Newspaper Page Text
JOSEPH S. BAKER— Bmiiit.
VOL. XIL
i V- TE*.MS PER aNNVM.
C@* “The Christian fxDE.x, publisTied
on Friday in-each week, (except two in the
year), will be fu misled to each subscriber
at $2 aft cents, in advance ; or $3 if not
paid within tlie year.
jCr” Post-Masters, where the Index is
taken, are requested to Forward renuttanccs
for subscribers at ‘their respective offices,
according to.a .decision of the Pos't-Master
General as to their right to do so. All pa
trons and.agents are requested to notice this.
Every Agent (and all Baptist Ministers
are particularly’solicited.le become agents)
who procure and pay for live copies of the
Lire itu.BilfidAo.a4 istfc naabcani
'■pensatton for his ‘(rouble.
, a Letters an business, or communications.
• Hpy 1 be addressed to the Editor, post paid.
JHBbitvertisemctfts may be inserted on usual
terms, at the discretion of the Editor.
/ UggjjjL—■■ ft “ U-” wHBB
* •’ ‘lnterpretation of'John iii: 5.
Except (i man be born of wafer and of
the Spirit, he cannot enter lhc..KLig-'‘
dom of God t
•‘III. WHAT SIGNIFICATION.
, Having'decided that gennad, hudor, and
flneuma, arc all ip !>e hiterprctcd'figurative
{t>ws are, now ‘.o delgtrmj.ne the
ojVeach, anoufe meaning of
the whole passage.
r ’ For tjtis purpose we wilt look back to
the'reshft of anr inquiries respecting the
mistis ‘loquendi, and collect the significations,
whfchlSff?dVal ferriw.fljHiatiy have, when
uftilied to suclL&ubjccls.*’ If we find that
Mt may he combined without unfitness, I
to make a sense'consistent .with common’
rrri , the scope of the and tlte
renin-’ ioctrine of wripw’tyf shall con
clude that we have ascertained the true |
meaning of the text.- . * j
Except a man sic ,j<a!'/t''t.fibip!c>ricit!ly ; j
i, p. undergo a great moral change of which
God and which is character *
ized. By’ producing faith, love, tighteo'us
tforfeis. victory juyer tb§ uM|d, and niesgr
vaiibn from4tifepd unfir of one.
Os water rhcfaphoricMi i. e. a divine
influence necessary “to spiritual lflVoud
well being, f *- i”
.'htd of spirit metaphorical ; 1. e. a di
-vine inltiiehce which is invisible or imma
terial. and active.
He cannot entcr\fhc kingdom of Goelg
ije. lie cannot partake of.jlie fpiicyy r<?4¥lk.
‘fftg front God's exercising kingly atilhori
~ty through (he Messiah,
These several ports may be fitly com
bined into a sense wniclt may be briefly ex
pressed tints :• Except a man undergo a
great moral change Ir<itn a divine influence,
which is in various respects comparable to
water and to air in motion, lie isitiuot be ;t
subject of Messiah’s Spititnal reign. This
sense, unless good reasons appear, to the
contrary, the.buys of interpretation compel
us to lake for the true one.
Tltis interpretation takes die phrase
iboru of water ami spi.it’ to be a double
metaphor, representing the same object
that the single metaphor ‘born of the spirit
isrtised for, in the following verse. *1 he
double metaphor may he supposed to have
been used in verse 5, because a more full
■description of the object was needed,
whereas, in verse (>, nothing more was re
quisite than that the object pointed
out as to be distinguished from that with
which it is contrasted ;—the Spiritual birth
from the natural.
AVe. may be unable to mark out with
■confidence the precise limits to which the
signification of each metaphorical term ex
tends, \Y r e may howevei conclude that, as
water is a visible element, it more fitly de
notes the influence excited through the ex
ternal means of spiritual instruction. Ihe
Scriptures countenance this conclusion.
1 Cor. iii, 0. I have planted, Apollos
watered.
lfeut. xxxii. 2. My doctrine shall drop
as the rain, my speech shall distil as the
dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb,
and Ss the showers upon the grass.
Eph. v,20. With die washing of water
bv the word.
’ On the other hand, air, being an in visi
ble element, more fitly represents the im
mediate influence of the Holy Ghost, mys
‘ tcriqus'iii.its operation, and giving efficacy
prille external means.
. John xx. 22. He breathed on them, and
saith unto them, receive ye the Holy
Ghost.
