles, Tobit, and Eccle- 
 siasticus ; but not all. Some doubts existed of their 
 authenticity and genuin&ijjess. Even the book of 
 Daniel was not universally received. 
 
 Now, if there be and have been in the world 
 certain documents, whose contents were dictated 
 by the mind of Gpd, and, of course, are wise, 
 significant, and elevated, beyond example, among 
 human compositions ; which are inerrable, infalli- 
 ble, and above criticism, — they must possess a 
 character so distinctive and peculiar as to be easily 
 and readily known and distinguished from all other 
 writings. Why, then, was there any doubt about 
 the inspiration of certain books ? Why were the 
 Jewish canons of Babylon, Palestine, and Alexan- 
 
 26 
 
302 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 dria unlike each other? Why did one canon con- 
 tain the book of Judith, and another reject it? — 
 one, the book of Esther ; another reject it ? — one, 
 the book of Canticles ; another, not ? — one contain 
 Daniel; another reject him? — one, the books of 
 Wisdom and the Son of Sirach ; another refuse 
 both? This phenomenon in the moral world is 
 inexplicable on the ground that all canonical books 
 are the work of direct divine inspiration. In this 
 case, they would carry their own unmistakable 
 mark, stamp, and seal. They would differ as the 
 works of God differ from the works of men. 
 
 But, in the books received and rejected by the 
 Jewish compilers, it 'is impossible to perceive much 
 of difference. Between the books of Judith and 
 Esther, what remarkable difference? How much 
 superiority has the latter over the former ? Is it less 
 extravagant and more credible ? We admit that 
 it has more embellishment; but is this a trait of 
 divine authorship ? Why is the Song of Solomon 
 in the Palestine canon, but the Song of the Three 
 Holy Children out of it ? — why the book of Eccle- 
 siastes in, but that of Ecclesiasticus out ? Has the 
 latter fewer dark passages than the former ? Why 
 was the book of the Proverbs of Solomon accepted, 
 but that of the Wisdom of Solomon refused ? Why 
 was Jonah admitted, but Tobit denied? What 
 manifest marks of divinity in the books accepted, 
 which distinguish and elevate them in relation to 
 the ones discarded? 
 
 Now, according to the popular view, there must 
 be a great and an essential difference between the 
 
THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 303 
 
 documents of the Bible and all others ; and, if the 
 fact be such, it must be observable and manifest. 
 We should, of course, perceive that the book of 
 Joshua was incomparably a better history of the 
 wars of his times, than the book of the Maccabees 
 is of the times of the Asmonean patriots and 
 princes. And yet who can perceive this ? Is not 
 the book of Maccabees as well written as the book 
 of Samuel ? as the book of Kings ? as the book of 
 Chronicles ? And why is not Esdras as well com- 
 posed as Ezra ? And why should the story of 
 Susanna be accounted less credible than those of 
 Esther and Ruth? There are certainly no visible 
 and decisive marks by which the canonical Scrip- 
 tures are verified, and the apocryphal discredited. 
 
 Again, if all the penmen of the Scriptures were 
 divinely and infallibly taught and guided, they 
 would give consistent and harmonious accounts. 
 When two writers narrated the same transactions, 
 they would give the same account. But the author 
 of the Chronicles does not always tell the same 
 story as the author of the Kings. One of these 
 writers says, that the Lord moved David to number 
 the people ; the other says it was Satan. The author 
 of the Kings relates the occurrences of a war waged 
 by the King of Israel upon Moab, on account of 
 revolt ; the author of the Chronicles says nothing 
 of a war upon the Moabites, but represents it as 
 having been made upon the King of Edom for the 
 same cause. Neither of these authors gives a full 
 and perfect account of the kings, and the times 
 over which their histories extend. But, if the 
 
304 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 omniscient God had indited their documents, we 
 should have had but one, and that a perfect history 
 of them. One full and indefectible history would 
 have been all which was needed. God does no 
 superfluous work. He would not have dictated a 
 second account, if the first had been one of his own 
 perfect works. The very fact itself of two histories 
 of the same times and people is proof that neither 
 of them is a product of divine and plenary inspi- 
 ration. 
 
 We ought here to note, that none of these 
 writers make for themselves the claim of inspira- 
 tion. They do not assert, nor even intimate, such 
 a thing. It is but doing common justice to them 
 to take notice of this fact ; for it exonerates them 
 from putting forth a claim which would render 
 them ridiculous. For such must be the light in 
 which they would inevitably stand, if they had 
 assumed the ground of divine dictation and infalli- 
 bility. There is, moreover, some self-inconsistency 
 in the accounts given by the same writer. The 
 author of the book of Samuel, for instance, gives 
 two different accounts of the introduction of David 
 to the acquaintance of Saul the king. According to 
 the first account, David was sent for by the king 
 to come as a musician and play on a harp in Saul's 
 presence, when his mind was discomposed. David's 
 music had the desired effect ; and the king kept him 
 at court, and made him his armor-bearer. Accord- 
 ing to the other account, David was unknown to 
 Saul until after his successful combat with the giant 
 of Gath, and owed his introduction to that extra- 
 
THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 305 
 
 ordinary exploit. Here certainly is a discrepancy 
 which could not have obtained in a perfect account 
 dictated by divine inspiration. It is also said, in 
 this connection, that David brought the giant's head 
 to Jerusalem. But this place was now in the hands 
 of the Jebusites, and was not conquered until many 
 years afterwards by Joab, the chief captain of 
 David's army. 
 
 "We now pass to the New Testament. The 
 same remarks, just made upon parallel histories in 
 the Old, apply equally to such histories in the New 
 Testament. The four Gospels are biographies of 
 the personal ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ 
 They, each of them, cover the same ground. The 
 agreements and the differences are just what occur 
 in other human compositions of the same kind, 
 written by honest but fallible men. But if the 
 first of these biographies had been divinely dictated, 
 and consequently full, inerrable, and perfect, no 
 other would have been needed. No second, third, 
 and fourth would have been written. They would 
 have been of no use. One perfect account renders 
 any further one entirely superfluous. And we here 
 repeat the adage, " God never does any superfluous 
 work." 
 
 The imperfections of the evangelical histories are 
 apparent to all readers of the New Testament. 
 The writers do not give the same accounts of the 
 same things. Matthew, for instance, represents 
 Joseph and Mary as residents of Bethlehem ; Luke 
 describes them as residents of Nazareth. Matthew 
 relates the flight into Egypt ; Luke makes no meij- 
 26* 
 
306 THE SCRIPTUHE RECORDS. 
 
 tioti of this sojourn in Egjrpt, but says that the 
 parents, after the dedication of the child, returned 
 to their own city Nazareth. Matthew describes 
 the slaughter of the children in Bethlehem; but 
 none of the other evangelists mention it. Luke 
 relates the account of the child Jesus, at twelve 
 years old, holding conference, in the temple at 
 Jerusalem, with " the doctors," — hearing them and 
 asking them questions. But the other biographers 
 are silent on this subject. Both Matthew and Luke 
 give a genealogy ; but that of the one does not agree 
 with that of the other. Both purport to be a ge- 
 nealogy of Joseph, not of Mary, who, according to 
 them, was the only human parent of Jesus. Of 
 course, neither of them is a genealogy of the son of 
 Mary. Luke says that the name of Joseph's father 
 was Heli; Matthew says it was Jacob. Matthew 
 makes fourteen generations between Zerobabel and 
 Joseph; Luke makes nineteen; and almost evety 
 name is a different one from Matthew's. Matthew 
 gives a list of fourteen names between David and 
 Zerobabel ; Luke gives twenty -one. Matthew puts 
 down Zerobabel as the father of Salathiel; Luke 
 puts down Salathiel as the father of Zerobabel. 
 All the names between David and Zerobabel are 
 different ones in the two genealogies. These ge- 
 nealogies cannot be correct ones, and therefore not 
 the work of God. 
 
 The evangelists give different versions of oUr 
 Saviour's answers to the same questions. The 
 question of the Sadducees, in regard to the resur- 
 rfection, was answered, afecoWiing to ohe evangelist, 
 
THE SCRIPTURE EECOHDS. 307 
 
 in these words : " Ye do err, not knowing the Scrip- 
 tures nor the power of God ; for in the resurrection- 
 state they neither marry nor are given in marriage, 
 but are as the angels of God in heaven." Accord- 
 ing to another evangelist, the answer was in the 
 following words : " The children of this world marry, 
 and are given in marriage ; but they which shall be 
 accounted worthy to inherit that world and the 
 resurrection-state, neither marry nor are given in 
 marriage ; neither can they die any more, for they 
 are equal to the angels, and are the children of God, 
 being the children of the resurrection." It is per- 
 ceived that these answers are not the same. One 
 is twice as long as the other ; and yet the shorter 
 of the two contains some ideas not embraced in 
 the other. Of course, neither of them contains the 
 whole truth, and nothing but the truth. They are 
 such reports as might be naturally given by honest, 
 intelligent, uninspired men; but the differences 
 are such as are irreconcilable with the fact that 
 both reporters were divinely inspired. And there is 
 also the reported answer of Simon Peter to our 
 Lord's question, " But whom say ye that I, the Son 
 of man, am ? " According to one evangelist, Peter 
 answered, " Thou art the Christ ; " according to 
 another, " Thou art the Christ of God ; " accord- 
 ing to a third, " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the 
 living God." The three accounts are each differ- 
 ent. The second contains more than the first; the 
 third, more than the second. They are not alike : 
 consequently ikey are not inspiration. 
 
 Matthew represents that Jesus sh©w«d himself 
 
308 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 alive, after his death, to the disciples at a mountain 
 in Galilee, where they saw him for the first time 
 after his resurrection, " and worshipped him, but 
 some doubted." The reference, undoubtedly, is to 
 Thomas's incredulity. And, from this mountain, 
 Matthew represents that Jesus made his ascension 
 into heaven. But Luke expressly states, that the 
 ascension took place on the Mount of Olives, in 
 Bethany, not far from Jerusalem. Matthew repre- 
 sents that the first resurrection-appearance of Jesus 
 was to the women, as they were returning from the 
 sepulchre ; that he conversed with them, and sent a 
 message to the disciples, directing them to meet 
 him in Galilee. But Luke represents that the 
 women returned, having " seen a vision of angels, 
 but him they saw not." Mark says that Jesus first 
 appeared to Mary Magdalene ; and John represents 
 Mary as lingering at the sepulchre after the other 
 women had departed, and that she here at length 
 saw Jesus, but did not at first recognize him, yet 
 finally conversed with him. This was his first 
 appearance, according to Mark and John. But 
 Matthew represents the first appearance as having 
 been made to all the women together, as they were 
 retvurning from the sepulchre to the city. One 
 evangelist says distinctly, that Jesus' first appear- 
 ance was to Simon Peter. Matthew represents all 
 the appearances, except the first to the women, as 
 having taken place in Galilee. But Mark and 
 Luke are entirely silent respecting any appearances 
 in Galilee, and represent all of them as having 
 taken place at and near Jerusalem. John repre- 
 
THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 309 
 
 sents Mary Magdalene as going alone to the sepul- 
 chre, and, finding it open, returned in great haste, 
 and reported the fact to Peter and John, who went 
 immediately, and ascertained that the sepulchre was 
 open, the body absent, the grave-clothes there ; but 
 nothing about his resurrection. John, having given 
 account of the appearance of our Lord to Mary 
 Magdalene, and of two others to the assembled 
 disciples, transfers the scene to Galilee, and gives a 
 detailed account of another which he calls the 
 third, and which occurred at the Sea of Tiberias. 
 Of this manifestation the other evangelists make 
 no mention. Nor does John mention the final 
 manifestation, made at the mountain in Galilee; 
 whence, according to Matthew, took place the 
 ascension into heaven. 
 
 But, notvvithstanding the discrepancies, there are 
 points of agreement, among the evangelists. They 
 agree in testifying to the facts of the crucifixion, 
 the resurrection, and a subsequent manifestation. 
 But they disagree about the number, order, and 
 circumstances of these manifestations and the as- 
 cension. As the accounts disagree, they cannot be 
 the word of God. They, of course, are human ac- 
 counts, and are to be treated as such. The points 
 in which human accounts agree may reasonably 
 be accepted as true ; but those in which they dis- 
 agree, regarded as doubtful. On this principle, we 
 are to accept the account of the crucifixion, the 
 burial, and the resurrection of Jesus, and of his 
 manifestation alive, as true ; but the accounts of 
 the particular manifestations, and ' of the bodily 
 
310 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 ascension into the firmamental heaven, as doubtful. 
 John is entirely silent about the ascension. He 
 does not assert that it ever took place. Nor does 
 Mark describe it as being a visible one : he merely 
 says, " So then, after the Lord had spoken unto 
 them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on 
 the right hand of God." He is totally silent about 
 the manner and the place. One evangelist, as we 
 have seen, represents it having taken place from a 
 mountain in Galilee ; another from Bethany, a few 
 miles from Jerusalem. It cannot, therefore, be 
 safely and certainly concluded that any bodily and 
 visible ascension did take place. 
 
 We are prone both, on the one hand, to confuse 
 things which are identical, and to identify things 
 which are distinct. We often identify divine reve- 
 lation with the Bible, and Christianity with the 
 New Testament. But these are distinct things. 
 Holy Scripture is one thing, and divine revelation 
 is another ; Christianity is one thing, and the New 
 Testament is another thing. Christianity had ex- 
 isted a hundred years before such a book as the 
 New Testament came into being. The former had 
 existed some thirty years before one of the docu- 
 ments of the New Testament was written. The 
 first of these probably was the Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans. Dr. Lardner dates the Gospels between 60 
 and 70 of the first century ; and it was not untU 
 about one hundred years after their composition 
 that they were bound together in a volume, called 
 the Gospel. At a stiU later period were the apos- 
 tolical letters to the churches collected in another 
 
THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 311 
 
 volume, called the Epistles. Still later were the 
 Gospel and the Epistles brought together in one 
 volume, with the book of the Acts, &c., inserted 
 between them. And the Apocalypse was added 
 long afterwards. Christianity, therefore, did not 
 originate from the New Testament. The former 
 had come into the world, and established itself, 
 long before the latter. Among all the numerous 
 churches between Arabia and Spain, among whom 
 Paul and the other apostles labored, not one of 
 them owed its existence to the New Testament. 
 Not one of the apostles ever saw the book. The 
 New Testament spoken of by our Lord Jesus Christ 
 and by St. Paul was not a book, but a dispensation. 
 Christianity came by Jesus Christ. It existed first 
 in his mind, and was by him preached to men. 
 The revelation was made from his mind to their 
 minds. " The seed is the word of God. He that 
 sowed the good seed is the Son of man." He sowed 
 it broadcast on the field of human nature. He did 
 not write a book : he did not dictate a Holy Scrip- 
 ture to be the platform of Christianity. Scripture 
 was but an auxiliary of subsequent times. Scrip- 
 ture cannot be divine revelation. It can only be 
 an instrumentality of it; nor even this by itself 
 alone. Language is not sufficiently significant and 
 definite. It signifies one thing to this person, an- 
 other thing to that, and perhaps has no satisfactory 
 meaning to a third. There must be both a sub- 
 jective and an objective in every revelation ; and, if 
 the subjective correspondent does not exist, the 
 objective must be forceless and unmeaning. The 
 
312 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 idea must first be received, and thus have become 
 subjective, before the word which expresses it can 
 be understood. The declaration, — for instance, — 
 " There is a God," could not reveal the fact of a 
 divine existence, unless the meaning of the word 
 God were already in the mind. The declaration 
 otherwise would be without significance, meaning- 
 less. The idea must be first, before the word 
 which signifies it can be significant. An original 
 revelation, therefore, cannot be made even by 
 speech, much less by writing or Scripture. The 
 first commandment in the decalogue is in these 
 words : " Thou shalt have no other god before me." 
 This could not be an original revelation. The idea 
 of God, or rather of gods, is presupposed; other- 
 wise the prohibition would have no import: it 
 would neither enjoin nor forbid any thing. 
 
 And, furthermore, the thing forbidden — the im- 
 propriety of it — must have been already enter- 
 tained, or the prohibition could not have been felt 
 and accepted. Tell a man that it is wrong to wor- 
 ship an idol, and you make no impression upon 
 him, unless there be previously in his heart some- 
 thing which corresponds to the prohibition. This 
 something is subjective ; the prohibition is objective. 
 Both are requisite in order to impression. 
 
 The fifth commandment enjoins, " Honor thy 
 father and thy mother." This injunction can have 
 no force, unless a child already knows what it is to 
 honor a parent. He must also know that it is a 
 right and a proper thing. God must first write his 
 law upon men's hearts, — we mean the germ and 
 
THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 313 
 
 substance of it, — or the Scripture announcing 
 them will be unmeaning and forceless. And 
 equally true is it that his revelations must also be 
 thus written, or they wiU be unavailable : the sub- 
 jective must be first, and the objective afterward. 
 
 We, therefore, make a great mistake when we 
 think, and say, that the Bible is the foundation of 
 religion ; the New Testament, the foundation 
 of Christianity ; and that, if the former were lost, 
 the latter would cease and die out of the world. 
 If every Bible and Testament in the world were 
 this day to be burned to ashes, religion and Chris- 
 tianity would still survive. And they would sur- 
 vive in all their power. The loss of Scripture 
 would scarcely be a check to its progress. Chris- 
 tianity never possessed more force than it had dur- 
 ing the first century and before the compilation of 
 the New Testament. 
 
