Preaching to Sinners by Gilbert Beebe

THERE is a general murmuring among the New School tribes, that the ministers of the Old School, or Regular order, do not preach to sinners. Let us examine this charge a moment. If they do not preach to sinners, to whom do they preach? If we be answered that they preach to the saints, we reply, that they only preach and apply the promises and encouragements of the gospel to that description of saints who know and acknowledge that they are sinners, and hope that they are sinners saved by grace. And is it not right to preach to saints? The direction is, “Feed my sheep, and feed my lambs.” “Feed the flock of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.” These they endeavor to feed and comfort. But do they not also preach to another description of sinners, viz; to sinners in Zion? Do they not warn the unruly of the evil consequences of abandoning the divine rule given in the scriptures for our faith and practice, and of running with the multitude into the New School operations of the day? Certainly they do.

Again. Do not the Old School Baptist ministers preach to, and warn the New School Baptists, and labor incessantly to convince the unconvinced among them, of the abomination of their way, while they profess to be disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, are laying in wait to deceive the people of God, and are teaching for doctrines the commandments of men? Do they not warn them of the awful judgments, and fearful threatenings of wrath which will soon overtake them? They certainly do. But, why, says one, do they not preach to that class of sinners who make no pretension to religion? We answer, they do preach to all who come within the sound of their voice, and leave all who have an ear, to hear what the Spirit saith to the churches; but where they have no ear to hear the sayings of the Spirit of truth, they do not attempt presumptuously to furnish them; nor do they feel themselves at liberty to preach what their Lord has not authorized them to preach, for the sake of accommodating their discourses to the condition of any class of sinners. But why should it be thought more important to preach to, and warn the class last described, than those who pervert the word of God, and bear a false testimony in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ? Are these less dangerous to the simple, less troublesome to the church of God, or less sinful in the sight of a holy God, or less exposed to that judgment which now of a long time lingereth not, and that damnation which slumbereth not? To what description of sinners did our Lord apply these expressive words: “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?” Was it to professors, or non-professors? It was to those whom he addressed as Scribes, Pharisees and hypocrites. And let it not be forgotten, that all the prophets of the Lord in olden time, were stoned by zealous professors of religion; our Lord was crucified by the most popular class of professors of religion then upon earth; the apostles and primitive saints, with all the children of God in subsequent ages, down to the present, from those who profess the most ardent zeal for the Lord.

If, therefore, we have in the ranks of the Old School Baptists, those who do not preach to such sinners as these, on all suitable occasions, we shall feel constrained to preach to them as sinners, for the wicked neglect of their bounden duty.

We therefore wish to be understood as calling on the New School sinners; (these being the worst sort) we warn them in the language of the scriptures, saying, “Ho, ye despisers, wonder and perish; for behold I work a work in your days, which ye shall in no wise believe, though one shall declare it unto you.”

ALEXANDRIA, D. C.,

October 19, 1838,

Elder Gilbert Beebe

Editorials Volume 1

Pages 457 – 459

Romans 7:2 by Gilbert Beebe

VERY DEAR AND MUCH ESTEEMED BROTHER BEEBE: - Will you please give your views, through the “Signs of the Times,” on Romans 7:2, and much oblige your brother in tribulation, if a brother at all.

William Brickey.

Red Bud, Illinois.

September 21, 1869.

Reply: The passage proposed for consideration reads thus: “For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.” The law of marriage which Moses gave to the Hebrews, as well as that law which was from the beginning, to which our Savior referred in his answer to the Pharisees, Matthew 19:3-9, was probably well understood by the saints to whom the apostle was directing his discourse, and his allusion to it was for the purpose of illustrating the redemption of the church from under the law, and her marriage to Christ, which was not so clearly understood. It was frequently the case that Christ and the apostles used subjects which were familiar to the saints to show by analogy the meaning of things which were more obscure to them. There are but few lessons in the gospel, which the saints have been more slow to learn and fully comprehend, than that of our release from the law, and marriage to Christ. The natural inclination of our carnal mind is to legality, to a system of works, and just so far as we are ignorant of God’s righteousness, like the carnal Jews, we go about to establish our own righteousness, in doing which we look to the law for a rule, and to our own strength for ability to meet the requisitions, and vainly suppose that we can in that manner commend ourselves to God. But the declaration of the Scriptures is, By the deeds of the law, no flesh living can be justified in the sight of God; And as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse.

The force of the apostle’s argument will more clearly appear when we consider the nature and dominion of law. Paul was speaking to them who knew the law, knew that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth. The law of the land in which we dwell extends its authority over living subjects, but cannot hold dominion over us when we are dead. So long, therefore, as we are subjects of the law which Paul in this connection calls a ministration of condemnation, and a law of sin and death, we are disqualified to be subjects of the law of Christ. No man can serve two masters. But if the law which we were under has convicted us of sin, and put us to death, it can extend its dominion no farther. If our sins were all laid on Christ, and he died our death, then we became dead to the law, and being quickened in the resurrection life of Christ, we are no more under the law that has slain us, but are under law to him who has raised us up from the dead. “I was alive once without the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died.” Still more clearly to illustrate this subject, the law of matrimony is used in the text under consideration. The woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth. That is, she is bound by the law of God. No human law can dissolve the relationship. Our legislatures may legalize adultery by granting divorcements, as they are called; but the relationship of husband and wife can only be dissolved by death. So stood the case with us in our relation to the law which held dominion over us, and which poured its curses upon our heads. No power could release us from its dominion, nor abate its severity, or shield us from its cursings. As long as we were under the law we were under its curse; and its dominion was so long as we lived under it. But when the law had exhausted all its wrath and vengeance on us in our Head, and we were buried with him by baptism into death, the relation ceased; the law was no longer our husband; the legal covenant, by its own well defined limitation expired, and left the church in her resurrection life free from Moses, free from the ministration of condemnation, and free to be married to him that is risen from the dead, that she might bring forth fruit unto God. “But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held, that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.” “Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to him that is raised from the dead.” David loved Bathsheba while she was the wife of Uriah the Hitite, but his marriage to her could not be legally consummated so long as Uriah lived. And Christ so loved the church that he gave himself for it. She could not be legally wedded to Christ in the New Covenant relation, until every jot and tittle of the law was fulfilled. The marriage nuptials of the Lamb could not be legalized until the covenant she was under to Moses was lawfully annulled.

“So then, if while her husband liveth she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband be dead, she is free from the law; so that she is no adulteress though she be married to another man.” As a woman who has a living husband cannot be married to another man without involving the guilt of adultery, so neither can we be married to Christ until we first become fully dead to the law, and the law dead to us. Such a union would be unlawful and adulterous.

The church under the legal covenant was in bondage, and the bond woman, in Paul’s allegory, was mount Sinai, in Arabia, answering to Jerusalem, under the Sinai covenant, in bondage with her children. Galatians 4:25. But whom the Son maketh free, are free indeed. He has redeemed his people from the dominion, as well as from the curse, of that covenant; and having removed the legal impediment out of the way, has betrothed her unto himself in righteousness. She is no adulteress in her marriage to Christ; for her obligation to Moses are fully, justly and righteously canceled; and Moses is dead, and cannot pursue her over Jordan; but Joshua is her leader. In the gospel covenant she is legally recognized as the bride, the Lamb’s wife. In the individual experience of all the saints, this doctrine is illustrated. The first perceptible evidence of a quickened state is that in which we find ourselves in bondage under the law, held there by an unrelenting and inexorable power. We have heard of the heavenly Bridegroom, the blessed Savior, and fain would we fly to his arms; but the law, our old husband, holds dominion over us; and until his claims are satisfled, we cannot be wedded to Christ. All our works of obedience to the law fail to bring us any nearer to Christ. All our efforts to liquidate the demands of our old husband prove ineffectual and vain. Nothing short of death can put asunder what God has joined, and we see, and feel, and acknowledge the power of the law, until sin revives and we die. But when the law has pursued us to death, and laid us in our grave, then Christ our Resurrection and our Life is revealed in us, and then we find that we are dead to the law by the body of Christ, that we should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead. Until Christ is revealed, the law holds us in durance, and pours down upon us its dreadful curses; its dominion over us is demonstrated by a flaming sword, which turneth every way, meets us at every point, and will be satisfied with nothing we can do. Tell us then, while thus sinking in despair, how easy it is to come to Christ and be his bride, while the very heavens lower in darkness, and the flaming sword of Eternal Justice is brandished over our devoted head, and we reply, No man can come unto him, except the Father which sent him draw them. With men it is impossible, but with God all things are possible. But when God reveals his Son in us, as he did in Saul, immediately we confer no more with flesh and blood. In the body of his flesh we were slain by the law, and in his resurrection life we are raised up in newness of life. His resurrection life has quickened us, and brought us up from the dead. Death is abolished, and immortality is brought to light. The marriage of the Lamb to us has come, and our heavenly Bridegroom takes us by the hand, and by all that is sacred, covenants and promises to love and cherish, support and protect us as his bride, as long as the days of heaven shall endure.

“My guilt and wretchedness he knows,

Yet takes and owns me for his spouse;

My debts he pays and sets me free,

And makes his riches o’er to me.

My filthy rags are laid aside;

He clothes me as becomes his bride;

Himself bestows my wedding dress,

The robe of perfect righteousness.”

Who that has been slain by the law, and raised from the dead by the resurrection life of Christ, would wish to leave his sacred embrace, to go in search of the dead body of Moses? Our dead husband never blessed, but always cursed us. Our living husband always blesses and never curses. The former required everything, but furnished nothing; but the latter furnishes everything freely, and demands nothing in payment. Then let us with cheerful hearts love, honor and obey him in all things, and never seek another lover.

Middletown, N.Y.

October 15, 1869.

