Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

Sandercock, his grammar school, which he quitted in their favour. This seminary had always been in high estimation, from the great character of the master; and the prices paid, considerable. They carried it on for some time with success, but from one cause and another it decreased, and Mr. S. quitted it to Mr. K., who held it for only half a year. Mr. K. now returned to his former patron, who reinstalled him in his former place. This gentleman venerated his virtues, and admired his character; indeed, it seemed to be the constant study of that whole family to oblige him. As the business he was now engaged in demanded his constant attendance, and the natural decay of his sight, he seldom appeared in the pulpit, except for his ardent friend, Mr. Burroughs.

46

A

In the year 1740 he wrote the "History of the reign of George II." It was added to "Howell's Medula Hist. Ang. ;" and soon atterwards an History of England," in one Vol., 8vo, printed in 1745. It has been esteemed by competent judges the best abridged History of England extant. The literary performances that, during the last twenty years of his life, he either prepared for the press, or lent his assistance to, would be too numerous to mention, as his judgment was consulted by all ranks of authors. It would be difficult to add any thing to the character given of him by the Rev. Joseph Burroughs, in his funeral sermon. specimen of his preaching is preserved in a volume of his sermons, published after his death, (which happened on January 28th, 1755, aged sixty-two,) in 1756. They are twenty in number, and are chiefly practical. The eighteenth sermon in this volume, was preached at the funeral of Elizabeth, the third wife and relict of JOHN MILTON, author of Paradise Lost, on March 10th, 1726. She was a constant attendant, if not a member, of the General Baptist Church at Nantwich. Ipswich.

CORRESPONDENCE.

THOUGHTS ON HEB. X. 26, 27. To the Editor of the General Baptist Repository. My dear Sir,-The following observations on the passage in Heb. x. 26, 27, an elucidation of which an "Inquirer" desires, are at your service, to insert them in the Re. pository, if in your estimation they suitably explain the author's meaning; if not, to suppress them.

The passage in question reads as follows, -"For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries." The persons of whom the apostle is writing are Christians. He describes them as persons that have "received the knowledge of the truth;" i. e., persons whose minds have been enlightened by the Gospel, who have seen their lost and perishing condition, have embraced the offers of salvation, and conformed themselves to the requirements of Christianity. In the context he speaks of them as in "their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience," i. e., freed from the guilt of sin; "and their bodies washed with pure water," which intends their holiness; as "sanctified by the blood of the covenant;" "being illuminated;" "having in heaven a better and an enduring sub

J. R.

stance;" "having a confidence which hath great recompense of reward," &c. After such a description of the character of the persons spoken of in the verses under consideration, we are not prepared to say that nominal professors merely are intended. This cannot be argued from the apostle's language, for the expressions he employs are such as apply to Christians in general. Nor would he, if speaking of mere professors, use the term we, and so identify himself with them. He is speaking of Christians in general.

Now, says the apostle, "If we sin wilfully," &c. The sin against which he is here guarding those to whom he wrote, is not to be understood of every kind of sin a person may commit after he has "received the knowledge of the truth;" but the sin of deliberate apostacy, renouncing Christianity, denying the truth of its revelations, representing and regarding it as a vile imposture, the invention of ungodly and designing men, a cunningly devised fable." The correctness of this representation appears,

66

First, From the meaning of the word used by the apostle, here rendered by our translators "wilfully." It is not the same as knowingly, but of stronger import. The original word is inovoiws the meaning of which is voluntarily, deliberately, determinately: sponte, ultro, in Latin, are equiva

lent to it. The meaning of the apostle, therefore, is not, if we sin by mere sudden and violent impulse, or by inadvertency or oversight; but if we sin deliberately, presumptuously, with forethought, with settled intention and design.

Second, That the sin of deliberate apostacy is intended, is evident, further, from the context. He who has committed the sin in question, is represented, verse 29, as having "trodden underfoot the Son of God." This is a strong figurative expres. sion, denoting the most contemptuous treat ment; regarding Christ as a vile malefactor, and wicked blasphemer and imposter, and as having deservedly suffered the disgrace. ful and cruel death of the cross for his blasphemy and false pretensions; "counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing;" i. e., view. ing the blood of Christ by which the new covenant is ratified not as possessing any atoning, sanctifying, saving efficacy, but as a common thing, as the blood of a vile im. postor, and as worthless; "and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace." It is most probable that the Holy Spirit is here intended, and that the apostle is referring to the extraordinary effusions of the Holy Ghost in the first ages of Christianity, by which miracles were performed in confirmation of its truth. By him, therefore, that does despite to the Holy Spirit, treats him with malignity or contempt, is meant, in this place, one who violently opposes his influences, denies their reality, and contemptuously and wickedly ascribes the mi. racles performed by his agency to satanic influence or magical arts. It would appear, indeed it is generally considered, that the apostle intends the same thing with our Lord, Matt. xii. 32, the sin against the Holy Ghost, which Christ calls "speaking against the Holy Ghost.'