 The different portions of this volume were not 
 written for general use in all future time, but for 
 particular occasions. Paul wrote his letter to the 
 Romans to meet the existing wants of the church 
 at Rome ; and he manifestly did not anticipate the 
 universal use which has since been made of this, 
 and of his other epistles. The Jewish prophets 
 wrote what are called their prophecies on local and 
 temporary emergencies, without a thought of con- 
 tributing a chapter or a book to the formation of a 
 Bible. The Old Testament was, probably, com- 
 piled not long after the return from the Babylonian 
 exile. It soon began to be regarded with venera- 
 tion ; and this reverential feeling grew deeper and 
 27 
 
314 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 
 
 deeper, until it reached a point of extreme supersti- 
 tion. Every letter and point was the work of inspi- 
 ration. Every sentence had several meanings, such 
 as literal, figurative, historical, prophetical, precep- 
 tive, &c. The apostles, in common with their 
 countrymen, believed in the plenary inspiration of 
 the writers of the Old Testament. This sentiment 
 is uttered by Paul, in the language of the text: 
 " All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." 
 All the apostles, doubtless, entertained the same 
 view. And so, likewise, they believed in the reaUty 
 of demoniacal possessions. They believed that 
 earth was a flat plane, having the sea all around 
 it and under it, with a concave, solid firmament 
 above it. They believed that the sun was vastly 
 smaller than the earth, and that the former' revolved 
 every day about the latter. 
 
 It has been illustrated in this discourse, that some 
 of the accounts contained in the Holy Scriptures 
 are not full and perfect. Consequently, they can- 
 not be the word of God. But all truth is the word 
 of God. AU truth is originally and constructively 
 from God. Whether it be revealed by the Bible or 
 by other means, it is not essential. Every report, 
 narrative, history, or account is the word of God, if 
 it be true. Every doctrine, theory, law, proverb, 
 and precept is also, if true, God's word. Man shall 
 not live by bread alone, but by every word which 
 proceedeth out of the mouth of God. He derives 
 sustenance for the inward man from truth. AU 
 truths are things upon which man should live. 
 And God hath not left himself without a witness. 
 
THE SCRIPTURE RECORDS. 315 
 
 " What may be known of God is manifest among 
 them, — even his eternal power and godhead." 
 " And they shall be all taught of God." « There is 
 a spirit in man : the inspiration of the Almighty 
 hath given him understanding." But all men are 
 not alike taught of God. Some have been burning 
 and shining lights. Such were Abraham, Moses, 
 the Lord Jesus Christ, and the apostle Paul. God 
 gave the spirit without measure to his Son. To 
 him we do well to take, as to a light which shineth 
 in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day- 
 star arise in our hearts. Take heed that the light 
 in you do not become darkness. 
 
316 
 
 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 'Waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." — ! Cob. i. 7. 
 
 The personal re-appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ 
 has been perhaps the most exciting topic of thought, 
 feeling, and speculation, which has ever existed 
 among Christians. The Chiliasm of the first three 
 centuries — the doctrine of Christ's speedy return 
 to the earth — was considerably prevalent in the 
 church. And, though at length it gradually de- 
 clined, yet it seems never to have died out. It was 
 powerfully revived in the tenth and eleventh centu- 
 ries, and again in the sixteenth ; from which time 
 it has taken an altered form, — that of modern Mil- 
 lenarianism. Notwithstanding the declarations of 
 the Lord Jesus, " It is not for you to know the 
 times and the seasons ; " " Of the day and the hour 
 knoweth no man, no angel, nor even the Son him- 
 self; none but the Father only," — yet such has been 
 the power of human curiosity, the strong thirst for 
 knowledge of the futu^re, that, even with nice calcu- 
 lations, " the times and the seasons " have been 
 confidently and ingeniously prognosticated. One 
 of the most extraordinary instances of this kind has 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 317 
 
 recently occurred in our midst, and has not yet 
 entirely disappeared. The fact is, that certain opi- 
 nions on which the doctrine of ChUiasm rests for its 
 foundation have been general and popular, not only 
 in the Protestant connection, but throughout Christ- 
 endom ; and even more or less during the whole 
 existence of the church. And, while such opinions 
 are entertained, calculations and excitements, like 
 those made and produced by Mr. William Miller, 
 will, from time to time, be put forth, and agitate the 
 bosom of the Christian community. It is a deside- 
 ratum that this subject should be re-examined and 
 better understood. We profess not to be able to do 
 it justice ; and with this acknowledgment we ven- 
 ture to offer some suggestions and inquiries. 
 
 Our starting-point is the passage of Scripture 
 in the book of Acts, i. 11 : " Ye men of Galilee, 
 why stand ye gazing up into heaven ? This same 
 Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven shall 
 so come in like manner as ye have seen him go 
 into heaven." On the theme now and thus intro- 
 duced, we make the following remarks and sugges- 
 tions. 
 
 I. The apostles and primitive Christians identi- 
 fied the return-advent of Christ, declared in Acts, 
 i. 11, with the "coming of the Son of man," so 
 frequently predicted by the Lord Jesus himself. 
 He said, " The Son of man shall come in the glory 
 of the Father, with all the holy angels." " Then shall 
 ye see the sign of the Son of man coming in the 
 clouds of heaven." " Hereafter shall the Son of 
 man sit on the right hand of the power of God." 
 27* 
 
318 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 The designation, " Son of man," and the cir- 
 cumstances of his exaltation and glorification, are 
 manifestly taken from Daniel, vii. 13 : " And I saw 
 one like the Son of man, who came in the clouds 
 of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and 
 they brought him near before him ; and there was 
 given him dominion and glory, and a kingdom, that 
 all people and nations should serve him ; his domii- 
 nion, an everlasting dominion ; his kingdom shaU 
 not be destroyed." There had been in succession 
 four great kingdoms represented in the vision ; and 
 these were to be succeeded by a fifth, which should 
 far exceed the others in extent, glory, and duration. 
 It was to be the kingdom of " the saints," the 
 " holy ones," the holy people, by which the pro- 
 phet himself, and his countrymen, doubtless under- 
 stood the Jews ; and by the Son of man, their 
 Messiah, of whom Moses and the prophets had 
 written. The Roman kingdom was now in its 
 culminating point ; the Jews were subjugated under 
 its sway, and they bore the yoke with great impa- 
 tience and indignation. The Messiah, as they in- 
 terpreted and believed, would surely deliver them. 
 The apostles of Jesus had received him as the 
 Messiah ; as the Son of man. They were disap- 
 pointed that he had not assumed the kingship of 
 the nation and of the world, before his crucifixion, 
 and were then almost or quite in despair. But his 
 resurrection had restored their confidence. He had 
 now gone up into heaven ; but he would return, 
 and be the king of glory over all the earth. At the 
 return-advent, as they believed, the Son of man 
 
THE RETUHN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 319 
 
 would come in his own glory, and in his Father's 
 glory ; and all peoples would serve and obey him. 
 
 II. The apostles and primitive Christians be- 
 lieved that the promise of the return-advent of 
 Christ would be speedily fulfilled. They all had 
 manifestly one common opinion respecting it. And 
 what it was is apparent from such expressions as 
 the following : " The Lord is at hand ; " " The time 
 is short ; " " He that shall come will come, and 
 will not tarry ; " " The night is far spent, the day 
 is at hand;" "The Judge standeth at the door;" 
 " Now is our salvation nearer than when we be- 
 lieved." And they had received this impression 
 from the declaration of Jesus, who had said : 
 " This generatioQ shall not pass away, until these 
 things are fulfilled ; " " There be some standing here 
 who shall not taste of death, until they see the king- 
 dom of God come with power." 
 
 III. They believed that, when the return-advent 
 of the Son should take place, there would be a 
 resurrection of the " dead in Christ." The apostle 
 Paul made the following declaration to the Thessa- 
 lonians : " For the Lord himself shall descend from 
 heaven with a shout, with the voice of the arch- 
 angel, and the trump of God ; and the dead in 
 Christ shall first rise, and then we who remain 
 alive shall be caught up together with them [who 
 have been raised from their graves] to meet the 
 Lord in the air ; and so we shall be for ever with 
 him." And again : " Behold, I show you a mystery : 
 we shall not all sleep [die], but we shall be changed 
 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the 
 
320 
 
 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 last trumph ; for the trumpet shall sound, and the 
 dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be 
 changed." 
 
 IV. They believed that the return-advent would 
 be attended or immediately followed by the sever- 
 ance of the wicked from the righteous : " So shall 
 it be at the end of the world : the angels shall come 
 forth, and sever the wicked from among the just." 
 " The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and 
 they shaU gather out of his kingdom all things 
 which offend and which do iniquity." « The Son 
 of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, and be- 
 fore him shall be gathered all nations ; and he shall 
 separate them one from another, as a shepherd 
 divideth his sheep from the goats." The tares and 
 the wheat were no longer to grow together, but the 
 chaff and the wheat to be finally separated. 
 
 V. They believed that opposite destinies would 
 then be accorded to the righteous and the wicked. 
 " Gather the tares, and bind them in bundles to 
 burn them ; but gather the wheat into my barn." 
 " The angels shall gather out of the kingdom all 
 things which offend, and cast them into a furnace 
 of fire : there shall be weeping and gnashing of 
 teeth. And then shall the righteous shine forth as 
 the sun in the kingdom of their Father." " The 
 Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven, with his 
 mighty angels, in flaming fire ; taking vengeance on 
 them who know not God and obey not the gospel 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and who shall be pun- 
 ished with everlasting destruction from the presence 
 of the Lord and from the glory of his power, when 
 
THE KETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 321 
 
 he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and ad- 
 mired in aU them that believe." " He shall set the 
 sheep on the right hand, but the goats on the left. 
 Then shall he say to them on the right hand. Come, 
 ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom pre- 
 pared for you before the foundation of the world. 
 But to those on the left, Depart from me, ye cursed, 
 into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his 
 angels. And these shall go away into everlasting 
 punishment ; but the righteous shall enter into life 
 eternal." Thus should the wicked be no more, but 
 the righteous had in everlasting remembrance. 
 " For the wages of sin is death ; but the gift of 
 God, eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord." 
 
 VI. The apostles believed that, when their divine 
 Lord should make his return-advent, this world 
 would be entirely and awfully destroyed. " The 
 heavens and the earth which now are, by the same 
 word [which created them] are kept in store, re- 
 served unto fire against the day of judgment and 
 perdition of ungodly men." " The day of the Lord 
 will come as a thief in the night ; in the which the 
 heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the 
 elements shall melt with fervent heat; the earth 
 also, and the things which are in it, shall be burned 
 up." " The end of aU things is at hand : be ye 
 therefore sober, and watch unto prayer." 
 
 VII. They believed that the time of the return- 
 advent would be the point of separation between 
 the present world or age, and that which was to 
 come. This fact is manifest from the events which 
 were then to transpire. The dead were then to be 
 
322 THE RETUKN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 raised, the living changed, and the immortal state 
 commence. Corruption was then to put on incor- 
 ruption ; mortal, put on immortality ; and death, be 
 swallowed up in victory. They believed that the 
 kingdom of God would then come in its full and 
 proper sense, and in which sense it never had come 
 before ; that the divine Son would then be en- 
 throned, being put in actual possession of his king- 
 ship and dominion ; that his reign would henceforth 
 be illimitable : " And the kingdom and the greatness 
 of the kingdom under the whole heaven shall be 
 given to the saints of the Most High, whose king- 
 dom is an everlasting kingdom ; and all dominions 
 shall serve and obey him." " The saints of the 
 Most High shall take the kingdom, and possess it 
 for ever ; even for ever and ever." 
 
 But where was to be the location of this king- 
 dom ? It was to be on this earth. But how could 
 this be after the earth had been destroyed ? It was 
 not to be disintegrated, and reduced to its elements 
 and to chaos. As the old world had been destroyed 
 by water, yet not annihilated, nor rendered unin- 
 habitable ; so the present world might undergo a 
 conflagration, and yet come from the furnace in 
 a habitable condition, and even much improved. 
 It is called the new heavens and the new earth, in 
 which the righteous shall dwell. The wicked had 
 all been burned up in the conflagration ; but the 
 righteous had escaped it, having been caught up in 
 the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. The New 
 Jerusalem now comes down from God out of hea- 
 ven, adorned as a bride for her husband. " And I 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 323 
 
 heard a great voice out of heaven, saying, Behold, 
 the tabernacle of God is with men ; and he shall 
 dweU with them, and they shall be his people, and 
 God himself shall be with them and be their God. 
 And God shaU wipe away away all tears from their 
 eyes ; and there shall be no more death, neither 
 sorrow nor crying ; neither shall there be any more 
 pain : for the former things are passed away." 
 
 It is an obvious truth, that even the apostles were 
 not divested of their Jewish notions and prejudices. 
 They had beKeved in Jesus as the promised Mes- 
 siah ; that he would reign King of kings, and Lord 
 of lords. They associated their ideal of his reign 
 with that of national aggrandizement and the glo- 
 rification of their king. This had faUed at his first 
 advent ; but the failure would be more than com- 
 pensated for at his second ; — that the Redeemer 
 would then return, and come to Zion, and turn 
 away ungodliness and unbelief from Jacob ; the 
 fulness of the Gentiles be brought in, and so all 
 Israel should be saved. Thus would all things be 
 subdued under him. Then would the end, thC' 
 consummation, come ; the kingdom, the mediato- 
 rial administration of it, be delivered up to God, 
 even to the Father, from whom he had received his 
 appointment ; — the object and the work of which 
 having been achieved and finished, God would be 
 all in all, and the. Son continue, as he ever had 
 been, subject to Him who had put all things under 
 his feet. 
 
 We have thus given our views of the return- 
 advent of Christ, as that event was contemplated^ 
 
324 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 by the apostles and the primitive Christians. We 
 believe that the truth of this representation lies 
 upon the face of the New Testament. But the 
 important inquiry now arises, Were these views 
 correct ? Did they justly interpret the declarations 
 of their divine Master? Was not his kingdom 
 more entirely spiritual than they conceived it to be ? 
 Did not their educational prejudices still cleave to 
 them, and lead them into misconceptions and mis- 
 takes? Did they not overlook some of the im- 
 portant intimations which he had given them ? 
 He had said, " My kingdom is not of this world." 
 He had bidden them to disregard those who should 
 say, " Lo, here ; and lo, there ; for the kingdom of 
 God cometh not with observation ; — the kingdom 
 of heaven is within you." He had told them that 
 this kingdom consisted of little children, and that 
 even they themselves could not enter it, until they 
 were converted from their existing ambitious and 
 worldly spirit. All this, however, had not dispos- 
 sessed them of their national prepossessions. They 
 continued to look for a kingdom to which the na- 
 tions and monarchs of the earth should bring their 
 glory and their riches. 
 
 There is another and a prophetical testimony 
 of their Lord and Master, which the apostles seem 
 to have almost entirely neglected. He had said, 
 " And they [the Jews] shall be carried away captive 
 into aU nations, and Jerusalem shall be trodden 
 down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gen- 
 tiles be fulfilled." This annunciation contemplates 
 a long period ; ages being necessary to the accom- 
 
THK RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 325 
 
 plishment. And it was to take place before his 
 return-advent. With what consistency, then, could 
 the apostles expect that the glorification of the 
 Messiah, and the consummation of his kingdom, 
 was an event near at hand ? Is it repHed, that 
 Jesus had declared that it would come to pass 
 during the lifetime of some who then lived ? But 
 were the apostles correct in identifying the return' 
 advent with the coming of the Son of man, — the 
 coming of the kingdom of God ? The personal 
 appearance of the Son in the flesh was not neces- 
 sary to the advent, extension, and prosperity of the 
 kingdom of God ; for, in reality, this kingdom does 
 not consist in organization, monarchy, or visible 
 glory. It being a kingdom not of this world, nor 
 coining with observation, it does not imply the ap- 
 pendages of state, or of an hierarchy, or of exter- 
 nal splendor and authority. It consists in rectitude 
 of spirit. The pure in heart belong to this king- 
 dom ; the peace-makers, the meek, the merciful, and 
 contrite. " The kingdom of God is within you," 
 in every member's heart. It, therefore, comes when 
 and where this spirit of moral rectitude and holy 
 faith prevails, and has not a necessary connection 
 with a personal advent of him by whom its foun- 
 dations were laid. 
 
 The kingdom of God, moreover, is a progressive 
 institution. It comes by gradual advances. The 
 first degree of it appeared in the mission of John 
 the Baptist. " From the days of John the Baptist 
 until now, the kingdom of heaven sufFereth vio- 
 lence, and the violent take it by force." It came 
 28 
 
326 THE EETUEN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 in a further degree, while Jesus of Nazareth pro- 
 claimed the doctrine of repentance and salvation 
 in all the region of Judea, Samaria, and Galilee. 
 It came in a still greater degree, when he had 
 risen from the dead, and ascended into heaven. 
 On the ground of this principle, we may interpret 
 his declaration, made at the last supper : " For I 
 say unto you, I will no more drink of the fruit of 
 the vine, until I drink it new in the kingdom of 
 God ; " drink it in his resurrection-state. Having 
 risen from the dead, the kingdom of God was ex- 
 hibited to men in a new aspect. In a manner, the 
 resurrection-state was then revealed. The first 
 fruits of that glorious harvest were brought forth 
 and offered. He now ate and drank with his dis- 
 ciples, " new in the kingdom of God." Still more 
 advanced was his glorification in his kingdom, 
 when he ascended into heaven. It was then that 
 he took his seat on the right hand of God; " angels, 
 principalities, and powers, being made subject unto 
 him." In a manner, it was his instalment in his 
 glorified office. It was the pledge of his power to 
 " save his people from their sins " and ruin. Hence 
 the apostle's remark : " He ascended on high, led 
 captivity captive, and received gifts for men, even 
 for the rebeUious, that the Lord God might dwell 
 among them ; and to some he gave apostles, to 
 some evangelists, to some pastors and teachers, for 
 the perfection of the saints, for the work of the 
 ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." 
 