Elder Gilbert Beebe

Editorials Volume 7

Pages 499 – 502

The Salvation of Infants by Gilbert Beebe

The doctrine of salvation by grace alone, as held by all consistent Old School Baptists, is the only doctrine ever published in the world that affords the least hope for the salvation of those who die in infancy. This we propose to prove by the most clear and positive testimony. All other doctrines represent salvation to be conditional; but the theories of men vary much in regard to what the conditions are on which salvation is to be secured, but all conditionalists agree that something is to be done by the sinner, in order to secure salvation. Some assert that the condition is faith and repentance; some that it is the giving up of our hearts to God, while others contend that a law of righteousness must be worked out, and “except we be circumcised and keep the law, we cannot be saved.” Some again represent the salvation of infants of rest upon the piety of their parents, and their work in having them rantized, or sprinkled into the pale of the church. Perhaps the most common theory among the Arminians is, that infants are not sinners, consequently are not lost, do not require to be saved. This last position is generally taken by conditionalists, to avoid the inconvenience and impractibility of showing how any infants can be saved on their conditional plans. Hence they set forth one way for adults, and another for infants. But if infants were not sinners, they could not die. “The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.” “Death has passed on all men, because all have sinned.” As Adam embodied all his posterity when he transgressed the law of God, all the human family sinned in that transgression. “By one man’s offense death reigned by one.” “Therefore as by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation.” - Rom. v. 18. The Scriptures fully demonstrate the fact that all infants and all adults have sinned, and as sinners judgment has come upon all unto condemnation, and it is therefore “appointed unto them all once to die.” And the fact that some infants do die, corroborates the testimony of the Scriptures, that all have sinned and are sinners. By these two witnesses the solemn fact is so clearly demonstrated as to defy successful contradiction. Certainly if it were not so, they could have neither part nor lot in that redemption and salvation which is by and through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Admitting, then, what cannot be denied, that all infants are conceived in sin, shapen in iniquity, and that they all go astray from the womb, speaking lies, the question arises, How can they be saved from sin, and the consequences of sin? Divine revelation declares positively that there is but one way. Our Lord Jesus Christ has said, “No man can come unto the Father but by me.” “There is no other name given under heaven among men whereby we must be saved.” If then there is but one way whereby a sinner can be saved, and that one way is Christ, then the notion that infants are saved by the piety, faith or works of their parents, is swept by the board. How strange the infatuation, that the piety and works of parents can save their infants, when neither can avail anything in their own salvation. For salvation is “Not of works, lest any man should boast.” As parents, therefore, cannot save their children, and God has said, If Noah, Daniel and Job stood before him, they could neither save son nor daughter, let us examine the conditional plan. Supposing salvation were offered to all sinners, on condition of something to be by them performed, could the infant perform it? Tell them that they must believe a preached gospel, repent of their sins, make themselves a new heart and a right spirit, that they must love God, reverence, obey and worship him, that they must give up their hearts, and that if they fail to do so, they must be damned, (for in this kind of language all conditionalists talk and preach to adult sinners,) On that plan who could hope for the salvation of a single infant? Very few, if any, even of the Arminians, will claim that infants can be saved by their own compliance with terms and acceptance of overtures, or even use of means.

Some contend that infants come into the world pure and sinless, and go so far as to fix for them a period in life at which they become accountable to God for their conduct; previous to which, they affirm, the infant is not accountable. To fix the precise time at which they cross the line, and become responsible beings, has been a matter of grave and perplexing deliberation among them. But in direct contradiction to this theory, the Scriptures of truth declare that they are conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity, and all infants and adults became accountable beings to God, as soon as God breathed into Adam’s nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul. To deny this, is an attempt to impeach the justice of God himself; for if in their creation in Adam they were not accountable to God, what right had God in justice to pass on them the judgment to condemnation, of which we read in Romans v. 18? Did the holy and righteous God enter judgment on any that were not accountable beings? Did, or did not death reign by one man, and from Adam to Moses, over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression? Most certainly it did; see Rom. v. 14. And could it have so reigned in justice over unaccountable beings? What daring impiety! What blasphemy then, to say that children come into the world holy and sinless, when the Scriptures, which are inspired by God himself, declare the very reverse.

Perhaps we have written enough for this time, in defense of our position that all infants and all adults are sinners, and by nature children of wrath. The object of this article is to give our views on the subject of their salvation. We have already said, and proved, too, that there is but one way of salvation for any of the posterity of Adam. To show then, that this one only way of salvation is perfectly adapted to the condition of infants, let us examine the doctrine of salvation by grace, and that in the light of what God has revealed in his word on the subject.

First. The doctrine of eternal and personal election is essential to salvation. We must admit this, or charge God with doing that which was not necessary to secure the salvation of his people. For the apostle has said, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ; according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.” - Eph. i. 3, 4. This was God’s method of securing his object, namely, that we should be holy and without blame. Arminians may think election unnecessary to secure our holiness and blamelessness before God, but it is enough for us to know that “So it seemed good in his sight.” And whether men like it or not, God hath chosen us (his people) in Christ, before the foundation of the world.

Second. As we have proven that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, and that the chosen people of God were all by nature the children of wrath, even as others, and all were under condemnation by the law, as sinners, therefore redemption was also indispensably necessary to our salvation. And we are happy to find the testimony, “engraved as in eternal brass,” that, “By one offering Christ has perfected forever them that are sanctified.” That he has carried their sorrows, borne their griefs, and the chastisement of their peace was upon him, and with his stripes they are healed.

Thirdly. Regeneration is indispensable to our salvation. “Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” - John iii. 3. And that birth must be “Not of blood nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man; but of God.” - John i. 13.

Election, redemption and regeneration, and every other requisite brought to view in the gospel of our salvation, are so essential to our salvation that in their absence, all, whether infant or adult, must forever perish in their sins. Now let us inquire if it was or is any more difficult for God to elect, redeem or regenerate infants than adults? Election being before the foundation of the world, must have been wholly of God, and in that matter the people chosen must have been perfectly passive, “Ye have not chosen me; but I have chosen you.” - John xv. 16. Adults then could have no more to do in effecting their election, than infants, for it is all of God, “Who hath saved us, and called us, with an holy calling; not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.” - 2 Tim. i. 9.

Redemption also was a work in which all infants and adults were equally passive. “For our Lord Jesus Christ is of God, (not of us) made unto us, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification and redemption.” We had no hand in this work. He, Christ, gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. Can there then be anything in redemption better adapted to adults than infants? Neither adults nor infants could have any agency, directly nor indirectly in their regeneration. None are so silly as to pretend that they were the agents of their own natural generation, and if that was impossible, is it not a still greater impossibility that an earthly, fleshly being could beget, conceive and bring forth immortality? That which is born of the flesh is flesh, nothing more, but that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit. “It is,” says Jesus, “the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing; the words which I speak unto you, they are Spirit and they are life.” But generation and regeneration imply a prior existence in a progenitor. Levi was in the loins of his great grandfather, Abraham, when Melchisedec met him and blessed him. And all the saints were in Christ Jesus, their spiritual immortal progenitor, when the eternal Father blessed him, and all his saints in him, with all spiritual blessings, according as he had chosen them in him before the foundation of the world. What agency could infants or adults, or adults more than infants, have had in that before the foundation of the world? But the inspired testimony of God allows no room for caviling on this subject, for, as we have already quoted, “They were born of incorruptible seed, by the word of God,” “Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man; but of God.”

From what we have said and proved, it appears that in all that is essential to salvation, the subjects of it are as passive in the hands of God as is the clay in the hands of the potter. The mightiest man that ever trod upon the earth, is just as powerless and helpless in the matter of salvation, as the feeblest infant that was ever inspired with human life, and neither the one nor the other can possibly be saved by any other than by the power of God. To all who are saved it is said, “For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast; for ye are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that ye should walk in them.” The hope and prospect of the application of this salvation which is altogether of God, in regard to its application to any of the children of men, is founded on the eternal purpose purposed in himself before the world began, and not on anything to be done by us, after the world began; and on the faithful pledge which God has graciously given. Hence Paul says, “In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began.” - Titus i. 2. “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” Can any child of grace ask for more?

“Enough, my gracious God,

Let faith triumphant cry;

My heart can on this promise live,

Can on this promise die.”

We have redeemed our pledge, and proved that the doctrine of salvation alone by grace, as held by all consistent Old School Baptists, is the only doctrine that can possibly save infants. But still the question returns, Are all infants saved? The answer to this inquiry God has seen proper to withhold from us, it is not our privilege therefore to answer it. Why he has not told us plainly, may be that from necessity on our part, we should trust the whole matter to him. The trial of our faith is very precious, and when we are called to give up unto his hands our little ones, our faith and confidence in him is put to a trying test. Job said, “The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; and blessed be the name of the Lord.” David said, “I was dumb, because thou didst it.” And our God has said, “Be still, and know that I am God.” Are we afraid to resign our infants to his hand? Why should we be? We know that he is too wise to err, and too gracious to be unkind.

We may take another view of this subject. Had the Lord plainly told us that all who should die in infancy should certainly be saved, would we not beg of him to take all our infants away in that state? But there is no saving virtue in their early death, for in their death, as in their birth, they are passive. The bounds of their habitation, as well as the number of their days, are with the Lord. It is infinitely better for us, better for our infants, and more sure to promote the glory of God, that it should be even so. The writer of this article has been called in the inscrutable providence of God to surrender four lovely babes to him who gave them, but he has never felt in the least uneasy about their future state. They are taken from the evils of this mortal state. And we do believe that God can and does regenerate infants as well as adults. That quickening power and grace which could reach the thief on the cross, in his expiring moments, or could impart spiritual life to John the Baptist even before he was born, can and does reach the dying infant. Without being born of the Spirit no infant or adult can enter into the kingdom of God, but that preparation being wholly of God, will never be withheld where its bestowment would be for the glory of God, or the best good of his saints. How ready Abraham was, when exercised by that faith which God had given him, to offer up his only son to God, and if we have that faith which Abraham had, will it not subdue our fears, and lead us to yield up our children, in death and in life, into his gracious hands? Living or dying, may God direct their course, and ours, and may his will be done on earth as in heaven. Be it our prayer that he may reconcile us to his will, conform us to the image of his Son, and save us with an everlasting salvation. Amen.