John iii. 8. The wind bloweth where it
listeth, and thou hcarest the sound thereof,
but canst not tell whence it corneth, and
whither it goeth : so is every one that is
born of the Spirit.
I Thess. i. 5. For our gospel came not
unto you in word only, but also in power
tnd (en pncumCtti hugio, in holy spirit,)
j. e. a Sanctifying divine influence.
IV. -THE INTERPRETATIONS
WHICH OTHERS HAVE GIVEN.
Having applied the rules of interpretation
for oi.rselves, and having drawn our own
continuous respecting the meaning of the
text, wv may now inquire what opinions
others lave formed, and on what grounds,
that we hay see if there is any just cause
to suspect.he accuracy of our investigation.
1. The- fvrsoiis who, on some questions,
are entitled t highest respect,- are the
ancient eccleVtical writers. This testi
mony concen\<r a historical fact or the
ineaning-of a sb r( ] with which they were
well dcquaintedXs jnost worthy of our re
gard. We haviy accordingly, consulted
i their writings to after tain the iisus loquendi
THE CHRIST N INDEX,
of their times- But in a question, whether
■n word, the niennirtg of which is perfectly
understood, is to be taken literally or meta
phorically, we ought not to make them our
judges. It would be as absurd as to refer
with implicit confidence to the decision of
some ancient mathematician respecitng a
problem which we may solve for ourselves
just.as well as he. It is nevertheless desi
rable to know how they interpreted the
text, and what doctrinal and practical infer
ences they from it, 1 lie inquiry, 011
these points, we have reserved for this
.place.
Wall has a chapter on of
the ancients concerning tiro him Jo state of
uiTaTffs orT.ftS'wFTtiie uoTiaptizedTirom
which vc make die following quotation :
“AH the ancient Christians (without the
exception qf one man) do understand that
rule of our Saviour (John iii. 5.) Verily,
verily, 1 say unto thee, Except u man [jit
is in tlie -original can me tie, exempt a per
son, or except one] be. born of water and
of Vie Spirit, he cannot enter into ihe king
dom of (Jod,. of baptism. .
“1 had occasion, in ill# First. Part, to
bring a great many instances of their wr
ings; where all that mr*^iu. that text-front
Justin Martyr down to Jie\usttn ibi so ap-.
ply it; and Wkj- u !f ‘•* V.C- fought.
Neither did I ettjT
in arty ancient
was the first that pkrecMe
mean baptism. i'lny c. 1(3.1 li*
gives another iulerprlV thF? wjifcirfie edit
fesscs to'bc new. This Tnim did indeed
write many things, in defence ol ‘infant bap
tism but he has doneifti times niore/piej
ndiceto that cause, by jjrithdrawiug (as far
as in-Mm lay*) the elrenttth of-this ■ text of
Scripture -(which the ancient Christians
used asachiei grown tof it) by that forced
iuu.rpiets.Hqtt nUiis.in'-ii hadias dunegood
to:-!*; :-;Uija i#w m*po;hv-es and Ilrgtl-';
qiCnfv. Vv hat pjSjfiof Scripture more
(fit to proufive.-V the gatuifitctlojg- C £ some
q-laiii find orcTnary man pt-t imps, is ,
■Hglcaji.ihlc oi tin- hccc <;f l
tlie rousi-ijifciicCs By-WTtiidi if is proven
from other places) that f,e ought to have Iris
- child baptized, tiiau tltis (esjiecially il’-it
were transnted. tuto English as it should
he; our Savknir say s, ‘t hat no-jpt-c
----son .nljall cbine to Heaven without it?—
nicanlifg, at least in tvtd’s ordinary way.
It is true,’ that Calvin at. other places
,determine tliis to be so*, as l shall show pre
'-sfMtyT'tnirhis ‘dtfrtPWW'HM'fffßr WFfi®#
for the loss of. a text of Scripture. Since
his time, those parties of the Protestants
that havu been the greatest adtnircrsof him,
have followed him in leaving out this place
fronramong tlieii proof of infant baptism,
and diverting the sense of it another way,
which the Anti-pauiobaptist observing,
have taken tlitpi advantage, and do aim to
sjjiufojr all the Protestant l’aldobaplists
from it. Tftey are apt now to lacy out
any of ill cm that make any pretence to this
text, as going against the grneral sense ol
Piotestants.”