 Could the apostles be correct, then, in identifying 
 the return-advent with the promised "coming of 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 327 
 
 the Son of man " ? In our Saviour's last discourse 
 with his disciples, he said : " A little while, and 
 ye shall not see me ; and again a little while, and ye 
 shall see ; for I go to the Father. And ye now 
 have sorrow ; but I will see you again, and your heart 
 shall rejoice ; and your joy no man taketh from 
 you." Here is a return implicitly promised. But 
 was it a personal advent ? Take the above-quoted 
 passage in connection with another from the same 
 discourse : " Because I have said these things unto 
 you, sorrow hath filled your hearts. Nevertheless, 
 I teU you the truth. It is expedient for you that I 
 go away ; for, if I go not away, the Comforter wiU 
 not come to you ; but, if I depart, I will send him 
 unto you." " The Comforter, the Holy Ghost, the 
 Spirit of truth, whom the Father will send in my 
 name." May we not justly conclude that the 
 return, "the coming again and receiving them 
 unto himself," was identical with the advent of 
 the Comforter? In what other sense or manner 
 did Jesus return to his disciples ? He never returned 
 to them personally ; but he did come to them spiri- 
 tually when they were " endued with power from 
 on high," by the illapses of the Holy Ghost upon 
 them on the day of Pentecost, and upon others on 
 subsequent occasions. 
 
 Again, he came to them at their death. Many 
 were then received unto himself, into the mansions 
 which he had prepared for them. Their advent to 
 him implied his advent to them. We must inter- 
 pret the predictions of our Saviour by the events 
 which followed. This must ' be our fundamental 
 
328 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 rule. As he did not return to them personally during 
 the lifetime of any of that generation, we cannot, 
 of course, understand a personal return. The ex- 
 pectation even of the apostles cannot be admitted 
 as infallible in the case. They might have mis- 
 apprehended the language of our Lord. 
 
 And may we not assume, that they did also 
 misapprehend him in regard to the time of the 
 resurrection ? In all his remarks and parables, de- 
 clarative and descriptive of the advent of the Son of 
 man and of the kingdom of God, he made no men- 
 tion of the resurrection of the dead. In the parable 
 of the sheep and the goats, of the tares of the field, 
 and of the net cast into the sea, all which relate to 
 the consummation of the kingdom of heaven, no 
 resurrection is declared or intimated. From this 
 fact arises the presumption that this kingdom was 
 to exist on earth, and among mortal men. If it 
 were to have been in the resurrection-state, we 
 might expect that some notice to that effect would 
 have been given. 
 
 The New Jerusalem-state, described in the Apo- 
 calypse, is evidently the same as the halcyon-days 
 foretold and brilliantly depicted by the prophet 
 Isaiah. The imagery employed in the former is 
 chiefly taken from the latter. In both descriptions 
 are seen the gold, the pearls, the gems, the better 
 light than that of the siin and moon ; the absence of 
 violence, sin, crying, tears, pain, and death, — bold 
 metaphor and strong hyperbole. What the prophet 
 described was obviously to take place on earth and 
 among mortal men. Nor is the imagery employed 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 329 
 
 more exaggerated than that which describes the 
 vials of destruction to be poured out on Jerusalem 
 and on the land of Idumea. And if the descrip- 
 tions of Isaiah are those of earthly scenes, then 
 doubtless are those of St. John. And though the 
 latter makes mention of " the first resurrection," yet 
 this must, in consistency, be accepted as one of a 
 moral description. It is " the dead," not the risen, 
 who are judged. It is the righteous dead who are 
 placed upon thrones ; and it is the unrighteous 
 dead who are cast into a lake of fire, and undergo 
 " the second death." 
 
 We may now inquire how far the views of the 
 apostles are sustained by the authority of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ. He had declared a future advent of 
 the Son of man ; that he would come to reign and 
 be glorified; that his coming would be attended 
 with heavy judgments on wicked rhen and nations ; 
 that, during his reign, the proper and the just differ- 
 ence would be made and put between the righteous 
 and the wicked; and that, at least, the glorious 
 beginning of his advent would speedily be fulfilled. 
 But he had not declared that a physical resurrec- 
 tion — that which introduces into the immortal 
 state — would attend his second advent. This, 
 however, was evidently the impression entertained 
 by the apostles. The coming of the Son of man 
 must long ago have taken place ; for, if yet delayed, 
 it could not then have been near at hand. We 
 must interpret prophecy by the event. There has 
 been no corporeal resurrection of the dead; nor 
 has the world, consisting of this earth and these 
 
 28* 
 
330 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 heavens, been destroyed. In entertaining such 
 views, therefore, the apostles manifestly were not 
 correct, but misinterpreted the language of their 
 divine Master. 
 
 The two remarkable and expressive passages in 
 the Epistles to the Thessalonians, already given in 
 this essay, are worthy of some further attention. 
 In the first, the apostle says, " The Lord shall de- 
 scend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of 
 the archangel, and with the trump of God ; and 
 the dead in Christ — Christians who have died — 
 shall rise." In the second passage, " The Lord 
 Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty 
 angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance," &c. 
 That these passages describe the same advent of 
 the Lord, but few, if any, will entertain a doubt. 
 And there can be as little doubt, that the apostle 
 intended the return-advent of Jesus Christ ; also 
 the advent that was near at hand. And, at the 
 time of this advent, he believed the resurrection of 
 the dead in Christ w^ould obtain. But was his be- 
 lief grounded on any due authority, derived from 
 the language of Christ ? The Christians at Thessa- 
 lonica received from his first Epistle the impression, 
 that the great day of the Lord was just at hand ; 
 and they were so disturbed that they neglected their 
 secular labors. To correct this impression, the 
 apostle, in his second Letter to them, states that 
 the day of the Lord was not to be immediately ex- 
 pected. There was previously to be an apostacy ; 
 the one, probably, predicted by the prophet Daniel ; 
 the little horn, which magnified itself above every 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 331 
 
 God, and spake great words against the Most 
 High, and into whose hand the saints were to be 
 delivered " for a tiijie and times and the dividing 
 of time ; " three and a half of times, i. e. years ; 
 just half as long as Nebuchadnezzar, king of Ba- 
 bylon, was to graze among the beasts of the field. 
 This term of time, not consisting of " year-days," 
 but of natural years, would not be of very long du- 
 ration ; and " the man of sin, that son of perdition," 
 might soon "come to his end, having none to help 
 him ; whom the Lord will destroy by the spirit of 
 his mouth, and destroy with the brightness of his 
 coming." Though the apostle postpones for a sea- 
 son the time of the return-advent, it is not to a 
 distant period. He seems still to have believed that 
 he himself should live to reach it ; for he says, " We 
 who are alive and remain shall be caught up." 
 
 What, then, are some of the conclusions which 
 are or may be derived from the preceding remarks ? 
 Among them may be the following : — 
 
 1. That the second advent, so frequently recog- 
 nized in the New Testament, did not take place at 
 the fall of Jerusalem by the Roman armies, under 
 the command of Titus. This event, though great 
 and tremendously awful to the whole million of 
 sufferers, and though it had some favorable bearing 
 on Christianity, did not, however, fulfil all the con- 
 ditions. It did not give safety, peace, and pros- 
 perity to the saints. The church remained fee- 
 ble and persecuted, still accounted as the filth of 
 the earth, and the offscom-ing of all things. The 
 Son of man did not then sit on the throne of his 
 
332 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 glory, having all nations gathered before him, which 
 he separated into two divisions ; the righteous by 
 themselves on his right hand, apd the unrighteous 
 by themselves on his left. The apostle's representa- 
 tion was not then verified : " Judge nothing before 
 the time, until the Lord come, who shall bring to 
 light the hidden things of darkness, and make ma- 
 nifest the counsels of all hearts; and then shall 
 every man be rewarded according to his works." 
 
 Nor did it take place in the subsequent catas- 
 trophe which befell the Jews under the reign of 
 Hadrian, when Jerusalem was literally " ploughed 
 as a field," and the besom of destruction swept the 
 face of the whole land of promise. These events 
 were rather the manifestation of Roman power and 
 vengeance, than the revelation of the Son of man 
 in his kingdom and glory. 
 
 Nor was the predicted advent realized in the con- 
 version of the Roman empire from Paganism to 
 Christianity, nor in the reformation from Popery 
 to Protestantism in the sixteenth century. All these 
 prominent events above mentioned might be im- 
 portant links in the great chain of occurrences by 
 which the world is to be converted into the church 
 of the living God ; but they did not consummate 
 the event, nor have the conditions yet been fulfilled. 
 The saints of the Most High have never yet " taken 
 the kingdom to possess it for ever," nor their prince 
 yet had " all nations to serve and obey him." 
 
 2. We may conclude, that the predicted coming 
 of the Son of man is a gradual and progressive 
 movement ; that it takes place in proportion as the 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 333 
 
 world becomes traly evangelized. Our Saviour in- 
 timated this in the parables of the leaven in the 
 meal, and of the mustard-seed. The leaven works 
 its office gradually : the mustard-seed roots, springs, 
 grows, and becomes a tree, not at once, but by 
 slow and imperceptible degrees. " So is the king- 
 dom of God as if a man should cast seed into the 
 earth, which groweth he knoweth not how." " The 
 kingdom of heaven cometh not with observation." 
 Its coming is not attended with visible, striking 
 appearances, popular developments, and national 
 demonstrations. " Not by might nor by power, but 
 by my Spirit, saith the Lord." The kingdom is not 
 an organization, but a right spirit; not in forms, 
 "but in righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy 
 Ghost." 
 
 In a partial sense the Son of man doubtless did 
 come, when the Jewish power, so hostUe to Chris- 
 tianity, was crippled and broken by Titus and 
 Hadrian ; also when Constantine made the gospel 
 of Jesus Christ the state-religion of the Roman 
 empire ; and also when the monk of Erfurth and 
 the princes of Germany effectively protested against 
 the tyranny and corruptions of the Romish Church ; 
 but these can have been only incipient acts in that 
 grand movement by which the kingdoms of this 
 world shall become the dominion of Christ. 
 
 3. Certain conditions of the advent, though de- 
 clared generally, must be understood as applicable 
 only to particular and partial manifestations of it. 
 The severest judgments are sometimes announced 
 as being its accompaniments. " As it was in the 
 
334 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 days of Noah, so shall it be when the Son of man 
 is revealed. They were eating and drinking, mar- 
 rying and being given in marriage ; but on the day 
 Noah went into the ark, the flood came and swept 
 them all away. And, as it was in the days of Lot, 
 they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded ; 
 but, when Lot went out of Sodom, the same day it 
 rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed 
 them all. So shall it be when the Son of man shall 
 be revealed." This condition may have been fol- 
 fiUed at the overthrow of the national power of the 
 Jews. But there are other conditions which did 
 not then have their fulfilment. The church was not 
 then redeemed ; the hidden things of darkness were 
 not all brought to light, nor the counsels of all hearts 
 made manifest, nor every man rewarded according 
 to his works, whether good or bad. 
 
 4. We should, doubtless, contemplate the advent 
 of Christ as a complex occurrence, including the 
 punitive judgments declared on the one hand, and 
 the spiritual means and successes implied, in it on 
 the other. In no inconsiderable extent it has al- 
 ready taken place. The kingdom of the Son of 
 Mary is now a greater empire than that of the Ne- 
 buchadnezzars, Cyruses, Alexanders, and Caesars 
 of the ancient world. But it is not yet what the 
 predictions of it declared it should be. Nor has 
 there been any one event by which it has been in- 
 vested with its present strength ; no single point of 
 time which has separated it from the times of its 
 earthly, secular predecessors. It does not exist in 
 the immortal state. There has been no physical 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 335 
 
 resurrection of the martyrs and Christians who 
 had died; yet this kingdom has become great, 
 incomparably great and glorious. But it has not 
 risen on the ruins of the fourth monarchy, as that 
 rose on the overthrow of the third; the third on 
 the ruin of the second; and the second on that 
 of the first. The apostles, retaining their Jewish 
 belief, expected manifestly that such would be the 
 fact. The early Christian views of the Messiah's 
 reign had a deep tinge of the Jewish faith. It was 
 to include an hierarchy, an oligarchy, and a monar- 
 chy, of unsurpassed splendor, wealth, magnificence, 
 and strength. It was to be separated from the 
 time of the fourth kingdom by the event of the 
 resurrection. Thus all the members of the kingdom 
 would be brought together ; none, without all the 
 others, be made perfect. But these expectations 
 have not been realized. The fourth monarchy fell 
 more than a thousand years ago. But the kingdom 
 of Christ did not rise on its ruins. It had become 
 a Christian kingdom before its fall. No personal 
 advent of the Son of man then took place. And 
 that the return-advent will be a personal one, is 
 exceedingly problematical. This, however, is gen- 
 erally believed : " We believe that thou wilt come 
 [personally, that is the idea] to be our Judge." But 
 he was to have come speedily. His reign was to 
 have commenced immediately on the fall of the 
 fourth — ^the Eoman — monarchy. 
 
 5. It is manifestly not the pleasure of God that 
 men should have a prescience of "the times and 
 the seasons " which are to come : he retains them 
 
336 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 in his own keeping. The vision of scriptural pro- 
 phecy does not constitute a prospective history of 
 the future. It is not, nor ever has been, available 
 for this purpose. The Jews have never been able 
 to turn the prophecies of their Scriptures to this 
 account; and Christians have had no better suc- 
 cess in this thing than the Jews. They have never 
 turned a single prophecy to any good account. 
 They have never been able to descry one of the 
 great events of the world before it happened. Since 
 the composition of the New Testament, many 
 important revolutions have taken place : the con- 
 version of the fourth kingdom to Christianity; the 
 fall of that kingdom ; the rise of the Mahommedan 
 power; the dissolution of the Saracenic empire; 
 the growth and decline of the Ottoman empire ; the 
 Protestant Reformation ; the French Revolution, — 
 these have been the remarkable events of the last 
 eighteen centuries. But the interpretation of pro- 
 phecy did not reveal one of them. They occurred 
 before they were predicted. And thus will doubt- 
 less occur the remarkable events of the future. The 
 primitive Christians had no better prescience of the 
 events of the next thousand years than we now 
 have of the thousand years which are immediately 
 before us. They had many imaginations, and so 
 have we. Some of their imaginations were proba- 
 bly useful to them. The same may be true of 
 some of ours. But they may likewise be hurtful. 
 The nearness of the return-advent, as they believed, 
 inspired them with greater fortitude and zeal, under 
 the contempt and persecution to which they were 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 337 
 
 subjected. The dazzling glories of a kingdom to 
 which all the monarchs and nations of the earth 
 should be tributaries animated them with a con- 
 fidence and a courage which rendered their spirits 
 patient and invincible. — If the question now be 
 asked, Will there be a future personal advent of 
 the Lord Jesus Christ to our earth ? the answer is, 
 We cannot tell. Oui' Saviour himself, we believe, 
 did not discrimj ate between a first and a second 
 advent. He often spoke of " the coming of the Son 
 of man." But he always spoke of this as one 
 event. And we have already described it as an 
 event of a complex character ; as having its incipi- 
 ent, its progressive, and its consummating stages ; 
 as commencing in the preaching of John Baptist ; 
 progressing in the personal ministry of Jesus and 
 his disciples ; and to be consummated when the 
 gospel of the kingdom shall become the acknow- 
 ledged law of all mankind. Then will all things 
 be actually given into the hand of the Son, as they 
 were constructively when he had fulfilled his per- 
 sonal mission on earth. But of the times and 
 seasons and manner we are not enabled to know ; 
 nor does it become us curiously and presumptu- 
 ously to inquire. We may think the time long, 
 and the movement too slow ; but He who governs 
 the world is wiser than we : " the foolishness of 
 God is wiser than men." 
 
 Again, if it is asked, Will there be two resurrec- 
 tions, that of the just at the beginning of the mil- 
 lennium, and that of the unjust after the close of 
 it? we give the same answer, We cannot tell. 
 
 29 
 
338 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 Our Saviour himself, we believe, did neither assert 
 nor intimate more than one resurrection ; and that 
 was the resuiTection of the just : " They who are 
 accounted worthy to inherit that world and the re- 
 surrection of the dead can die no more, but are 
 made like the angels ; the children of God being the 
 children of the resurrection." 
 
