Newspaper Page Text
JOSEPH WALKER, Editor of.o--a.3st of the baptist of the state of Georgia.
Yol. XXXYI. —STew Series, Yol. 25.
C|f Christian fitk*.
PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY,
* AT MACON, GA.,
BY A COMMITTEE OF BRETHREN, FOR THE
GEORGIA BAPTIST CONVENTION.
TERMS.
Fifty numbers in the year are mailed to each subscri
ber for $2.50, or $2.00 in advance.
Discontinuance may be ordered by the subscri
bers at the close of any year, provided all arrearages
have been paid , or by the Editor, at his discretion,
whenever more than one year’s subscription is due.
Any person who remits $lO in advance for five
mew sobscrit'ers, may for one ylir.
Any minister of the Gospel who remits $8 in ad
vance, for four new subscribers, may receive the paper
one year.
Advertisements at the regular charge will be One
Dollar per square of ten lines or less, for the first in
sertion, and Fifty Ce'itis for each subsequent insertion.
All advertisements not specified as to time, wiU be pub
lished until forbid and charged accordingly. A liberal
discount allowed to those who advertise by the year.
Communications should be addressed to the Chris
tian Index , Macon, Ga.
t Professional and Business Men.
and Bcsiness Cards will be inserted
ander this head, at the following rates, viz:
For three lines, per annum $ 5 00
“ Seven lines, do 10 00
“ Ten lines, do 12 00
* l Twelve lines, do 15 00
No advertisements of this class will be admitted, un
less paid for in advance, nor for a less term than twelve
months. Advertisements of over twelve lines will be
charged pro rata. Advertisements not paid for in ad
vance will be charged at the regular rates.
The Office of the Christian Index is on Third
Street, over Thomas J. Lane’s Store, opposite the W are
house of Messrs. Hardeman & Sparks. Persons having
business with the office will find the Editor ready to re
ceive them during the usual business hours of the city.
JMrj.’
For the Index.
“ Sweet Home ” on the Seaboard.
BY J. O. S.
Our boat is launched upon the gliding stream,
By oarsmen’s vigorous nerve, is made to bound,
While practised skill from other days is found,
Which hold the oar a childish toy, I deem.
Red is the light of day; the setting sun,
Which spread its gorgeous mouth to enshroud,
Like victors wreath thrown o’er that faithful one.
The porpoise bounding from the depths, inhales
■Our ambient air above—the breath of heaven,
That sacred pledge of love to mortals given,
Now borne on Zephyr’s wing in gentle gales.
Our dashing oars give forth phosphoric light
Unseen before, ’midst saline wavqg concealed,
Such radient gems by rudeness thus revealed,
Are sparkling brightly o’er the face of night.
And stars in conscious laimuage now reveal,
In all tke dazzling blaze oovorlds omiugh,
• Their glorious Architect who built that sky,
And stamped on them His own immortal seal.
Beneath such heavenly light we homewards glide,
And gain the shore; our well known lights appear;
“ Sweet Home,” a thousand rising thoughts endear,
Which claims more love than all the world beside.
And yet my Heavenly Home transcends it far,
In aaore than Eden’s bloom ! with halo bright,
So wide diffused! with rivers of delight;
And friends grown radient as the evening star!
For there the Life Eternal first hath gleamed,
Hath clothed in glory all whom Christ redeemed;
Hath equals made them with the sons of morn,
And framed in heavenly mould, the earthly born!
My Wife.
[The following beautiful lines, written by the late
Bishop Heber, were addressed to his wife, whilst he was
making an episcopal visit to his immense diocese in the
East Indies.]
If thou wert by my side, love!
How fast would evening fall,
In green Bengala’s palmy grove,
Listening the nightengale.
If thou, my love! wert by my side,
My babies at my knee,
Ho-w gladly would our pinnancc glide
O’er Gunga’s mimic sea!
I miss thee at the dawning gray,
When, on the deck reclined,
In careless ease my limbs I lay.
And woo the cooler wind. .
I miss thee when by Gunga’s stream,
My twilight steps I guide;
But most beneath the lamp’s pale beam,
I miss thee from my side.
