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