the bible standard march 1907

8/2/2019 The Bible Standard March 1907

1/16

TH.& ...-----------------~-----------------------------~~~~

Hjbl~S t a n d a r d . "1 11 ' 1 1I co.c 11. .Clt ,1ft of 6011 I . ecrul [1ft."VOL. 2~. No. 3. TWOPENCE.UCKLAND, N.Z., MARCH, 1907., " " J I l " " " T f 1 l " '" 'T J Il " " ' 1 ' f 1 " " " '1 1 I' "

~ I I I U ~ ~ @ q ~ i j " " D _ em'I~*~III~. ~,m~@w~~~~=-~.< t b t m o n t b .

"~~In ' 1 there is to be another meeting of the, ' ~~ 'Peace Conference at the Hague, and we

I learn that one millionaire is ready toI d?nate a larg~ sum of ~o~ey ~or the. ere~-'.' ' tion 'of a suitable building m which Ito~ can' meet. e So the dream of disarm a-~~- ment stijL'continues. Of course, all the

nations profess the desire for disarmament, but virtuallyeach says to the others.. "I t is for you to begin," and theariswer thatfis-made is.an.increase, Of.fighting strength,

,',f ~. ,," or:HThl',the,r':f:q:Jooditureto makelD teanw :o;{ wacmore-"certwin. A HomeIDtsarm~it1i0Ilt. f paper ,:said r!lc~ilDy;_when review-_:(c '~l j " r : ing av speeohv of Mr. Haldane's:"Disl'frniament is a' dream of .sentimentalists and short-sighted economists and Radical statesmen out of office.Practical responsibility' dispels the vision; but the as-piration; or; perhaps the force of habit; ,still' moulds thepbrases.rof- Radical oratory., Mr. Haldane cherishesrrullennial hopes. He looks forward' to a+time whenthe democratic peoples will, rise and Aictitte' a policy ofdisarmament and a policy .of peace ') to. dhei,r chosenrulers. -::In the meantime, self-defence- 'is' 'the' first lawof':nations,' as of nature, and Mr. Haldane, adopted themaxim+that .capacity of defence means' capacity ofattack. [1liis, .he .was careful to say, does not implyaggression; but it must imply readiness in case of needto anticipate aggression, and it means that no nationdares to take the lead in a process of disarmament."This endorses what has for long been said bv sincerestudents of the Word. The hoped-for goal to be at-tained by human effort is apparently further away thanever. There are many things existent in the world,:IY,hichemphatically deny the boasted progress towardsthe..social millennium, but we need do no more than

j

point with steady finger to this blot upon our civili-sation-the dread shadow of war-and affirm that solong as it is in existence there is no hope at all that mencan advance a single step towards the goal they so boast-ingly proclaim is near.

(tauses oflP o"ert}?.

What are the causes of poverty? Doubtless there aremany contributing causes, some of whch can be dealtwith by a community resolute to cope with them;others, it may be, are beyond their power. If only

men would consider the practical-those which lie within theirown province, and which existonly because of the will of the

community-then ways and means might be consideredto deal with those which are not so apparently undertheir control. In the course of an address deliveredby the Right Hon. Lloyd-George, he pointed out thatthe "most fertile cause of all was a man's own improvi-dent or imprudent habits, such as drink and gambling.This was supposed to account for sixty per cent. of thepoverty in the land. It was directly responsible formore. Drink impoverished not only the individual, butthe race. It also indirectly contributed to unemploy-ment by diverting earnings from those necessaries oflife, the manufacture of which would give three timesas much employment as the production of drink. Thedrink problem was the most urgent problem of thehour for our rulers to grapple with. Surely the sup-pression of this great social pest was not beyond theresources of civilisation. If it were, then God helpcivilisation. Humanity was indeed doomed if it couldnot cope with an evil of this stupendous magnitude,afflicting its well-being, and the causes of which layopen to its vision, and were within its grasp." Theseare weighty words, and bear eloquent testimonv to theweakncssand vanity of our present social orde;. In aperiod when wealth is being produced as never before,and abundance is at hand for the satisfaction of everyhuman being, there is in the verv midat dire povertvand distress. caused and continued bv the verv wealthrl'p:1tf'Cl.and thp desire to obtain more. '

Some months ago the Rev. John MeNeil was invitedto Malta to conduct some public meetings. These


2/16

34 THE BIBLE STANDARD. MARCH, 1907.meetings were open to all to attend. The Archbishopof Malta (Catholic) was much displeased at this, and

wrote in severe terms to the Gover-nor of Malta against allowing anyother religion than the Catholicpublic protection. The Governor,

not yielding to the senseless clamour of the Catholicleaders, they inaugurated public meetings, at which pro-tests were uttered against the effort to deprive the peopleof the island "of their religion." The entire questioncame up in England, and the King forwarded Royalinstructions that "all persons inhabiting our saidisland should have full liberty and the free exercise oftheir respective modes of worship." This was too muchfor the representative of Home, and he sent a publicpetition to the King praying that this sanction mightnot be granted! But the Instructions received theIioyal signature, and His Eminence received a snub, fora reply to him stated there was "nothing inconsistentwith the full protection of their religion whi ch hasalways been enjoyed by the Roman Catholics of }falta."Bent on affording another object le son to the world toshow that Home "never changes," the Archbishop replies:"I can hut signify my deep displeasure, and that of allmy dioccsans, at the sanction of liberty of religiousworship in these islands." Of course, it must greatlydisplease Home, for it is wholly opposed to freedomin religious worship, and this may serve as a littlelesson to keep Protestants on the alert, that Home'sinsidious advances in these Southern lands do not giveher dominance in politics, as a prelude to a control shealways seeks to hold over "an imperial race."

Uolerlltion inf1Dalta.

Recently a conference of the Women's ProtestantUnion was held in Exeter Hall, London, at which aninteresting address on "Popery, as it is Seen in ItalyTo-day," was delivered by the Rev. Campbell Wall, cif

Rome. He said that an Italian boytrained by Rome's agent" willoften answer, if he be askedwhether he prays to his Father

in heaven, "Yes, I say my prayers every Sunday toSt. Anthony and my Creator. I also say my prayersto the Blessed Virgin, my Patroness." Ask the Italianpeasant why he wears the crucifix. He will tell youit is his God. Every year an image in a church nearthe Vatican is treated as a living woman. Its clothesarc removed from it, and are kept as sacred relics, tobe distributed to women who are in a condition to needthem. This is just as Lucina used to be worshippedby the old Pagans of Rome. I have seen a poor oldwoman go and kneel before the image of Madonna ofSt. Augustine, begging that her disease and lamenessmight be cured. Seeing and hearing no response fromthe stony divinity, she exposed the horrible sore on herbody. Then the priest tried to persuade her that someof the oil from the lamp which burned in honour of theimage, or some of the wax from the candle, would cure

~oper)2 as itis in 3-tal)2.

her. English people should take notice that because Ipublicly exposed all this, the Roman Catholic priest atSalisbury called me "a fraudulent imposter." In avillage in Central Italy there is an image of St.Dominic adorned with big snakes. A solemn proces-sion was held in its honour, sanctioned by the Bishop.I saw women marching with snakes round their necks.They repeated prayers, and then threw themselves intothe dust. They crept along the ground, twisting them-selves like snakes. This is described in a learned workon the Abruzzi, and pictures of it have been publishedin Home. I myself witnessed it, but this R.omanCatholic priest at Salisbury accused me of falsehoodwhen I described it in the local press. Mr. Wall thengave an interesting account of families in Rome whohave been brought under the influence of the Gospeland liberated from priestly bondage.-PrutesiantObserver.No one can be long in connection with a Christian

association without being painfully cognisant of theface that multitudes treat the Bible and its teachingswith ridicule. Indeed, it almost seems that a certain

passport to popularity is obtainedby such means. But, concurrentlywith this, he will also find thatthere are occasions in the lives of

these people when they seek for the help and assistanceand sympathy of Christian men and women, and seemto believe that they have a right to call for it. Thereis never any lack of these ministrations, but it some-how strikes a believer as strange that this anomalyshould exist. Note, too, that prayer, though scoffed at,is a first resource in trouble. As an instance, at thetime of the San Francisco disaster there were onehundred prisoners locked in separate cells in the cityprison. Their crimes ranged from drunkenness tobrutal murder. When the earthquake came and shookthe place from basement to the top of the tower, andit became apparent that the attendants could do no-thing for them, because the earthquake had twistedand warped the locks that not a door could be opened,sin-hardened men and women appealed in prayer toGod to spare them. A matron, on duty at the time,testifies that the prisoners cried and shrieked for mercywhen the shock came many of the men at-tempted to destroy their lives by battering their. headsagainst the steel bars when they realised there was nochance for immediate release. When all was over, andthe doors were opened, it was a meek and humblehundred that we removed to the branch county gaol.So, when the stubborn facts and realities of eternitystare onc in the face, he wants something more thansuppositions to rest upon, and finds that the airy philo-sophy which carries him on from day to day is animpotent thing in face of danger and death.