I spread my books, my pencil try,
The lingering noon to cheer,
But miss thy kind, approving eye,
Thy meek, attentive ear.
But when, of morn and eve, the star I
Beholds me on my knee,
I feel, though thou art distant far,
Thy prayers ascend for me.
Then on! then on! where duty leads,
My course be onward still;
On broad Hindostan’s sultry meads—
O’er black Almorah’s hill.
That course, nor Delhi’s kingly gates,
Nor mild Mulwah detain;
For sweet the bliss us both awaits, *
. By yonder western main. *
Thy towers, Bombay, gleam bright, they say,
Across the dark blue sea;
But never were hearts so light and gay, ; -
* As then in thee. v
— _____ • .
CfmmtfiatifM.
Typal and Representative Charac-
TERS OF THE BIBLE.
NO. VI.
The first Murderer and the first Martyr.
Gen. 4 : I—l 7.
From the early annals of the race it ap
pears that industry was commended as a
primal virtue. Our first parents were
sent abroad from Eden to till the earth.
And as showing that their sons also were
accustomed to industrial employments, it
is said.: 4 “Abel a keeper cf sheep;
but Cain was a tiller of the ground.” No
individual is properly educated, no fami
ly or community properly ordered with
out a system of industry.
It also appears in the brief narrative
of the ancestry of the race that the first
household w r ere religiously educated. For
ifiis spoken of as an appointed and cus
tomary thing, that in process of time,
“ Cain brought of the fruit of the ground
an offering to the Lord. And Abel he
also brought of the firstlings of the flock.”
Divine revelations are thus shown to have
been co-eval with the race. Not only did
God communicate with our first parents,
but appointed the methods of approach to
himself by their posterity. Not only were
they taught to recognize his eternal pow
er and God-head, his relation as Creator,
Preserver and bountiful Benefactor, but
also they were required to perform cer
tain specific acts, expressive of obedience,
homage and praise to God. As in daily
dependence and cravings of appetite, man
would rejoice in the fruits and harvests of
the earth, that he might not forget the
giver in the use of the gift, and that he
might not degenerate to mere sordid, sen
tient and selfish life, he was required to
offer a part —the first fruit of his toil and
the production of the earth to God. How
elevating, ennobling and refining would
be such recurring and grateful remem
brance of the Giver of all good and per
fect gifts.
But it was necessary to celebrate the
doctrine of pardon and redemption, as
well as of Divine providence and human
gratitude in tjie order of worship. This
was provided for in the appointed and
impressive sacrifice of animals. The vic
tim quivering under the sacrificial knife
and burning on the sacrificial alter, was
perpetually suggestive of the suffering
and death caused by and due to sin. Such
emblems and promises of pardon would
exalt and honor the law of the
Creator, while humbling the creature. If
God so loved the world, as to provide for
its restoration through the sufferings and
death of a Divine redeemer, prefigured in
typical sacrifices upon appointed altars,
that love was inefiibly great.
Bloody sacrifices were not required to
appease a capricious vengence, but to
symbolize the priceless value of justice,
the cost of the pardon of sin and the in
effible and everlasting indebtedness of the
redeemed. Such seems to have been the
order of religious worship observed by
the first family of the race and which has
obtained throughout succeeding dispensa
tions, with corresponding variations of
signification throughout all ages.
But difference of character and destiny
early develops itself in the first family
in the spirit and manner of religions sac
rifices. Cain and Abel approached the
altar with very different feelings; the
one haughty, self-reliant and full of envy
and jealousy towards his brother; the
other meek, humble, grateful, devout aud
charitable. How vain are all forms of
worship, however, costly and magnificent,
without the spirit of worship.
“In vain our lifted eyes salute the skies,
Our bended knees the ground;
God abhors the sacrifice,
Where not the heart is found.”