Middletown, N. Y.

December 1, 1856.

Elder Gilbert Beebe

Editorials Volume 3

Pages 405 - 412

All the iniquities of all his members found on him - Gilbert Beebe on 2 Corinthians 5:21

"He was made sin. See him whom the heavens adored arraigned before the bar of justice, now in the form of sinful flesh, with all the iniquities of all his members found on him, not merely by imputation, as some suppose, but by actual identity of head and body." - Gilbert Beebe

II CORINTHIANS 5:21

Brother Beebe: Will you please give your views on II Corinthians 5:21. “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” I am aware that you have many such requests from brethren and sisters; but I am so situated that I have no preaching except that comes to me in the “Signs of the Times.” The “Signs,” with my Bible and hymn book supply all I receive. There are no Old School Baptists within fifty miles of me, that I know of. Elder T. H. Owen is the nearest, and I have not seen him for eighteen months.

Yours as ever,

B. Newkirk.

Yola County, California.

April 11, 1866.

Reply: The apostle in the connection of this text is treating upon the subject of the complete redemption of the people of God from the curse and dominion of the law, the guilt and punishment of sin, by the blood and righteousness of our Lord Jesus Christ. That all for whom Christ died were sinners against God, transgressors of his righteous law, and, by nature, children of wrath even as others, is fully demonstrated; for if they were not sinners, no expiation of sin would be required on their behalf. This apostle informs us in Romans 4:24,25, that Jesus, the Lord, was delivered for our offenses, and was raised again for our justification. And in our context, verses 14 and 15, he says, “For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.”

Our views on this subject, which we believe are warranted by the scriptures, are that the immaculate Son of God, who was delivered for our offenses, was holy, harmless, separate from sinners, and higher than the heavens. He was a Lamb without spot or blemish, who knew no sin in his nature, or in his works. Shining in all the brightness of his Father’s glory, he was the express image of the invisible God, and he was and is the Lord from heaven, and filled with all the fullness of the Eternal Godhead. All the infinite perfections of the eternal deity were embodied in him. He was one with the Father, and he was in the Father, and the Father was in him. In his eternal identity with the Father he knew no sin. His will was and is the will of the Father, and that will is the supreme standard of holiness, according to which God worketh all things. On his unsullied purity and absolute holiness all holy beings love to contemplate; angels adore, saints extol, and devils tremble before him. If he had known sin, as attaching impurity to himself, it must have disqualified him for the great work of our redemption.

“For he that could for sins atone,

Must have no blemish of his own.”

All the victims required to be slain under the ceremonial law, and indeed all that were offered from the foundation of the world, as typical of Christ our sacrifice, including that of Abel, were required to be without blemish, to show that we, the church of God, are not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without spot or blemish, as set forth from the foundation of the world, pointing to that one offering wherein he through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, and by which he hath obtained eternal redemption for us.

This holy and spotless Lamb was made sin for us! How? By himself coming under that law of which he was the author and superior, and which his members in their Adamic nature had transgressed. “When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his own Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them (his members) that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.” In thus coming under the law he took on him the seed of Abraham. “Forasmuch, then, as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death; that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels,” (for angels were not in the nature of those to be redeemed, or to receive the adoption of children) “but he took on him the seed of Abraham.” That is, as explained by Paul to the Galatians, “If ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” In taking on him this seed, he took on him all their transgressions. “Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities (Isaiah 53:4-11).” Thus he was made sin, or, if we include the supplied words of our text, he was made to be sin for us. He was not made to sin, or to do that which was sinful; but in taking on him our nature, he took on him our infirmities; was made like unto his brethren (Hebrews 2:17).

Much has been said and written in modern times of the immaculate conception of the Messiah, as though his design had been only to take on him the seed of Abraham, and not their sins. But the very object or design was to bear the sins of his people in his own body. Imbodied in the seed of Abraham, which body was prepared for him, with that seed he stood identified, as its life, and he was recognized by the law and justice of God, as being responsible for their sins. Should a capital offense be committed by a man’s hand, would not the life of the body of which that hand is a member be held in law and justice for the offense? In the typical illustration of this sublime subject, the priest confessed the sins of Israel over the head of the scape goat, and it was said their sins were laid upon the head of the scape goat, and borne away. It is in this way we understand that Jesus was made sin for us. And he was made a curse for us, as it is written in the law, “Cursed is every one that hangeth upon a tree.” Mere substitution could not meet the demands of the law. To condemn and punish the innocent, or to justify the guilty, were alike forbidden by the law which Christ came to fulfill. Yet the head being identified with its body may be held for the transgressions of the body. The right of Christ to redeem his people, as the one nearest of kin to them, and holding, by virtue of higher claim, a right of property in the seed of Abraham, before they were partakers of flesh and blood, and before they had sinned, rests on their spiritual existence in him, anterior to their becoming partakers of flesh and blood; but his qualifications to redeem them with his blood required that he should take part of the same flesh and blood in which they had offended, that he might be recognized as being under the same law by which they were condemned. Hence he was made flesh and dwelt among them. With them identified as the head with its body; the life of the body was prepared for him. He was made sin. See him whom the heavens adored arraigned before the bar of justice, now in the form of sinful flesh, with all the iniquities of all his members found on him, not merely by imputation, as some suppose, but by actual identity of head and body.

He has taken on him that body, that seed, and in that body crushed with the mighty weight of all the sins, which with the body he assumed, the law with unabating fury pours on him the wrath that was due to the sins which were laid on him. An arbitrary act of imputation could not suffice. He is made sin, or made to be sin, for us. For whom? For the seed of Abraham: for his body, his bride, his sheep, his seed, his members, and for them only. “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit (Romans 8:3-4).” But we pass to consider the great purpose or design of this wonderful condescension and unparalleled humiliation of the Son of God.

We are told in the sacred word that God sent his Son to redeem them that were under the law, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself; to save his people from their sins; to redeem them unto God. But justification as well as redemption is contemplated in our text. Merely the putting away their sins would not secure to them the righteousness of God. It could only restore to them their original innocence in which they stood in Adam before sin entered. Hence to make the redeemed seed the righteousness of God himself required that the same relationship should exist between Christ and his members which we have found to be indispensable for their redemption.

Theological speculators talk of justification before God in a variety of ways. Some look for justification by the deeds of the law, or by the righteousness of their own works. But God has informed us that in that way no flesh shall be justified in his sight. As many as are of the works of the law are under the curse. Others speak of the righteousness which Christ wrought out by his active and passive obedience to the law. This was indispensable in our redemption from sin. “By the obedience of one, many shall be made righteous.” And so far as legal righteousness is considered, it is secured by the obedience which Christ has rendered to all the jots and tittles of the holy law. This legal righteousness redeems and saves us from wrath and condemnation, but does it qualify us for communion with God, for fellowship with the Spirit, and for an inheritance with the saints in light? Our text contemplates a higher order of righteousness than the mere satisfaction rendered to the law for our transgressions. “That we might be made the righteousness of God.” Much more than an acquittal from guilt and condemnation is required to bring us to God, and prepare us to stand before him in the perfection of his nature. God has told us by the mouth of Daniel that Christ should not only “finish transgression and make an end of sins, and make reconciliation for iniquity,” but also “bring in everlasting righteousness.” To work out is one thing, but to bring in is quite another. Without the former, the latter would be impossible. It was indispensably necessary that Christ should redeem us from sin, and death and hell; but having so redeemed us, it is no less indispensable that we be made the righteousness of God, and partakers of the divine nature. We are therefore assured that Christ is of God “made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.” This is the name wherewith he shall be called, “The Lord our righteousness.” “For their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord.” So then as Christ was made to be sin for us, in the putting away of our sins, and as he was made sin by taking on him the seed of Abraham, so the seed of Abraham are made the righteousness of God in him who is the righteousness of God. Christ is our life, and he is the true God, and Eternal Life. We are in him, and he is in us, that all his members should be made perfect in one, that the world may know that God hath sent him, and that he hath loved us even as he hath loved him.

Middletown, N.Y.

July 1, 1866.

Elder Gilbert Beebe

Editorials Volume 6

Pages 352 - 357

CREEDS AND CONFESSIONS by Gilbert Beebe

IN this paper will be found a letter from brother Conrad, of Kentucky, dissenting from some part of our reply to brother Buckley, of Alabama. We are sorry that our remarks have been understood as involving a reflection upon any of our churches or brethren, as nothing could have been more foreign to our intention. So far as we are prepared to answer the first interrogatory of brother Conrad, we believe the practice of writing a brief summary of the faith held, is very general among the Old School Baptist churches, but a practice by no means peculiar to them, but equally common among the New School, and nearly all orders of professed christians; but the practice we believe is not universal among the churches of our faith. It was not our design to denounce the practice, or find fault with the brethren who think them necessary, nor even to insinuate that such brethren as adopt them thereby reject the New Testament as a rule of faith and practice, or think that look insufficient (when duly understood) to thoroughly furnish them to every good work. So far from entertaining such an opinion of our brethren, or of any of them, we are satisfied that their motives are to guard against innovations, heresies, disunion and confusion. In coming together in church fellowship, nothing can be of more importance than harmony; two cannot consistently walk together if they be not agreed. One Lord, one faith and one baptism must be acknowledged, received, professed and practiced, to distinguish the church of Christ from the various branches of anti-christ. The fellowship of the saints also rests on the same basis as at the day of pentecost, when “they that gladly received the word were baptized, and they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” - Acts ii. 42. We are aware that many designing men, in order to lead the saints into some new theory, and away from the simplicity of the gospel, have commenced their work by denouncing creeds, confessions, &c., and have professed great attachment for the bible as an infallible rule; and others again, to bring about an unlawful amalgamation of the saints with the children of the bond-woman, have taught that a particular set of views are of little or no importance, and consequently all discriminating confessions should be laid aside. To protect the saints from confusion and disorder therefore, our brethren have in most instances, at the organization of churches, prepared and adopted a written declaration of what they understood to be the doctrine and order of the gospel, as taught in the scriptures.