'lutck


3/16

MARCH, 1907. THE BIBLE STANDARD. 35tality of the human soul? Have we not settled thefact of its-immortality yet?" 'I'hese questions are put

in announcing "a thick, handsomebook" intending to settle the ques-tion from the philosophical stand-point. The endeavour of the

author is to meet the arguments of philosophers whodeny that the question can be settled from the philo-sophical side. We have not seen the book, nor do weknow the nature of the arguments adduced, but wemention the fact of its appearance to show that thereis not by any means the certainty on this questionwhich is usually imagined to exist. Certain we arethat the Bible' does not teach this dogma, and we haveyet to meet with any argument which can take so muchas a single step in the pathway of proving its truth.Men are still trying to prove it, because there exists nosatisfactory proof, that is why. They may imaginethat they have found such proof, but there is certainto arise some keen intellect which will show that thelaboured arguments are but refuges of clay. How muchbetter and more satisfactory it would be if, instead oftrying to buttress the Devil's lie, men would accept thetestimony of that Word which agrees in every particu-lar withthe present pressing facts of our nature, asknown to "ourselves by experience, and which shows theway to the attainment of immortality through the Life-Giver, Jesus Christ,

RnotberlEftort.

What a nebulous condition is that of our moderntheology. .Tntellectuality is claiming a high place, andthe theologian justifies his nebulous position becauseof the presence 'of this' blatant claim to knowledge re-

garding science and philosophy,lmo~ern and he says "a 'man must keepmistiness. an op en mind to move with the, ~,. L ' ever-moving revelation of God!"What is the doctrine of the open mind ? Is it the atti-tude which neverireaches to a position of certainty onanything? U-stl>\it is of very little use to its possessor.There 'must" come a point where action takes place as aresult' of certainty reached, or we for ever drift, fear-ful to move by ourselves because we are not certain ofthe direction in which we should journey. TheOhristian repeats soma-words of Mr. Spurgeon's that'are sound' and to the-point : "We ought to make every'truth to know-sruth- better, but we must understand, tobegin with, that '\ve' shall never know' better truth,"that is, -the doctrine of the "open mind," and it takesright away from this mist' and haze which now en-shrouds' our theologians, and pu-ts-us where we can walkwith courage in our hearts.rand go on to further know-ledge, guided by the truths already in possession.

Having Iaid the foundation of his, "New Theology,""Rev."'CampbeII goes on to erect and beautify his

structure. He has set aside the Bible doctrine of theFall, the Atonement, Judgment, and the Person of the

Lord. Now he is proceeding togive his congregation at the CityTemple some explanations of theOld Testament which will be very

instructive! In a recent sermon on the "Pillar ofFire, and of the Cloud," he has taken the people intohis confidence and assured them that there was nosupernatural miracle about that deliverance of theIsraelites, nor in the manner in which they were guidedon their journeys. The pillar of fire was simply abrazier charged with some inflammable material byMoses, or at his command, and it was carried aloft bysome sturdy Israelites. Moses led his people across themarshes at low tide, and the Egyptians were drownedbecause they foolishly followed when the tide was flow-ing. The miracle on Carmel, in the days of Elijah, isno miracle at all. Natural oil was poured over thesacrifice of Elij ah, and was set on fire by the action ofthe sun, and that is all there is to it. How easy these"explanations!" But what is to be thought of th(:; stateof mind that can seriously put them forward for anintelligent people to believe. In all cases the Biblenarrative has to be denied. His explanations beingtrue, the Bible is a collection of lies palmed off uponmen as solemn truths. Why search for moral lessonsin it? Then there is presumption of the ignorance ofthe people of those past times, who were imposed uponby Moses and by Elijah. What must be the state ofthe modern mind which can conceive that king, andpriests, and people were so deceived by Elijah, thatthey who knew of these "natural oils" as well as he,should be so deceived that they believed that an actualmiracle was wrought, a miracle which led to a decisionon the part of the people involving the destruction ofthe priests they had hitherto followed? We give thepalm for credulity to Mr. Campbell. He will go farbefore he finds another more credulous than he hasshown himself to be .

1Learneb


4/16

THE BIBLE STANDARD.in Christ, and is now bringing all things in subjectionto Himself. To understand these things we must"search the Scriptures," and give the central place toChrist, of whom they testify fro mfirst to last. Herewe find our boast and glory in a faith which has for itswatchwords the Mystery of the Incarnation, the Aton-ing Death, and the Glorious Resurrection of Christ-the power of God and the wisdom of God -TheChristian.

\lu e5tion < torner.Sir,-Please answer the following through the

STANDARD:-(1) Is it Scriptural to fellowship with those who

have not been baptized into Christ, or to ask them topartake of the Bread and Wine on the first day of theweek?We believe that this question never arose in the

Apostolic Church, for the reason that no person everthought of being a Christian without submitting him-self to the act of obedience. Scripture, therefore, hasno word to say on this matter. Unfortunately, therehas grown up in the Church opinions on baptism whichare purely of human origin, or result from ignoranceof Bible teaching. So it comes to pass that manysincerely centre their faith in Christ who are ignorantof the truth on this matter, and many who sincerelybelieve that they have been baptized, when they haveonly been sprinkled. Now, are these persons in a savedcondition or not? Up to the light of their knowledgethey have obeyed, and we are not of those who dare toexclude them from the Lord's table. But we do con-sider it to be our duty to teach the place of baptism inthe Christian economy, but that place we do not findto be a condition of salvation. Therefore, we do notexclude such persons from the table.(2) Is it Scriptural to admit as members those who

have been immersed in the belief that Christ is reigningin His Kingdom now, and when death takes them theygo to reign with Him in heaven, ignoring the teachingon His second coming and Life in Him only?We know there are some who urge that baptism

should take place as the signature to certain doctrinesof Scripture, to acquire the actual knowledge of whichis a task not easily or quickly accomplished. We findthat baptism is always associated with the Pei


5/16

MARCH, 1907. THE BIBLE STANDARD: 37Scripture for the sake of man-made punctuation marks.

(4) Stephen's spirit went direct to God.So we believe, but Stephen's spirit was not Stephen,

for we read in Acts viii. 2 that "devout men buriedStephen." Oh, but that was Stephen's body ! Just so;but Tf "Stephen means Stephen's body, then Stcphen'sbody means Stephen, and we rest at the fact that theman was buried, and unless the Lord raises him fromthe dead there .is no more of him.(5) "Absent from the body, present with the Lord."Yes, that passage is usually quoted in that fashion,

but we submit that it does not fairly represent whatthe apostle said. He said, "Willing rather to be absentfrom the body, and to be at home with the Loid" (2Cor. v. 8). If .this is taken in its context, it does notcall for any special interpretation. Let the apostlespeak for himself,and you will see that he is contrast-ing two states, one of which is temporal and the othereternal. This temporal state, with its "tabernacle," hedesires should give place to the eternal state, with its"house from heaven," and that is the possession ofimmortal life in an incorruptible organism. This isthe only desirable state for a believer. This cani.ot beentered upon until the Lord returns, as described in1 Thess. iv., and then; and then only, shall we be "everwith the Lord." EDITOR.-- ..."Unforgiveness in the heart will hinder prayer."God does not measure what we bring to Him. He

weights it.-MARK GUYPEARSE.Bluster and brag seems to be doing great things, but

it soon turns out it was, nothing but chaff flying in the'wind.-G. D. WATSON.It is said of Barzillai (2 Sam. xix, 32) that "he was

a very great man." God had given him a large estate,and, it seems, he had a large heart to do good with it:what else but that isa large estate good for? It is whata man is, more than what he has, that bespeaks himtruly great.-MATTHEW HENRY.

"A minister, once remarked to a dying saint that itmust giveher great comfort to look back upon a well-spent life.' 'Yes,' she said, 'it does; but the well-spentlife is not mine, but my Redeemer's, and it is indeedan .unspeakable comfort to know that His perfect right-eousness is mine.' "-Phil. iii. 8, 9; 1 Cor. i. 30, 3L"Eyes, to the front, forward!" is the order with

which each new day should begin. Whatever the pasthas held, It is past. All the wisdom and allthe power of' all-the ages cannot give us back even, yes-terday' for our reliving; .it is as hopelessly gone as thatfirst far-away morning in Eden. The old times, what-ever they may have been, ate our times no more. St.Paul was right when he said, "Forgetting the things ..which are behind I press on." There issanity and religion, courage, faith" and fresh strengthin the marching order, resolutely given for each newmorning: "Eyes to the front, forward!"-J. R...MILLER.

THE NEW THEOLOGY.

"As we have said before, so say I now again, if any manpreacheth uuto you any gospel other than that" hi ch ye receivedlet him he ana'thema."-GAL. i. 9.