The routine of Cain’s sacrifice was not
accepted for his heart was not right to
wards God and towards his brother.—
Moreover the sacrifice of Cain was defec
tive in form as well as spirit; while Abel
brought an oblation of the first fruits of
the earth, and also of the firstlings of the
flock, acknowledging a sinful state, and
typyfying the method of God’s clemency
and £grace: but Cain in defiance of Di
vine order, and in repudiation of all sense
of dependence upon an atonement, brought
only an oblation, withholding the sacrifice.
His offering therefore, was not only unat
tended by the spirit of a true worshipper,
but was associated with self-reliance, pride
and rejecting of Divine order. His wor
ship was discarded while that of Abel was
‘-m ‘ -* ’ ‘ * ‘
MACON, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1857.
accepted. Thus is left a great lesson to
mankind, that worship must be commend
ed by Divine authority and by a right
spirit.
Thus the destinies of the race devide at
the altar of God. The character of na
tions and ages has been determined by
their religion. And as the jealousy and
hatred between brothers was fostered by
differences of worship; so the greatest
alienations, hatred aLd wars among men
have arisen from differences of faith and
worship. Disaffected and alienated in
other walks and spheres of pursuit,
most diabolical hatreds are inflamed,
through perversion of religious sentiment
and appeal.
We have no detailed accouut of the
gradual developement of contrarieties of
character between, the brothers. At first
a want of congeniality, discouraged inti
macy and fostered indifference, alienation
and disaffection. Jealousy and envy grew
on a apace. Cain could not speak peacea
bly to or bear with equanimity, the pres
ence of his brother. He envied more and
more his superior virtue and happiness
and the multiplying tokens of Divine fa
vor. He was unhappy when meeting
him in the family circle and when meet
ing him before the altar of God. He of
ten taunted, cliode him. He pursued
him with reviling and imprecation. And
thus nursing his envy and inflaming his
passion with angry words, he at length in
maddened, frenzied passion, assailed his
brother with murderous blows and left
him weltering in his gore on the ground.
How appalling this first spectacle of the
mortality of the race, to our first parents
and their now numerous family! Here
was death, and death by a brother’s hand!
Now is traced the varying fulfillments of
the penalty pronounced against sin. That
penalty embraced all perversion, degrada :
tion or destruction, physical and moral.
Death was the comprehensive curse!
How keen the remorse; how foreboding
the fear of the first murderer and homi
cide ? Suspicion’ haunts a guilty mind.
And notwithstanding the coutcarj* expe
rence, the guilty can hardly believe them
selves safe. It is not strange that with
out experience he should apprehend his
punishment as immediate, inevitable and
overwhelming. Every object seemed a
messenger of vengeance. All men and
nature seemed armed to destroy him. But
in accordance with the forbearance of
God’s government, sinners, even the great
est, may have their probation prolonged.
As the murderers of our Lord and Ste
phen were spared, so others might be.
And Cain received a mark, or rather a
token of the Divine forbearance and pro
tection. E.
For the Index.
The true Standard of Christian Be-
NEVOLENCE—AN ERROR.
Brother Walker : —l think that an er
ror is creeping in amongst us relative to
the standard of Christian benevolence,
which ought to be corrected. That error
consists in estimating a man’s liberality ac
cording to his contributions, irrespective
of his ability. All error is hurtful; and
this error does harm, I think, first, because
it tends to discourage the poor. Second
ly, because it tends to puff up the rich.
No observant person can have failed to
notice the fact, that those who give large
sums are praised in our public meetings,
and their names are heralded about
through our public journals, while those
who give small amounts are passed by in
silence. I think it must also have been
noticed, that the poor, as a general thing,
give more according to their ability than
do the rich. I know it is wrong to give
in order that we may he applauded; I
know it is also wrong to withhold what
we ought to give, because it may be too
little to bring us applause. But, notwith
standing this, no one will deny that it
must tend to discourage and repress the
liberality of poor Christians, when they
are not only not applauded, but actually
stigmatized as “stingy ,” although they
give proportionally much out of their
scanty, hard-earned incomes, while theijr
more highly favored brethren are lauded
to the skies, although, perhaps, they givq
proportionally but little out of their overt
flowing abundance. I have verily thought
that if our Agents, Secretaries, &c., had
been present at the casting into the treas
ury witnessed by Christ and his Apostles,
we would never have heard of the widow’s
“ two mites.” See below a oase in point.