 If, yet again, it be asked, " What will be the cha- 
 racter of the millennium ? and when will the time 
 be ? " our answer must be the same. We cannot 
 tell. Our Saviour made no mention of a millen- 
 nium. He did, however, declare himself to be 
 the Son of man ; the same, obviously, whom the 
 prophet Daniel in vision saw coming in the clouds, 
 and came to the Ancient of days, and received a 
 kingdom, which embraced all people and nations, 
 and should endm-e for ever. The Son is put in pos- 
 session of this kingdom, just as fast as mankind 
 embrace Christianity, imbibe its spirit, and obey its 
 law. But how absolutely perfect and universal 
 the kingdom of God will ever be on earth, we can- 
 not know. There is, as all enlightened minds will 
 admit, much Orientalism in the language of the 
 Bible. Its real, unadorned import must be under- 
 stood from a knowledge of the facts and objects 
 which it describes. When these are yet future, they 
 cannot be specifically known until after they have 
 actually occurred. Moreover, is the question put. 
 Will this earth ever be burned up, and reduced to 
 cinders and chaos ? we must still confess our ignor- 
 ance, and say, We cannot tell. Our Saviour did not 
 say that this earth should be destroyed. He spoke 
 
THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 339 
 
 of the end of the world or age ; of the time which 
 should be the point of separation between the 
 world, the age, which then was, and the world or 
 age of the reign of the Son of man. But this did 
 not imply a disintegration of the earth, or a confla- 
 gration of its elements. The reign of the Son of 
 man and of the saints, being of a moral descrip- 
 tion, requires no change in physical nature. All 
 things become new, in the scriptural sense, when 
 men have all imbibed the spirit of Jesus, and be- 
 come holy, harmless, and separate from sin. 
 
 But when will the resurrection take place ? How 
 long before the event will come ? Will the world 
 then be burned up ? And what is there yet to take 
 place previously to the consummation ? To all 
 these and the like inquiries, we must answer as 
 above. We cannot tell. We are confident no man 
 can tell. We have had no oracle from heaven 
 announcing the solution of such problems. This 
 world may, notwithstanding what we know, con- 
 tinue essentially as it now is for millions of years, 
 or it may not continue for one year. If the world 
 should come to its catastrophe to-morrow, it can- 
 not be made apparent that the Scriptures would 
 be broken. All the scriptural prophecies may have 
 been fulfilled, so far as they have regard to this 
 world. — But the millennium has not yet taken 
 place ? You do not know that it has not. And 
 the Jews have not returned to their own land to 
 enjoy the great and the long jubilee of their na- 
 tion ? You do not know that they ever will, even if 
 the earth should abide for ever ; nor do you know 
 
« « 
 
 340 THE RETURN-ADVENT OF CHRIST. 
 
 that the Scriptures have foretold such a restoration. 
 But neither Mahommedanism nor Popery has yet 
 come to an end ? And you do not know for cer- 
 tainty that they will not continue as long as the 
 moon shall endure. You may have belief; but, on 
 this subject, you cannot possess knowledge. But 
 you cut us off from all prophetic knowledge of the 
 times and seasons ? And thus, doubtless, our Lord 
 designed that we should be placed. His admoni- 
 tory command is, that we should be always watch- 
 ing ; that the Son of man is always near to us, — he 
 may come at any hour ; that the time is short. The 
 Lord comes to us, when we are called to him : 
 when our work on earth is finished, we go to our 
 account. And who is that faithful and wise servant, 
 who lives continually watchful and always ready ? 
 
341 
 
 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR BE- 
 TWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 
 
 ■ It was ordained of angels in the hand of a mediator." — Galitiaits, iii. 19. 
 
 The person adverted to in this text was Moses, 
 the mediator through whom the " first covenant " 
 had its dispensation. The Lord Jesus Christ is the 
 Mediator of the " better covenant." Hence the de- 
 claration of the evangelist John : " For the law 
 was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by 
 Jesus Christ." 
 
 The intercourse between God and mankind is 
 not usually direct and immediate, but mediate and 
 secondary. God works by principles. He employs 
 intermediate agencies. He acts by the hand of 
 mediators. God, for instance, dispenses blessings 
 to children by the mediation of their parents ; bless- 
 ings to nations by the mediation of their rulers ; food 
 and raiment to his people through the mediation 
 of the husbandman, the shepherd, the fisherman, 
 and the mechanic. The number of mediators, there- 
 fore, is so numerous that they cannot easily be 
 counted. But of this vast multitude, there are three 
 which stand pre-eminent, — Moses, the Lord Jesus 
 29* 
 
342 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 Christ, and Nature. The mediatorial office of 
 Moses was broad and important ; that of the Lord 
 Jesus was incomparably broader, more interesting, 
 more important ; and that of nature is the broadest 
 of all. It was through the mediation of nature that 
 we aU had our birth ; that we became living crea- 
 tures ; that we then received those attentions by 
 which we were bred and nurtured ; that we were 
 endowed with all our mental and physical faculties ; 
 that we have obtained all our knowledge, our capa- 
 city for business, our enjoyments, and even our 
 moral habits, both of virtue and of vice. We, our 
 very selves, are the offspring of nature, as weU as 
 the offspring of God. 
 
 But what is nature ? It is not God, but the 
 work of God. Nature is the creature ; the creation; 
 the whole of it; creation primary, universal, and 
 absolute. Nature came into existence when God, 
 by his almighty word, produced in a moment aU 
 the substance of which this whole world consists ; 
 when he said, " Let there be light," and every other 
 element. These were produced in just such num- 
 bers and quantity, and endowed with just such 
 powers and qualities, as fitted them for the construc- 
 tion of the world which now exists. These elements 
 must have once existed in a state of dispersion and 
 confusion. Hence the doctrine of chaos among the 
 ancient philosophers. There was once no composite 
 thing ; no sun, no moon, no planets ; no water, 
 air, rocks, or minerals ; no herbs, grasses, or trees ; 
 no fishes, beasts, or men; none of these; yet all 
 the materials out of which they have been formed. 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 343 
 
 generated, grown, and made. Naturalists inform 
 us, that the elements must have once been in a state 
 of extreme rarification ; that the body of them filled 
 a wider space than that now occupied by our whole 
 solar system ; that every particle was then endowed 
 with its chemical and mechanical attributes; and 
 that these attributes fitted and empowered them to 
 do the whole work of formation, construction, pro- 
 pagation, growth, and decay. Thus God made the 
 elements, and the elements made the world and aU 
 things in it. That substance of which a thing is 
 made must, in all cases, exist previously to the 
 thing itself. The materials of a house always 
 precede the house. The elementary particles of 
 which all composite things consist were the first 
 productions. And when God created them, he 
 gave existence to nature. In this consisted the 
 work proper of creation. Nothing but the produc- 
 tion of the primary elements are true and proper 
 creations. All subsequent productions are the re- 
 sults of formation, combination, generation, &c. 
 Thus have been produced the sun, the planets, the 
 moons, the atmospheres, the oceans, the seas, 
 the rivers, the hills, the mountains, the plains, the 
 vegetables, the reptiles, the fishes of the seas, 
 the fowls of the air, the beasts, wild and tame, of 
 the forest and the field; together with man him- 
 self, made in the likeness of God. All these are 
 doubtless the immediate work of nature. In a 
 constructive sense, they are all God's work. God 
 made the elements for the very purpose that they 
 should produce all these things. He gave to the 
 
344 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 former the power requisite to produce the latter. 
 We perceive the manifestations of design, of won- 
 derful knowledge and skill, in the works of nature. 
 AU this must be referred to God ; for nature is 
 unintelligent. Nature has no understanding, no 
 soul, no design. The power of nature is very great, 
 immeasurable. But in her heart is no such thing 
 as thought, feeling, or purpose. Nature is God's 
 creature, his agent, his mediator, standing between 
 himself and mankind. Nature is the creature 
 universal and absolute. As soon as the substance 
 of our material and visible universe came into 
 being, nature had an existence. And she has ever 
 since existed constantly. She never ceases either 
 to be or to work ; nor do we know that she ever 
 wiU cease to be and to work. If this whole uni- 
 versal system of sensible things should grow old, 
 and dissolve again into its original particles, as 
 man's body dissolves into its primitive dust, nature, 
 nevertheless, would remain. The dust of the ma- 
 terial universe would be nature ; and it might again 
 reconstruct itself into worlds replete with life, order, 
 and beauty. 
 
 Nature, we have said, is God's universal agent. 
 Our world is constantly full of phenomena. Every 
 year, and even every day, contains them. There are 
 births and deaths, calms and storms, heats and frosts, 
 pleasures and pains, accidents both happy and un- 
 happy, events adverse and prosperous, friendships 
 and enmities, wars and rumors of wars, continually 
 transpiring. None of these are the immediate work 
 of God. They are all, as we hold, the work of 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 345 
 
 nature. God never does evil. That cannot, be, 
 because he is good. None of the ills of this life 
 and- world can be the immediate work of God. 
 They are wrought by the agency of nature. Na- 
 ture itself works involuntarily and without design. 
 We have already said, that it has no intelligence, 
 no sensation, no soul. Nature is mechanical, che- 
 mical, perhaps instinctive ; and yet this agent, as 
 we above intimated, performs more work than aU 
 other agents. Nature propagates the successive 
 generations of aU the animal races, and had pre- 
 viously made the world, — all the minerals, metals, 
 rocks, mountains, plains, rivers, and oceans. She 
 sends abroad among men the diseases, the famines, 
 the devouring locusts, the mischievous vermin, the 
 wars and the commotions, which so often afflict 
 and distress the world; all the storms, hurricanes, 
 whirlpools, waterspouts, earthquakes, avalanches, 
 electric shocks, and volcanic eruptions. God does 
 not do any of these things. He does them in no 
 other sense than he commits the murders, the lar- 
 cenies, the cruelties, the various and innumerable 
 abominations, which have been in the world. In a 
 constructive sense, all things are of God. They 
 are consequences of God's work of creation. But 
 the good and the evil are not equally the work of 
 God ; for he designs the former, but not the latter. 
 He made fire wholly for the good which comes of 
 it. He made water wholly for the benefits it con- 
 fers on the world. But there are many disasters 
 which come of water and fire. God, however, had 
 no view to them, when he ordained that fire and 
 
346 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 water should abound, as they do, on earth. The 
 evils that come are undesigned, accidental, unavoid- 
 able. When a child's dress takes fire, and it is 
 burned to death, it is an accident. We call it such ; 
 and we understand what we say. The event was 
 an accident, because not sought, not designed. 
 And equally such, doubtless, are all famines, pes- 
 tilences, earthquakes, together with the less forms 
 and measures of disease, pain, and mortality among 
 men. 
 
 But how and why is all this so? Is it true? 
 Is it right? Ought the fact to be as we have 
 represented ? For the proof of our doctrine, we 
 refer every man to his own experience and obser- 
 vation. From these sources, he has already learned 
 that there is an established order in the world. 
 Things do not eventuate at random. Means are 
 requisite to the production of ends. We cannot 
 have fiii-e without fuel, nor bread without husban- 
 dry, nor mills without a physical power to move 
 them. And the right means, duly applied, always 
 produce the ends designed. When seeds are duly 
 planted in the earth, they spring and grow into 
 vegetables. When stones are duly placed by and 
 upon each other, they constitute a wall. When 
 suitable timbers are duly joined together, they make 
 a house. When _a man puts on a stout woollen 
 garment, it defends him against the cold and the 
 storm. All these, and all other suitable means, 
 always accomplish their proper ends ; and the for- 
 mer produce the latter efficiently and necessarily. 
 The means are the proper causes, and the ends are 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 347 
 
 the proper effects. The connection between these 
 and those is necessary and inevitable. The proper 
 means cannot be employed, without producing the 
 subsequent end. You cannot duly mix lime, sand, 
 and water together, without producing mortar. 
 You cannot place brick and mortar together, in 
 a certain order and quantity, and not build a chim- 
 ney or the walls of a house. You cannot apply a 
 flame to dry combustibles, without producing a con- 
 flagration. You cannot pass an edge-tool through 
 the middle of a bar of wood, without dividing it 
 into two equal parts. It is therefore no other than 
 cant to say, as metaphysicians have said, that 
 means are not efficient causes ; that they are mere 
 antecedents; that they precede by order, not by 
 causality. This doctrine of the inefficiency of all 
 means is contradicted by what occurs every day, 
 and before every man's eyes. He sees and knows 
 that additions to a thing do necessarily increase it ; 
 that subtractions from a thing do necessarily les- 
 sen it. Tell a plain man that the addition, for 
 instance, of a quart to a gallon of water in a bucket 
 does not necessarily increase the quantity in it, or 
 that the addition is no proper cause of the increase 
 in the amount of water, — would you tell him the 
 truth ? would he believe you ? Is it any other than 
 cant, sophistry, and pantheism to refer every phe- 
 nomenon in the world to the immediate volition of 
 God? 
 
 There are two destadptions of pantheists ajnong 
 men. One deny the existence of God antecedent 
 to nature; the other deny the existence of nature. 
 
348 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 The former are atheists ; the latter, metaphysicians. 
 Both are agreed in discarding the doctrine of me- 
 diation. Both refer all phenomena to the first 
 cause. Both repudiate the doctrine of secondary 
 causes. Both affirm that there is no medium, no 
 interventional agency, between the first cause and 
 the phenomena of the world. They differ in one 
 thing : the class first mentioned call the Great First 
 Cause nature ; the other class call it God. It is 
 hence apparent that the metaphysicians and the 
 atheists have a near point of conjunction with each 
 other. 
 
 In contradistinction from both stands our posi- 
 tion. It recognizes the threefold distinction of 
 being, — God, Nature, and Phenomena. God is 
 one thing, nature is another thing, and phenome- 
 na differ from both God and nature. God is the 
 Great First Cause ; nature is the first and universal 
 creature of God ; phenomena are the events and 
 changes which take place in the world. And is 
 not this the doctrine of common sense ? Is it not 
 recognized by all unsophisticated minds? None 
 deny it but a certain school of metaphysicians. 
 And the doctrine of these excludes the reality of 
 creation. There never was, according to their 
 doctrine, such an event. Creation with them was 
 but the commencement of phenomena, and it is 
 now constantly going on. They say that the crea- 
 tions of to-day aie as numerous and real as those 
 of any antecedent period of time. 
 
 Now, if we can furnish rational and satisfactory 
 " ]hat there has been accomplished such a work 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 349 
 
 as creation, it will be also proved that there is such 
 a thing as nature, and consequently such things as 
 secondary causes and mediation. 
 
 What, then, is creation? It is giving existence 
 to something which in no sense, form, or manner, 
 had an existence before. Something is produced ; 
 and this something must have attributes, properties, 
 powers. The idea of there being something which 
 possesses no properties is a contradiction and an 
 absurdity. A fancied thing, having no properties, 
 is really nothing. A property is a power. If no 
 powers are produced, nothing has been created. 
 But, if something has been created, it possesses 
 attributes, powers ; and these are the secondary 
 causes which produce phenomena. There is no 
 middle ground between this doctrine of the effi- 
 ciency of secondary causes and pure universal 
 idea.lism. According to the latter doctrine, the 
 whole universe consists of God and of ideas. All 
 phenomena are nothing but ideas. And what we 
 call nature is no other than an ideal existence. 
 Our metaphysicians admit that there is an order in 
 the occurrence of phenomena. But it consists, say 
 they, wholly of antecedents and consequents. One 
 phenomenon follows another, but it is not caused by 
 it. Of what use, then, is it ? It is a maxim that 
 " God does no superfluous work." Why should he 
 connect certain phenomena, if there be no depend- 
 ence of one upon the other? Why should God 
 have created the sun, if it have not the real power 
 of illuminating the earth? Why should he send 
 rain upon the fields and pastures, if rain be not the- 
 
 30 
 
350 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 real cause of refreshing and reviving them ? Why 
 should man have hands and feet, if these are not 
 among the real causes of his being able to walk 
 and to labor? If God must now, by immediate 
 acts of his own power, produce all phenomena 
 equally with means or without them, then of what 
 value or for what purpose are they? Is it any 
 better than impertinence to say, that a man's eyes, 
 ears, feet, and brains are antecedents to his seeing, 
 hearing, walking, and thinking, but not the causes 
 of these phenomena ? — to say that water is ante- 
 cedent to the sailing of a ship, and air to the flying 
 of a bird, but neither causal nor necessary ? Natu- 
 ralists have been in the habit of tracing the marks 
 of God's adorable wisdom in the formation of the 
 human body ; the adaptation of his bones, joints, 
 and sinews to the purpose of action ; his eyes to 
 the purpose of vision ; his ears to the purpose of 
 hearing. But if properties are not powers, if sec- 
 ondary causes have no real efficiency, if means are 
 not causal, — it follows, as an inevitable deduction, 
 that the whole idea of adaptation is a fallacy ; that 
 no phenomena produce other phenomena, no an- 
 tecedents are causes, no sequents are effects. And 
 if these are just premises, then there never has been 
 such a work as creation ; and there really exist no 
 such things as sun, moon, planets, earth, oceans, 
 rivers, mountains, and seas. 
 
 We will now briefly define our position, and then, 
 consider the objections which are alleged against 
 it. It is this, — that there has been a creation, a 
 world produced, in its elementary state, by the will, 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 351 
 
 knowledge, and power of God ; that this world has 
 powers, and could not be a world without them ; 
 that the world consists of elements ; that the powers 
 of the world exist primarily in the elements, and 
 are the attributes of them ; that these elements 
 constitute nature ; and that nature, miracles ex- 
 cepted, produces all the phenomena of the world, 
 and is the mediator between God and men. 
 