The apostle compares the sin under consideration with that which the Jews committed in "despising" the law of Moses. "He that despised Moses' law," was one who set it at nought, denied its divine authority, regarded it as a human inven. tion, and who contemptuously transgressed and derided it. If, therefore, there is any meaning in the comparison, the person described by the apostle must have treated the Gospel in a similar manner.

sin, nor is his case hopeless. Such cha racters are exhorted in Scripture to return, and are encouraged to do so by the kind assurance that God will receive them graciously, and love them freely. See Jer. iii. 22; Hosea xiv. 2--4; 1 John i. 8-10, ii. 1, 2. The persons here intended are deliberate apostates, as is apparent from what has been said above; and it might he made more so, from a consideration of the object of the author in writing the Epistle, which was to prevent Jewish Christians from defection from the christian religion.

The consequence of this sin is most awful. "For if we sin wilfully," &c., "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment," &c. If you make defection from Christianity, renounce the Gospel, give up your hope and trust in Jesus Christ, no other atoning sacrifice is or can be provided for you. No other makes real atonement for sin: this being renounced, therefore, your case is desperate. The sacrifices under the law are abolished, and no forgiveness can possibly be expected through them. The sacrifice under the new covenant is never, like the Jewish sacrifices, to be repeated. Apostacy from your present religion, therefore, is final perdition. There is nothing remaining for you "but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries." "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden underfoot the Son of God," &c. the Gospel is infinitely more excellent and important than the law, the sin of despising it is incomparably greater, and the punishmentinconceivably heavier. See cap. ii. 1—4.

As

I

Such are the thoughts, dear Sir, that have occurred to me on this passage. would say, in conclusion, let us be on our guard against this evil, so aggravated in its character, and so awful in its consequences; and not only against this, but against sin of every kind. The backslider need not be fearful that he has committed this sin. Though his sin is great, it is not the sin of deliberate apostacy. Let him, therefore, as he is called and encouraged in scripture to do so, repent, and "take unto him words, and return to the Lord, who will have mercy upon him, and to our God, who will abundantly pardon him." Yours respectfully, March 9th, 1841.

J. N.

This, then, is a case not of backsliding, but of deliberate apostacy. A person may be overtaken in a fault, may sin, and may even decline in religion, without renouncing the Gospel as a system, or committing the sins here enumerated. And though the sin of the backslider is great, and his state In many of the works by the advocates dangerous, yet it is not an unpardonable of baptizing by sprinkling or affusion, an

VOL. 3.-N. S.

Q

ANSWER TO AN OBJECTION AGAINST BAPTISM BY IMMERSION.

objection is urged against dipping the subjects of this ordinance, by saying, that though in the Old Testament there were numerous instances in their "divers bap. tisms" (Heb. ix. 10) of persons having to bathe and wash their whole bodies, yet there is no instance of any one having to do this to the body of another. And then they launch away, with a temerity enough to make every one shudder at the possibility of their being mistaken, into reproaches against the indecency of our practice. Now, Sir, I think that, in spite of their repeated assertion to the contrary, there is a very clear instance of one person applying water to the whole body of another; and what makes this the more certain is, that we have the action described, both in the way of command, and in the recorded history of its being obeyed. This matter is written in Lev. viii. 6, "And Moses brought Aaron, and his sons, and washed them with water.' Now this word "washed," is the Hebrew

[ocr errors]

, and is of a meaning sufficiently definite. It occurs very often in this same book of Leviticus: I need only mention the fifteenth chapter, where it occurs in verses 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13. In each of these verses the same word, †, is translated, "bathe himself;" and a different word, D, is employed for the expression "wash his clothes."

I cannot help thinking that the English translators were afraid of letting the people have the full advantage of comparing passage with passage, and word with word; and have, therefore, darkened the meaning of many words in the Scriptures, by rendering them here one way, and there another. Here it is passover, there easter; here atonement, there reconciliation; here pardon, there re. mission; here bishop, there overseer; here dip, there baptize; here wash, there bathe; and I could mention more and more painful instances, in which the mere English reader is robbed of a fair chance of formning his own opinion of the will of his Maker, by this mischievous contrivance of needlessly translating the same phrase by different words.