A MEASUREof interest has been aroused by the cable-gram announcing that the Rev. Campbell, of CityTemple, London, has declared that the Bible record ofthe Fall of Man is not true. The statement has hadthe curious effect of causing some believers to tremblefor the ark of God, and has stimulated the unbelieverto chuckle and rub his hands, and with an "I-told-you-so" sort of air, to talk learnedly about the "ChangingSanctions of Modern Theology." It is in place to sayjust here that nobody need be worried. The mere as-sertion, even of Mr. Campbell, will not alter the factof the Fall, if it be a fact, and it is quite possible thathe may be mistaken. It is a little too early, even yet,for anyone to "crow," and the believer can afford totreat the statement as merely an opinion held by Mr.Campbell, indicating such depths of ignorance, bothof man's needs and God's provision, that it had beenbetter for his reputation had it not been expressed.Wiser men than he have even declared that no part ofthe Bible is true, but that book. still continues to liveand to win thousands to its teachings and to the salva-tion it proclaims.'I'he statement contained in the cablegram is no news

to those who have kept abreast of current theologicalliterature, and who know anything at all of the teach-ing of Mr. Campbell. Since he succeeded to the CityTemple pulpit, he has been putting forward teachingwhich may be fairly classed as pagan pantheism andspeculative transcendentalism. For a few years heedited a column in the British Weekly, in which heanswered the questions of' enquirers, and publicly airedhis own doubts. Recently he was chosen as Chairmanof the London Congregational Union, and in that officedelivered an address which is the' source of the presentstatement. It was given in public, and before menwhose avowed life service is to "contend earnestly forthe faith once delivered' to the saints." The positionheld by Mr. Campbell gives him a prominence he wouldnot otherwise possess, and it should be borne in mindthat his prominence does not necessarily give his utter-ances the stamp of infallible .truth. It is needful thathis statements should be submitted to the test of Scrip-ture and of common sense. He is by no means the firstwho has spoken in this way, but the changing sanctionsof modern theology .do not change the statements of the


6/16

THE BIBLE STANDARD. MARCH, 19 07.Word, which, after all, is the source of truth on allquestions raised by itself. As one has said, "the Bibleis a solid cube; turn it which way you will, it is alwaysright side up." The recollection that Mr. Campbell isa fallible man, with no sources of information save suchas are open to us all, and that he may be mistaken,should be sufficient to steady the nerves of any believerwho has for the moment felt disturbed. That we mayhave this matter before us in other than the bald formin which it appears in the newspapers, I will read youa few statements from Mr. Campbell's paper. "'vVehave," he said, "therefore to accept frankly and fullythe already changing sanctions of religious thought withregard to such subjects as the Fall, Sin, Atonement,Salvation, the Person of Jesus, and the meaning andscope of His work. The Fall, in a literal sense, is nottrue; the Genesis story is originally literature, notdogma. It was taken over into popular thought asdogma through St. Paul's rabbinical thought-forms.

The theory of the Fall is in direct conflict withthe finding of modern science, or with the true histori-cal method. Yet many preachers go on using lan-guage which appears to assume the doctrine of the Fall,because without it they do not know what to say aboutsin and salvation. Sin is assumed in populartheology to be not only individual disobedience to thewill of God, but that inherited taint of nature anddefect of the will which render disobedience inevitable.This is a false view. Sin is simply selfishness. It isan offence against the God within us."Let me briefly examine some of these statements:-(1) "The Fall, in a literal sense, is not true." We

have heard this before from many varied sources. It istaught by all who insist that the story of Genesis ispictorial, or allegorical. But he who says it is untruetakes upon himself an authority which is fairly opento question. In the book of Genesis there are no signsof symbolism or of pictorial teaching. If anywhere inancient prose history there is a simple, realistic style,that style is found in Genesis, from its beginning toits end. The whole of that early story is told in asmatter-of-fact manner as any narrative in the Bible."If the writer is recording a myth, he at least recordsit as if he believed it to be true." But I go further,and say, that the truthfulness and literality of thisstory is the only thing that can explain the Bible as awhole. The man who sets it aside is setting aside thebasis of Christianity as the religion of redemption.Apart from this as a truthful historical document,there is no hope of rescue from present ills.How does the New Testament treat this story?

There is no need to cite texts; it is sufficient for meto give Mr. Campbell's statement that the "dogma wastaken over into popular thought through St. Paul'srabbinical thought-forms." 'I'hat concedes the positionthat we have read the New Testament aright. It isequivalent to an admission that Paul was a staunchbeliever in Moses and the prophets, and that he based

his theology upon the story of the Fall, literally understood, as he further built upon the Abrahamic andDavidic covenants. On his own admission, thereforethe setting aside of the story of the Fall involves thsetting aside the whole of Paul's writings, in whichthat Fall is the basic fact on which the doctrine oredemption is reared. It is well to see something owhat is involved in this denial. The charge concerningthe influence of Paul is a telling testimony to the beliefs of the apostle, and of those who formed the firsChristian Churches and suffered for their faith. MrCampbell's statement being true, there was no necessityfor their martyrdom, for there was nothing to witnesfor that called for self-sacrifice. Paul is dead, andcannot speak for himself, save through his writings;but when he was alive his opponents found him anawkward man to handle. I cannot recall a single instance where his opposers came off other than secondbest. Yet some of them were shrewd and learned menI fancy that Mr. Campbell would not speak quite so confidently in the presence of the apostle, especially if hewere catechised as to the source of his own "thought-forms." Living, the apostle was a great and forcefulcharacter, and since his death his writings have fash-ioned the thought of myriads of believers, and will goon doing this when, probably, Mr. Campbell and .hisextravagances are forgotten. Hear what the apostlehas said regarding the message he delivered, and .contrast that statement with the summary assertion re-garding Paul's "rabbinical thought-forms." "For Imake known to you, brethren, as touching the gospewhich was preached by me, that it is not after man.For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taughtit, but it came to me through revelation of JesusChrist" (Gal. i. 14, 15). Again, in 1 Cor. xv. 1, theapostle declares the gospel which he preached, and heattaches this significant phrase, "by which also ye aresaved." Will this new theology put to its message theauthoritative statement of certain salvation for thosewho accept it?But we are assured that the story of the Fall is un-

true because it "is in direct conflict with the findings ofmodern science." If there is one thing more thananother which is annoying, it is the continual assump-tion on the part of those who claim to' be "advanced,"that they are the truly intellectual people. Those whohold to the historicity of- the Genesaic narratives areclassed as ignorant and unacquainted with "science."So far as I have read modern science, it has yet to takethe first step towards proving this record to be wrong.I think I have a due sense of the responsibility I under-take when I thus speak. I know there are scientifictheories abroad which, if they were established as true,would seriously conflict with Bible statements. Butthey are yet theories, and the true scientist holds themas working hypotheses only, and is ready to discardthem when something better is presented. Ascertainedfacts~true science-have not yet opposed the Biblerecord, literally read, and theories are not to be allowed


7/16

MARCH,1907.

to usurp the place. of true science, even if theologiansare so foolish as to give them that position.(2) Of course, the rejection of this early Bible story

involves the rejection of the Bible testimony regarding"sin, atonement, salvation, etc.': In that Mr. Campbellis consistent. But it does seem that the rejection ofthese takes from him the right to call himself Chris-tian, or to occupy the position of a Christian teacher.Observe there is no attempt to show that we misunder-stand the Scriptures, literally reac1. These most as-suredly teach these doctrines. Sin is connected with theFall in Rom. v. 12. "But," says Mr. Campbell, "youneed not accept it on that account. Paul was mis-taken." But give it what name we may, sin is here, andthe problem is, how can it be so dealt with that thesinner can be freed from its consequences? There arebut two ways that I know of which can effectively dealwith sin. In view of a retribution to come, in whichmost men believe-in which MT. Campbell believes-although he believes in an automatic operation of whichwe know nothing; in view of that retribution, what canbe done? Sin may be forgiven, so that its consequencesdo not fall upon the sinner, or the sin and the sinnermay be destroyed. Is there another way-a way soclear that we are not left to grope in the mist of un-certainty? This is no subject to speculate upon. Thehuman mind craves for knowledge, and it is not to beput off' by mere guesses. Sin, says Mr. Campbell, issimply selfishness, "an offence against the God withinus." Is it? The Bible presents it from another as-pect, and shows it as a crime committed against themoral Governor of the universe, And that is true, forwe have. but to ask, how does sin work now? Sinagainst the body, does it work for health or for destruc-tion? Transgression which works against the law ofour physical being spells destruction, and this is a lawof God. Will sin that is of the mind only work differ-ently? I trow not. It is because of such oversightsas these that I, for one, cannot consent to follow inthe path that Mr. Campbell travels. The Bible gives areas.onable account of things as they are, and it offers areasonable way of escape, which, if not availed of,leaves us under the doom of a reasonable punishment,a doom which says, "Seeing ye judge yourselves un-worthy of eternal life, ye shall die."Paul had strong convictions regarding the message