A LIBERAL. CHURCH BLACKS VS. WHITES.
Not a thousand years ago, I was pres
ent at the of a highly respectable
aud intelligent Association. In the Re-
P“>rf on the State of Religion, which re
pAt was unanimously adopted by the
b dy, it was argued that religion must be
a’ ?>. low. 1 ebb, judging from the meager
n oftthe missionary contributions, which
itAeems must’have fallen quite short, had
it *ot been-for the “ very commendable
lit -raiity of the Church.” The quo
tation marks indicate the exact words of
. ‘ V-port. Now, what was tjie influence
from “that 1 Simply, that this particular
church was far more liberal than any of
her sister churches. Now, what was the
fact in the case ? Simply this: If that
church had equaled in liberality some of
the other churches, it would have doubt
less had to increase its contribution ten
fold. Ido not pretend to say that any of
the churches came up to their duty, but I
do believe some of them, yea, many of
them, came much nearer to it, than did
their sister what was held up to them as
the very model of liberality.
There was a case, however, in that same
Association, which, I think, really did
merit a notice, though it failed to receive
it. I refer to an African Church—a church
composed of poor African slaves—situa
ted in the midst of a sterile country—few
in numbers and several of these old and
decrepit—which poor African Church ac
tually gave more in amount than some of
the white churches, respectable both for
numbers and for property. Further: This
poor African Church gave proportionally
more than several others of the white
churches, some of which held as members
persons of considerable wealth. But why
was not this church noticed ? Ah, its con
tribution did not sound big , and conse
quently it was passed by as unworthy of
notice. But though unnoticed by men, I
trust it was noticed and that by Him who
commended the liberality of the poor
widow. OBSERYER.
For the Index.
of tho Far
TIST SUNDAY SCHOOL CONVENTION.
Dear Brethren: —ln the Index of the
present week, it will be seen that a Reso
lution was offered by brother Howell, of
Nashville, and passed by the Concord As
sociation of Tennessee, recommending the
formation of a Southern Baptist Sunday
Scool Convention. I am glad that the
subject has found such an able advocate
as brother Howell. The initiatory step
was taken by our Convention two years
ago, last April, in its session at Newnan,
as may be seen by reference to our min
utes of 1855, page 5, where the following
Resolution was advocated and passed:
“ Resolved, That a Committee of five be
appointed by the chair, to address our
Baptist brethren of all the Southern States,
inviting them to unite with us in forming
a Southern Baptist Sunday School Union.”
Since the passage of the above Resolu
tion, the course of the Convention has
been timid and vacilating. Consequent
ly she has failed to accomplish this most
desirable object. She has lacked that
essential characteristic of the present day,
“ Go-aheaditiveness.” .
To accomplish anything good or great,
it is necessary both to he “ right ” and to
“go ahead.” Now, brethren, if we think
that in the desire for the formation of such
a Sabbath School Union we are “ right”—
let us “go ahead.” There is needed the
co-operation of the entire denomination,
or at least, of a large part of the influen
tial brethren. What say you, brethren ?
Can your influence be obtained ? Or will
you stand aloof from enlisting in one of
the noblest of causes ? The Resolution of
brother Howell and the above are in un
ison ; but do they accord with your feel
ings and sentiments? If so, speak out.
The necessity of such a move must be ap
parent to all. It hardly admits of debate;
but -whether to make it a part of our Pub
lication Society or to have a separate or
ganization, it may he a question, yet open
for our decision. Some apprehend that
two Societies so nearly allied, could not
be sustained by the Baptists at the South.