But brother Conrad will inquire why “we, for ourself, are getting more and more out of favor with written creeds, confessions of faith,” &c.? In answer, we respectfully submit The following reasons, viz.:

First. The Old School Baptists are coming to be much less in need of written creeds to distinguish them than formerly, by their conformity to the New Testament as their only and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice; while every other sect and denomination are departing further and further from even the form of sound words. The time has been when the several branches of anti-christ professed as strict a regard for the scriptures as a rule of faith as the Baptists did; while at the same time they construed the language of the divine record to mean the very opposite of what we were taught by the Spirit to understand; but the time has now come in which they publicly disavow such regard for the bible as a rule, and take the ground that the scriptures were only designed as a general outline of what God requires, and that the ingenuity of man is to be taxed to fill up the blank, by co-working with God, in contriving ways and providing means for the more effectual execution of the divine will and salvation of sinners, and that many things, for which there is neither example or precept in the bible, are of more importance in the work of saving sinners than any thing which the bible contains. Hence a strict adherance to the New Testament is at this time a more prominent and distinctive badge of our peculiar faith, than all the written creeds and confessions that were ever written by uninspired men could possibly be.

Second. Our next reason is, that whatever written creeds have effected in preventing innovations and confusion in our churches, they cease to be effectual at present. A vast number of the New School churches of our acquaintance have as sound and unexceptionable articles of faith as ally we have ever found written among the Old Fashioned Baptists; and yet run as greedily after the error of Balaam as any of the arminians of the present age; so that the very creeds which were designed to preserve the church from a connection with heresies and heretics are used for the opposite purpose, and churches which have gone quite over into New Schoolism are retained in our associations, because they still retain the written confession of faith in their church book, and annually preface their associational letters with a copy of their original confession, thus rendering themselves perfectly invincible by fortifying themselves with the same confession of faith which we also hold.

Third. We are more and more convinced by our own observation that there is no valuable object secured by the use of written creeds, which is not equally secured to every gospel church by a direct reference to the word of God. Is it said, “But we differ in our construction of the word of God?” The same may be said of creeds; the truth is, those who would cavil with the scriptures would cavil with the best creed that was ever written by uninspired man.

Fourth. There is a very great discrepancy in the written confessions in use among those who are perfectly agreed in their understanding of the scriptures. It has not been uncommon in some of our association where the churches were in the most perfect apparent harmony and fellowship, to find in their different versions of the leading sentiments laid down in the preface of their letters an entire want of harmony. We have something like a bushel of such documents which have been sent us for publication at sundry times and from divers places; were they all spread out in the columns of the SIGNS, they would do for more to confuse and obscure the real sentiments of Old School Baptists than to elucidate and make them plain.

Fifth. Without imputing anything improper to brethren, churches and associations, the writing of a creed to be made binding as a standard of faith, does seem to us to imply what none of our Old School brethren wish or dare to say, viz.: That the New Testament is not a complete and sufficient rule of faith and practice to the saints of God. If complete, it cannot be improved; if sufficient, nothing more is required.

Sixth. The practice of adopting creeds written by uninspired men, did not originate with the church of God; nor is the practice authorized upon any express or implied command of God, or example of the primitive church. Nothing was required to identify the primitive church more than their strict observance of all things whatsoever Christ had commanded. A confession and profession of faith was required to be made verbally by every person on application for fellowship and membership in the church; on such profession they were received and baptized, and as long as they held fast this profession of their faith by walking conformably to the gospel, they enjoyed the apostles’ fellowship. And it is our honest impression, that the best confession of faith that can be adopted at this time, should be much more plainly written than with ink and paper; there is a way of showing our faith by our works, by our attachment to the cause, our submission to the government of Jesus, our love to the brethren, our close conformity in word and doctrine, and in faith and practice to the New Testament, more effectual than all the written parchments dictated by councils of good or bad men since the apostolic age of the church.

“So let our lips and lives express

The holy gospel we profess;

So let our works and virtues shine,

To prove the doctrine all divine.

Thus shall we best proclaim abroad

The honor of our sovereign God.”

A written creed may be carried in our pockets, while our hearts are far from righteousness; but the faith of God’s elect must exist in the heart, exercising its governing power over those whose happy privilege it is to possess it.

We cannot agree with our correspondent in his application of Romans i. 31, for we have no idea that the characters there described were ever guilty of breaking any covenant entered into by or obligatory upon the members of a gospel church; the violation of any contract is a species of covenant breaking, and as it is required of every one, in uniting with an Old, School Baptist church, to promise conformity to the New Testament, as the only infallible rule of faith and practice, any departure from. that rule, even by substitution of other rules, is so far covenant breaking, and any departure from the scriptures as a rule is so considered, and so treated by our Old School churches, when satisfied that such is the case, whether the thing in which the offending party has offended be named in a set of articles or not.

The confusion alluded to in the church at Corinth, (1 Cor. xiv. 26) was not to be prevented by written confessions, but by a strict observance of the directions which the Holy Ghost gave them by this inspired admonition of the apostle; otherwise, when they came together each might have a creed, each a confession and each a summary of faith, which might possibly differ is widely as the psalms, doctrines, tongues, revelations and interpretations of which Paul complained. This admonition goes rather to show the necessity of keeping everything out of the church that is not plainly authorized, than to show the necessity of additional psalms, doctrines and interpretations. Written confessions, as defined by brother Conrad, are written interpretations of the word, and show the peculiar doctrine embraced in the confession. Let each come together with his written creed, and what would they lack of the confusion which existed among the Corinthians?

Our brother inquires, if we were called to assist in the organization of a church, and we should find the constituents destitute of a written summary, whether we could report them perfectly joined together in the same mind, judgment, &c.? If we should find them perfectly joined in all things contained in the New Testament, we could. But, in our judgment, they might have a set of very clear articles of faith, and each sign his name and pledge himself to abide by them for ever; and still in our estimation lack that perfect unanimity which we consider essential to the fellowship of the gospel. We would not measure them by their written creeds, but by the measuring reed with which John was commanded to measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein; (Rev. xi. 1) and if we should find the city four square, having twelve foundations and twelve gates, and in all things agreeing with the measurement of the reed, we would not dare pronounce her deficient because she had no written creed other than the bible.

Brother Conrad entirely mistook our use of the words, “But who shall dare to say that the New Testament is not a sufficient standard of faith and practice?” in his inference that we designed to charge our brethren with denying the sufficiency of the New Testament as a rule. The church in which we hold our membership, and both churches to which we statedly preach, have written summaries of their faith, and we believe that it would be hard to find any churches in our country who more firmly believe that the New Testament is an infallible, complete and sufficient rule of faith and practice. So that according to his construction of our words, the charge would have fallen heavier upon our own head than on his or any of those brethren who held written confessions, without regarding them in the light in which he understood us to regard them.

It is true we do not regard the Old Testament as a rule of faith and practice to the gospel church, or our faith would still be looking for a Savior to come, and still we should practice the service of the worldly sanctuary, and perform the carnal ordinances of the old dispensation. With this distinction brother Conrad is not only with us, but has carried out his views in clearer language, in “declaring that the scriptures are the only proper rule of faith and practice, and in his profession of faith he only makes a declaration briefly of what he understands to be contained in the New Testament.” In this, if we understand our brother, we are perfectly agreed. We not only hold that it is lawful for the disciples of Jesus to declare frankly what they understand the scriptures to teach, but that it is their duty to do so; and this we intended to express in the words which he quoted from us, viz: “Brethren cannot too well understand each other in regard to their faith and practice.” Certainly such declaration does not require them to disown the New Testament as their only rule.

The want of harmony which brother Conrad inferred, between our remarks, and much of our published writings, and our practice, and above all, in what he understood to be an implied rejection of our brethren and their sentiments, is altogether owing to his understanding us differently from what we designed to express. If there is any implied discrepance between our doctrinal views and those of our brethren in Kentucky, and other places, we are not aware of it; and certainly our brethren abroad have had abundant opportunity to know of our doctrine and practice for the last twelve years.

In regard to Christ’s having quoted from the Old Testament, and Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, writing, &c., brother Conrad will not say that these were like the saints of the present day, uninspired men; nor do we believe our brother would be willing to give modern written opinions, even of the best of men, an equality with what was written by immediate inspiration of God.

Brother Conrad says all that we write or preach is our creed, and confession of faith, &c. Very true; but not in the common acceptation of these terms; in this qualified sense of creeds and confessions, we not only admit the propriety of them, but we consider it the bounden duty of all the children of God, as opportunity is offered, to declare verbally, or in writing, what God has taught them, and thus contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints.

Perhaps we have written sufficiently upon this subject for the present, and we sincerely hope that our explanation may be satisfactory to brother Conrad, and to all others who have been hurt with us. We certainly did not intend to start any new game for controversy. When we wrote to brother Buckley we wrote as we believed, and called on our brethren to examine the subject for themselves, and not trust to our views. Brother C. has complied with our request; he has written frankly, and we think in the spirit and temper of the gospel, and we hope that all that has been written by us both, may serve to edify, and at least lead our brethren to inquire at the holy oracle.

NEW VERNON, N. Y.

July 15, 1844.