he preached-convictions which carried him to thedungeon and to death. He believed that his gospelembraced "the whole counsel of God" in relation tohuman redemption. He taught these things with un-shakable confidence, and the only thing that troubledhim was that "false brethren" crept in as "grievouswolves" to lead astray and to devour the flock. Andwe may add, the race is not yet extinct.To speak of the apostle's "rabbinical thought-forms"

is to give him the high praise of being a lover of theWord of God. But what sort of "thought-forms" are Mr.Campbell's? His statement that the mission -of the Lordwas to "make us realise our divinity" is perilously like

the Satanic thought-forms expressed in Eden by theserpent, "Ye shall be as gods, ye shall not surely die."'I'he changing sanctions of modern theology have

been carefully marked upon our chart by the apostle,and this, maybe, is one reason why there should be sucha desire to lessen his value as a teacher. These aresome of his warnings :-"But the Spirit speaketh ex-pessly, that in later times some shall depart from thefaith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines ofdemons" (1 'I'im, iv. 1). "But know this, that in thelast times grievous times shall come, for men shall be

holding a form of godliness, but having deniedthe power thereof," and the Lord asked, "When the Sonof Man cometh shall He find (the) faith on the earth ?"Our one question must be, "Is this 'modern theology'

opposed to the Bible?" Admittedly it is, or therewould not be this attempt to belittle the testimony ofthe apostle. Theology may change, and the theoriesnow advocated may give place to others equally absurd,but there is one thing that does not, and in the natureof things cannot, change, that is the changeless wordwhich "abideth for ever."I take it the statement of this London preacher isthe utterance of a man to whom the great basic factconcerning man's nature is yet unknown. If he knewthe truth on this he would be a better judge of man'sneeds, and be better qualified to decide whether or notthe Bible story of the past agrees with it, and whetheror not the redemptive plan is the one suited to meetand satisfy his needs. So long as he holds to the in-herent immortality of man, so long is it impossible thathe give a trustworthy judgment on the Bible story ofthe Fall, or on the doctrines of sin, atonement and sal-vation. Loud assertion, unbelieving criticism, or theairy piffle of "modern theology," which is to replacePauline theology, betray an ignorance of the natureand extent of man's needs that is truly appalling, andthat calls for an immediate and thorough repentance.What will happen when this book, so freely and solightly criticised and set aside, becomes the critic, a" itwill, "For the 'Nord of God is living and active andsharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing evento the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, of bothjoints and marrow, and quick to discern the thoughtsand intents of the heart," is a question, the answer towhich will disclose the worthlessness of "moderntheology," and be a compulsory lesson to its upholders.

A woman who lived very unhappily with her husband

came to a great divine to ask his counsel. "Always meetyour husband with a smile," said the wise man. Shefollowed his advice, and very soon returned to thank himfor the blessings of a happy home. Whenever a homelandscape is dreary and its horizon clouded, we believethat it proceeds not so much from the storms of man'spetulance and unreasonableness, as because woman hasforgotten to draw a sunbeam from the Sun of righteous-ness.-Maria Breu ie+ er,


8/16

'ri-lE BIBLE STANDARD.TABLE OF CONTENT~

THE MONTHQUESTION CORNER ..ECHOES FROM WEST S'l 'REKI'ASSOCIATION NOTES ..'fHE VIRGIN BIRTH OF' OUR LORDLETTERS 1'0 A YOUNG FRIEND ..THE HOME CIRCLE-TALKS ON ETERNAL LIFE.CHURCH AND MISSION NEW';'CHRIS1'IAN BANDUNFORTUNATE INTEHRUPTION ..LIQUOR DRIVEN ,'RON BARO'l'SELAND

PAGE" 33-36

36-3737-39

4041-4343-48

45," 4647+ 74717

~ (b~ 6ibl~ S ta n d a r d . ~/ '-< .Jjp --

MONTHTLY ORGANOF THE

ntw Zt al and I la n l1 d ls tl c a nd Publ ic a ti on J fs so c la tl on.EDITED BY GEORGE ALDRIDGE.

ASSISTED BY SPECIAL CONTRIBUTIONS.

The Editor wtshea it to be understood that, wlrile he exercises a general super-vision over the articles and Correspondence appear-ing in the STAND.4.1W,respouai-bility for sentiments expreased rests upon the individual writer.

aeeoctanon 1RotC5 .When in Boston, U.S.A., we called upon the two

brothers Hastings, whom we found carrying on thework instituted by their father, H. L. Hastings. Onlearning that we were from New Zealand, and wereinterested in the Life views, John K. Hastings Immedi-ately placed himself at our disposal, and offered to actas cicerone to show us the sights of the city. He was wellposted in the historic events associated with the city,and told many interesting stories as he piloted us fromplace to place. We appreciated his kindness greatly,and have remembered the occasion as an instance ofhow. a common faith breaks down all barriers ofstrangeness, and loosens the floodgates of fraternal love.Now we learn that this dear brother has fallen on sleep.He had suffered from an insidious disease, and died ina sanatorium on October 13. The paper whence weextract this news adds: "He was a faithful fdlowerof the Master, and his life abounded in good works."The Morning Star is a good paper, and has given

much helpful teaching regarding the Coming of theLord, but it has no kind of sympathy with Life teach-ings. In a review of a recent pamphlet it says: "Theprophetical writings of Colonel Thomas are good, andthe pity of it is that they are rendered unfit f01 simplereaders by the way in which the author always drags inhis heresies on 'conditional immortality,' or the denialof eternal punishment."Dr. Samuel Carmen, a famous American Presby-

terian clergyman, asked, on his return to New York,

whether there was anything new in Europe, re plied:"Yes; it is ten years since I have been there; and I amdelighted to report that the old-fashioned idea abouteverlasting punishment, which I have always le!:,ardedas a most mischievous and pestilential idea, is .apidlydying out."Quite a number of Faith Libraries accumulated dun-

ing our absence from home, and we must call attentionto their existence and their themes. No. 115 is ;I four-penny pamphlet by an Anglican clergyman, wh, givesthe substance of two sermons preached by him,in which.he argues against the modern teachings on man'snature, and effectively shows their unsoundness. Thiswould be a useful pamphlet to place in the hands ofAnglicans. It has one weakness, we think, in that it.adopts Edward White's view concerning the inter-mediate state. No. 116 is a penny pamphlet by Dr.Forster, entitled "Where Are We; In the Old Creationor in the New?" This is a treatise that ought to be.read by all who are interested, and all Christians .Irould,be, in the dispensational standing of the Church. Fromthat standpoint, the Doctor shows the error of scventh-day keeping on the part of a believer in the Gospel.No. 117 is a twopenny number, "The Living Christ ofNazareth," and this gives certain narratives whicl. showthat faith in Christ is-a vital force entirely inexplicableapart from its foundatio n in fact. No. 118, "TheRestitution of All Things," a chronological argumentto show that we are close upon the "time of the end.'!'I'he author thinks that we cannot be very far wrong-ifwe look forward to 1935 as being about the time d thecommencement of the great Day of Restitution ! " . To'tell the truth, we have no desire to look ahead quite sofar, and we yet await the presentation of any worthyevidence that the "year-day" theory in limyof its vary-ing phases has any place in the prophetic Word No;119 is a penny issue by an ex-Catholic, showing theerrors of Rome as contrasted with the plain teachingsof the Word of God.

Just to be tender, just to be true,Just to be glad the whole day through.Just to. be merciful, just to be mildJust to be trustful as a child.Just to be gentle and kind and sweet,Just to be helpful with willing feet.Just to be cheery, when things' go wrong,Just to drive sadness away with song.Whether the hour is dark or bright,Just to be loyal to God and right.Just to believe that God knows best,Just in his promises ever to rest.Just to let love be our daily key,That is God's will for you and me. (

. 'Selected:Doubt the merit of your opinion if .it is of 'more'value

to you than is the argument by which you sustain it.


9/16

lIRE B:v.BLE STANbAkD.'[be \Dirgin :J13irtbof ~ur ]..orb.