 But, against the view now given, objections have 
 been strongly urged. 
 
 1. It is objected, that the doctrine places God at 
 a great distance off from men : nature intervenes 
 between him and his rational creatures. But we 
 want a God that is near ; a God who governs and 
 directs in all things, — in aU the particulars, as 
 w^ell and as much as in the whole general course 
 of events. 
 
 This objection, though it has some plausible 
 appearance, yet on examination wiU be found to 
 imply more difficulties than it removes. If provi- 
 dence be particular, then it is God who produces 
 all the evils in the world. By his direct agency, 
 he dispenses all the calamities which afflict human 
 nature, all the premature instances of mortafity, all 
 the distressing casualties, all the errors and the sins 
 committed by mankind. And what difficulty is 
 greater than this ? But few men have possessed 
 nerve enough to look this difficulty fuU in the face. 
 Yet some have boldly done it. Calvin and Ed- 
 wards, and their followers, have done it. They 
 ffinched not to avow the doctrine, that " God hath 
 foreordained whatsoever comes to pass ; " that he 
 
352 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 knows all future events, because he hath deter- 
 mined to produce them. But can that God be 
 wise and good who produces so much evil ? and 
 are not the principles of moral rectitude the same 
 both in heaven and on earth ? Can it be right in 
 God to do what it would be wrong for a man to 
 do ? If he instigate a man to act the part of a 
 murderer, a robber, a thief, an incendiary, is the 
 crime wholly with the man ? Is the instigator 
 faultless, and the organ by which he operates alone 
 criminal ? God's infinity and independence invest 
 him with no right to violate the laws of moral 
 equity. These law^s are universal, common to all 
 moral beings. Besides, God cannot be tempted of 
 evil. He is inaccessible to all motives of envy, 
 jealousy, rivalship, and anger. For none are above 
 him, none can Compete with him. Therefore, God 
 can have no motive to do wrong. 
 
 It is, however, alleged, that God produces evils 
 for the sake of the good which results from them. 
 But is there not a palpable inconsistency in this 
 hypothesis ? Have not all evil things an evil ten- 
 dency ? Can good come out of evil ? Can sweet 
 water proceed from a bitter fountain ? It may, and 
 it is, sometimes the fact, that, in a conflict between 
 evil and good tendencies, the result may be good. 
 But this salutary result comes of the good tendency, 
 not of the evil. It is an absurdity to tallv of the 
 useful tendencies and consequences of sin. If sin 
 have a good tendency, how can the sinner be justly 
 accoi^nted a mischievous doer, a guilty culprit? If 
 sin came into existence because the highest good 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 353 
 
 of the universe required it, with what propriety can 
 the transgressor be condemned, and everlastingly 
 punished ? 
 
 There is, moreover, a further inconsistency in the 
 hypothesis that sin and all other evUs are the means 
 of promoting the greatest general good. This 
 theory is maintained only by the metaphysicians 
 who deny that means possess any causal efficiency. 
 They hold that God employs means, not as causes, 
 but as signs ; that means have no efficiency ; that 
 God can as easily produce the effects without the 
 means as with them. They admit that food and 
 drink are the means of sustaining the bodies of 
 men in health and life; but they deny that food 
 and drink are the causes that support the human 
 body. The cause, say they, is the immediate power 
 of God ; and he could as easily support a man in 
 health without the means as with them. Very well. 
 Then God could as easily promote and accomplish 
 the highest good of his great kingdom without 
 sin as with it. , For sin and aU other evils are 
 but means ; and means are not causes : they are but 
 signs of the established order of phenomena. They 
 might all be dispensed with without foregoing any 
 beneficial result. Of what importance, then, can 
 sin and suffering be as means of promoting the 
 general welfare ? 
 
 There are others who adopt a medium-theory 
 on the subject of divine providence as being general 
 or particular. They assign one portion of the phe- 
 nomena of the world to a specisd divine agency, 
 and the other portion of them to a general or com- 
 
 30* 
 
354 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 mon providence. But where or how can the line 
 of demarcation between the two portions be drawn ? 
 This line has never yet been drawn. And let any 
 man attempt to run it definitely, and he wiU 
 find himself involved in insurmountable difficulties. 
 Suppose, for instance, that he starts on the princi- 
 ple that God interposes a special direction of all 
 the important events, but commits other occurrences 
 to the course and order of his common and general 
 providence. It now becomes necessary to fix the 
 distinction, and draw the line between important 
 events and those which are not important. And 
 what man is competent to do this thing correctly ? 
 Is there such a man on earth ? No ; no such man 
 on earth, no such angel in heaven. 
 
 Again : suppose the distinction between good and 
 evil to be made the line of demarcation ; that all 
 which is good be referred to the special agency of 
 God, but the evil to the action of common pro- 
 vidence. We would now inquire, in the first place, 
 what is gained by this assumption? If found to 
 be true, of what benefit is it to the world ? Does 
 it increase the amount of good there is in it ? Not 
 at all. The amount of good in the world is a mat- 
 ter of fact. It is what it is. Any theory about 
 the mode of its existence neither increases nor dimi- 
 nishes it. And the real question now at issue is, May 
 not a general providence be competent to produce 
 it ? Is the sum total of human virtue and welfare 
 so great that God's providence must have been par- 
 ticular in order to produce it ? No man will affirm 
 this. But it is the true question. If aU the good 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 355 
 
 which exists may have come to pass under the 
 divine administration of a general providence, then 
 there can be no evidence — from facts — that pro- 
 vidence is not general. And the universal con- 
 fession, that there is a common providence, goes far 
 toward a satisfactory proof that the whole of it is 
 such ; for the strong presumption must be, that all 
 providence is of this description. That a part of it 
 should be of one character, and a part of another, 
 indicates incongruity. Wherever there is wisdom, 
 we expect consistency. If God have a common 
 providence, then doubtless he accomplishes as much 
 by it as possible. And can we reasonably doubt 
 that he was able to institute such an order of things 
 as should be so far complete and perfect as to work 
 out all the good which now is, or which has been, 
 or which will be ? — miracles only excepted. And is 
 it not a fact that we are able to trace phenomena 
 to their principles ? Do we not, in nearly all cases, 
 make the attempt? Do we not inquire for the 
 cause ? And we generally find one which, whether 
 true or false, is satisfactory to our own mind. In 
 all such cases, we proceed on the assumption that 
 there is an established, systematic order or course 
 of secondary causes, by which all the phenomena of 
 the world eventuate ; that there is something which 
 stands between God and phenomena ; that he acts 
 through a mediatory organ ; that this organ is na- 
 ture; and that nature, notwithstanding her non- 
 intelligence, is yet competent to produce whatever 
 transpires on the earth. "We assume all this when 
 we inquire after the cause of unexpected events. 
 
356 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR 
 
 And yet most of us flinch from the whole of the 
 doctrine, when it is distinctly announced. We 
 think it needful that God should often interpose, 
 and give a particular direction to the course of 
 events. We seem to think it impossible that even 
 God himself could have made so perfect a creature 
 as nature is, if indeed she be the dispenser of all 
 the good phenomena of the world. But are we 
 warranted in resting on such a conclusion? Is 
 there any thing, but a contradiction, which is 
 too hard for God? If man can make a creature 
 that is able to speak, to sing, and even to play a 
 game of chances, is it a thing incredible that God 
 should have made a creature invested with all those 
 great and wonderful powers which we find in na- 
 ture? 
 
 The time has been when those phenomena which 
 could not be accounted for by being traced to some 
 known principles, were ascribed to the immediate 
 agency of God. Hence all such events as eclipses 
 £)f the sun and moon ; all unusual appearances of 
 the heavens, by night or by day ; aU earthquakes, 
 pestilences, and famines ; all premature and sudden 
 deaths, were accounted to be the immediate work 
 of God. The capacities of nature were then but 
 very imperfectly understood. The fact is now con- 
 siderably different. There is now no hesitation in 
 attributing storms, pestilences, meteors, and the ob- 
 scuration of the celestial luminaries, to the agency 
 of nature. Still, however, there is much confusion, 
 and even inconsistency, in the views and language 
 of men on the subject of divine providence. The 
 
BETWEEN GOD AND HIS CREATURES. 357 
 
 doctrine of means, or rather of the use of means, is 
 confused and discrepant. Men talk about means 
 which are not causes. And they can even adduce 
 the authority of such eminent men as Dugald Ste- 
 wart and Thomas Brown to endorse that empirical 
 doctrine. It is, however, foundationless and cannot 
 stand. If man's common sense does not utterly, 
 constantly, and universally deceive him, the doctrine 
 is false. If there ever was such an event as creation, 
 this doctrine must be false. If God have not de- 
 signed and contrived that all men should live and 
 die under a dense, dark cloud of delusion, the doc- 
 trine is untrue. If true, God must be the greatest 
 deceiver in the universe. 
 
 Our metaphysicians say that means are signs, 
 and as such possess an importance. But if the 
 signs of realities have some importance, the reali- 
 ties themselves must possess much more. The 
 body is always better than the shadow ; the thing 
 typified is of more value than the type which pre- 
 figured it. 
 
 Let us not be deceived : " God is not mocked ; 
 whatsoever a man soweth, that must he also reap." 
 There is a God. The things which are made de- 
 monstrably declare his existence. You know that 
 the world is full of phenomena. Nature is the me- 
 diator between God and men ; between man and 
 God. Nor is this doctrine an idle speculation : it 
 is the most practical truth in the world. If you 
 would be respected, you must possess integrity of 
 character. If you would be happy, you must be 
 good. If you would be God's accepted, servants, 
 
358 NATURE THE UNIVERSAL MEDIATOR. 
 
 you must serve him in spirit and in truth. The 
 great results of salvation and eternal life must be 
 wrought out with fear and trembling, by a patient 
 continuance in well-doing. 
 
359 
 
 GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 
 
 " And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." — John, 
 viii. 33. 
 
 This text declares that a knowledge of truth is the 
 condition and the cause of true freedom. But upon 
 what principle does the truth of this declaration 
 stand ? Whence is it apparent that a knowledge 
 of truth invests a man with that self-control and 
 just balance of mind in which the best description 
 of freedom consists? In other words, on what 
 principle is it that the knowledge of truth is useful, 
 so that the man who possesses just views of ihings 
 holds a great advantage over him whose views are 
 erroneous ? It must manifestly be this, that there 
 is an adaptation between the constitution of man 
 and the condition in which he exists ; between the 
 elements within him and the elements about him ; 
 between the world within and the world without. 
 For it is obvious that any creature must be un- 
 happy, if situated where there is a discrepancy 
 between what is in him and what is around him. 
 Where the more knowledge he has of the circum- 
 stances about him, the greater is the conflict in his 
 
360 GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 
 
 own mind ; where the better he understands his po- 
 sition, the greater is his uneasiness and discontent. 
 
 The sentiment of this text, and the doctrine which 
 we shall endeavor to substantiate in this discourse, 
 is this, — that knowledge is preferable to ignorance ; 
 that correct views are more advantageous to man 
 than those which are wrong; that the apprehension 
 of truth is more healthful and happy than the be- 
 lief of en'or; that the nature of man is suited to 
 the constitution of the universe, of which he is a 
 part. 
 
 Our first endeavor will be to prove this doctrine. 
 And a strong presumptive argument in proof of 
 our position is furnished by the acknowledged doc- 
 trine of God's absolute perfection. That he is per- 
 fect in wisdom, power, and goodness, is a point of 
 belief among all Christians. And a wise and good 
 being will always adapt whatever he produces to 
 the place which it is to occupy, — to the circum- 
 stances in which it is to be and to act. If the fact 
 be otherwise, the work must be a failure. Any 
 thing unsuited to its place and circumstances is a 
 bad thing for that position. If the nature of man 
 be unsuited to his place and destiny, God has made 
 him wrong. His great work of thr human creation 
 has been a failvire. But this cannot be. God must 
 have made man right; and, if so, the knowledge of 
 truth must be better for him than ignorance or the 
 belief of error. In the acknowledged attributes of 
 God we have a pledge of the fact that man is 
 suited to the world, and the world is suited to 
 man. 
 
GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 361 
 
 We also have the doctrine declared in the Holy 
 Scriptures; the doctrine that truth has a salutary 
 and a sanctifying influence upon the human mind. 
 Our Saviour thus prayed to his heavenly Father: 
 " Sanctify them through thy ti-uth : thy word is 
 truth." Here is the plain fact, that the tendency 
 of truth is to sanctify the heart, to correct its obli- 
 quities, to restrain the passions and appetites from 
 extravagance, to quicken and invigorate right affec- 
 tion, to regulate the whole soul through the agency 
 of enlightened reason. The same fact is also indi- 
 cated in another scriptural passage : " Sanctified by 
 faith which is in me." It is here asserted that faith 
 sanctifies. Faith is a correlative of truth. Faith 
 is the subjective, and truth is the objective, of the 
 same thing. Truth sanctifies through the medium 
 of knowledge and faith. It cannot otherwise act 
 upon the mind. 
 
 The great work of human redemption is accom- 
 plished by the instrumentality of truth. The good 
 old puritan divines of the sixteenth and seventeenth 
 centuries, such as Isaac Ambrose, Matthew Mead, 
 Robert Fleming, and many others of kindred theo- 
 logy, said much about the consultations holden in 
 heaven about the redemption of man. The unre- 
 pealable law of God condemned him to eternal death 
 and misery. But was it possible to save the race, or 
 even a part of it ? The angels said. No. God's law 
 must stand; therefore man must be damned. There 
 is no possible remedy. At length, Jehovah himself 
 suggested an idea : it was, that the second person in 
 the Godhead should consent to be incarnated and 
 
 31 
 
362 GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 
 
 victimized in the room and stead of the offenders. 
 The suggestion ■was received with shouts of admi- 
 ration and gladness. The deepest wonder was 
 expressed. How astonishing, said they, that even 
 infinite wisdom could dive so deep, and infinite 
 love grasp so much ! And this topic has been the 
 theme of much eloquent declamation, even in mod- 
 ern pulpits. We have heard the excellent and 
 gifted Eliphalet Nott and the late ingenious Jabez 
 Fisher expatiate with great force upon it. Had 
 angels, said they, sat in consultation through the 
 whole of eternity, they could not have devised an 
 effective and satisfactory method. They could not 
 have proposed a plan which would honor God's 
 law, and save man the sinner. It has, we observe, 
 been a fine theme for eloquent pulpit-declamation. 
 Yet it is all moonshine. Man is not redeemed, 
 even on their principles, by having his penal debt 
 cancelled; by having an angry God appeased; by 
 a vicarious sacrifice. 
 
 Our imaginative theologians have assumed false 
 princiijles ; that sin is transferable, and may be im- 
 puted to the innocent; and the guilty, by this 
 means, acquitted ; that the death of Christ was a 
 real expiatory sacrifice ; that it was so satisfactory 
 to God that he becomes willing to propose terms 
 of reconciliation to sinful men. These, however, 
 are not truths, but mistakes. What theologians 
 call the atonement does not, of itself, according to 
 their own doctrine, save a single soul. It only 
 brings man into a salvable state ; a state in which, by 
 conversion and repentance, he may secure the par- 
 
GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 363 
 
 don of his sins and the favor of God. And this cer- 
 tainly is the state in which man has ever been from 
 the sixth day of the first week to the present time. 
 
 This scheme of redemption — as it has been 
 called — and which has been so much extolled, and 
 caUed a matchless wonder for its profundity of wis- 
 dom, does, in reality, when fairly examined, bear 
 more of the marks of human weakness and foUy than 
 of divine strength and intelligence. It assumes for 
 truth the palpable error that the temporary death of 
 one human soul is an equivalent to the eternal death 
 of the whole human race. For the death of Christ 
 was the death of a man. It was the man only, as 
 they acknowledge, that died ; and it was impossi- 
 ble that he could have suffered the penalty of the 
 law. The penalty, say they, is eternal death, end- 
 less misery. This Christ did not suffer, nor any 
 thing like an equivalent to it. 
 
 The power of truth has been acknowledged by 
 different forms of expression. It has long been a 
 maxim, that time is the wisest thing in the world. 
 Also, that truth is the strongest thing in the world. 
 Also, that knowledge is incomparable in its power. 
 All these maxims stand on the same basis, and are 
 essentially one and the same. Time itself has no 
 power, except as it furnishes opportunity for the 
 action of knowledge and truth. Truth has no 
 power, except as it is known. And knowledge de- 
 rives all its strength from truth. It follows that 
 time, knowledge^ and truth are a combined power. 
 One is nothing without the other. And what one 
 of them can do, another of them can do also. All 
 
364 GREAT POWER ANB USE OP TRUTH. 
 
 the improvements and reformations that have been 
 effected in the human world have been the work of 
 truth. When the faults and vices of an age have 
 been avoided by a succeeding age, the reform has 
 taken place through the action of truth. If the 
 Chaldeans were less vicious than the Egyptians, it 
 was because the former were more enlightened than 
 the latter. If the Persians were less immoral 
 than the Chaldeans, it was due to their superior 
 enlightenment. And the same thing may be pre- 
 dicated of the Greeks in relation to the Persians, 
 and of the Romans in relation to the Greeks. The 
 amount of knowledge in the world has been ever, 
 gradually and slowly, on the advance ; and, as 
 knowledge has advanced, some forms of vice and 
 wickedness have disappeared. The custom of reta- 
 liation, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, and the right of 
 the nearest relative to avenge a death by killing the 
 man-slayer, — who might be innocent of intentional 
 murder, — fell into disuse and became obsolete 
 through the prevalence of knowledge. The ten- 
 dency of truth is to humanize man's heart. It 
 assuages his anger ; it cools his malignant passions; 
 it moderates his selfishness; it gives scope to com- 
 passion and generosity. All the reforms in modern 
 society have been effected by enlightening public 
 sentiment, — the temperance reform; the peace re- 
 form ; the anti-slavery reform ; the free government 
 reform. These reforms are not yet consummated ; 
 but they have commenced, and the requisite amount 
 of public enlightenment wUl carry them on to com- 
 pletion. 
 
GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 365 
 
 There is no condition of human society so bad, 
 be it among savages, barbarians, or nominally civi- 
 lized ; no amount of vicious customs so prevalent 
 and strong, though it be what has been called a 
 hell upon earth ; we repeat, no condition of human 
 society so bad that it cannot be reformed by en- 
 lightenment and truth. Every society is composed 
 of men ; and every man is susceptible of good im- 
 pressions and of true virtue. Enlighten him to the 
 requisite extent, and he will become the subject of 
 them. It is not requisite that any change should 
 be wrought in man's constitutional susceptibilities. 
 When he knows the whole truth, he perceives that 
 it is for his own advantage to act right ; that his 
 duty and his welfare are identified. Even his self- 
 love will then lead him on in the ways of justice, 
 sobriety, and rectitude. 
 
 The wise man uttered the following doctrine : 
 " There is a way which seemeth right to man ; but 
 the end thereof are the ways of death." Men may 
 practise wrong, thinking that it is right. In this 
 way, doubtless, all wrong customs have been intro- 
 duced into human society. Men commenced them 
 under the impression that the thing was right. 
 Thus, undoubtedly, commenced the custom of war; 
 that of slavery; that of arbitrary and tyrannical 
 government; that of unprincipled competition; — 
 the strong taking advantage of the weak, thinking 
 that might and right are nearly identical. By 
 means of these customs, the great mass of man- 
 kind have been oppressed, degraded, vitiated, and 
 brutalized. All these customs are wicked; and, 
 
 31* 
 
366 GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 
 
 when men become convinced that they are wicked, 
 they will renounce them, though not before. The 
 way, therefore, to redeem the world from its sins, 
 is to enlighten it. Convince aU men, that war, 
 slavery, arbitrary government, cruel and bloody 
 laws, selfish and unprincipled competition, and the 
 oppression of the weak by the strong, are unrighte- 
 ous and wicked customs ; and they will cease to 
 practise them. The world wiU then be redeemed 
 from these sins, and all the miseries which attend 
 them. And this is the method proposed and pur- 
 sued by the gospel of Christ. It acts first upon 
 individuals ; and it acts by way of enlightenment 
 and instruction. Men are to receive the truth by 
 conviction, not by dictation, not by authority and 
 a blind faith. The man who thus receives his 
 creed does not know whether it consists of truth 
 or falsehood. The man must be free to accept or 
 reject ; free to discuss and examine ; free to profess 
 what he believes, ■v^dthout incurring any stigma or 
 disadvantage. It is conviction of truth, thus ob- 
 tained, that will work reform and sanctification. 
 Freedom of thought is requisite previously to ob- 
 taining freedom from error and sin. 
 
 It has of late become the fashion, in certain 
 quarters, to disparage intellectual education, and 
 to extol what they call the moral, — the culture of 
 the heart. Knowledge, say they, does not make a 
 man righteous : it does not regulate his heart. The 
 most enlightened man may be a knave, a counter- 
 feiter, an embezzler, an unprincipled demagogue. 
 "We are, however, dissatisfied with this doctrine. 
 
GREAT POWER AND USE OF TRUTH. 367 
 
 We believe that all enlightenment, even what is 
 CEiUed the moral, comes through the instrumentality 
 of the intellect. All just moral distinctions are the 
 work of the understanding. No emotive impulse 
 is safe and reliable, until it has been judged of by 
 the intellect. Emotions of compassion, of genero- 
 sity, of tenderness, and pious zeal, must be exam- 
 ined and justified by the understanding, before they 
 can be safely adopted as principles of actions. 
 There must be discretion, as well as kindness, mer- 
 cy, and conscientious zeal, in order that an action 
 be useful and good. Indiscreet acts of kindness, be- 
 neficence, and pious zeal, may be, and will usually 
 be, injurious rather than beneficial. 
 
 When a man knows the whole ti-uth, he knows 
 how to make moral distinctions. Until he makes 
 such distinctions accurately, he is not duly enlight- 
 ened. And he must make them by the use of his 
 intellect. He knows nothing except through the 
 instrumentality of his understanding. All useful edu- 
 cation comes through this medium. All useful 
 preaching acts on the same principle. It must 
 address the heart through the medium of the un- 
 derstanding, or it is as water spilled on the ground, 
 which forthwith is evaporated and dried up. A 
 man is not well inteUectuaUy educated, unless he 
 is capable of readily making right moral distinc- 
 tions, and obeying them. A morally unprincipled 
 man must be deficient in knowledge. He does not 
 understand in what his own welfare consists. He 
 makes the great mistake of thinking that gain is 
 godliness ; that dishonesty may be profitable. 
 
368 
 
 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 " No man, having drunk old wine, straightway desireth new ; for be saith, 
 The old is better." — Luie, t. 39. 
 
 The meaning is not that old, stale, and soiar wine 
 is better than that which is fresh, well made, and 
 comparatively new ; but that wine well fermented 
 and of suitable age is better than that which is just 
 from the press and imperfectly made. Our Lord 
 here asserts a fact which was doubtless well known 
 and acknowledged. But was such an assertion 
 worth being made ? Perhaps not for its own sake ; 
 but the language is to be understood as figurative. 
 The real meaning is one more ultimate than the 
 literal. It appears to be this, that the new dispen- 
 sation, about to be erected, and now in its incipi- 
 ency, would be better than the old ; that Christianity 
 would be better than Judaism. 
 
 We are led to this conclusion from the connection. 
 In this our Lord makes use of several similitudes : 
 " No man putteth new wine into old bottles ; else 
 the bottles will burst, and the wine be spilled, and 
 the bottles destroyed. But new wine must be put 
 into new bottles, and then both the bottles and the 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 369 
 
 wine are preserved." These bottles were the skins 
 of small animals. New, fresh skins, being strong 
 and elastic, would bear the fermentation of the wine. 
 They would stretch and enlarge. But old skins, 
 being stiff and unyielding, could not endure the 
 wine's fermentation, but would break, and the wine 
 be wasted. Old bottles or skins are unsuitable for 
 new wine. Again : " No man putteth a piece of 
 new cloth into an old garment ; else the new not 
 agreeing with the old, taketh from it, and the rent 
 is made worse." Garments were generally made 
 of wool. By being often washed, they became fuUer 
 and thicker as they grew old. New cloth was 
 thinner than that of an old garment. Hence it 
 was not suitable to be put into it for the purpose 
 of filUng up a hole or rent ; because the new piece 
 would shrink by being washed more than the old. 
 It would then cease to answer its intended purpose. 
 New cloth, therefore, was unsuited to mend an old 
 garment. 
 
 Furthermore, in the immediately preceding con- 
 nection, we are informed, that " they said unto him, 
 "Why do the disciples of John often fast and make 
 prayers, likewise the disciples of the Pharisees ; but 
 thine eat and drink?" He answered, "Can ye 
 make the children of the bride-chamber fast, as long 
 as the bridegroom is with them? But the days 
 will come when the bridegroom shall be taken from 
 them; then shall they fast in those days." The 
 idea seems to be this : fasting is suitable for times 
 of affliction. Men in ease and prosperity do not 
 often fast. But it is when in danger and distress 
 
370 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 that they betake themselves to fasting and prayer. 
 Thus the children of Israel, when engaged in an 
 unfortunate and distressing war with the tribe of 
 Benjamin, fasted and wept in a great general as- 
 sembly before the Lord in Mizpeh. And in the 
 time of Jehosaphat, when the country was menaced 
 by a most formidable invasion of hostile Ethiopians, 
 — people, probably, of Upper Egypt, — the good 
 king instituted a special fast as a means of invoking 
 and obtaining divine help and protection. And 
 when the Jews were in imminent danger from the 
 conspiracy of Haman, Esther the queen and Mor- 
 decai and their companions fasted for the space of 
 three days. And the king and people of Nineveh, 
 being greatly alarmed by the preaching of Jonah, 
 observed a fast of so rigid a character that all 
 persons from the throne to the footstool clothed 
 themselves in sackcloth, and neither ate bread nor 
 drank water. And this regimen was extended to 
 brute as well as to man. 
 
 Fasting is an observance appropriate to times 
 and circumstances of adversity and sorrow. Our 
 Lord did not enjoin it upon his disciples; for they 
 were then in the circumstances and enjoyment of 
 great privilege. The bridegroom was with them. 
 But this privilege would not always continue. The 
 time was coming when he would be removed. 
 They would then be afflicted, and have occasion to 
 fast. 
 
 The beauty of a thing depends upon its adapta- 
 tion and suitableness. " A word fitly spoken, how 
 good it is ! It is like [painted] apples of gold in 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 371 
 
 pictures of silver." There were many things in the 
 old dispensation, which, though there proper and 
 useful, are nevertheless unsuitable to the genius of 
 the new. A different age of the world had come. 
 The human mind had improved by experience and 
 enlightenment. The Mosaic institute was distin- 
 guished by its numerous, rigid, general, and unyield- 
 ing rules. The whole service of God was a matter 
 of prescription ; the whole duty of man, laid down 
 in specific laws. He must do so much, and no 
 more. Thus he was made a kind of slave or pri- 
 soner. Repossessed but small discretionary power. 
 And these laws and customs, in many cases, were 
 burdensome, harsh, cruel, unjust, and barbarous. 
 The distinctive of Christianity is that of mildness, 
 utility, mercifulness, and liberty. The man is al- 
 lowed a large share of discretionary power. He 
 may adapt his conduct to circumstances. He may 
 govern himself by principles. The fixed speci- 
 fic laws of Christianity are few. It is the obser- 
 vance of principles, not of prescriptive rules, that 
 regulates the Christian's life. Our Lord Jesus 
 Christ did not rigidly observe the Mosaic and the 
 Jewish formalities. Hence he was accused of 
 being a sabbath-breaker, a wine-bibber, a glutton- 
 ous man, a friend of publicans and sinners. There 
 was a fi-eedom in his demeanor which to the formal 
 pharisee seemed to amount to transgression and 
 licentiousness. John Baptist was an ascetic, wear- 
 ing sackcloth of camel's hair with a leathern girdle, 
 and subsisting upon locusts and wild honey. The 
 pharisees wore broad phylacteries, and enlarged the 
 
372 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 borders of their garments. Jesus our Lord made no 
 artificial display of sanctity. He knew that pure 
 religion and undefiled in the sight of God consisted 
 in holiness of heart and rectitude of conduct. 
 
 The sentiment we have deduced from the text, 
 and which we shall endeavor to illustrate, is this, — 
 that Christianity is better than Judaism. That it 
 is such may be made apparent from the following 
 considerations : — 
 
 1. Christianity discards the inhumanity and in- 
 justice contained in some parts of the Mosaical 
 law. This law, being produced in a barbarous 
 age, adopted a considerable measure of the usages 
 of its times. Many of these were inhumane and 
 unjust. The penalties affixed to offences, real 
 and imaginary, were often unreasonable and cruel. 
 The punishment of death was more common than 
 any other. The statutes of Moses ordained that a 
 slight violation of the law for the observance of the 
 sabbath should incur the forfeiture of life. The 
 man who gathered sticks for his fire-hearth was 
 put to death. The woman who broke her conju- 
 gal vow was doomed to die without mercy. So 
 likewise the stubborn son. And the man who pro- 
 posed an alteration in religious worship was to be 
 capitally punished. If a man, not a priest, touched 
 the ark or any of the sacred vessels, he must die 
 for his transgression. If a man ceremonially un- 
 clean came into the sanctuary, and mingled with 
 the great congregation of worshippers, he must be 
 cut off, — put to death ; and these ceremonial de- 
 filements were easily and necessarily incurred. It 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 373 
 
 was done by the sight of a dead body; by touch- 
 ing a grave, or the bone of a dead man ; by having 
 the leprosy, and certain other diseases ; by any 
 malformation of body ; by being a bastard, a dwarf, 
 or a cripple ; by having the itch or a scab. And 
 the penalty to all these, for entering the sanctuary 
 or attending public worship, was death. A large 
 number of persons were thus excluded, and many 
 of them excluded for life, from the place and the 
 privilege of public worship ; and this exclusion was 
 for no fault of their own. Such a deprivation im- 
 plied a hardship and injustice. 
 
 Children and other relatives were often involved 
 in the same disabilities and punishment with the 
 offenders. When Achan was put to death for his 
 theft, his wife, children, and all his household, per- 
 ished with him. When the inhabitants of Jabesh- 
 GUead had incurred the displeasure of the eleven 
 tribes for not coming to Mizpeh, on being sum- 
 moned thither in order to consult about the war 
 with the tribe of Benjamin, an army was sent 
 against them with instructions to slay and destroy 
 man, woman, child, and property; and these in- 
 structions were punctually fulfilled. And the same 
 barbarity was inflicted on the offending tribe of 
 Benjamin. There was an indiscriminate slaughter 
 of old and young, male and female ; and the cities 
 of the tribe converted into waste and desolation. 
 
 In the first chapter of Judges, it is related that a 
 
 certain Canaanitish king, named Adonibezek, was 
 
 taken a prisoner of war. And how did they treat 
 
 him? They cut off his thumbs and his great 
 
 32 
 
374 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 toes. Agag, king of the Amalekites, in a similar 
 condition, was hewed in pieces, — had his limbs 
 lopped off, probably, one after another, and then 
 his head. And all these things were done pursu- 
 ant to the spirit, and in many cases the very letter, 
 of the Mosaical law. And the instances recorded 
 in the Old Testament of these barbarities are very 
 numerous, too much so to be given in detail. It 
 cannot be candidly denied, that the Jewish law 
 sanctioned a great amount of injustice and cruelty. 
 Their mode of execution was barbarous. They 
 killed a man by pelting and bruising him with 
 stones until he was dead. Such was Judaism. 
 But such is not Christianity. Its author specially 
 inculcated compassion, forgiveness, and mercy : — 
 " Be ye, therefore, kind and merciful like your Fa- 
 ther who is in heaven." He is good unio all, — to 
 the just and the unjust ; and causes his sun to rise 
 upon them both, and sendeth his rain upon their 
 fields and pastures. To a woman brought before 
 him, charged with the crime of adultery, he said, 
 " Go, and sin no more." He sanctioned no severe 
 penalties, no intolerance, no bloodshed. He speci- 
 fied, on different occasions, many passages of the 
 Old Testament that were exceptionable, and taught 
 a contrary doctrine ; declaring that Moses, for the 
 hardness of the people's hearts, gave them those 
 precepts. The apostles, having learned in the 
 school of Jesus, imbibed his doctrine and spirit. 
 They taught the lessons of patience under injuries, 
 forbearance toward erring brethren, forgiveness of 
 enemies, and love for all mankind. " Be ye kind. 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 375 
 
 pitiful, courteous, tender-hearted, forgiving one an- 
 other, even as God, for Christ's sake, hath forgiven 
 you." 
 
 2. Christianity is better than Judaism, because 
 it renounces its superabundance of ceremony and 
 its superstition. The law of Moses laid a heavy 
 and burdensome yoke of ritual service upon the 
 people. The sacrifices for the altar were very nu- 
 merous and expensive. The ablutions, both of the 
 body and clothing, were, in a manner, constant and 
 endless. The three annual festivals, at which the 
 whole nation w^ere required to attend, and each of 
 which continued for seven days or more, must have 
 been onerous and inconvenient. And some parts 
 of this ceremonial were even grossly superstitious. 
 There was the law in regard to the leprous house. 
 If the walls of a man's domicile exhibited spots 
 seemingly analogous to those on a leper's body, 
 the conclusion was that the house had the leprosy. 
 The priest was sent for to examine it. This he 
 did with great formality, observing the same pro- 
 cess as if he were examining a human body. It 
 was believed that houses were susceptible to the 
 same unclean disease as the body of a man. If 
 the priest, having gone through the prescribed for- 
 malities, pronounced the house leprous, it was or- 
 dered to be forthwith demolished, being regarded 
 as an intolerable nuisance and a dangerous plague. 
 For it might, by its infection, communicate its 
 plague to other houses, perhaps to the family which 
 occupied it, and the neighbors who entered it. All 
 this surely was a superstition. Nor was it an inno- 
 
376 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 cent one : it possibly caused the destruction of many 
 needed and valuable habitations. 
 