[A Defective] "BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH" - Gilbert Beebe

BROTHER Buckley of Alabama has sent us a printed copy of a document purporting to be a “Baptist Confession of Faith,” desiring our opinion of the same. By whom this confession is made, we are not informed; but we sincerely hope it is not even an adopted child of any of our Old School Baptist brethren, either of Alabama or any other state. Many parts of it are as inharmonious with the scriptures, with christian experience, and with the general doctrinal views of Old School Baptists, as are the sentiments of the Mahometan Alcoran. It would require too great a space of our paper to copy the entire confession, but we will copy and remark upon such parts as we consider most objectionable. Let it not he supposed, however, that we approve of those articles on which we offer no comments; we consider the whole defective, with only a sufficient semblance of truth to decoy some well-meaning but poorly taught christians. Passing by the errors and defects of the first four articles, we will notice the fifth:

"V. Of Justification. That the great gospel blessing, which Christ of his fullness bestows on such as believe in him, is justification; that justification consists in the pardon of sin and the promise of eternal life, on principles of righteousness; that it is bestowed not’ in consideration of any work of righteousness which we have done, but solely through his own redemption and righteousness; that it brings us into a state of most blessed peace and favor with God, and secures every other blessing needful for time and eternity."

This article is altogether erroneous, and a perversion of the scriptural doctrine of justification. Neither pardon of sin or promise of life ever did or possibly can justify a guilty sinner; nor do the scriptures anywhere teach any such doctrine. To illustrate the subject, suppose a criminal convicted of the crime of murder, and by the law sentenced to die, should receive from the executive power a pardon, and with it a promise of life and liberty; would that constitute him a just man, and wash him from the stain of blood? Certainly not. He is just as guilty as though he were hung. Whether executed according to law, or pardoned and suffered to run at large, does not change his guilt; he is a murderer. Justification, in a gospel sense, removes, or rather takes away all guilt; and a justified soul is made as free from guilt as though he had never sinned. If pardon alone could justify us, the Savior’s blood was not required; it would then have been sufficient for God, against whom lie had sinned, to forgive the offender without reference to law or justice. But the testimony of the bible shows that the work of justification is that by which the guilty are made just. Therefore the blood of Christ was demanded, for nothing short of his blood could take away sill; his blood cleanseth from all guilt. While pardon and justification both occupy prominent places in the gospel, they are altogether distinct in nature and effect; pardon is an acquittal from punishment, but justification delivers from guilt. To remove the guilt from his people, Christ actually bore their sins in his own body on the cross, and put away their sins by his own sacrifice, was delivered up for their offences, and raised again for their justification. Justification has to do with the law, and required an atonement satisfactory to the utmost demands of the law; so that the law which held is in condemnation as sinners, requires that we should be set at liberty as just or as justified persons. Pardon proceeds from a satisfaction rendered to divine justice, in which we were personated and identified, in the identity of that body that bore our sins on the cross. In order to avoid the force of truth, the arminians would so separate justification from the atonement, as to preach a general or universal atonement and a limited justification, and so connect justification and pardon as to represent both accessible to all mankind and certain to none. Justification is inseparably connected with and based upon the atonement, and the atonement is predicated upon the right vested in Christ as the near kinsman to redeem.

The right to redeem captives belongs naturally only to those to whom such captives belonged prior to their captivity. The church of God belonged to Christ her Head before she had any being in Adam, and consequently before she went into captivity; being in a state of captivity, a ransom price was required for her deliverance. That price could not be estimated in silver and gold; in nothing short of the precious blood of Christ. Why his blood? Because the right of property was in him before the property or church were captivated. Had rivers of her blood been shed, it could not have redeemed the church, as the right of redemption belonged alone to Christ. The execution of the sentence of the law against the guilty upon an innocent sufferer, could not exculpate the guilty nor satisfy any law founded in justice; but, by virtue of pre-existing relationship, and indissoluble, eternal union between Christ, the Head, and the church, which, is his body, Christ’s one offering has for ever put away sin, and those for whom his sacrifice was made are freely justified through his blood, and completely secured from condemnation; for “Who shall lay anything to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea, rather that is risen again,” &c. We are brought experimentally into the knowledge and enjoyment of this justification by regeneration: but we pass to notice the next article.

"VI. Of the Freeness of Salvation. That the blessings of salvation are made free to ail by the gospel; that it is the immediate duty of all to accept them by a cordial and obedient faith: and that nothing prevents the salvation of the greatest sinner on earth, except his own voluntary refusal to submit to the Lord Jesus Christ; which refusal will subject him to an aggravated condemnation."

This article is false from beginning to end. In what part of the gospel are the blessings of salvation made free to those inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, who are now suffering the vengeance of eternal fire, or to that people against whom God has said, Reprobate silver shall men call them, for I have rejected them? Or that people against whom the Lord hath indignation for ever? Or those which were before ordained to condemnation? Or to those who stumble at the word, being disobedient, whereunto they were appointed? Or to those who like natural brute beasts were made to be taken and destroyed? The blessings of salvation embrace all the blessings of the new covenant, wherewith God has blessed his people with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, according as he hath chosen them in him before the foundation of the world, that they should be holy and without blame before him in love. – Eph. i. 4. Eternal and immutable love, stronger than sin or death; eternal, indissoluble union to Christ the Head of the church, eternal election, redemption, deliverance from guilt and wrath, regeneration, a new heart, a new spirit: love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness and faith, are among all the blessings of salvation, and how can they be free to those who are now in hell, or to those who die in their sins? The sentiment involved in this declaration is, that the provisions of salvation are made alike for all mankind, and the benefits of them made to depend upon the volition of the human will. But the words of God declare that it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth; and that all those unto whom power is given to become the sons of God, are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man; but of God. Deliverance from sin is one of the blessings of salvation, as we have shown, and if deliverance from sin be free to all sinners, may not devils avail themselves of it? The doctrine is preposterous and false. The gospel makes salvation free for none; it is a proclamation of that full, free, and finished salvation which God has provided for his own elect, whom he has saved and called with a holy calling; not according to their works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given them in Christ Jesus before the world began. – 2 Tim. i. 9. And it is equally false, that it is the immediate duty of all to accept the blessings of salvation; for neither salvation in the abstract, nor any of its blessings were ever offered to any being, by any authority found in the divine testimony. God has never offered to save a sinner; therefore it cannot be the duty of any to accept of what has never been offered to them. We read much of offers of salvation and mercy in the filthy creeds of arminian workmongers, but not a word of it in the volume of divine inspiration. The doctrine is of men and devils, and altogether discordant with the revelation of grace and truth, embraced in the scriptures. There is not a truly regenerate soul on earth whose experience does not prove the absurdity and falsehood of the doctrine. Souls that have experienced the new birth, have seen the time when they would have freely given ten thousand worlds, if they possessed them, for one gleam of hope that there was, or could lie any salvation for them; but as to offers and acceptances, these they knew were out of the question. And when they have received an evidence of their interest in the salvation of God, they have discovered that it proceeded from the settled, eternal and immutable purpose and decree of God, and not from any will or works of their own: but the article before us goes on to state in what way its arminian author supposes that the blessings of salvation are to be accepted; namely, by a cordial and obedient faith. The faith of the gospel which accompanies salvation, follows, but does not precede regeneration; it is the fruit of the Spirit and the gift of God. Christ, and not the sinner, is the Author and Finisher of it. It is distinguished from the faith of wicked men and devils, as that faith which is the operation of God; and that which works by love and purifies the heart. The sinner in his natural state is without hope; faith is the substance of things hoped for; how then can the unregenerate put in requisition that faith which none but quickened souls ever possessed? Is not faith itself one of the blessings of salvation? Yet we are told that the blessings of salvation are free to be received by all men, by a cordial and obedient faith; that faith is a condition of faith! What consistency! But the article goes on to state, that nothing prevents the salvation of the greatest sinner on earth, except his own voluntary refusal to submit to the Lord Jesus Christ. His being dead in trespasses and sins; under the curse of the law; under condemnation and wrath; full of enmity to God; with a heart that is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked, with a throat like an open sepulchre, with a month that is full of cursing and bitterness, with feet swift to shed blood, with misery and destruction in all his ways, and having never known the way of peace, nor the fear of God, with a carnal mind, which is enmity against God, not subject to his law, and which neither indeed can be; yet this article can discover nothing but a voluntary refusal to submit to Jesus Christ, in the way of his enjoying the blessings of salvation! How different the language of eternal truth on this subject: “No man can come unto me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him; and I will raise him up again at the last day.” Again, The natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of God, (and the blessings of salvation are among the things of the Spirit; for it is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing,) neither can we know them, because they are spiritually discerned. So this article of faith is not the faith of God’s elect, but is an article of the faith of devils; not however believed by devils, for they know better; but by devils invented, and by their seducing spirits palmed off upon arminians. But there is yet another heresy embraced in this abominable article, viz: “which refusal will subject him to an aggravated condemnation.” What strange confusion! Condemnation aggravated beyond that of the greatest sinner on earth! But as the legs of the lame cannot be equal, we will pass on to notice what is implied in this sentiment, viz: that the condemnation of a guilty sinner, by the fiery law of God, may be aggravated or enhanced by his rejection of the gospel. Now if this be true, the gospel becomes to that soul not only the minister of condemnation, but of an aggravated condemnation, and that in direct contradiction of the express testimony of our Lord Jesus Christ, who declares that he came not to condemn the world, &c. It is not for the want of repentance, or faith, or an acceptance of the gospel, that sinners are condemned and damned, but for being sinners against God. But we will pass to the article –

“VIII. Of God’s Purpose of Grace. That election is the gracious purpose of God, according to which he regenerates sanctifies and saves sinners; that being perfectly consistent with the free agency of man, it comprehends all the means in connection with the end; that it is a most glorious display of God’s sovereign goodness, being infinitely wise, holy and unchangable; that it utterly excludes boasting, and promotes humility, prayer, praise, trust in God, and active imitation of his free mercy; that it encourages the use of means in the highest degree; that it is ascertained by its effects in all who believe the gospel; is the foundation of christian assurance; and that to ascertain it with regard to ourselves, demands and deserves our utmost diligence.”