'l'HE Congregational nion of England and Wales heldtheir autumnal session last October at Wolverhampton.In connection therewith a 'I'heologieal Conference tookplace, when the Rev. George Barrett, D.D., Norwich,read' a paper on "The Virgin Birth," maintaining thebelief that Jesus was born of the Virgin MaJ.Y. In thecourse of the discussion which followed, great was thesensation when .three professors-representatives ofthree colleges-rose in succession to question the cor-rectness of the position taken by the writer of thepaper. They declared themselves to be convinced be-lievers in the Incarnate Christ, but denied that a beliefin the Incarnation in any way depended upon a beliefin a Virgin birth. These learned profe sors-Dr.Ritchi , Dr. Duff, Dr. Forsyth-said that while Paulbelieved in the Divinity of Christ, he made no ref rencein his epistles to a miraculous birth. Mark and John,i~ th ir writings, are silent concerning it. 'I'he exa -gerated importance attached to the Virgin Birth inChristian history had been verj' unfortunate for m rethan' one reason. The commencement of Christ's lifewasunimportant compared to the end of it, which con-tained the key that explains it. If Jesus was born ina manner different to that of ordinary folk, how is itto be explained that He Himself never referred to thewondrous fact? It is a mistake to make the fact of theVirgin Birth the doctrine of a rising or a fallingChurch: The credibility, integrity, and infallibility ofthe Bible is concerned in this question. Mr. W. B.Wilson (West Bromwich), in a speech of great earnest-ness, denounced the professors who were destroying thefaith taught him at his mother's knee, which earnest-ness (says the B ri tis h. Weekl y) "excited the laughter oftheaudiencc, of which we were heartily ashamed."'I'he Chr ist ian WO'I'Z cl(which endorses the views of theHigher Critics) says: "The honest deacon thought thathe had crushed the professors when he asked trium-phantly how would they explain Isaiah vii. 14, 'Beholda Virgin shall conceive,' etc. Everybody who had evenan elementary knowledge of Old Testament criticismand exegesis smiled, but sympathised with the gooddeacon."Now, what is' to be said concerning this ? We fear-

les-sly assert that a denial of the Virgin Birth of ourblessed Lord is an outrage, a calumny, an impious irre-verence; a blasphemy. We are aware that the threeprofessors have said, "We do not formally chaIlenge thebelief, but simply regard it as an open question."Butwe wonder how either of them would take it if we weretovsay concerning their parentage, "We do not chal-lenge the belief that your reputed father is your father,but simply regard it as an open question!" We fearan action for gross libel and a claim for heavy damageswould be entered against us, and that the Judge of theCoura would make mincemeat of our plea that we didnot- "challeng,e" the parentage of the plaintiff, but

merely begged his friends to regard it as "an openq ues tion."A belief in the Virgin Birth has been from the earli-est ages an integral part of the faith of. the ChristianChurch. The first denial was that of Cerinthus, whomJohn the apostle is recorded to have met in the bath 'ofEphesus, and to have fled from lest the roof should fallm, In every age belief in the Incarnation and in theVirgin Birth have gone together, and it is a new phe-nomenon reserved for this twentieth century that it ispossible to deny the one and yet retain the other belief ..As God made the fir tAdam by a special creation, soGod created Jesus, the second Adam (1 Cor. xv. 45),by a special creation. The action of the Spirit is tobe regarded not as sexual, but as creative. The ol 'igi n-aiion of the personal ity of Jesus (at birth-e- Luke i.35), as well as the equipmeni of that per onality (atbaptism-Matt. iii. 16), must be traced directly toGod. He must always have been Son of God.'I'he opening chapters 01 Matthew and Luke areundoubtedly parts of the original Gospels written bythose evangelists, and they could have obtained theirinformation only from two persons, Mary and J oseph.The chief reason for denying the Virgin Birth is itssupernatural character. But, it might be asked, "Ifby ordinary generation one Christ has been produced,why have not other Christs also been born?" Andagain, "Can natural humanity bring forth a sinlessbeing ?" If Christ had an earthly father as well as ariearthly mother, then the perfection of His character ismore inexplicible than ever. Those who deny theVirgin Birth cannot long retain the doctrine of theIncarnation, and if the Incarnation is proved untrue,the Deity of Christ is false also, and He is nothingmore than a perfect man. .Ernst Haeckel, the great German biologist, ridicules

the dogma of the Virgin Birth by quoting, as if it werereliable history, the fable that Mary was betrayed byPandera, a Roman centurion, and so by a humanfather she became the mother of Jesus. And now wehave English ministers and professors of theologyflinging sceptical doubts on this most revered of allevangelical doctrines. That J oseph was not the hus-band of Mary, in the full sense of the term, when Jesuswas born, the Gospels most positively assert (Matt. i.24, 25). ']'hat Mary was not married at the time ofthe child's begettal is distinctly affirmed (Luke i. 34).Who, then, do these ministers and professors think wasthe father of Jesus? If He had an earthly father, Jesuswas an illegitimate child, even though J oseph noblystood by his betrothed and married her. .But may we here at once dispose of the objection

that a Virgin Birth is a thing impossible? 'I'he illus-trious Huxley, the prince of biologists of his day, wasasked whether he could believe in the possibility of sucha miraculous Incarnation, and at once replied that hisscepticism concerning Biblical truth did not in any wayrest on any objection to such a birth, seeing that therear e m illions of virgin bidhs among the lowes t orderso i


10/16

tHE 13113LIt srANDARD.human beings. Unprejudiced, scientific teaching suchas this outweighs the daring doubts of ministers and'professors.

The story of the birth of Christ is told in the firstand third Gospels with a simple grace that excels themost perfect art. It is related in terms of the mostexquisite delicacy. Matthew says with significantmodesty, "Mary was found with child of the HolySpirit;" while Luke, with greater fulness, but equalpurity, records that the angel said to Mary, "The HolySpirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the MostHigh shall overshadow thee." The phrase "Spirit ofGod" often, in the Old Testament, denotes the Divinecreative agency, the power of God active and exercised,whether in the making and maintaining of the world,or the forming and sustaining of man. And so Mat-thew and Luke agree in representing Jesus as the childof the Divine Creator, and find the cause of His beingand birth in the creative action of God. The angelGabriel spoke of the child that should be born as "theSon of the Most High, the Son of God" (Luke i. 32,35). The evangelist Luke was the friend and com-panion of the apostle Paul, and as the Divine Sonshipof Jesus is the foundation of Pauline theology, so inthe Gospel of Luke it is made the starting point of thewondrous life therein recorded.Jesus is a real man, for He was "born of a woman,"

and "of the seed of David according to the flesh."Did not the people once exclaim, "Is not this the car-penter, the son of Mary P" But alongside this recog-nition of the real and material birth stands the con-fession of evangelists and apostles that He had a higherand diviner origin than the rest of mankind. Paul, inmany passages, expresses and emphasises his belief ina Christ who, "being in the form of God, emptied Him-self, and, taking the form of a servant, was made inthe likeness of men." Now, the problem IS, if Jesushad an earthly father, how is it to be explained thatthe apostles and early Christians gave credence to thestory of a supernatural birth, which was an idea pro-foundly offensive to the Hebrew mind and faith? Howdid such an idea arise, and how did so cultured andcommon-sensed a man as Paul come to entertain it?Nothing in the personal history of J esus could giverise to such a thought. The men who knew Jesus sawHis poverty, marked how His words were ignored andHis person rejected by His own nation; they witnessedthe agony of His shameful death; they recognised thetotal extinction on the cross of all His claims-de-feated, despised, degraded, helpless, He passed away.And yet this is the very person whom they set forth tothe Jews as the Son of their awful and eternal J ehovah,as the manifestation in the flesh of their AlmightyMaker, and as Lord of mankind. Unless they knew(by revelation from heaven as well as from Mary'slips) that the Incarnation and Sonship of Jesus wasan historical fact, it was impossible that any Jew whosemind was filled by the recollection of the low estate,the poverty, the suffering and the public 'execution' asa

criminal of Jesus could ever have placed God and Jesusin the relationship expressed by the terms Sonship andIncarnation.Such was the birth of J esus, His hold on humanity

was only through His mother. He who came to in-augurate the new race of the. sons of God, stood apartfrom the ordinary course of nature. He was to be be-gotten by no man, but of the Holy Spirit, in the wombof the Virgin. Thus one of the greatest, most won-drous sayings which ever fell from the mouth of aprophet of Israel, one of the most mysterious, was ac-complished: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive, nd beara SOD, and shall call his name lmmanuel" (Is. viii. 14).Nearly a hundred years later than that birth, an aged

apostle, one most profoundly initiated into the secretsof His Master and Friend, the apostle John, more fullygave the interpretation of this marvellous fact. Hetaught that in the person of Jesus "the Word whichin the beginning was with God and was God, becameflesh and dwelt among us."Before concluding, we may be permitted a few words

consrning that important prophecy of Isaiah, "Be-hold, a virgin," etc. Some contend that "a youngmarried woman" is intended. But the writer on Isaiahin "The Speakers' Commentary" remarks that suchinterpretation is utterly incorrect, as the Hebrew word"almah" is limited by its usage. in the Old Testamentto the unmarried woman. Our English word "maiden"comes as near as any to the Hebrew word. This word"almah," rendered "virgin," is the one used of Rebekahthe maiden (Gen. xxiv. 43), and of the maid Miriam(Ex. ii. 8), and also in Ps. lxviii. 25, Cant. i. 3, vi. 8,Prov. xxx. 19, where it is translated damsels, virgins,maid. These are the only passages in the Old Testa-ment where the word "almah" occurs. To King Ahaz,through Isaiah, was given a sign of God's goodwill toIsrael and to the house of David. It was not to be im-mediately fulfilled, but related to a future event whichmight seem utterly impossible-the birth of a DivinePerson (Immanuel) from a human virgin. We havegood authority, therefore, for dismissing from ourminds the doubts that the Higher Critics would instilinto them concerning the relevancy of this grand pro-phecy. The revelation (sign) God then gave was inreference to an unmarried woman, and is not to beforced (in order to get rid of the miraculous element)to mean that a woman at that moment a virginshould later on (when married) have a son. No inter-pretation of this verse can be an adequate one unlessit admits (1) a supernatural birth; (2) a child ofDavid's family; (3) a child of such high dignity thatof Him it shall be said, in the words ot' Isaiah's furtherprophecy, "For unto us a child is born, unto us a sonis given, and the government shall be upon His shoulder,and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor,Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace" (ix.6). These three reasonable demands have never beenmet by any interpretation but that which the birth ofJesus supplied. 'I'his Virgin Birth is the solution of