 And they had another superstition of a vastly 
 more barbarous and cruel character. The husband 
 was allowed to be jealous of his wife without cause. 
 Though he could prove nothing against her, nor even 
 give facts to sustain suspicion, yet he was legally in- 
 vested with power to bring her before the magis- 
 trates and the priests for inquisition. He might say 
 to them, " The spirit of jealousy has come over me; 
 I suspect that my wife has been unfaithful to my 
 bed, but I have no evidence of the fact." And, on 
 the ground of this empty allegation, the woman 
 was subjected to undergo a most degrading, painful, 
 and dangerous ordeal, like that of being tied up in 
 a sack, and thrown into the water; or stripped 
 naked, and caused to pass through the fire. The 
 priest, having abjured the woman, made her drink a 
 certain liquid, called " the bitter water which causeth 
 the curse." It was probably a description of poison 
 which sometimes proved fatal, but not always. The 
 person who drank it had some chance of escaping 
 death. It was superstitiously believed, that, if the 
 woman were guilty, she would be mortally poi- 
 soned, and die by slow and dreadful agonies ; but 
 that, if she were innocent, the bitter water would 
 do her no harm. Here surely was gross supersti- 
 tion and wanton cruelty. The process itself, made 
 in the most public manner, was scarcely less tolera- 
 ble than death. What could be worse, even if she 
 escaped with her life? But the chance might be 
 against her; for, guUty or innocent, the poison would 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 377 
 
 work its office. Even supposing that the innocent 
 always escaped with their lives, that could not re- 
 pair the injury done to her feelings by having been 
 made such a public example. And all this in 
 pursuance of the whim of a husband, who took it 
 into his head to declare himself jealous of his wife, 
 though he could not teU why nor wherefore. 
 
 There is nothing like this in Christianity. It en- 
 joins no burdensome ritual. The religious services 
 it demands are of the most simple description. 
 " God is a spirit, and they who worship him should 
 do it in spirit and in truth." It aims at mental en- 
 lightenment and spirituality; and its design is to 
 produce this effect by moral means, — instruction, 
 persuasion, rebuke, and encouragement ; by motives 
 addressed to the understanding and the heart. The 
 Mosaical law aimed to regulate the heart and the 
 life by means of rites, ordinances, and rules. It 
 proceeded on the presumption, that the observance 
 of these prescriptions would form a good character. 
 And perhaps this method was the best which could 
 at that time have been employed. Children, we 
 know, must be governed by rules. They do not 
 comprehend principles. But the time comes when 
 they are able to understand them. Judaism im- 
 proved under the ministry of the prophets. They 
 perceived that men might make a righteousness of 
 outward formalities ; that they rested on the means, 
 and overlooked the end. But the instructions of 
 the prophets did not eifectually correct the evil. 
 The tendency to formality proceeded on, and ripened 
 in phariseeism. The pharisees were just such a 
 32* 
 
378 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 description of men as the law of Moses was fitted 
 to produce. They kept the law externally; and 
 they thus kept it rigidly, scrupulously, sanctimoni- 
 ously. But it did not make them spiritual; it 
 did not arrest the growth of inordinate and evil 
 passions. They who governed themselves by its 
 precepts were inflated with pride, self-esteem, arro- 
 gance, bigotry, and contempt of mankind, instead 
 of being " clothed with humility," and filled with 
 the fruits of the spirit of goodness, love, peace, 
 gentleness, forbearance, and charity. Christianity 
 seems to have been indirectly produced by the re- 
 action of phariseeism. It corrects its errors. It 
 recalls the human mind back to the principles of 
 real goodness. It teaches that God is neither 
 pleased or honored, nor is man improved or bene- 
 fited, by mere external services, by sacrifices, ablu- 
 tions, penances, vows, mortifications, all of which 
 go to the construction of an artificial righteousness. 
 It teaches men that nothing is available in the sight 
 of God but a religious morality which consists in 
 heart-and-life goodness. The prophets had taught 
 this ; but their voice was not duly heard. The in- 
 comparable efficiency of Jesus, the Son of God, 
 to whom the spirit of the Father was given without 
 measure, was needed to enlighten and reclaim the 
 Jewish and the Gentile world. His mission has 
 been attended and followed with vastly important 
 results, with the most glorious success. For though 
 men have tenaciously and stubbornly clung to their 
 errors, yet the strongholds of superstition have been 
 effectively assaulted ; post after post has been sur- 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 379 
 
 rendered ; the darkness has been receding, and the 
 light making advances ; and the consummation 
 must come. Jesus will be king of nations as he is 
 king of saints. 
 
 3. Christianity is preferable to Judaism, because 
 it confers more freedom of thought and judgment. 
 It recognizes no hierarchy to control the opinions 
 and the practice of individual men. It virtually for- 
 bids such an institution. " Call no man on earth 
 your father; for one in heaven is your Father. And 
 call no man your master ; for one is your Master, 
 even Christ. And be ye not called Rabbi; for ye 
 are. all brethren." The aim of Christianity is to 
 impart unto every man that enlightenment by which 
 his own conscience shall become his own compe- 
 tent director. He is commanded to prove all things, 
 and to hold fast that which he finds to be true and 
 good. This liberty was not accorded to individuals 
 by the Jewish institute. In this the people were 
 instructed just what they should believe and do. 
 Its rules and statutes were specific. But small 
 latitude was allowed to private judgment. The 
 man was to learn his duty as the child learns his 
 lesson. He was rather passive than active. But 
 not such is Christianity. It furnishes the elements 
 of truth and doctrine, and then leaves the task of 
 working them up into rules and system to the in- 
 dividual man. And it exonerates him from blame, 
 from the condemnation of his brethren, for his opi- 
 nions' sake. One man esteemeth one day above 
 another; another man esteemeth every day alike. 
 Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. 
 
380 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 One man eateth meat [on holy days] ; another man 
 eateth herbs. Let not him that eateth despise him 
 that eateth not; nor him that eateth not, him that 
 eateth ; for God accepts them both. Because he 
 that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord 
 [he acts conscientiously] ; and he that regardeth not 
 the day, to the Lord he regardeth it not [he also 
 acts conscientiously], giving God thanks. Why 
 should one man's liberty be judged of by another 
 man's conscience ? To his own Master [in heaven] 
 he standeth or falleth. To him who acts from a 
 pure conscience, all things are pure [he is morally 
 unblamable] ; but to him who acts against his con- 
 science, all his actions are morally wrong. Happy 
 is he who is not self-condemned for his habitual 
 and deliberate conduct. Whatsoever is not ap- 
 proved by a man's own conviction incurs guilt. 
 He that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, it is 
 sin. 
 
 The gospel of Christ regards every man as 
 accountable for his own conduct ; and the condi- 
 tion of moral responsibility is freedom of thought 
 and judgment. It is only by enjoying liberty of 
 investigation that a man can arrive at an enlight- 
 ened conclusion on the points of truth and duty. 
 It is opportunity for free reflection and discussion 
 that brings forth improvement on the subjects of 
 morality, philosophy, and religion. An hierarchy, 
 consisting of a grade of authorities, exercising the 
 power of prescribing to the people what each one 
 must believe and practise, is a yoke of bondage. It 
 is a chain which cramps and confines the intelligent 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 381 
 
 soul, and renders it a prisoner. It bars up the path 
 of progress, saying to the voice of inquiry, " Thi- 
 therto you may advance, but not beyond ; at that 
 point you must stop, — cease to think, and only 
 believe." By the effectual operation of this insti- 
 tution, the human mind must be kept in a state of 
 perpetual childhood. It can never arrive at man- 
 hood. The errors of the times of ignorance are 
 thus fastened on all posterity. Man can never 
 attain to his proper stature. Science cannot divest 
 itself of its falsehood, nor morality of its vices, nor 
 religion of its superstitions. Judaism furnished this 
 iron yoke, but Christianity breaks it. It brings 
 forth the prisoner, and bids him go free. 
 
 4. Christianity brings us into acquaintance with 
 a God of greater perfection and goodness than 
 was the Jehovah of the Jews. His character was 
 marred with many imperfections. Though he was 
 called merciful and gracious, yet he was described 
 as jealous, wrathful, and unjustly severe. Though 
 declared to be good unto all, extending his tender 
 mercies over all his works, yet he is represented 
 as oftentimes furious, implacable, and merciless ; 
 though declared to be fuU of pardoning mercy and 
 forgiving love, yet described as visiting the ini- 
 quity of the fathers upon their children unto the 
 third and fourth generation, and as glorifying 
 himself by the infliction of the most dire, indiscri- 
 minate, and destructive judgments. He hardens a 
 king's heart, that he may deluge a whole kingdom 
 with plagues and distress. He deceives a prophet, 
 that he may have the occasion of destroying him. 
 
382 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 Now, if all mankind were indeed in the hand of 
 such a God, how wretched must be the condition 
 of the world! Christianity, however, reverses this 
 position. It brings mankind into acquaintance 
 with that Holy One, whose mercy is as great as his 
 power ; with One who would have all men come to 
 the knowledge of the truth, and be saved. Though 
 the Jewish prophets had announced him as such, 
 yet the Mosaical doctrine had generally prevailed. 
 
 5. Christianity gives to the world, instead of a 
 national deity, a God and Father of the whole 
 human race. Judaism was a national religion. 
 It recognized but one altar of public worship, and 
 but one people, whom he had chosen to be his own. 
 Although it tolerated the admission of proselytes to 
 partial privilege, it could not become a universal 
 religion. All nations cannot go to Jerusalem for 
 to worship ; and the burdensome ritual of the Jews 
 served as an impassable wall of partition between 
 them and the great mass of mankind. But the 
 reUgion of Christ brings all men into a paternal 
 relation to their divine Creator. With the God 
 and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, there is no 
 partiality, no favoritism. " In every nation, he that 
 feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted." 
 The commandment given to the apostles was, — 
 " Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel 
 to every creature." He that believeth and obeyeth 
 this gospel, whether Jew or Gentile, shall be saved. 
 There is no respect of persons with the God of 
 Christianity. It is not his will that one of his lit- 
 tle children should perish. 
 
THE NEW AND THE OLD. 383 
 
 Finally : Christianity stands on better promises, 
 and is inspired with better hopes. It brings life and 
 immortality to light. It promises a resurrection 
 and a future life ; the exchange of the corruptible 
 for the incorruptible, of the mortal for immortality ; 
 the dissolution of this house of our earthly taber- 
 nacle to be replaced with a building of God, — a 
 house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. 
 But the promises of Judaism were of an earthly 
 description. Its language was, " There is no know- 
 ledge nor thought nor work in the grave. In the 
 day men die, their very thoughts perish. They go 
 down into the regions of darkness and the shadow 
 of death, of darkness as darkness itself, where the 
 light is as darkness." Thus have Christians been 
 begotten again to a lively hope by the resurrection 
 of Jesus from the dead. As they have borne the 
 image of the earthly, it is promised that they shaU 
 bear the image of the heavenly. For, as in Adam 
 all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive. 
 
 In view of the preceding propositions and re- 
 marks, we have occasion to reflect that Christianity 
 has been much misunderstood by its professors. 
 They have erected hierarchies, and deprived indivi- 
 duals of that liberty with which Christ has made 
 them free. The Jewish law has been adopted as 
 the model of ecclesiastical order. The children 
 of the chturch have been put under the same kind of 
 bondage as were those of the Hebrew covenant. 
 They have been taught to fashion their faith and 
 their practice in accordance with the forms of doc- 
 trine and discipline given them. Ecclesiastical 
 
384 THE NEW AND THE OLD. 
 
 authorities have usurped the seat of the great Head 
 of the church. They have exercised domination 
 over God's heritage. They have grievously op- 
 pressed those virho, in all honesty and conscience, 
 have dared to think for themselves. They have 
 accounted men heretics and criminals for entertain- 
 ing opinions different from those contained in 
 human standards. Thus have Christians been shut 
 out from the enjoyment of moral freedom. Thus 
 have the errors, the ignorance, and the superstitions 
 of dark ages been fastened upon the generations 
 which came after them. All this is unchristian. 
 What has Christianity to do with popes and pri- 
 mates, with councils and synods, with creeds and 
 excommunications, with penances and indulgences, 
 with anathemas and canonization ? It is putting 
 new wine into old bottles ; it is mending an old 
 garment with new cloth ; it is wedding the virgin 
 bride of Christ to Moses, or Elijah the Tishbite. 
 
385 
 
 FASTING AND PRAYEK. 
 
 •Then shall they fast in those days." — Luke, v. 35. 
 
 Our Lord, in his discourses, chiefly urged those 
 duties which are things good of themselves ; such as 
 humility, pureness of heart, forgiveness of injuries, 
 trust in God, hungering and thirsting for the right- 
 eousness of the kingdom of heaven. These are 
 called moral duties, in distinction from others called 
 ceremonial, such as sabbath-keeping, fasting, prayer, 
 and attending the ordinances of religious worship. 
 The former of these two descriptions of duty are 
 things good in themselves ; they constitute actual 
 righteousness : but the latter are only relatively 
 good ; useful as means ; and, when attended to as 
 an end, fall into the category of formality and self- 
 righteousness. It was the great fault of the Jews in 
 our Saviour's time, that they had become religious 
 formalists. There was comparatively little need of 
 urging attention to ceremonial duties. The want 
 was on the other hand. Hence this peculiarity in 
 the discourses of our Lord. This omission became 
 a matter of notice and inquiry. They said of Jesus, 
 " This man is not of God, because he keepeth not 
 
386 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 the sabbath-day." To this allegation he replied by 
 saying, " The sabbath was made for man, not man 
 for the sabbath." It is not an idol to be worshipped, 
 but a privilege to be made use of and improved. — 
 Again, they accused him of immorality in eating 
 and drinking with publicans and sinners. This 
 accusation he repelled by pronouncing the three 
 admirable parables recorded in the fifteenth chap- 
 ter of Luke. He mingled among these men, not 
 for the sake of enjoying their society, but to do 
 them good ; to convert them from their sins. It 
 was always lawful to do good ; always right to 
 perform acts of mercy, usefulness, and truth, even 
 sometimes at the expense of disregarding the con- 
 ventional morality of the times. On a certain 
 occasion, the disciples of Jesus came to him, " say- 
 ing. Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his 
 disciples.'" This request seemed to imply a ne- 
 glect on the part of Jesus to inculcate the duty of 
 prayer. On this occasion he gave them that ad- 
 mirable formula denominated the Lord's Prayer ; 
 at the same time cautioning them against repeti- 
 tious formality, " like the heathen who thought that 
 they should be heard for their much speaking." And 
 again, " they said unto him. Why do the disciples 
 of John fast often, and make prayers ; likewise the 
 disciples of the pharisees ; but thine eat and drink ? " 
 He answered by saying, " Can ye make the children 
 of the bride-chamber fast while the bridegroom is 
 with them? But the days will come when the 
 bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and 
 then shall they fast in those days." The principle 
 
FASTING AND PRAYER. 387 
 
 in regard to fasting, inculcated in this passage, is 
 obviously this, that religious fasting is appropriate 
 to times and occasions of affliction ; that it is na- 
 tural and proper for men to fast when they are in 
 peril or in trouble. David fasted when he was dis- 
 tressed. The Jews fasted when they were in peril 
 from the machinations of Haman. The people of 
 Nineveh fasted when alarmed to a sense of their 
 danger by the preaching of Jonah. 
 
 But what is the design and the origin of fasting 
 as a religious exercise ? The design doubtless is 
 humiliation, self-abasement, a suitable concomitant 
 of prayer. When a person feels deeply afflicted on 
 account of his sins, he has no relish for food ; he 
 neglects his usual meals. This fact undoubtedly 
 suggested the thought of ceremonial fasting. It 
 might deepen the feelings of contrition and humi- 
 lity in the heart. It is nearly akin to ceremonial 
 mourning. - AH mourning, as well as fasting, is pri- 
 mitively natural. Both have their origin in nature 
 and in fact. Lamenting the death of a worthy 
 relative was a thing fitting and commendable. 
 Hence, mourning grew into a ceremony. A cer- 
 tain number of days were set apart for the forms 
 and exercise of mourning. Musicians and min- 
 strels were sometimes employed on such occasions. 
 Forty days ,of mourning are said to have been kept 
 at the tomb of the patriarch Jacob. The expres- 
 sion repeatedly occurs, " And when the days of 
 mourning were ended." A specific time was also 
 devoted to ceremonial fasting. The Jews in the 
 time of Esther fasted for three days and three 
 
388 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 nights. Daniel represents that on one occasion he 
 fasted during the space of " three whole weeks, 
 eating no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor 
 wine into his mouth." The pharisee in the parable 
 said, " I fast twice in the week." The advantage 
 of fasting resulted from the favorable opportunity 
 it afforded for devout meditation and prayer. And, 
 so long as it was observed for this purpose, it was 
 proper and useful. But when it became a mere 
 formality, and was observed for the sake of the 
 righteousness which was supposed to consist in 
 mere fasting, its proper design and use were over- 
 looked. Fasting lost its true character ; it became 
 a superstition; it grew into an enormous extrava- 
 gance among Christians in the third, fourth, and 
 succeeding centmies. It was the basis on which 
 the huge and unsightly edifice of monasticism was 
 built. The hermits were accounted the rarest and 
 most excellent Christians. And such is usually the 
 perversion of truth, when ceremonial righteousness 
 is substituted for moral, and even raised above it. 
 