The quotation already made from Justin
Martyr, (p. 14.) shows his interpretation
of the text. Wall, in commenting on it
says : “We see by it, that they understood
that rule of our Saviour, Except one be re
genctatcd for born again] of water and the
spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom ol
God, —of water baptism ; and concluded
from it, that without such baptism, no per
son could come to Heaven ; and so did all
the wtiters ol these 400 years, not one man
excepted.”
The following from Turtullian, shows
not only how the text was interpreted in
his time ; hut that the doctrine of the ne
cessity of Baptism to Salvation was under
stood to he t,light by it. “Whereas it is
ail acknowledged rule, that none can he
saved without baptism ; grounded especial
ly on that sentence of our Lord, Unless one
be born of water he cannot be saved.”
We add another from Gregory Nazian
zen, (A. D. 31i0.) to show the connexion
between the doctrinal inference just men
tioned, and the practice of infant baptism.
“Some mav say’, Suppose this to hold in
the case of those that can desire baptism,
—what say you to those that are as yet in
fants, and are not in capacity to bo either
sensible of the grace or the miss of it ?
Shall we baptize them too ! \ es, by all
means, if any danger make it requisite, for
it is better that they he sanctified without
iheir own sense of it, than that they should
.die unsealed and uninitiated. And a ground
of this to us is circumcision, which was
given on the eighth day, and was a typical
seal and was practised on those that had no
use of reason ; as also the anointing of the
door-posts, which preserved the first-horn
by things that have no sense. As for oth
ers, I give my opinion that they should
stay three years or thereabouts, when they
are capable to bear and answer some of the
holy words; and though they do not per
fectly understand them, yet they form them;
and that you sanctify them in soul and bo
dy with the great sacrament of initiation;
for though they are not liable to give ac
count of their life before their reason be
come to maturity, (they having this advan
tage by their age, that they are not forced
to account for lire faults they have commit
ted in ignorance) yet, by reason of those
sudden and unexpected assaults of dangers
that arc by no endeavor to be prevented, it
is bv all means advisable that they be se
cured by the laver.
So far for the interpretation of Wall and
the Fathers.
2. VY’e come now to the interpretation of
Galvin. The passage of his Institutes to
FOR TIIE BAPTjIST fONVKN’fffON ( THE STATE OF GEORGIA.
PENFtELD, GA., JIIGUST 2, 1844.
which Wall refers reads as follows.
“Moreover They [the opponents of in
fant baptism] adduce tlie languageof Christ,
which is recorded by John, and which they
suppose to’ represent a present regeneration
as reqtiisite.io baptism: “Except a man. be
born of water and the Spirit, he catpiof en
ter into the tiie kingdom of Gcd-’* See,
they say, how baptism is called regenera
tion by tlie mouth of the Lord. When it
is evident, then, that infants are utterly in
capable of regeneration, on what pretence
do we admit them to baptism, to which re
generation is indispensably necessary ? In
the first place they are deceived in suppos
ing -that refill* to baptism, bw
ei.use ir-Tiieiuiuna wotm for, alter Christ
hud declared to Nicodemus tlie corruption
of nature,.and shewn him the necessity of
being born again*; because Nicodenms was
dreaming of a secound corporeal birth, he
here indicates the manner in which God
regenerates us, namely, by water and by
the Spirit, as if he had said, By the Spirit
who, in the ablution and purification ol the
souls of the faithful, performs tlie office of
water. Nor is this a novel mode of ex
pression : for it perfectly corresponds with
that declaration of Jjoiu) the Baptist: “He
that corneth after me, shallA<nptize ujth the
‘Holy Ghost ami with fir?.”- • / ?s to bicptnc
iuithJhe Uoty Spirit tire,- Urero-’
•fore, is to comer tjie Holy “'li'‘. it;
‘legeneration, lias the and nalufo of
fi re; .so, to he born of water-and of the
Spirit, is up other than to receive tlwt'infUi
enee/of the Spirit, which does in-the soul
what water dbes on thohotjy. I know that!
othersgivtqa different interpretation, hut 1
have .110 doubt that*this is tlie genuine sense;
bdbati.se the intention of Christ is pimply to
teach iv*- nil must be divestn! of then own
nlmircnvlio aspire to the kingdom “of. hea
ven.” - .) ’ ■ ‘
3. Tl,<iUr remains a liiiul mtt'rprciat-iprtV
which was given on p. 28, in the win'd*iif :
’ •••’ •/• i; - ..ili lirelinn f
- pqfiing haplisiiHo jpe 'iitteud*4<Jmf. -it iffip >
find dlit-lit tint the thrwe
ii> of baptism to salvation.