11/16

M A R CH , i907. THE BIBLE STANbARD.the problem, "How can the Holy One dwell with sinfulmen? How can there be an Immanuel, a 'God withus?' " But our highest warrant for reading literallythe words of Isaiah is found in the comment madethereupon by Matthew, the inspired writer of the Gos-pel. Writing concerning this Divine babe, these arehis words, "Now all this is come to pass, that it mightbe fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through theprophet, saying, 'Behold, the virgin shall be with child,ar.d shall bring forth a son, and they shall call hisname Immanuel.' "'The conception of the Christ was entirely miracu-

lous, the body of the Messiah being created directly bythe power of God, agreeably to the declaration in Heb.x.. 5, "Wherefore, when He cometh into the world Hesaith, 'A body didst 'I'hou prepare for Me.' " And yet,in face of this declaration, Dr. Duff dares to say, "Thematter of the Virgin Birth was a biological, physio-logical matter for the medical man rather than for thetheologian to study and decide. The theologian's busi-ness .was to see what the soul of the sinner needed."But Dr. Duff forgets that only a Divine Saviour whocan exercise an Almighty power can save a sinner, andthat if Jesus of Bethlehem is not Divine He has notthe qualifications needed for so stupendous a work.On the last day of His ministry, Jesus was teaching

in the Temple at Jerusalem. Among the crowd weremembers of the Jewish Sanhedrin. Jesus knew thatthey had never forgiven Him for claiming to be Son ofGod, and were charging Him with blasphemy. There-fore He desired to bring His adversaries to recogniseHis right so to name Himself, on the authority ofScripture. So, turning to the Pharisees, He put tothem this' question, "What think ye of Christ; whoseson is He?" Without hesitation they answered, "TheSon of David." Accepting this title which expressedHis human descent, He then set Himself to suggest tothem the mystery of His divinity. "If Christ, then, isthe Son of David," He said, "how does David, speakingas inspired, call Rim. Lord ?" And Jesus then pro-ceeded to recite the Psalm (cx.): "The Lord (J eho-vah) said unto my Lord (Adonai), Sit Thou on myright hand, till I make Thine enemies Thy footstool."It is evident that if Christ is the Lord of David, seatedat the right hand of God, He is endowed with theattribute of divinity. And did not Isaiah call the Sonof David "Mighty God" (ix. 6)? Micah spake of Himas one "whose goings forth are from everlasting"(v. 2). Malachi describes Him as "The Lord comingto His temple" (iii. 1).Think a moment. Could Abraham have called Isaac,

J acob, or J oseph, or any of his own descendants, nearor remote, his Lord? If not, how came David to doso? There can be but one answer-because that Sonwould be divine, not humap-David's son by humanbirth, but David's Lord by His Divine begettal. Butthe Jewish authorities would not face the difficulty,and even on a topic so important, as their Messianichopes rejected the clue of faith which would have led

them to the true explanation of the mystery of thepersonality of their Messiah, who was Son of Davidand yet David's Lord. They could not, they wouldnot, answer Christ's question, and were .self-convictedof incompetency as religious teachers.Are not some of our English ministers and profes-

sors showing the same lack of perception and repeatingthe folly which so characterised the learned Scribes andPharisees of olden days?Let us hold fast to the ancient confession: "I believe

in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven andearth. And in Jesus Christ His only Son our Lord,who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of theVirgin Mary. He ascended into heaven, and sittethon the right hand of God the Father Almighty."Rotorua. C. CRISPBROWN.

'JLettera to a lL'oung frienl) on tbe

Stl1b~ of \p rop bec \?LETTERI.-INTROD(JCTORY.

My DEARFRIE "D,I am indeed glad that you have an interest in

the teachings of the Holy Scriptures, and' that, whilenot neglecting those parts which give rules and warn-ings in connection with our present every-day life, youare especially turning your thoughts to the wondrousprophecies to be found in those sacred writings. En-gaged daily in business pursuits, your time for study1 : : ; necessarily limited, and, besides, at thc close of ahard day's work, it is not always an easy task to sitdo,:n and concentrate attention on a Biblical subject,which-a-to do it justice-always demands our best andfreshest powers. It has been suggested that a series ofletters dealing with the rudimentary truths of prophecymight be helpful in quickening thought, clearing awaysome difficulties, and sustaining your interest in God'srevelation concerning "things to' come." And, there-fore, trusting that the effort may meet with a kindlyreception on your part, I take up my pen.There is one preliminary point which we here must

insist upon, viz., that the thirty-nine books of the OldTestament and the twenty-seven books of the NewTestament, together constituting what we call "TheHoly Scriptures," are inspired. The Bible is "inspiredof God" (2 'I'im. iii. 16) ; it is an inspired work such asno wisdom of man could have framed; and, further, theOld Testament is as inseparably connected with the NewTestament as the acorn is connected with the oak whichsprings from it. So far as the books of the Old Testa-ment are concerned, our Lord Himself testifies to theirgenuineness and authority when He' bids us "Search theScriptures; they are they which bear witness of Me"(J ohn v: 39). It is beyond dispute that the Old Testa-ment in every particular was the same in Christ's day


12/16

4 4 . THE BIBLE STANDARD. --- - ---as to-day. Christ's word, therefore, is sufficient war-rant for every Christian to implicitly rely upon thecorrectness of the writings of "the holy prophets" (2Pet. iii. 2). And as for the New 'I'estament, we mayobserve that the writers thereof claim the fullest inspir-ation for themselves. In everyone of his epistles, thcapostle Paul distinctly and emphatically claims to speakin the name of-the risen Christ. Says he, "We have themind of Christ" (1 Cor. ii. 16); "We know the thingswhich are freely given us of God" (1 Cor. ii. 12) ; "Iwas taught it by the revelation of Jesus Christ" (Gal. i.12) ; "The word which ye heard from us, ye received itnot as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the wordof God" (1 Thess. ii. 13). The apostle Peter classesPaul's writings with "the other Scriptures" (2 Peter iii.16). And you mu'st not forget that Christ Himselfsaid to His apostles, "He that heareth you heareth Me"(Luke x. 16) ; "It is not ye that speak, but the Spirit ofyour Father which speaketh in you" (Matt. x. 20);"The Holy Spirit shall teach you all things, and bringto your remembrance all that I said unto you" (J ohnxiv. 26) ; "When He is come He will guide you into alltruth. He shall declare unto you the things that are tocome" (John xvi. 13). Before the end of the first cen-tury the New Testament was completed, and during thenineteen centuries that have come and gone since thenthere has not been discovered a single writing of thoseearly times which was omitted that ought to have heenaccepted as inspired. We may say, then, that it is ascertain that God is the Author of the Scriptures as it isthat God made the world.If the Bible is not the inspired Word of God, our

faith in it is a degrading superstition, and the sooner itis abandoned the better. Indeed, if God has not re-vealed Himself to man, then most likely there is noGod. At any rate, if He does not wish us to know Him,it shows If c has not the slightest interest in us. Butwc arc quite assured that "our Father in heaven" caresfOTHis children on earth, for is it not written that Godso loved the world that He sent His Son to save sinfulmen from perishing?But here a word of warning. There is only one Bible,

and it speaks with only one voice. There are thousandsof books about the Bible, and they speak in a thousanddifferent ways, contradicting each other and makingsuch confusion that a young beginner in Bible studymay well be alarmed, and tempted to abandon his en-quiries, and despairingly ask, "What is truth?" Butthere is no occasion to be troubled or anxious. Whatyou and I have to do- is to "cling to the Bible." Holdon to that book, read it with your own eyeB, and medi-tate on It with your own thoughts, and form your ownopinions as to its teachings. Learn all you can from thewritings of those who have made the Bible a life-study,respectfully and carefully weigh their statements andarguments, and unhesitatingly accept or reject themaccording as you believe they agree or disagree with the.text and teaching of Scripture. Let me give an instanceof. what I mean. J ohnW esley taught that ''babies

MARCH, 1907.

should be sprinkled," and calls that baptism. CharlesHaddou Spurgeon insists that "believers should be im-mersed," which he asserts is the only.true water bap-tism. You read the opinion of these two eminentministers. One is evidently in error. Which teachingshall you accept? Turn for yourself to the Scriptures,and from it alone decide what is and what is not truebaptism. And so on with all the various questions thatmay come before you. And thus you will be able togive a Scriptural reason (in the very words of Scrip-ture) for the faith you hold and the hopes concerningthe future which you entertain. And as long as youkeep to this rule you cannot get very far astray.Now we understand each other as to our foundation.

