Image provided by: Friends of the Dallas Library; Dallas, OR
About Christian herald. (Portland ;) 1882-18?? | View Entire Issue (March 21, 1884)
CHRISTIAN ■ 2 V ------- ;---------------------------------------------- • “ p would not have his brethren ignor ant. According to Mr. Newton one may believe the story of Elijah’s ascension to heaven, or he may not ; —- --- ---- -—» > ♦ - --- —' — - yet the same Old Testament about whose miracles he is little concern MORE CLERICAL NON- \ SENSE. ed declares that God tood Enock, and Paul confirms the fact by stat Two or three more preachers in ing that God translated him that New York city and Brooklyn aré he should not see death. Is the just now making themselves ridicul ous 9S W61! AS ’di sgracing the cause ' lieve than the~other ? What non of Christ by vigorously attacking sense ! Does it require any greater the historic record of the Old Testa effort to-believe that Elijah ascend ment Scriptures. Prominent among ed to heaven than to believe that he the number we mention R. Heber appeared in glory on the mount of Newton of the first named city and transfiguration and faked with the •divirre ' Savior ? Is it any more unreason Church ; • Mr. Newtoii flippantly able that Elisha’s axe should swim says: than that Peter should walk on top “Perhaps Elisha’s iron axe did of the sea ? Is it any greater marvel swim upon the water. I an; pre pared to beJieve almost any thing that the Red Sea should Be divided after our spiritualistic médiums, by the miraculous hand of' God and their exposers. Whether it did through Moses than that Tabitha or did _not concerns me no whit should arise from the dead at the 1 shrug my shoulders and read on command of Peter, or that Lazarus I can not make out the historical fact which was at the basis of the should come forth at the word of Red Sea deliverance; nor do I care the Master ? Or is the story of the much to make out this or any other creation and the fall given in Gen Old Testament miracle. If I felt esis any greater miracle than the obliged to accept literally these resurrection and the ascension of heartily commend to our readers; but these unguarded expressions place woman’s work in a false light before the world. V II of Moses, the blessings of the gos pel had come to all, so that the Jew, the Greek, the bond, .the free, the male and the female, having all been baptized into Christ on the same terms, were all alike the children of God by faith in Christ; .. .... in tta|^ him. But if the passage means that men and women wero to be one in every sense, or placed on an equal footing in church an^Lofficial work in every particular, then the wo men, as well as the men, could have been apostles, evangelists, pastors, teachers, etc., which we think is more than our Sister can show from the*<^iptures. To intimate that any one would keep three-fourths of the church members “ doing nothing," because they are women, is doing a great injustice to those who do not find in the Scriptures that women are to be placed on an equal footing in every particular with men. That there is a large field of usefulness for woman’s work in the church, and that they largely occupied it in the days of the apos tles by their zeal and faithful labor in the gospel, is true; but that they did this by claiming equality with __ »en in every particular, and by making speeches and becoming pub lic teachers in the churches, can not be shown from the word of God. '■ '• 2 ... S. !r- ■" ■ . ■ r T---- »*' ' «î^s, 21. Á? : business of the - Th er$ is mu c h in th e- article we - 11 write on the other side would only give it a fair hearing and accept its declarations as final. But just here lies the whole difficulty. For . ex ample, among the neglected, pass ages we find such as the following : ~u Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first form- ed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being de ceived was in the transgression.” 1 Tim. 2.: 11-14. “Let you women keep silence in the churches; for it is not permitted unto them to speak; 'Utit they dre7o beund&r obedience, as also saith the law.” 1 Cor. 14 :34. That this Scripture is applicable there can be no ques tion, for here Paul is talking of wo- menspeaking in the public assemblies or churches. Then why not let it _ settle the question ? Tlie language of Paul, “ There is neither male nor female, for ye are all one-in Christ Jesus,” is not to the point; and to make such a use of it is a manifest perversion of the Scriptures. The Apostle is simply showing, that in- ’r'' HTERJALT). . JMJÂ-thû~ v.tnce of Croil winch speaks through the men of the Bible I should care greatly. In the true view of the Bible 1 am delivered from solicitude about these traditions, and am un der no constraint of credulity. Those who can believe the story of Elisha and the bears, or of Elijah’s ascension into heaven, may; those ..JKhftJGaft .nQL...nmL.jml.