. qONCLU‘MON.
1. The chief argument iii support of the
first interpretation, and the only one which
Wall advances, is its antiquity) It may be
noticed that, in die very firet .instance- in
which the term regeneration's applied ip
baptism, (see the quotation from Justin
M at yTi-fr t* Tsmumtir ifTfnts’
text. The interpretation therefore, may
lie supposed to have given rise to that, use
of the term’ If so, this ttsus loquendi
ought not to he urged as an argument for
the interpretation, having no higher author
ity than the interpretation ilsolf.
How far the Ancients may he relied on
as authority in the interpretation of Scrip
ture, may be inferred from an example
given by Wall, vol. l, p. 40. “The pas
sage itself, [Hernias, Faslor, lib. 3, fiiriiJi
trtd. 0, cap. Hi.] which rrpres-. nis the pa
triarchs and prophets of the Old ‘!’<.•■ am-.-nt
to stand in need of baptism, and of tin
| apostles preaching the name oi Cluisi to
them aflet; they were dead, before they
could be capable of entering tlie kingdom
of God, does indeed seem strange to us,
and is the oddest passage in all the hook ;
but we must consider it is represented by
way of vision, where every tiling is not to
he taken in a proper sense ; yet (Jletnens
Alexandrinus, who lived about 100 years
alter this book was written, cites this pas
sage, and lakes it for real matter of fact;
and those texts, 1 Pet. 3. 10; and 4, fi,
which speak of the gospel being preached
to than that were dead, though they be
now by most Protestants understood in a
notlier sense, were, by most of the ancients,
understood in a sense like to this.” Again,
p. 00. “Many of the eldest Christians (be
sides Hernias, whose words I gave befote)
conceived that the gospel of life was preach
ed, and baptism, in the name of Christ,
given to the patriarchs in their separate
statu.” The truth is, that the Fathers, as
intepreters of scripture, and theologians,
were but children, when compared with the
Reformers and other divines of modern
times. Every age in the progress of time
easts new light on the Ifildc ; and in tin;
last age, when ‘knowledge shall la-increas
ed,’ much of that knowledge will be deriv
ed from clearer and more correct interpre
tations of the sacred volume. It is there
fore manifestly wrong to fetter the mind in
its investigations of divine truth liy the au
thority of the Fathers. How much mis.
chief has resulted from their misinterpreta
tion of this one text, it is not the business
of an interpreter to decide.
2. Tlie last interpretation, which agrees
with the first only in supposing baptism to
be intended, but differs widely as to tire
general sense of the text, has not the author
ity on its side. It is moreover contrary to
the principles of interpretation, and involves
an impropriety ; see p. 20.
3. Tlie interpretation of Calvin, the scc
ond in the above enumeration agrees sub
stantially with that to which our investiga
tions have led us. It differs in taking
jmeuma to signify the person of the lloly-
Ohost : ours understands it to denote his
influence. As to the general sense of the
text, the two interpretations harmonize.
Wall objects though Galvin‘did indeed
writs many things in defence of infant bap
tism, lie lias done ten limes more prejudice
to that cause, by withdrawing (as far as in*
him lay,) the strength of this text of .Scrip
ture (which the ancient Christians used as
a chief ground of it) by that foiccd inter
pretation of his, than he has done good to
ituxLl bis new hypotheses and argu
mejr This objection lies with nearly
, or if!.: equal force against the inlerpreta
tioiv-’ Dwight, and any other that does
i baptism necessary to salvation.—
- validity cannot be admitted. If it
slioi i appear that tlie great Reformer, by
mec eiilg this text from the misinterpreta
tion the Fathers, has undermined the
very, undation on winch infant baptism
was|irigiaa!ly built, still the rules of cor
rect interpretation should bo followed. No
textlboiild be made to spo; k a sense not : ls
owDuierely to furnish a convenient defence
QC-raD I *.particular doctrine o! practice.
duty to respect m>t thy .m
----lut the reasons of uninspired men,}
‘vhqqave preceded us in the interpretation
of SijHpture ; and as in the present instance
we lirve found no sufficient reason 11 set
asidathe result of our own investigations;
we must decide, with Calvin, that “the in
tent ill i of Christ is simply to teach that ail
mustl.e divested of itreirown nature, who
aspic to the kingdom of heaven,”
For the Christian Index.