It is an implicit reliance upon the Bible, which is trulythe Word of God, and an exercise of sanctified commonsense in its interpretation, not relying upon the judg-mcnt of another, but using the intellectual powerswhich God has given us in order to arrive at our ownconclusion as to what God means us to learn therefroiu.You are not lazily to drift where others would lead you,but, like the evangelist Luke, your duty is to "investi-gate all these things with great care from their verybeginning, in order that you may satisfy yourself 01the accuracy of the things. wherein thou art instructed"(i. 1-4).The subject upon which I desire to render any help

I can is the most important one of unfulfilled prophecy.May I recommend you to read through your Bible fromGenesis to Malachi and Matthew to Revelation, and tounderline with red ink every passage which evidently isa prophecy as yet unfulfilled. I t will take time, seve-Tal months, but it will be time well spent. Years agoI did this, and found it a most useful exercise, for itensures a careful examination of every verse in everychapter. For your information, I may say that in onlycight books out of the thirty-nine in the Old Testamentare there no unfulfilled prophecies. Also, I wouldsuggest that you mark in the margin WIth blue pencilany verses you cannot understand, and then from timeto time seek their explanation, till, in the course ofyears, nearly every passage of Holy Writ will be openedto your understanding.You will not get much encouragement from Chris-

ti.ans generally in the study of unfulfilled prophecy. Iremember how, in my early days, I was advised to keepto the plain" Gospel (as if prophecy is not "good news")and not to trouble .myself about the secret things whichbelong only to God. But I was not desirous of prying into"secret things;" what I wished was to understand thethings which are revealed. I was also told that muchin Scripture is purposely concealed, in order that faithmay be exercised. But this I knew was pure nonsense,for I felt sure that if God had given a revelation Hemeant it to be understood. And, moreover, I waswarned that prophecy can only be interpreted at thetime or after its fulfilment, and that it was a sinfulcuriosity ,to Ibok i~to the .futuie. But, however modest

(Uontinued. on page 48:)


13/16

MARCH, 1907. THE BIBLE STANDARD. 45. c:e ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Cb~f i o m ~ ird~.r.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~x~~~~rx

Talks on Eternal Life.No. m

There was much in our last talk to-gether to cause though t, and si lice ittook place I have gone very carefullyover the va.rious matters then int ro-duced. There can be no doubt that theGospel of John does set forth in un.un-biguous language the message of EternalLife in the verv forefront of the Lord'steaching. But students of Scripturea re more and more coming to the posi-tion that in a.ll our studies we oughtto a.llow due weight to the dispcnsa-tional place of any hook of Scripture.Ko\\', the Gospel of John records a mes-sage delivered to the .Iews of ourSaviour's time-a. message which soughtto win from them their acceptance ofthe Mest iahship of the Lord Jesus. Hisproffer of the Life-gift was in connec-tion with that message. Now, the ques-tion arises, Are we justified in carryingover this teaching on the Life questionto make it a necessary part of thatmessage which is to bc brought to bearupon all, irrespective of race or colour?I think Isee your point. You think

that some objector might fairly urgethat if in the present dispensation thereis anv change at all in the mes age de-livered, tna.t change may go so far asto aff'cct the 'nature of the offer whichis now made to men, and may work to('hange the nature of the gift which Godwill bestow upon faith.Yes, that catches my thought. Thereis no doubt in my own mind; but Ifancy that such an objection is possible.'Veil, without entering into the dis-pcnsa.tional argument, which might bevery a.ttractivc, '[ should say that thereadiest mode of settling the questionwould be to appeal to those writingswhich admittedly belong to this d is-pensation. There arc certain epistleswhich contain the outline of the Gospelfor this age, and certain others whichgi ve the necessary instruction for theChurch. If these speak on this grea tquestion at all, then we should be ableIn reach positive conclusions. 1 Illay


14/16

l'HE BIBLE S'l'ANDARD. MARCH, 1907.

C b u r e b a n d ) J is s lo D N e w s .

AUCKLAND. - Notwithstanding thelong holiday season, we have had goodaudiences, who have listened with closeattention to the themes spoken to. Thetendency of some of the schools of theolo-gical thought has been to ignore theaccount of the Fall, as detailed inGenesis. One preacher has openly de-clared that narrative to be untrue, andhas propounded a "New Theology,"which wiIl, no doubt, have the effect ofleading many from their allegiance toChrist-(alling away from the truth-another indication that the trend ofevents points to the nearing consumma-tion.Sunday, January 26, 1907: Bro.

White presided. John's Gospel, xii. 36,"The Light of the World." In theevening Bro. Aldridge's subject was,"The Rev. Campbell's New Theology."

Sunday, February 3, 1907: Bro. Wil-cock presided; his discourse was takenfrom 2 Corinthians xii. 7, 9. With usin fellowship were Bro. and Sis. McDel!.In the evening Bro. Aldridge preachedon "The Atonement, and the NewTheology."Sunday, February 10: Bro. Wild pre-

sided; his exhortation was from Mat-thew iv. 3, 4. We had the pleasure ofseeing the presiding brother's daughter(Miss Kate Wild) put on Christ in thewater of baptism. May she be kept bythe power of God. In the evening agrand discourse was delivered on "TheWay of God."Sunday, February 17, 1907: Bro. Al-

dridge presided. Bro. Phipps gave anaddress from 1 Thessalonians, chapters4 and 5. In the evening, "The Unchang-ing Veri ties of the Word."Great interest is manifested in the

series of lectures being delivered at theWednesday evening Bible Class, the sub-ject matter being the Book of Job. Thisbook has received its quota of abusefrom many would-be iconoclasts. Someview it as beautiful poetry only;but truth stands fast. The writeris extremely sorry that, owing topressure of business, he is debarredfrom attending these addresses, whichare reported to be interesting and in-structive.The second lecture was delivered onthe 30th January, and was entitled "The

Testimony of Job."On February 6 the lecture was on"Job's Three Friends."On February 13, the weather being

boisterous, the subject, "The Contro-versy of Job," was postponed untilWednesday, 20th inst. W.G.THAMEs.-There having been no re-

port for some months past does not indi-cate that we are dead, or even asleep,but, rather, that those whose privilegeit is to forward the news have beenoccupied in many other duties, and

hence have allowed the time to passmonth after month. Our services atThames have been carried on as usual,and our Morning Fellowship Meetingshave been seasons of blessing; while theGospel has been proclaimed as regularlyas the first day of the week comesround. In September our Sunday.School Anniversary was a pronouncedsuccess, when Bro. C. F. Garratt waswith us. The Tea to the children wasvery full, and at the entertainmentwhich followed the building was packed.The hymns sung by the children reflectthe highest credit upon the conductor(Bro. E. C. Sherlock) and Miss AliceMorgan (organist), and the efficient or-chestra, led by Bro. Sanders; while thedialogues, recitations, etc., were de-cidedly taking. Then we had a visitlater. from Bro. C. B. King, which wasmuch appreciated, and his utteranceswere marked with fervour and spiritu-ality. Then we have held our AnnualChurch Meeting, which, from many as-pects, was very encouraging. The pre-sent Board of Deacons consists of Bros.Robinson, Gubb, Graham, Sanders, A.'Morgan, and Vercoe. Then later we hada Church Social, which passed off mostsuccessfully; it was a "Cup and Saucer"Social-i.e., each gentleman brought agold and white cup and saucer for ad-mission, while ladies found the provi-sions; and so a beginning was made inaccumulating our own. "crockeryware"for future use at the church; and a verypleasant social evening was spent inprogressive games, etc. On January 29the School Festival was held at Para-wai, in Mr. Deeble's grounds. Here thechildren had a most happy day, andeveryone returned home tired and satis-fied. The teachers all worked well andsatisfactorily, and made the day one tobe long remembered. We have a goodschool, but are feeling the need of moreteachers, so many having removed fromour town of late years. That remindsus that our Eldership has been reducedby the removal of Bro. Cropp. Wetrust, however, that his light will shinewhere he is going, and that blessingmay attend him. We have not yet com-pleted all the repairs and painting ne-cessary to our church building, but weare hopeful that a decided improvementwill be made during the next few weeks,and we hope that sufficient funds willcome to hand to meet the outlay.TAPu.-Bro. E. H. Taylor has paid

his regular monthly visits to this set-tlement, and has had the usual goodcongregations for a small community.The services are much appreciated, andwe had testimony that some havebeen influenced for good by the seedsown there.MATATOKE.-Here we hold a monthly

Sunday service and a weekly BibleClass, which Bro. Taylor goes out andconducts on 'I'hursday evenings of eachweek. The Bible Class is well attended,usually from 20 to 30 being present;and on a recent Thursday the Class pre-sen ted Bro. Taylor with a golden offer-ing in appreciation of hIS work amongthe people. We are hopeful that some

will be led to obedience in the watersof baptism, and be amon" the savedones at the Lord's coming. E.C.M.