Election is truly the gracious purpose of God, according to which he regenerates, sanctifies and saves sinners; but this truth of God this article turns into a lie, by subjoining to it the declaration that God’s purpose according to which he saves sinners is perfectly consistent with man’s free agency, whereas the testimony of the scriptures is the very reverse: “Who hath. saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.” “Therefore it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth; but of God that sheweth mercy.” “Not of works, lest any man should boast; for we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained, that we should walk in them.” The doctrine of man’s free agency is not found in the bible. If man as an agent is free, he cannot be a sinner; if free, he is under no restraint or obligation to God or man. To be a free agent, maim cannot be an accountable being; for if he is an accountable being, and amenable to God for his conduct, he is not free; and if free, he has a right to do as he pleases. But it is not of man that walketh to direct his steps; and therefore the election of grace is not in harmony with the arminian notion of free agency; but is set forth by an inspired apostle as in accordance with the very opposite of what the workmongers call free agency: “For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, hot of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” – Rom. ix. 11—16. And after stating what the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, the apostle adds in verse 18, “Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.” Does this look much like free agency? But Paul anticipated how this truth would set upon an arminian’s stomach in verse 19: “Thou wilt surely say unto me, Why doth he yet find fault ? For who hath resisted his will Nay, but O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?” &c. Be it remembered that in these scriptures the apostle, by the infallible inspiration of the Holy Ghost, illustrates the sovereignty of God “according to election,” and not election according to man’s asserted free agency. There is no more harmony between the purpose of God in election and what is called man’s free agency, than there is between heaven and hell, or any other direct opposites. Another expression in this eighth article is, that the doctrine of God’s electing grace encourages the use of means in the highest degree! Now if what we have quoted from the mouth of God, that it is neither of the will nor works of men, that God will have mercy on whom he will, and that he hardeneth whom he will, &c., encourages the use of means in the highest degree, then is this item of the article well sustained. But the term means, when used in regard to procuring grace or salvation, belongs to the arminian vocabulary – it is not in the bible, nor is it in harmony with any sentiment that is taught in the bible. There are no more means used in the quickening of a dead sinner, than there were in the creation of the world. The work of salvation is as immediately and exclusively the work of God, as is the work of raising the dead, receiving the righteous into heaven, and turning the wicked into hell.

New Vernon, N.Y.,

March 15, 1844

(Continued)

“X. Harmony of the Law and Gospel. That the law of God is the eternal and unchangable rule of his moral government; that it is holy, just and good; and that the inability which the scriptures ascribe to fallen men to fulfill its precepts, arises entirely from their love of sin: to deliver them from which, and to restore them through a Mediator to unfeigned. obedience to the holy law, is one great end of the gospel, and of the means of grace connected with the establishment of the visible church.”

That the law of God is holy, just and good, is demonstrated by the express declaration of an inspired apostle; and that it is, as a standard of right, inflexible, immutable and everlasting, will scarcely be denied by any; but that the inability which the scriptures ascribe to fallen men to fulfill its precepts, arises entirely from their love of sin, is not quite so clear. If this position were correct, the very moment a quickened sinner is made to loathe sin, he would find himself released from all inability; a thing which all christians know is not true. “The carnal mind is enmity against God, it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Not simply because he loves sin, but because the law is spiritual, and the sinner is carnal, sold under sin. In this article, the writer and the holders of the doctrine betray a very confused idea of both the law and the gospel. They mistake the nature of the gospel, in supposing that one great end of it is to qualify mankind to keep the law. This certainly is not the case; for the gospel is glad tidings of great joy to those who are prepared by the quickening operation of the Holy Ghost to receive it; but it was never designed to enable us to personally meet and fulfill the requisitions of the law of God. If the design or end of the gospel was to remove from man kind their inability to keep the law, we must unavoidably come to one of the two following conclusions, viz.: first, that the gospel has failed to accomplish that great object for which Infinite Wisdom designed it; or, second, that all man kind are now able to render a perfect and perpetual obedience to its exceedingly broad commandments. Either of these conclusions would involve the most degrading and blasphemous reflections upon the being and attributes of Jehovah. If in relation to the first, God is disappointed in what he designed should result from the law or gospel, his wisdom is impeached. That cannot be infinite wisdom which would look for effects without providing an adequate cause to produce them; and if the wisdom of God did not, with infallible certainty, comprehend all things, the end from the beginning, it must be susceptible of improvement by the experiment of passing events; and if the wisdom of God can undergo any variation, either for better or for worse, his immutability is also involved; and as one of the perfections of God cannot be impaired without effecting all of them, the moment we take the position that either the law or gospel has failed to secure all that was contemplated in the mind and wisdom of God, we virtually say, with the fool, “There is no God.” Nor scarcely shall ye find less difficulty in taking the other horn of the dilemma; for if we assume that the gospel has removed the impediment to our perfect obedience to the law of God, destroyed the love of sin which, this article says, embodies all the inability of man, we shall thereby impeach the veracity of God, who has certainly denounced, at least, a portion of the human family as “Cursed children, that can not cease to sin.” And as God has said that the carnal mind cannot be subject to his law, even since the gospel, no man can assert that the inability of mankind, or of any man, to render perfect obedience to the law of God is removed by the gospel, without charging God with falsehood.

“To deliver fallen men from the love of sin, and restore them through a Mediator to unfeigned obedience of the holy law, is one great end of the gospel, and of the means of grace connected with the establishment of the visible church.” Now if this complicated jargon of sounds were true, instead of one great object (if we can count) there would be at least two, viz.: first, to deliver from the love of sin; and second, to bring into a state of unfeigned law obedience; but neither of these objects are presented in divine testimony, in a way harmonious with the doctrine of this article.

There are no provisions in either the law or the gospel to deliver fallen sinners, in the general sense expressed, from the love of sin. It is true that God has made ample and certain provisions in the purpose of his grace, to destroy, in his children, (the election of grace) the love of sin; and it is also true that a proclamation of such provision to the heirs of promise is one important announcement of the gospel. But it is well known by every heaven-born soul, that the love of sin is destroyed in the children of God by the regenerating power and grace of the Holy Ghost; and by nothing short of the Holy Spirit can this be effected, much less by that “another gospel” contemplated in the heterogeneous article under consideration: a gospel connected with what is called “means of grace, a cant phrase of arminians, but never found in the vocabulary of those who are experimentally taught of God.

But the work of the Spirit, in destroying, in renewed souls, the love of sin, is not, as asserted in the article, to enable them to obey the law of God. Christians, of all men on earth, are the most sensible of their utter inability and complete helplessness. But that Spirit by whom they are made alive, after destroying in them the love of sin, shows them the perfect righteousness of their Redeemer, Jesus Christ, as, not only commensurate with all the requisitions of law and justice, but also sufficient to elevate them above what they were or could possibly be as they stood in Adam, even in primeval rectitude. Instead of teaching them that they are now able to keep the law, it teaches the very opposite lesson; they are slain to the law, dead to the law, redeemed from under the law, and brought under law to Christ, whose yoke they find to be easy, and his burden light. But the “harmony of the law and gospel,” which the writer of this article seems desirous to establish, is something like the following: That man having fallen into sin, the law was given for his restoration; but finding that men would not or could not avail themselves of salvation by the deeds of the law, the gospel was added, as a second experiment, to aid man in saving himself by the deeds of the law, and thus both law and gospel, having the same end in view, are in harmony. Such delusive notions have their bearing to make graceless arminians preach a mongrel system, a workmongrel gospel; but our natural bodies could as well be fattened on winter fog, as the children of God could be made to grow and thrive on such a system of doctrine. But we will pass on to article –

“XIII. Of the Christian Sabbath. That the first day of the week is the Lord’s Day, or Christian Sabbath, and is to be kept sacred to religious purposes, by abstaining from all secular labor and recreations; by the devout observance of all the means of grace, both private and public; and by preparation for that rest which remaineth for the people of God.”

The anti-typical or christian Sabbath is not by any divine authority confined to the first or any other day or days of the week. It commenced with the gospel dispensation, and will terminate on earth with the dissolution of the world. The obligation of christians to appropriate a portion of their time to the social worship of God, is not predicated upon the supposed perpetuity of the Jewish Sabbaths, or a continuation of the Abrahamic covenant. The authors of this creed do not attempt to give any references to scriptural authority for their professed faith; and they find themselves as greatly puzzled to find any, as their pædo brethren are in proving that their infant sprinkling system was embraced in the covenant of circumcision. It is nowhere in the bible said that “the first day of the week is the Lord’s Day, or Christian Sabbath;” but it is expressly said, Let no man therefore judge you in meats, nor in drink, nor in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath; which are a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ. Those who have never been slain to the law, who regard the gospel only as an assistant to help us to keel) the law, are for ever grasping after shadows and always miss the substance. Their constrained service at the worldly sanctuary is tiresome; their language is, “When will the new moon be gone, that we may sell corn? And the Sabbath, that we may set forth wheat, making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit? That we may buy the poor for silver, and the needy for a pair of shoes; yea, and sell the refuse of the wheat?” – Amos viii. 5, 6. One day in seven is as many as such people can well afford to be religious in; and even that is devoted mostly to worldly business, such as school teaching, tract peddling, dunning and collecting money, selling sermons and prayers at a stipulated price, and wiping their mouths and saying they have not sinned. But such as the Son has made free from the bondage of the legal dispensation, have entered into that rest which remaineth for the people of God; Christ is their Sun, the light of his countenance constitutes their day, and all the days and hours of their sojourn on earth are not too much to be devoted to his praise. It is not a weariness to them, for his yoke is easy and his burden is light. They are not like the workmongers laboring to prepare themselves for that rest which remaineth, but they have already entered into it, and have ceased from their own works as God ceased from the works of creation and rested on the seventh day, and as Christ ceased from the work of redemption when he had obtained eternal redemption for his people, and entered into rest. But the wicked are like the troubled sea that cannot rest, for they continually cast up mire and dirt.