 Ceremonial mourning and fasting have prevailed 
 most among people comparatively rude and un- 
 enlightened. As the amount of enlightenment has 
 increased among them, they have made less account 
 of them. This result may be accounted for, not so 
 much because they discover the impropriety of the 
 thing itself, but the uselessness of the superstitions 
 which have been associated with it. Ceremonial 
 mourning, fasting, and prayer, all stand on the 
 same original foundation. If any one of these be 
 utterly useless and improper, so likewise each and 
 
FASTING AND PRAYER. 389 
 
 all of them. The fact, however, is, that there must 
 be some use and propriety in them all, or they never 
 would have been adopted and practised. Every 
 phenomenon must have a cause. Every custom 
 among every people must have originated in some 
 want ; in some sense of use and propriety. Cere- 
 monial mourning expressed a feeling of respect 
 for deceased relatives, benefactors, and friends ; and 
 this was proper and beautiful. Ceremonial fasting 
 contributed to deepen feelings of contrition and hu- 
 mility ; and this also was proper and useful. And 
 ceremonial prayer was found to cherish and to 
 strengthen feelings of devotion, and on this ac- 
 count was estimated as useful and important. If 
 there are those who can, without any injury to them- 
 selves or others, dispense wholly with ceremonial 
 mourning, and also those who can thus dispense 
 with ceremonial fasting, there may likewise be 
 those who might wholly dispense with ceremonial 
 prayer. None of these customs prevailed among the 
 early generations of mankind. Men then mourned, 
 fasted, and prayed from natural impulses only. 
 And if they would return back to any one of these, 
 and wholly exclude the ceremonial, consistency per- 
 haps requires that they return to all of them. Let 
 them reject ceremonial prayer as much as they do 
 mourning and fasting. The argument against the 
 first of these is the same as it is against the two 
 others. If you allege that outward mourning does 
 not create sorrow, nor necessarily express it, the 
 same allegation may be made against prayer. It 
 does not change the mind and the will of God. 
 
390 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 Why, then, should we pray at all ? Is not prayer 
 wholly useless? Doubtless it is so, unless there 
 are good subjective effects. If the tendency of 
 prayer be to render the mind more conscientious, 
 contemplative, and devout, then it is useful ; not 
 useless, but availing. And the same is true of 
 ceremonial mourning and fasting. So far as they 
 contribute to deepen and to regulate a healthy sor- 
 row, they are useful. For sorrow itself may be a 
 good thing. Hence the proverb among them of old 
 time : " Sorrow is better than laughter ; for by the 
 sadness of the countenance the heart is made bet- 
 ter." 
 
 There are, probably, many who have very little 
 faith in the use of ceremonial mourning and fasting, 
 yet very strong faith in the availableness of prayer. 
 But is there not some inconsistency in this thing? 
 For if the power of godliness without the form, 
 if the spuit of truth without the letter, if the meat 
 of the nut without the shell, be the only things valu- 
 able and needful, then may every part and parcel 
 of the ceremonial be at once laid aside. Prayer, in 
 this case, must be repudiated as the natural sister 
 of fasting and mourning. To retain the first as a 
 thing good of itself, but to reject the others, would 
 be anomalous. But, if the utility of the things 
 determine their propriety, you may perhaps con- 
 sistently retain one part, and lay aside the other. 
 The subject now becomes wholly conventional and 
 arbitrary. You may mourn or not mourn, fast 
 or not fast, pray or not pray, just as you deter- 
 mine the use and propriety to be in your own mind ; 
 
FASTING AND PRAYER. 391 
 
 remembering, however, that you are responsible for 
 all your determinations and practices. For, as 
 mourning does not create sorrow, nor fasting neces- 
 sarily induce contrition ; so prayer cannot change 
 the mind of God, nor alter the course and laws of 
 his natural providence. 
 
 The time, however, has been when it was believed 
 that prayer could do such a thing ; that prayer could 
 shut up heaven, that it rained not ; that prayer also 
 could open the windows of heaven, and bring down 
 rain upon the earth ; that prayer could repel a 
 powerful army of invaders, drive away clouds of 
 destructive locusts, stay the hand and the sword 
 of the angel of pestilence, and convert abodes of 
 famine into a place of plenty. But such belief is 
 not now prevalent. It is now generally believed, 
 that God governs the world by a system of con- 
 stant and uniform laws or tendencies, by which 
 are brought about whatsoever comes to pass ; that 
 all natural phenomena have appropriate physical 
 causes ; that the only way to change the course of 
 results is to remove the productive causes; that 
 physical effects are always and only produced by 
 physical agencies. It was once believed, that God 
 interfered with the laws of nature, and sent upon 
 individuals and nations physical calamities, such as 
 wars, wild beasts, pestilence, dearths, floods, tem- 
 pests, earthquakes, &c. as penal retributions for such 
 iniquities as sabbath-breaking, idolatry, and injustice 
 between man and man; and that a reformation 
 from these delinquencies would change the tide of 
 war, arrest the depredations of the lions, the locusts, 
 
392 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 and the caterpillar ; would stay the progress of floods, 
 tempests, and earthquakes. It is now, however, 
 more generally believed, that reformations produce 
 their good results by the physical powers embraced 
 in them ; that all moral phenomena possess also a 
 physical character; that conscience and fear and 
 love and sympathy are physical as well as moral 
 principles ; that, though the physical and the moral 
 are distinct things, and often act independently of 
 each other, yet that they are intimately related, the 
 one sometimes running into the other, and the two 
 being often combined in the same faculty and action ; 
 that, under the constitution and government of God, 
 universal obedience to his laws would be necessarily 
 attended with peace, content, competent supplies 
 of things needful, general prosperity, health, and hap- 
 piness ; that an infringement upon physical laws 
 produces mischiefs which the strictest obedience to 
 moral law cannot countervail and resist; that a dis- 
 regard of the laws of health will be attended and 
 followed by sickness and death, however conscien- 
 tious and godly are the people ; that a skilful obser- 
 vance of these laws will generally insure health and 
 life, however wicked be the people ; that, in the 
 constitution of things, means and ends, causes and 
 effects, are appropriately related and connected. 
 Make use of all the appropriate means, and the end 
 is certainly attained. Neglect to use all the means, 
 and what means you do use will probably fail. 
 That there are good ends attainable by such moral 
 means as mourning for sin, fasting, prayer, and 
 religious faith. But the ends are appropriate to 
 
PASTING AND PRAYER. 393 
 
 the means. They may produce carefulness, con- 
 scientiousness, confidence, hope, courage, resolu- 
 tion, and perseverance. And these are important 
 facilities for removing many afflictions. But they 
 will never accomplish that for which they are un- 
 fitted and inappropriate. They will not change 
 drought into rain, noxious air into salubrious, frost 
 into "warmth, or famine into plenty. Yet devout 
 fasting and prayer may add much to the courage 
 and energy of pious reformers, who labor to en- 
 lighten and persuade an ignorant and a vicious 
 people, and thus be the means of converting dis- 
 order into order, dissipation into sobriety, sloth into 
 industry, and destitution into supplies. All forces 
 are fitted to produce effects. But every one " ac- 
 cording to its kind." Some forces are adapted to 
 produce certain results, but not others. In all cases, 
 the right forces must be employed, or all endeavors 
 will be ineffectual. Evils which have a purely phy- 
 sical cause must be remedied by the removal of 
 their causes. If the causes be indolence, indiscre- 
 tion, luxury, intemperance, uncleanliness, poverty, 
 and the like, the remedy lies in the virtues which 
 are the counterparts to those ills and vices. Those 
 neglected, all the fasting and prayers which ever 
 were among God's saints upon earth wiU avail 
 nothing. 
 
 We have already remarked, that it was once be- 
 lieved that idolatry and sabbath profanation procured 
 such evils as drought, locusts, caterpillars, and earth- 
 quakes. This was, doubtless, a mistake. And our 
 Saviour corrected it when he said, " Your heavenly 
 
394 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 Father is good unto all, sendeth rain upon the just 
 and the unjust, maketh the sun to rise upon the 
 evil and the good." All the agencies of divine 
 providence are constantly fulfilling their missions, 
 without regard to the moral character of men. 
 God has so wisely adjusted them in the constitu- 
 tion of the w^orld, that there is no sufficient occasion 
 for his supernatural interference. He certainly does 
 not interfere on occasions which we should judge 
 to be the most urgent and imperative. He did not 
 interpose in the case of the Mexico, the Lexington, 
 the Atlantic, and the Fredonian. And if no divine 
 interpositions in such extremities as those, where 
 can we ever expect to find them ? 
 
 But why did the ancient saints believe in the 
 facts of divine interposition and special providence ? 
 Must they not have had some reason for such a 
 belief? They certainly had; a reason that was 
 satisfactory to them. They saw, in the world of 
 nature and of providence, abundant evidence of the 
 goodness of God ; and they concluded that a God of 
 infinite goodness would not leave the occurrences 
 of time to the haphazard of chance. They saw 
 so much of righteous retribution, both iipon the 
 just and the unjust, that they easily inferred the fact 
 of a special dispensation. They had learned but 
 little about many of the laws of the divine econo- 
 my. They were ignorant of the exquisite perfection 
 of the world's constitution. It was to supply what 
 seemed to them to be the deficiencies of nature that 
 they brought in the doctrine of the immediate su- 
 pervision and agency of the Almighty Creator. 
 
FASTING AND PRAYER. 395 
 
 And, though there was much mistake, there was 
 also much of truth, in their views. It was a truth, 
 as they believed, that God reigns over the world ; 
 that he judgeth in the earth ; that the righteous are 
 recompensed here, much more the ungodly and the 
 sinner. But it was their mistake, that a special 
 and supernatural providence was indispensable to 
 such a divine government. It was also their mis- 
 take, that causes merely moral produced physical 
 effects, both for good and for evil. They were in 
 a mistake when they concluded that the greatest 
 sufferers were the greatest sinners. Our Saviour 
 corrected this mistake when he said, " Think ye 
 that these men were sinners above all others, 
 because they suffered such things ? I tell you, 
 nay." And some of the wise men " of old time " 
 entertained very serious doubts of the correctness of 
 the popular views on this subject. The authors 
 of the books of Job and of the Ecclesiastes were of 
 this number. They even seem to have repudiated 
 them. " All things," says the Preacher, " come 
 alike unto all. There is one event to the righteous 
 and to the wicked ; to the clean and to the unclean ; 
 to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth 
 not." " There is a vanity upon the earth, that there 
 be just men, to whom it happeneth according to 
 the work of the wicked; again, there be wicked 
 men, to whom it happeneth according to the work 
 of the righteous." This fact, though it perplexed 
 him, did not unsettle his faith in the moral govern- 
 ment of God. " Yet," said he, " surely I know that 
 it shall be well with them that fear God; but it 
 
396 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 shall not be well with the wicked which fear not 
 God." And he concludes his book with the asser- 
 tion, that " God will bring every work into judgment, 
 even every secret thing, whether it be good or evil." 
 And Job goes so far as to say, and to repeat the 
 assertion, that " God destroyed the righteous with 
 the wicked." He doubtless intended no more than 
 the Preacher did in the declaration, "All things come 
 alike unto all," designing to express the idea, that all 
 men are alike mortal ; all equally liable to the detri- 
 mental accidents of life ; to the pestilence, to dearth, 
 to the floods, to the thunderbolt, to the whirlwind, 
 to sudden death. 
 
 It is hence obvious that there was, in ancient 
 society, an under-current which moved in a difl'erent 
 direction from the one on the surface. This current 
 has been rising toward the surface, so that noM^ 
 most of the great ships are influenced by it. But 
 the customs of ancient society have not all died out ; 
 nor ought they utterly to die. There was much 
 truth at the bottom of them. Ceremonial mourning, 
 fasting, and prayer, are of this description. They 
 still hold a place in society, and will long hold it. 
 When a member of Congress dies, a resolution is 
 brought forward and passed that the surviving 
 members wear a badge of mourning for the space 
 of thirty days. And in each of the New England 
 States the governor annually issues a proclamation, 
 recommending that a certain day, which he speci- 
 fies, be observed as a season of humiliation, fasting, 
 and prayer. And the President of the United 
 States has recently issued a " recommendation " to 
 
FASTING AND PBAYBR. 397 
 
 the people of these states to observe the third day 
 of August instant, as a religious fast for the pur- 
 pose of imploring the aid of God to stay the ra- 
 vages -which the cholera is making in many parts 
 of our country. Some of the editors of our pubHc 
 journals have attempted to ridicule this official 
 document of our chief magistrate as being a return 
 again to obsolete ideas, to a worn-out superstition. 
 But our view and judgment of the case are of a 
 different kind. We stUl believe there is a propriety 
 in ceremonial mourning, fasting, and prayer. What 
 if fasting and prayer cannot change the mind of 
 God, nor alter the action of nature's laws ? We 
 can, by such means, hold a description of inter- 
 course with Him in whose hand our life and our 
 breath are, and whose are all our ways. Though 
 it would be an impropriety to ask of God what 
 we have every reason to believe he wiU not do, yet 
 there can be none in praying for things which we 
 may reasonably hope that he will bestow. And 
 may we not hope that it is the will of God to check 
 and to stay the " Asiatic scourge " which is depopu- 
 lating some localities of our country ? If it now be 
 alleged that fasting and praying wUl not alter the 
 event, we answer, that, when the plague shall be 
 stayed, it wUl be a satisfaction to us that we have 
 devoutly prayed for such a mercy ; for, in this case, 
 we have become better prepared and fitted to be 
 thankful recipients of the blessing. We may never 
 pray for the purpose of changing the mind of God. 
 But, in cases wherein the divine will is unknown to 
 us, it may be proper for us to act on the ground 
 
 34 
 
398 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 that our prayers might persuade him ; for it is on 
 this ground that we can come to him as to a Father, 
 " able and willing to help us." We can thus have 
 intercourse and communion with the Father of our 
 spirits. As it is our duty as individuals to acknow- 
 ledge him in all our ways, so likewise as a nation ; 
 for as a nation we are dependent upon him. And 
 we are made to feel it in the present visitation of 
 his providence. Though as a nation we are strong, 
 and can send forth great fleets and armies suffi- 
 ciently powerful to humble our enemies, yet we 
 cannot repel the destroying angel of pestilence ; 
 we lie at his mercy ; we are dependent on a Power 
 above us, and it is good for us that we acknow- 
 ledge it. It is suitable for us as a nation to bow 
 and tremble before God ; not as menials and syco- 
 phants, but as intelligent and accountable beings. 
 It is fitting that we adopt the language of the pro- 
 phet : " Doubtless thou art our Father, though 
 Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknow- 
 ledge us not. We are a people called by thy name. 
 Save us." 
 
 We repeat in substance what we have already 
 said, that we should pray just as we would, provided 
 we did believe that God might be persuaded by 
 our prayers. We may never pray for what it is 
 contrary to the order of God's providence to dis- 
 pense ; and, when we pray for things which it is 
 in accordance with the order of his providence to 
 confer, we may reasonably hope for them. Yet the 
 tiiought of obtaining things by only praying for 
 thein should not be entertained. Some devout 
 
FASTING AND PRAYER. 399 
 
 persons appear not only to have expected success 
 to their prayers, but have felt an assurance that 
 they had received specific blessings in answer to 
 their prayers. This we call presumption. It is 
 not the proper design and end of prayer to obtain 
 outward benefits which we should not receive with- 
 out it. If we knew that we should realize certain 
 benefits, — proper subjects of prayer, — whether we 
 supplicated for them or not, this knowledge would 
 not diminish the duty of praying for them. We give 
 an illustration. A son earnestly desu-es a favor 
 from his good father. It is one for which it is 
 proper that the son should make request to his fa- 
 ther. Now, if the son should say. My father knows 
 aU my circumstances ; he knows that I need the 
 thing ; and he will do it whether I ask him or not. 
 It is, therefore, useless for me to make the request. 
 Now, would this son act with propriety ? Would 
 it not be a mark of dutifulness, a suitable acknow- 
 ledgment of dependence, on the part of the son, 
 to go to his kind father, and make his request ? 
 Could he well acquit himself as a dutiful son with- 
 out doing it? Would not the mutual sympathies 
 of the father and the son be thus cherished and 
 augmented ? And the chief object of prayer is to 
 hold communion with God ; to walk with him ; 
 to be in harmony with him ; to demean ourselves 
 as the sons and daughters of the Almighty. There 
 is no impious impropriety in men's aspiring to 
 friendship and sympathy with God. They are, in 
 a degree, capable of it ; for man was made in the 
 likeness of God. His mind is an image of the 
 
400 FASTING AND PRAYER. 
 
 divine mind ; his soul, a miniature of the great soul 
 of the universe; his goodness, a reflected form of 
 God's goodness. Why, then, may there not be 
 communion between God in heaven and men upon 
 earth ? How accordant with this idea the declara- 
 tion of our Saviour, " If a man love me, my Father 
 will love him ; and we will come unto him, and 
 make our abode with him " ! 
 
 The proper use and end of fasting and prayer is 
 the cultivation of a devotional spirit; of a spirit 
 which acknowledges God, communes with God, 
 walks humbly with God, trusts in God, seeks earn- 
 estly and continually to be in harmony with God ; 
 a spirit which laments its deficiencies, mourns for 
 its transgressions, and ardently aspires to return 
 and be reconciled to Him from whom it has sin- 
 fully revolted. This spirit finds encouragement in 
 the Bible : " Return unto me, O ye who have back- 
 slidden ! and I will return unto you." " I dwell in 
 the high and the holy place ; with him also which 
 is of a humble and contrite spirit, and trembleth 
 at my word." " Behold, I stand at the door, and 
 knock: if any one hear my voice and open the 
 door, I will come and sup with him, and he with 
 me."