Parkhurst has a valuable observation on this washing. "In the Hebrew language are two words to express the different kinds of washing; and they are always used with the strictest propriety. Da, cabas, that kind of washing which pervades the sub. stance of the things washed; and П, rachatz, which only chases its surface. There is a similar distinction in the Greek, in which λovw, louo, is properly to wash the whole body; IT, niptein, the hands and

[blocks in formation]

A DISCIPLE OF TRUTH. RENUNCIATION OF THE TITLE REVEREND.

[We insert this note at the request of Mr. Matthews, though we are aware the course he has adopted will be thought by some liable to exception.-ED.]

From a deep antipathy to all that is superstitious and untrue, I take the liberty of letter, or otherwise, with the title "Reverrequesting my friends not to address me by end."

I do not agree with Rome, or any other system, whether Pagan or Christian, that Teachers of Religion are a distinct caste, or have any more authority or respectability than those who follow any other lawful occupation.

I believe all sincere Christians are equally respectable and reverend—that is, worthy of being revered; that quality entitles to office, but not office to quality; and that spiritual qualifications should not be made the basis of worldly honours.

I object to a distinction without a meaning, simply because it is not true; and because, by placing truly good men in the same class with their opposites, it serves, I fear, to obscure the real difference between them. I would fain be reverend; but I esteem it a poor compliment in these days to be called so. If my friends do not revere me, they are not sincere in calling me reverend; if they do revere me, and will express their feelings, had they not better do so inside their letters than outside? Perhaps this disclaimer, on my part, will plead my apology, if at any time I omit the phrase before the name of my friends in the ministry.

THOS. W. MATTHEWS.

Boston, March 2, 1841.

QUERIES.

Is it right to allow individuals of our congregations the privilege of engaging in prayer at public prayer-meetings; who, though seriously disposed, have not the inclination to unite in Church fellowship, and who hesitate not to express, it is not their intention ever to connect themselves with any society of Christians? Or is it proper to encourage others in the same public manner, who though they have been mem. bers of a Christian Church, have been separated by discipline, and appear, like the former, most inclined to stand aloof from the fellowship of the Church? In each case supposed, is the practice most likely to have

[blocks in formation]

REVIEW.

A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE RENDERING OF THE WORD BANTIZN in the ancient and many of the modern versions of the New Testament, with especial reference to Dr. Henderson's animadversions on Mr. Greenfield's statements on the subject. By F. W. GoгCH, A. B., Trinity College, Dublin. Ward and Co.,

London.

When will there be an end of controversies on baptism? This is a question which cannot very readily be answered, and yet it might seem that the subject itself was one not presenting a wide field of debatable ground.

66

The advocates of sprinkling, or applying water in any way," are, it might seem, "at their wits end" to find a divine sanction for their practice; and though the language they use is often strong, positive, and learned, they appear to some candid and intelligent observers as far from having attained their object as ever. Among other modes of settling the question of mode, an appeal has been made to the rendering of the word baptizo in the more ancient versions, and this most completely establishes the authority of immersion.

It was objected to Dr. Carey and his colleagues, that they had "rendered to baptize' by a phrase compounded contrary to the idiom of the language, but which can signify nothing else than to give a dip. ping or immersion." The late Mr. Greenfield (not a Baptist) met this charge on the ground that the phrase was idiomatic; that it was a correct translation of the word baptizo; and that to render it by a term signifying immerse, was in accordance with established usage. He observes, "it may safely be affirmed, that many of the most accurate and valuable versions, both ancient and modern, are involved in the same accusa

P.

tion, and that there is no one which is decidedly hostile to the interpretation." And he adds, "In consistency, if that aid (i. e., of the British and Foreign Bible Society) be withdrawn from the Serampore missionaries because they have rendered baptizo to immerse, then must it also be withdrawn from the Churches of Syria, of Arabia, of Abyssinia, of Egypt, of Germany, of Holland, of Denmark, &c.; and the venerable Peshito Syriac version, the Arabic versions of the propaganda, of Sabat, &c., the Ethiopian, the Coptic, and other versions, must all be suppressed."

Dr. Henderson immediately published a reply to Mr. Greenfield in the Congregational Magazine, in which he animadverts strongly on the statements of Mr. Greenfield on this subject. The present pamphlet is intended to give an examination of the rendering of the word in question in all the ancient versions, and in many of the modern ones, under the conviction, that though the question of mode is a minor affair, yet that we "cannot regard it as an unimportant thing to ascertain the truth in any matter connected with the standing laws of Christ's kingdom." Mr. Gotch comes to his task with every qualification for its successful execution. Learned, patient, candid, and without any purpose to serve but to discover and display truth.