We have before observed that there are other objectionable things embraced in this “confession of faith;” we have, in accordance with brother Buckleys request, pointed out what we consider most objectionable. And as the items which we have dwelt upon are of general interest, we hope the brethren in other parts of our land may be led to examine this matter. For ourself, we are getting more out of favor with written creeds, confessions of faith, &c. Brethren cannot too well understand each other in regard to their doctrine and practice; but who shall dare to say that the New Testament is not a sufficient standard of faith and practice? We have received several confessions from Old School brethren and churches for publication, some of which have appeared in our columns; but with none of them are we so well pleased as with the book which God has given us, and the heavenly Interpreter, whose office it is to lead the children of God into all truth. May all who love the Lord be ever under his salutary influence, and feel in their hearts that they are not their own, that they are bought with a price, and that it is their privilege to glorify God in their bodies arid spirits which are his.

New Vernon, N.Y.,

April 15, 1844

Romans 7:25 by Gilbert Beebe

Romans 7:25
by Gilbert Beebe

“So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.” – Rom. vii. 25.

If Paul had in him these two opposite principles, and both so identified with his person that with the one he himself served the law of God, and with the other at the same time he himself served the law of sin, was he like all other christians in these respects? Have all christians in them a mind with which they themselves serve the law of God, or can any man be a christian who has nut such a mind? And have all christians, like Paul, a principle or law in their members which is at war with this law of sin? Or is the flesh of some christians so purified by regeneration that they are unlike Paul, and have no wicked propensities in their flesh whereby they serve the law of sin?

WHAT IS THE GOSPEL AND TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED by Gilbert Beebe

WHAT IS THE GOSPEL AND TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED
by Gilbert Beebe

From Signs of the Times -February 15, 1869.

There is, and long has been, much controversy between legalists and the disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ, not only as to what the gospel is, but also in regard to whom it is or should be addressed. If all the parties engaged in the controversy could understand the scriptural signification of the word, those who are now zealously contending for a universal application of it to all mankind indiscriminately, would desire rather to restrict than to extend its application, as they have ever exerted themselves to suppress its publication. What they call gospel differs very widely from what Christ and the holy apostles proclaimed in the primitive days of the gospel church. Our Redeemer encountered the same class of zealous fanatics, who compassed sea and land to disseminate their false gospel, but a perversion of the gospel of Christ; and exposing and denouncing their hypocrisy charged them with teaching for doctrines, the commandments of men. The voluntary religious institutions originated and enjoined by men without any divine authority from God are now very widely taught and greedily received by graceless men, and such teaching is by them dignified with the name of gospel. Their preachers may entertain conflicting opinions in regard to what is contained in the Scriptures, for the doctrine of the Bible and the laws and institutions of Christ are regarded by them as minor points, while opposite sects can freely unite in opposing the doctrine of Christ, and in the propagation of any or all of the inventions of men. They can and do, with much seeming cordiality, take each other by the hand, and with wonderful reciprocity compliment each other as “truly evangelical,” while in truth there are but two points in which they are really agreed among themselves; the one is that salvation is attainable by works, and the other is in denouncing the Old Primitive order of Baptists. As to precisely what works will secure salvation, and by what mode of warfare they should fight the Old Baptists, they may differ widely without interruption of fellowship. What they call gospel may be obtained in any quantity from the schools of men, in which every man is engaged in teaching his brother and neighbor, saying, “Know the Lord.” From Infant and Sabbath Schools, and Bible Classes, as well as from Theological Seminaries; from books and tracts, and various other sources, they can procure all of that kind of delusion which they call gospel in indefinite quantities. We would by no means misrepresent them; but we have failed to understand their language, if what they call gospel is not with them an article of commerce. Do they not propose to send it to the heathen; to Burma, Hindostan, and to all the distant islands where they can find a profitable market? They gravely tell us, in a business way, what amount of capital must be invested, what number of men and amount of money, how many ships and seamen must be employed, and how long it will take to supply the world.

What of their falsely called gospel they retain for home consumption, if we may judge from ruling prices, ought to be superior to what they ship to foreign markets, as those who retail it from their pulpits at home frequently amass large sums by this traffic.

To make their false gospel salable, they must, of course, adapt it to the taste of all. Those who have no ears to hear what the Spirit saith to the churches, have no difficulty in hearing the doctrines of men; hence there is a great cry about preaching to sinners. Their doctrine is precisely what unconverted sinners can feast upon; for instead of being told that they are condemned already and the wrath of God abideth on them, they are told that they are probationers, free agents, and have ability to move by their prayers the power that moves the world. Instead of being told that “No man can come to the Father but by Christ,” and that “No man can come to Christ except the Father draw him,” they are told that they can do a great deal for the Lord. And this is profanely called preaching the gospel to sinners. While with an air of affected superiority, they charge the Old order of Baptists, that we do not preach the gospel to sinners, while they themselves do not preach a word of gospel to saints or sinners. It is not gospel to utter falsehood in the name of the Lord; there is no gospel in telling men what they can and must do, or be damned. To call on dead sinners to repent and believe the gospel implies ability in them to do so, whereas the gospel proclaims that Christ is exalted to be a Prince and a Savior, to give repentance to Israel and the forgiveness of sins. It is as exclusively the work of our exalted Savior to give repentance as it is to forgive sins, and the dead sinner can no more do the one than the other. True repentance which is unto life and needeth not to be repented of, must proceed from life. If the repentance be spiritual it proceeds from a spiritual source, and must be preceded by the quickening Spirit of God. The sorrow of the world worketh death; but godly sorrow worketh repentance unto life; and to be godly, in distinction from the sorrow of the world, it must come from God, it must be given by the exalted Prince and Savior. Faith is also the gift of God, Jesus Christ is the author and finisher of it, if it be genuine; for it is not the faith of the creature, but it is the faith of the Son of God, and without it no man can please God. Paul says, It is not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast. To preach the opposite to what the inspired Scriptures teach, is not preaching the gospel to saints, nor to sinners.

But we propose to show how the Scriptures define the word gospel. Compare Isaiah 61:1, with Luke 4:18, and you will see that what is by the prophet called good tidings, is by our Lord rendered gospel, and to prevent any caviling, the good tidings in the prophecy, and the gospel in its fulfillment, are defined to mean, good tidings to the meek - “to bind up the broken hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and opening of the prison to them that are bound; to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God, to comfort all that mourn. To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified.” Observe who these meek, poor, broken-hearted, prisoners are, and what gospel is preached to them. The Spirit of the Lord God qualifies those on whom it is poured, to follow the blessed Savior in preaching good tidings, or gospel, to the meek; not to the proud, haughty, and self-righteous. It proclaims liberty, not to free agents who were never in bondage, who have all the religion they live for, and could have as much more if they pleased to work for it. The poor broken hearted, helpless prisoner hails with joy the tidings that proclaims his release from prison. But how could the same tidings be joyful, or gospel, to those who are not poor, nor captive, nor broken hearted, nor meek? When Jesus said to the poor dying thief, “This day thou shalt be with me in Paradise,” we cannot doubt it was good tidings to him. But would the same words, if spoken to his murderers who were reviling him, been appreciated as gospel tidings? The gospel is discriminating; it finds out the “humbled sinner in whose breast a thousand thoughts revolve.” You who complain of the Old Baptists, that we do not preach the gospel to sinners, would you have us, if we meet a band of robbers, pirates or murderers, say to them, in gospel terms, “Fear not, little flock; it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom?” Or to a company of Atheists, “Let not your heart be troubled; ye believe in God, believe also in Jesus?” If this is not what they mean by preaching the gospel to sinners, how far short of this do they come, when they address the most blessed and sacred assurances which Christ gave to the meek, the poor in spirit, the pure in heart, the peace makers, and the persecuted saints, to unconverted sinners, as an inducement to them to “get religion,” saying to them, Seek, and ye shall find; Knock, and it shall be opened unto you; Ask, and it shall be given to you? Not one of these gracious promises were ever addressed by our Lord or any minister of his to any but to quickened subjects of his saving grace. Instead then of preaching the gospel to saints or sinners, they pervert the gospel, in attempting to give the children’s bread unto dogs, in direct defiance of the special command of Jesus Christ, who positively forbid that that which is holy should be given to the dogs. By their artful misapplication of the Scriptures, they are charged by an apostle with “turning the truth of God into a lie,” by making the Scriptures seem to say what they do not say; and so by handling the word of God deceitfully, they not only lead the blind into the ditch, but frequently perplex and worry many of the unsuspecting honest hearted enquirers after truth. We have at this moment a case before us that is in point. An esteemed and dear friend who has long been held in captivity among the New School Baptists, has recently withdrawn from their communion, writes us that there is still one point of difference in which she cannot yet feel satisfied that the Old order of Baptists are right, and that is the point which we are now discussing; namely, that our pastors confine their addresses to the churches, or in other words, do not preach the gospel to sinners, and she refers us to the parable of the king’s son as favoring her position, or as being in the way of her accepting the views supposed to be held by us.

Without digression from the theme of this article, we will examine the objection to what is supposed to be our views, and the bearing of the parable upon the subject.