TIMARU.-Bro. Neil, of Dunedin, hasrecently spent a short time with us, andgiven some greatly appreciated help tothe cause by lecturing in the SophiaStreet Hall on matters connected withMan's Nature. ' I n .a! lecture on "Is theSoul Immort.a.l ?" he affirmed that thedogma of soul immortal ity was heathen,as it was not found in the Bible, nor inany of its tr.msla.tions. He voiced hisstrong feeling against the popular doc-trine because, nrst, it was not true;second, because it robbed Jesus, thePrince of life and glory, of His chiefglory as the giver of eternal life - to man-kind; and, third, because it caused mento go down to hades, or, as the commonversion says, hell, with a lie in theirright hand, viz., that they had in them-selves immortality. In an address on"Heresy," Mr. Neil summed up the posi-tion taken by himself on the great andgrave questions pertaining to man'snature and dest iny by saying: "First,that man was a mortal, perishing sin-ner; second, that eternal life or immor-tality was the gift of God throughJesus Christ; third, that impenitentsinners would be destroyed in the seconddeath.' This, he was convinced, after acareful study and life-long acquaint-ance with the Bible, was God's truth;while the opposite three were cardinaland unscriptural errors-First, that manwas an immortal being; second, he' hadeternity without Christ; and, third, thatby his undying nature he would live forever, either in heaven or hel!. Thesefalsehoods he, the lecturer, regarded asthe doctrines of the devil. Both ad-dresses were followed by interesting dis-cussions.DUNEDIN.-We are pleased to report

that our meetings this year, so far, bothmorning and evening, have been verywell attended; the younger members aretaking part in the morning, which isvery encouraging and helpful to thefew who have the burden of the workupon them. The evening services arealso keeping up in number, and occa-sionally we have a few strangers. Ourannual church meeting was held on.Ianuary 20th, when the following offi-cers were elected :-S. Lawrence, secre-tary; E. Sincock, treasurer; deacons,Bros. Sincock, Greatorex, Sanderson,and Lawrence. We are still anxiouslywaiting for someone to come along andassist us in holding up the Banner ofLife. Greetings to all the brethren.-S.L.

GEORGETOWN, BRITISH GUIANA.-Several letters have arrived from Bro.Edgehill, from which we cull a few ex-tracts :-"1 have visited lately' a smallplace called Albury, and have givensome 'addresses on the prophecies ofDaniel, and illustrated them by a chart.A goodly number attended to hear thesetalks. It was quite a -new thing forthem to hea-r that the Fourth Kingdom


15/16

MARCH, 1907. 'I'HIt B~BLE S'l'ANDARD. 47LJNFORTUNATE INTERRLJPTION.was yet future, and that the head of the

image, or the Babylonish kingdom, mustagain come upon the scene, along withthe other kingdoms, that the Stonemight ,grind them. to powder. Some ofthe audience laughed at these state-ments, but, as I continued, and quotedfrom the words of Jeremiah, Isaiah,Daniel, and Revelation, showing fromthese that the prophecies concerningBabylon had not been fulfilled, thingsbegan to change in my favour, and agood hearing was given. I gave thepeople a promise that I would pay an-other visit. This I did two days later,and there were hundreds present to hear.An endeavour was made by some toshow that Rome was certainly theFourth Kingdom of the Image, but tothese I Quoted, 'Did Christ destroy'Rome; and with the agents spoken ofin Scripture?' 'Did the nations see thisdestruction by Christ?' ' 'Was the de-struction of Babylon as sudden as thatof Sodom.' 'Did its overthrow resemblethe throwing of a stone into the water,as stated in Jeremiah?' These ques-tions remained unanswered. I thinkthat some oood was done. It is God'sWord we sow, and we leave the resultswith Him.

"Mv work lies on the streets, morethan "in houses. I feel that Imust goto my countrymen to tell them the mes-sage of salvation.

"As the year closes, I am thankfulthat God has hitherto kept me, and en-abled me to carry His Word to thosethat sit in darkness.

"Recently Iwent to Jonestown to seea sick brother. I talked with him con-cerning the Lord's coming, and our gath-ering unto Him. A visitor present in-terrupted me, with the remark that the'soul' went to heaven when man


16/16

THE BIBLE STANDARD. MARCH, 1907.(Uontiuued }rum paye 44.)

and humble this may seem, a little thought showed itsabswdity,. for what is the use of prophecy if it doesnot 1'eve(~l a future event? Noah's prediction of theflood was surely intended to be understood by those towhom it was addressed! 'I'he prophecies of the OldTestament concerning the Messiah were all uttered forpractical purposes' (for instance, as to His riding intoJerusalem on an ass-compare Zech. ix. 9 with Markxxi. 1-5), and as to the Book of Revelation, we aredistinctly told that the Lord gave it "that He mightshow unto His servants things that must shortly cometo pass" (Rev. i.' 1).

IV e may, therefore, come to the following conclusion :r. 'I'hat whatever it has pleased God to reveal inScripture must be suitable for the considera-tion 'of His children.n. That as the Old Testament prophecies con-cerning the first advent of our Lord wereliterally fulfilled, so the prophecies of theNew 11~sta11lentconcerning His second ad-vent will in due time likewise receive a literalfulfilment.

IH. Tbat if the Book: of Revelation (which some,say always either finds a man mad or makeshim so) was not intended to be diligentlystudied and in some manner understood, itis surprising that it commences with the de-claration, "Blessed is he that readeth thewords of this prophecy" (i. 3).

In my next letter we will begin to enquire what Godhas said, and what we are to understand by His wordsof prophecy which as yet have received no fulfilment.

Your friend,CARPUS.- - - . _ ---

"It is not, where didst thou glean yesterday, norwhere wilt thou glean to-morrow, nor where wilt thouglean in other days and years, but 'where hast thougleaned to-day?'" (Ruth ii. 19). Have you reallygleaned anything to-day that is of value to yourself or'othei's ?-SeZected.

God has called men to preach His Word, but theycan receive His Word to deal out to others only as Heentrusts it into their hands. Very little of so-calledpreaching is the preaching of the Word of God. Thereis a famine of hearing the Word of the Lord all overthe land, and ,.~hile God has an emancipation procla-mation for the ..slaves of sin, yet He is calling, "Whowill go for l . . l $ } / ' because very few live close enough tothe 'Lord to receive the revelation of His Word. HisWord is full of reproofs, admonitions,. encouragements,.,plain examples, high ideals, and rules for holy living.It is a tester of our experience, a traveller's guide inthe narrow WHy. "Search the Scriptures, for in themye think ye have eternal life." "Study to show thyselfapproved unto God."'-Sel.

c r : b c J l 3 t b L c Stanl)arl).The Bible Standard. can be ordered direct from Lhe 'I'reasurer

MR. ALIX. PAGI!:, Murdoch Road, Grey Lynn, Auckland. _~. d... 2 6.. 0 2Price per ann um. post freeSing le copiesBOOK STIW ARD-H:. H. FAI.IC'":~l Queen ..Street.

AGINTS FOLt TH~; BIBLIt Ii1'ANIJ.AIUJ:NEW ZEALA!,\D.

Auckland-Mr. Hancock, Bookseller, Queen Sbreet,Wellington-H. J. Barraclough, Myrtle Crescent. .Christchurch-T. P. .Iud kin s, 80, Broug harn Street, Syllenilam.Dunedin-Mr. Lawrence. Hope Street.Ka.iapoi-c Mr. James Holland.Rangiora-Mr. Wm. Smith, SOIl~h Hro"k.Ne w Plymouth-c-Mr. F'red Goodacre, CuurtneY,Road.Iast "xford-Mt. A.. England ..Thamcs-Mr. C. Sanders. Macky Street.'I'imat-u=-Mr. H. H. King, Stafford St'cct.'I'inwa ld, Ashburtun-Mr. sncarer.Waihi-:I1r. .Ioseph Foster.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA ..Adelaide-Mr. C. Gamble, Magill Road, Stepney.

NEW SOUTH WALES.Syd ney-c-Mr. H. Cropp. Mitchell Street. Kogarah.

Oommunications to the Edit.or to be a.dd ressed : GIO. ALl>RIDGEBren t.wood Avenuc, Mount Eden. Telegraphic Address, "HockyNook.'" ' '_All communications to the Association and orders for Bible Standardto be addressed to the Secretary ancl,1'rcas'lrer MR. ALEX.,?-AG]l~,Murdoch Road. Grey Ly nn , Anckland. -

CHURCH OF CHRIST . 1 . ;Hold Servtces 8.8 under:a UCKLA ND- West Street.Sunday, at 11 o'clock a.m., Fellowsblp Mee!ln~6.45 p.m., Preaching Service.Snnday School at 2.45.Wednesday evenlnl/: .. Bible ClaSS at 7.4r >,Evaneel ist's add r-ess=-Geo. Alctridge, Brentwood Avenue

Mount l

the bible standard march 1907

Documents