^and.. both, alike should read reverently their Bibles, not for these tales of won der, but for the still small voice of the eternal spirit sounding through holy lives and holier aspiration, un til He come whose life was the Word of God, the Wonderful." Now is it not a little strange that after such language as this Mr. Newton is willing to accept the New Testament miracles ! He does not care to make out any Old Tes tament miracle; yet he accepts those of the New Testament as standing apart from all other mira cles, and instead of being contrary to law, are in harmony with all the forces of nature in her manifesta tions ! Then he strangely overlooks, or intentionally avoids the fact that the connection between the two Testaments is complete—that the historic value of the New depends largely upon the miraculous ele- ment and historic accuracy of the Ohl.He “ can not- make out the historical fact which was at tlie basis of the Red SEa deliverance ; » yet the apostle Paul refers to it as CTiTsTian Advocate. That paper can dogmati- ” cally assert infant baptism in the household of thp jailer, and de nounce immersion; but when polite ly asked for the proof, it can only cast of its clothes and throw dust into the air. Here is its reply to our unanswerable proof texts and criticisms : “The C hristian H erald does not vouch for thq truth of the aill. y . . story it told about a Methodist class meeting. We hardly believed it would when we put the question to it, but still it was, and is, a won der to us what motives can in fluence „a paper to publish such caricatures, which amount to mis- repxv»uri(4,tldftd, ”“oT the doctrines and practices of other churches. As it cannot be devotion to truth, it must be an intense and blinding sectarianism. As to our declining to fill the Advocate with controver sies about doctrines or practices that have received the sanction of perhaps seven tenths of the believ ers in the Bible since the days of the Apostles, and do to-day, we certainly have no apology to make to the H erald . And that is all. Any thing to cover up and evade the main issue. Why does the Ad vocate pass over our column and a guments and raise the silly question •X-Qur candid opinion is that when about the class-meeting ? The ques a minister of the gospel treats the tion is not whether such a class Old Testament as Mr. Newton and meeting ever actually occurred or his school are now doing, it is only not, but whether or not infants a matter of time when they will were baptized in the jailer’s house deal in like manner with the New hold and whether the jailer was Testament Scriptures. Then would .iB’liersed .jnsLQad..Qf..J&priiikled... la.... be..arguments .are - ofdyso'many the class-meeting of more invest stepping stones down grade from to the Advocate than the question faith in God and in the Bible to under consideration and the Scrip avowed Atheism. They commence tures that bear an it 1 Besides, we with a timid denial of the first did not pretent to vouch for the chapter of Genesis and close with a truth of the story, as our contem bold denouncement of the last chapter of Revelation. Or from porary knows; but distinctly stated, “ A 8 tlie account runs. We told it another point of the compass, they only as it come to us, and for this begin by wishing there were no hell, and end with declaring there much we vouch. But our recollec tion is that it was told as a fact, is no heaven. At first the idea of and hence we would not feel justi a personal devil is rejected, and at fied in calling it in question. But last the doctrine.of a personal God whether true or not, the Advocate is a myth. When will these lead knows that it fairly illustrates the ers of the people learn the differ Methodist argument for infant bap ence between independent Biblical tism, and for this purpose only we criticism and the popular esthetic used it. Any child can see that the bosh of the pulpit. whole drift of the illustration was to show that the only argument in THROWING DUST. telligent Methodists pretend to offer When the apostle Paul was de for ^infant baptism in the Scriptures claring his conversion to"'the people is logical inference. Hence we deny of Jerusalem, his enemies cried out, that the illustration misrepresents “ Away with such a fellow from the any doctrine or practice of the M— earth, for it is not fit that lie shodlT E. Church as stated by the ^dvocate. live;” and they “ cast off their And now to put this matter to the •clothes and threw dust into the air.” test, we ask that paper definitely, This seems to be the chief cry and > Has it any argument to offer for