-I- Slavery.—So. 5.
* J ve endeavored, in the foregoing nuni
-1 a express the argument in the brief-
Csfefjl inner possible. It is susceptible of
alnijd- ’indefinite addition and expansion;
b-d, re I do not desire to fatigue the reader,
I \viE% ct what has been written suffice for
*!> ict argument on this part of the sub
ject. 1 will notice, however, before passing
jgQoml position under the first gener
al hen , two offsets which have been pre-
Sterttelftgainsi the direct scripture sanction
of slijpry.
JsksMfa said, that the same course ofrea*
l# n i jjv'ould prove, as well, that God sane- |
gCZZ-Sj I havo not seen aiiy ac
'o sustain such an allegation, and
o-Hi*;t4jß | |,e advanced. It eanribt escape
the uml’e oi ( tbe most careless reader, that
the tw are mentioned in a very
yli.fl'crcy manfiei in the script-ties, ami we
have,aa;sidcs, iji the New Testament w-lurt
js (qiti%dcnt to a prohibition ol polygamy’.
No spmfic law against’ it Was necessary ;
have no existence in Judea in the
tini(7 (‘iTT 7] ffts*f trtAtmihrrntrrevA
words of Christ, however, (Jlatt. 19: 0.)
may hi constnied by an .easy iwinjicalion to
pndiiht it. If whoever •putlelii away his
wile aid marrieth nnother cominittcih adul
tery ; jo who marrieth another without put
ting ae.ay the first, is no 1.-.-s ruilly ul'atlul
teiy. Ami ; , ! p: in the
Epiaib/.j !’:e ; ri’fci.. -v . ia; ri. \ - alwava
i;op:./,|k-li; i !’ uuio -oi on man to
urn- v, i. ; . i , : , 1 i .7 : 1
I I,
I. .. e staurn, ibv God net only j--HTiir :i
but (lit t!y s::;i:'tio:icd it under both Ihe Old
and Ntw T -slanu-nt di.“|ieiisati<ms
2.j'J'he second refuge is, that the word
serumt in the Bible docs not mean slave,
but lifers to one occupying a more volun
tary situation than a bondman. In antici
pation! of this objection, we gave an ac
count, jn the second number, of the nature
of Roman slavery, which account is sus
tained by the concurrent testimony of all
the claGienl writers on tlie subject. But
little additional is needed here. If the Ro
man ssihy extended over all those places to
which the Apostles directed epistles, when
ever mention is made of .servants it must re
fer to spelt as were servants under Roman
law. This is proof enough, of usrlf, that
the sacred writers when tfii-v mi\ - rva.iu*
mean slaves. But. the G-ici-r Wi- m, and
to express waster nod servant would settle
the poilit, were all oilier evident: ■ lacking.
For master we have: i. /Curios from
kurosauthority and applied to any one pos
sessing yto.lh-.i.'l;- v”; -1 ‘ J Ih uni, • r i J 1
ileus fear ami pioiewfl o ’fiiake, or, perhaps,
ilesmoi a bond anil poito to make, and ap
plied, primarily, to a master of slaves ; as
every Greek scholar knows, and any one
can learn by’ application to the Lexicon.—
For servant we have: 1. Oi/cetes, from
oi/cos, a house, that is, one belonging to the
house; and 2. dou/os, from i/eo to bind,
that is, a bondman. But it is needless to
wastc.tiie readers time in pro\ mg that which
every tyro knows.
Slavurv is not an immorality itself:
Secondly. Because it is not indirectly
forbidden by the spirit of the scriptures.
The opponents of slavery’ claim tlie en
tire spirit of the Bible to he oil their side.—
They say, that die moral precepts —such
as thou shall love thy neighbor as thyself,
and all things whatsoever ye would that
m n should do to you, do vc even so to
them—ire diametrically opposed to slave
ry. That the fact, that, under the circum
stances, the Gospel does not forbid slavery
affords no reason to believe that it does not
mean to prohibit it: for if its principles
’ wore fully adopted slavery could not exist.
That God has two ways to reveal his will,
the direct and the indirect. Ho may for
bid a thing directly, or lie mav command
certain duties, or impose certain obligations,
with which a certain course of conduct is
manifestly inconsistent, and thus forbid it
indirectly. That God lias manifestly im
posed such obligations as are inconsistent
with slaveiy.