First, we will correct a misapprehension of the position and practice of the ministers of our order. While we believe and preach the gospel, as Christ and his apostles did, wherever a door is open for that purpose, openly addressing our preaching to every one within the sound of our voice, the gospel which we preach discriminates between the living and the dead. It is a savor of life unto life, to those who are quickened by the Holy Ghost, and a savor of death unto death, to them that perish. It is “to the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.” And if our preaching is not a savor of death unto death to the ungodly, and a stumbling block to the Jews, and foolishness to the Greeks, and if it be not a savor of life to the quickened, and if it be not to them that are called, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God, then it is not apostolic preaching. Who ever knew an Old School Baptist to refuse to preach the gospel to any but saints? We cannot search the hearts or try the reins of those to whom we preach; but the word which we preach makes the discrimination; for it is quick and powerful, sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart; neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight; but all things are naked and open unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do, (Heb. 4:12,13). The gospel which we preach is good tidings to the meek; but if any part of our audience are not meek, it is not gospel, or good tidings to them. All who have an ear to hear, are more than welcome to hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. But if any have not hearing ears, the preachers cannot supply them; for the hearing ear and understanding heart are of the Lord. The Son of God alone has power to cause the dead to hear his voice and live; for the words which he speaks to them, they are spirit, and they are life. Therefore his sheep hear his voice, and he knows them, and they follow him; for he gives to them eternal life, and they shall never perish. He, and he alone has power over all flesh that he should give eternal life to as many as the Father has given him. All this the Old Baptists preach to every creature. But we do not give the children’s bread to any but the children, nor do we give what belongs to the dogs to the children.

But let us examine the parable of the marriage of the king’s son, (Matt. 22:1-14). Unto whom, and for what purpose was it spoken by our Lord, and why spoken in parable? The context will show that it was addressed to the Jews, including the Pharisees, who were so much enraged on hearing it, that they went and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk, (see v. 15). As whatsoever God speaks is certain to secure the object for which it is spoken, (Isa. 55:11). What was accomplished by this parable shows conclusively for what purpose it was spoken. And the reason why he spake to all but his saints in parables, is given in his own words to his disciples, in Luke 8:10. “And his disciples asked him, saying, What might this parable be?” Alluding to the parable of a sower, “And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God; but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.” We must reject Christ’s own explanation of his reason for using parables, or admit that this parable was spoken expressly to discriminate between his disciples to whom was given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, and all others from whom that gift was withheld, and by the inscrutable purpose of God all but the disciples, in seeing should not see, and hearing should not understand. Instead of his parables being used to elucidate, illustrate, and make the mysteries of the kingdom of God clear and plain to the understanding of the ungodly, they were designed to make them the more obscure, that they might be a stumbling block to the Jews, and folly to the Greeks. “Therefore Jesus rejoiced in spirit, when he said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hidden these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father, for so it seemeth good in thy sight.” Perhaps our esteemed friend will perceive that neither this nor any other parable, correctly understood, will sustain the position taken, that the address of the ministers of Christ should be indiscriminate. The same gospel preaching which elucidates the mysteries to the saints on whom the heavenly gift is bestowed, involves them in parabolic obscurity to all but such. Still the question may return, What does the parable mean? We have already shown that it was intended like all the parables to baffle the wisdom of the Scribes, Pharisees and work mongers of that and of all subsequent ages, and bring down their lofty imagination, humble the pride of man, and cause that none should glory, only in the Lord. It was nevertheless full of wholesome instruction to those to whom it was given to know the mysteries of the kingdom. The kingdom of God, which in this parable or similitude is compared to a king who made a marriage for his son, embraces Christ and his people in both the legal and then prospective dispensations. The marriage of the king’s son represents the public espousal, and marriage of Christ and his bride, the church, which was then about to be consummated, according to prophecy. The oxen and fatlings, representing all the sacrifices under the law, had been killed, and the Bridegroom had come to redeem his bride from under the law, that she might be identified with him in his resurrection from the dead. The marriage festivities, or feast, was now about to be spread, in the opening of the gospel dispensation. The Jews, as a nation or people, had been notified and bidden to the marriage by the prophets, and they had professed to be anxiously awaiting the coming of the Bridegroom and announcement of the feast. “The law and the prophets were until John.” John the Baptist had announced the advent of Christ as the Bridegroom, saying, “He that hath the bride, is the Bridegroom; but the friend of the Bridegroom rejoiceth because of the Bridegroom’s voice: thus my joy is fulfilled.” John’s mission was to make ready a people prepared of the Lord. Seventy servants had been sent to announce to the commonwealth of Israel that the feast was prepared; but they were not ready to leave Judaism, nor had they any disposition to embrace Christianity. These servants had been forbidden to go with this proclamation to any but those Jews which had been bidden by the prophets. “Go ye not in the way of the Gentiles,” nor into any city, even of the Samaritans were they not to enter, but to go exclusively to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. “But they made light of it.” He came to his own, and his own received him not. He grew up among them as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground; he hath no form, nor comeliness; and when they saw him there was no beauty or attraction for them to desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not, (Isa. 53:1-3). Again other servants, the apostles, were sent out, with the same charge to go only to the Jews which were bidden; but they made no serious matter of it; and they slew the servants. This was literally true of the disciples and apostles which were sent with this message to the Jews; they not only rejected their message, but put the messengers to death. All this preceded the wrath which was brought upon the Jewish nation, when nationally they were destroyed, and Jerusalem and other cities were terribly destroyed.

Then said the king to his servants, or ministers: The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden, the carnal Israelites, were not worthy. The law could make nothing perfect. Their legal self-righteousness was but filthy rags, and would not answer for a wedding garment. They with all their filthy rags, or legal works, were now utterly rejected, and the decree of the king is published, that none of them which were bidden, or to whom the prophets had been sent, should taste of the supper, the gospel feast. And now the servants are sent forth to the Gentiles, who had not been bidden to the feast as were the Jews. Comparing the version of Luke 16 of this same parable with that of Matthew, we perceive that when those who were whole had declined the feast, the servants were instructed to gather from the streets and lanes of Jerusalem, or Israel, the poor, the maimed, the halt and the blind; quite a different description of guests; yet the very description to whom the gospel is good tidings; and of this description there were gathered by the apostles from the secluded lanes and streets of Israel all the original constituent members of the gospel organization. And the apostles reported to their Lord, saying, “It is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room.” Poor, helpless, halt and blind sinners who felt their poverty, and had no works or merits of their own to plead, were gathered to the gospel feast; but those of that character called from the Jews did not exhaust the provisions of grace, and the gospel proclamation is by divine command extended to the high-way and hedges of the Gentile world. “Go ye,” the ministers of the everlasting gospel, who had received a “Go ye” from their King, “and as many as ye shall find bid to the marriage.” Certainly not as many of the self-righteous work-mongers, but as many as they should find of the character already gathered into the marriage, of the poor, lame, broken hearted, helpless and guilt-stricken; bid them welcome, in the name of the King to the marriage. But none others should partake of the feast, as we see how he fared who came in not having on the wedding garment. The broad phylacteries of self-righteous Pharisees would not do; the guest must be clothed with garments of salvation, as sinners saved by grace alone, and covered with the robe of Christ’s own righteousness, that is the wedding dress; and a profession of religion without it will avail nothing. All who come in without God’s grace will be thrust out without his favor.

Again, permit us to ask, What is there in this parable that can be justly construed to favor an indiscriminate address of the gospel ministry to all mankind?

The work of the gospel ministry is very clearly and fully stated in the words of our risen Savior to the apostles immediately before he ascended to heaven. “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” This is a most vitally important introduction to their commission. If there are any sinners who have power to resist his will, or to secure their own salvation, or to prevent their own salvation, then all power in earth is not in him. If ministers have power to save souls, to quicken dead sinners, or to prevent their quickening and salvation, then there is power besides what is vested in him. Or if Theological Schools have power to prepare men for the gospel ministry, or Mission Boards have power to commission men to preach, then that power is not exclusively found in him. The fact is not only in itself important, but it is also important that all who are called by him to the work should know it; for it is upon this very therefore that they are commanded to go. Go ye therefore, or from this consideration. It does not allow the alternative, to them to tarry at home, and send somebody else. “Go ye therefore.” And what? “Teach all nations.” He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords, having all power in both worlds, has a right to send them over every state, territory, and division of the universe; and no king, potentate or ruler of the earth has any legitimate right to forbid, or throw impediments in their way. All nations. The command of Christ is no longer restricted to the Jews; now the middle wall of partition is taken down, and the messengers of Christ are commanded to go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. For God has a people in every tribe and nation, and his gospel shall search and find them out, and call them out; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. That is as was understood and practiced by the apostles, baptizing all who gladly receive the word, and who believe with all their heart on the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus by baptism adding them manifestively to the apostles, and to the apostolic church. “Teaching them.” They need instruction, and Christ has by his supreme authority authorized this manner of instruction, by and through the diversified gifts which he has received for and given to them. But what are they to teach them? Not the arts and sciences of this world; for in the knowledge of them the ministers of Christ are generally quite limited themselves. But the orders of the King are very plain and definite. “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.” No new lessons that Jesus has not commanded the apostles. No progression beyond the commands of Christ. Nothing that he has commanded may be omitted. Nothing that he has not commanded may be added. If any man shall add to the words of the book of this prophecy, or instruction, God shall add to him the plagues written in this book; and if any man shall take from the words of his instructions, he shall be expelled from the church of God, the communion of the saints, and from the privileges of the Holy City, New Jerusalem. But, “Blessed and happy are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs.”

We have been the more particular in showing what the gospel is, by whom, and to whom Christ has commanded it be preached, that not only our friend, but all who read may see that very much of what passes currently for gospel at our day, is but the teaching for doctrines the commandments and institutions of men, instead of the all things whatsoever Christ commanded his apostles to teach. In conclusion of this extended article we wish to add a few words in regard to the object and utility of the gospel ministry. The apostle, who is commanded to teach us, defines it thus: “Feed the flock of God, which he has purchased with his own blood.” Jesus commanded Peter, saying, Feed my sheep, and feed my lambs. None but the flock of God can feed upon the gospel; none but they can live on every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. The beloved disciple and inspired apostle John says, “Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them; because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. They are of the world; therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God; he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error,” (1 John 4:4-6). Finally, as the sun in the heavens can only be seen in its own light, so the light and glory of the everlasting gospel can only be discerned in its own divine radiance. Until God who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, shines in our hearts, we cannot comprehend the light of the knowledge of the glory of God shining in the face of our Lord Jesus Christ.