The following are the results of his investigation. "We have now gone through all the ancient versions which have been published; and noticed many modern ones in the course of our examination.

"The conclusions to which the investigation leads us, are-

"1. With regard to the ancient versions, in all of them, with three exceptions (viz. the Latin from the third century, and the Sahidic and Basmuric,) the word Banτilw

is translated by words purely native; and the three excepted versions adopted the Greek word, not by way of transference, but in consequence of the term having become current in the languages.

"Of native words employed, the Syriac, Arabic, Ethiopic, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic, and earliest Latin, all signify to immerse; the Anglo-Saxon, both to immerse and to cleanse; the Persic, to wash; and the Sla. vonic to cross. The meaning of the word adopted from the Greek, in Sahidic, Basmuric, and Latin, being also to immerse.

"2. With regard to the modern versions examined, the Eastern generally adhere to the ancient Eastern Versions, and translate by words signifying to immerse. Most of the Gothic dialects, viz. the German, Swe. dish, Dutch, Danish, &c., employ altered forms of the Gothic word signifying to dip. The Icelandic uses a word meaning cleanse. The Slavic dialects follow the ancient Slavonic; and the languages formed from the Latin, including the English, adopt the word baptizo; though, with respect to the English, the words wash and christen were formerly used, as well as baptize."

What reply Dr. Henderson can give to this pamphlet we cannot conceive.

A LETTER TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE
LORD VISCOUNT MELBOURNE, First
Lord of her Majesty's Treasury, on the
Present State of British Connexion with
Idolatry in India at each of the four pro-
vinces, and the Island of Ceylon. By the
REV. JAMES PEGGS, late Missionary
at Cuttack, Orissa, author of "India's
Cries," &c.
Wightman, London.

Whether Lord Melbourne has read Mr. Peggs's pamphlet or not, we trust it will be read extensively by the British public, and that British Christians will, ere long, express their sentiments so strongly, that the most luxurious and ease loving minister of the crown, whoever he may be, will be induced to put an end to the abominations which are here set before us. All that is vile, obscene, and abominable in idolatry is supported by the authority of a profess. edly christian government. But let us bring forward a few facts. To all intents and purposes, there exists in Hindoostan a union of Church and State; and the Church, instead of being episcopal, or popish, or presbyterian, is the hateful system of Hin. doo idolatry. And it is also correct to add, that while the delicate and heavenly prin ciples of Christianity invariably wither and die in the earthly embraces of the state, the more carnal and corrupting elements of idolatry are amazingly fostered by this union. What will our readers think of

facts like these? A resident in Pooree, an idolater, states, that under our administration Juggernaut had become popular, so that the population of Pooree had increased two-fold in his time. p. 12. "Though the government have renounced the pilgrim tax, they have agreed to give the temple 47,000 rupees per annum; a sum," Mr. Lacey remarks, "more than sufficient to support the idol in all his glory, and to perpetuate him for ever." In the Madras presidency, "it is now required of christian servants of the government, both civil and military, to attend heathen and Mahomme. dan religious festivals, with a view of showing them respect. In some instances they are called upon to present offerings and do homage to idols. The impure and degrading services of the pagoda are now carried on under the supervision and control of the principal Europeans, and therefore christian officers of the government; and the management and regulation of the revenues and endowments, both at the pagodas and mosques, are so vested in them under the provisions of Regulation VII. of 1817, that no important idolatrous ceremony can be performed, no attendant of the various idols, not even the prostitutes of the temple, be entertained nor discharged, nor the least expense incurred, without the official concurrence and orders of the christian func

tionary."

I have just returned from witnessing the An eye witness remarks, Dec. 11, 1839,form the Honourable East India Company annual ceremony of the presentation of gifts to the Idol Yeggata, at Fort St. George,

"I passed through the crowd of Natives and had a full view of the process. The Honorable Company's presents, consisting of a scarf of crimson silk, a thalee or ornament for the neck, apparently of gold and attached to a yellow string, and another scarf of scarlet woollen cloth, exactly resembling that of which soldiers' jackets are made, were borne several times round the Idol stage, with wreaths of flowers, broken cocoa-nuts, &c. A peon, the white metal plate of whose belt bore the inscription

COLLECTOR OF MADRAS,' led on this procession, clearing the way with his cane, and a number of men followed with long trumpets, which they pointed towards the Idol and sounded.

"It might be interesting to trace to its origin, the strange and truly idolatrous practice of this annual present made by the English to Yeggata. Did we listen to the Natives themselves, we should have many solutions; one of which 1 heard the other day from a respectable Native, as the opinion of many of his countrymen, and which

« EdellinenJatka »