To.the .question : . why this manner of
forbidding it was chosen in preference to
any other ? it is answered: The reason
may be that slavery’ is a social evil; and to
its eradication a change must be effected in
the society’ in which it exists, li the Gos
pel had forbidden the evil instead of sub
verting the principle ; il it hud .proclaimed
the ii nla win Incss of slavery and taught slaves
lo resist tiie oppression of their masters ; ii
would instantly have arrayed the two par
ties in deadly hostility throughout the civ
ilized world, &c. (Wayland’s Mor. .Sei. p.
214.) We have endeavored to present tlieii
views in the clearest way possible and in
regard to them we make the following re
marks :
1. Suppose wo grant, which we do un
hesitatingly, that God does reveal llis will
indirectly as ivell as directly : would it be
doing justice lo Hrs character, would it be
reverential to charge Him (as the Abolition
ists do, if language means any thing) with
saying one thing and meaning another!—
He may reveal a thing indirectly but it can
not be opposed to that which He has al
ready in a direct manner revealed ; and we
leave it to the unprejudiced reader to decide,
whether it has been satisfactorily proved,
that the lettoi of tiie Bible does sanction
slavery. Should one of our fellow crea
tures approach us wil.li a certain language
upon his lips, and feelings tlie revcise of
that, in his heart, we would consider him a
hypocrite and deceiver; and yet God is
charged—l shudder while I write it—with
permitting and sanctioning slavery’ by tit<*
letter of the scriptures, while bv its spirit
lie is seeking its subversion I
2. If Christ am! liis Apostles viewed it -
as a social evil, and chose to subvert the |
principle rather than forbid tlie evil, from a
desire to avoid the anarchy and blaodshed
which wouldbe dn: - 1
■f, : ■ *-r.iwfr-Cim-rW":ud oi ri ew 1 r,ng(ali<l
Abolitionists. They feel no hesitation to
proclaim the “ unlawfulness of slavery,” j
and “to teach slaves to resist the oppression j
of their mastersand tints recklessly do
j that, which, according to their own show
i mg, Almighty God tiiinscll, from a regard !
jto consequences, refused to do. “ Fools !
li.-adl- ng rush \\ hero angels Icar to tread.”]
] 3. \V’- have no evidence from tlte /crij> j
! ‘-tires that God withholds a revelation oi’ His !
i .ill ft • m a . nawicdge that its promulgation .
wuiiid cause the shedding of human blood, j
i Our Saviour Himself that He
came not to bring peace on earth, but a
sword, and that the principles which He
inculcates would set at variance even mem
bers of the same family. We do not find
Him endeavoring to destroy idolatry by the
use of language so framed as by its spirit to
subvert it. at the same time that its letter
would not fall unpleasantly upon a pagan
ear ; and yet there was no subject on which
the large majority of mankind were more
sensitive than on this. Every reader of ec
clesiastical history knows, that more Chris
tian blood has been made to (low by the
persecutions excited by paganism than by
all oilier causes combined.
4. The idea that God omits to forbid
gross sin for fear of exciting men’s angry
pa.--sious. and producing anarchy in society,
springs from an unworthy view ol 11 is cliar
j aetcr. God cannot look upon sin ; and,
surely, 1! in whose bauds are the hearts of
the children ol men, and who can turn them
ji.s llie. i-i.in.-i-* iii” u.:Ot-r uric lui’uud, would
never be willing, even in appearance, to
connive at sin from a fear ol consequences.
5. The Apostle Raul did not seem lo he
as well instiucted in regard to the spiiit of
Christianity as some of our modern divines,
or he surely would not have used such lan
guage as he did to Corinthian masters and
servants : Let every man abide in the same
calling wherein he unis called. Art l/iov
called being it servant ? cure not for it :
but if thoumayest be made free, use it ra
ther. For he that is called in the Lord,
being a servant, is the Lord's freeman:
likewise also he/lint is culled, being free, is
Christ's servant. Or did the Apostle thus
endeavor to blind their eyes to the op
pression ol the system, that they might not
lie “arrayed against each other” and that
the invisible spirit so dissimilar to th cboihj
of the .scripture-, might insidiously, ami
without their knowledge, dissolve their con
nection !
0. Our Saviour declared that lo love God
with all our hearts and mu neighbors as our
selves constitute■; tlie sum of the law of dit
to n commandments. Now is it not remark
able, that the very precepts, which, it is as
serted, do so unequivocally condemn slavi -
n', have inseparably inwrought into their
Publisher— BENJ. BRANTLY
very plirasoleogy a recoguitionland sanction
of it? We havealready shown, that in the
4th and 10th commandments, —one in each
of the two tables—-men servants and maid
servants are mentioned, as those who are
rightfully held in bondage. Here then we
have the letter and the spirit of the moral
precepts themselves arrayed against each
other? Such impious liberties can inen
lake with God’s word, -.viien they desire to
gratify their own prejudices, or fear to of-
Icnd the prejudices of those among whom
they live I
In the next number I shall take up the
moral precepts themselves, and see wheth
er they do condemn or undermine slavery.
Circumstances may prevent me from wri
ting for the next paper.
A -Baptist Ministep.
For ’he Christian Index'.
lltllcr la Confess tlitiu cover Sin,
Designed for the particular benefit of those
whom it may concern.
It is tho declaration of a wise man “ lie
that covcreth his sins shall not prosper but
whoso eonfesseth and forsnkeih them shall
find mercy.” Do you believe this ? Did Sol
omon speak the truth when lie uttered these
words ? Every one, we think, of common
understanding must subscribe to the cor
rectness of this sentiment. It is not requi
site to enter into an elaborate argument lo
convince any mind, that a man in covering
up his sins, averts none of their destructive
consequences ; and that the wisest course
which lie can possibly adopt, is to confess
and to forsake them. But whilst this truth
secures universal assent, how inconsidera
ble the practical influence which should re
suit from such an admission. Under what
a sti’hnge infatuation do men live in refer
ence lo religious realities I Only let a child
of tins world be persuaded that a particular
course of action winch lie had been pursu
ing is disas’trnus, bow instantly
a course be relinquished. Only let him be
convinced that any policy will abridge his
jiV ir
it With us when onr spiritual instead of our
; temporal interests are jeoparded. Here,
: then, may be persuasion, and even convic
’ lion, and still no corresponding effort.—
Though the ini penitent man acknowledges
that u iiboirtn hope in the Redeemerqf-sfn-.
! ners in- must lie wholly undone and mis<*i-
I able, yet lie puts forth not one excitation lo
I obtain ifrat hope and lives unconce*rned,
whil t this is-, tins: cured. Though aware
that in covering up his sins there is no
prosperity and that mercy can he had only
upon confession- and abandonment, he per
sists in practising the former and neglecting
the latter.
How prevalent die disposition of th*s hu
man heart to cover up sin—hoping thus to
hide from observation its ugliness and de
formity. How comparatively few the in
stances in which men come forward, and
with a noble magnanimity anil Christian
candor, acknowledge their transgressions,
declaring at the same time, their determina
tion to forsake them. Were we to judge
from tiie practice of the world we should
suppose that prosperity was the reward of
those who succeed in covering tip their sins,
and that shame and ignominy were univer
sally visited upon those who owned them
selves guilty. We have heard of ancient
people in whose judgment it was no dis
grace to steal, if the thief could escape dc
lection, but if discovered, he was in the pub
lic view, deserving ol punishment and dis
grace. In like manner, many now act a*
if the conciiialiiumt nfsin was a virtue, and
its acknowledgment a crime. With multi-*
tudes, (ho first thought, after the commis
sion of some wicked deed, is, How can it
be hidden ? By what artifice can it be cov
ered up ? If they can succeed in conceal
ing their conduct they (latter themselves that
their guilt is extenuated. The wise man’s
language to all such is, Cover Vour sins
and you shall have no prospeiity ; you di
minish none of tlieii -1 turpitude, you ward
off none of tho punishment which He who’
is acquainted with the most secret iniquit
ies will inflict upon you. Own and forsake
your sins and voushall have merry; though
justice condemns you,’ yet you will be
spared ; though you merit suffering, yet,
for Christ’s sake, you will lie pardoned.”
There are several methods by which per
sons attempt to cover sin. The number,
too, of those who are engaged in this unhal
lowed practice is lar greater than is ordina
rily supposed. Every man who declines’
confessing mav be said to cover his giiift.
From tire self-iigh'i re . mail who boasts ill
his exemption from all iniquity, down to
life man wlin.-e character is stained vvitU
vile ud a'ii i. then- is a consul#
effort to bide guilt. Now it is to be bilnp
in mind that men nun / c over their sin mi
NO. 31