Ido not think so. Think of the almost
half million of members! How much can
they do ? Or rather, what obj ect can they
not accomplish when united together in
one solid phalanx ? No one who wishes
to read a good book, or to have his child
ren attend the Sabbath School, will be
any the poorer for any proportional amount
he may give to either of the objects. He
will have his books enough cheaper to
pay him back for all he throws in, beside
the reward, (not to be despised) arising
from the consciousness of aiding a good
cause. -
Another reason, besides our ability for
a separate organization is, that the Publi
cation Society has already more than it
can do to supply the demand for other
than the Sabbath School books, and would
have as much as it could do, if its capital
were increased five or ten thousand dol
lars yearly, till it had a hundred thousand,
dollars. Am I not right ? No one would
r wish to throw any obstacle jh the way of
the Society’s advancement; but every
one of a true missionary spirit rejoices in
its prosperity. I am one that believes
that the above amount, with a proper ef
fort, can be easily raised by the Publica
tion Society, while the Sabbath School
Convention, with its purpose steadily in
view, could obtain a fund nearly equal to it,
if not as great, and at the same time with
out robbing any other benevolent object.
Let us come up to the work and take hold
as men.
Yours in the cause of Christ,
J. F. WOODBURY,
Cor. Sec. of the Ga. B. S. S. Con.
i ■ i > ■ i
For the Index.
Sherwood’s Commentary.
Mr. Editor. —l have seen in the reli
gious papers, (of our denomination of
course) many very commendatory re
views of Dr. Sherwood’s Notes on the
New Testament. Being unwilling to say
anything for or against the work, until I
had read it considerably, I have delayed
giving any expression of opinion in -refer
ence to its merit or demerit. I procured
a copy at Augusta during the session of
the Convention, and have read it regular
ly through Mathew, Mark and Luke, and
promiscuously in many other parts. —
What shall I now say ? I say with Bro.
Dayton, that I consider it the best ever
published in our language.
- From the letter of brother Sherwood to
brother Campbell on the revision ques
tion, I was fearful considerable injury to
the fcfllayf tlu* Laak mryilQ W
the result, knowing that a great many
Baptists all over Georgia, as well as the
South generally, were in favor of the revi
sion of the Bible. But our brethren need
have no fears on this score. In common
with other learned commentators, Dr.
Sherwood has given us the “better trans
lations,” “the better readings,” &c. In
deed I have been somewhat amused, while
proceeding through the book, to find so
much of this sort of “work. His reputa
tion for Biblical learning, especially in
this country, induced the belief that we
should find the “ better rendering ” in his
book. His letter to brother C., however,
rather forestalled us, until we read for our
selves. Baptists generally, and the min
istry particularly, should procure the
work. lam probably as strong a revision
ist as any, and brother Sherwood has not
hesitated to give us what he considered
the better translation of many passages.—
Well, if one man can make so good a book,
what could a “Board of revisors” selected
from the most eminent scholars do ? The
very first stroke of his pen is made in fa
vor of revision. “The Gospel according
to Matthew.” He leaves out the prefix
St., and tells us it is “a prefix of a later
age than the sth century,” and that “Saint
Matthew is as unauthorized by the origi
nal as would be the prophecy by Saint
Isaiah, or Saint Malachi, and as unscrip
tural.” Yerywell; if Dr. Sherwood can
take out some unscriptural words that has
crept into our Bible, could not, and should
not a committee, such as is now being se
lected, remove all the “ unscriptural ”
words? At the 18th verse of the first
chapter of Matthew, he says, “ The birth
of Jesus , is Dr. Clarke’s version, and is
, more simple than the English Testament.”
Matt. 2. ch. 1. 2d verse. “Star in the East,
or we in the East have seen his star,” is
his version, and every commentator agrees
with him. Then why not revise our En
glish Bible? 16th verse, “All the male
children is the oorrect rendering of the
phrase,” he informs us, “for in the Greek
the gender is distinctly marked by the
masculine article taus.” Chap. 3:2. “King
dom of heaven f should be t ransla ted reign,
when the connection relates to the earth
—kingdom , when the place of future bless
edness is the subject of discourse. He re
vises the 10th verse—“ Axe is laid at the
root of the trees.” His remarks on-the
11th verse: “Let it be remembered that
our translation was revised from 1601 to
1611, when it was published, and that all
GEORGIA TELEGRAPH STEAM PRESS
was done by Pedobaptists; hence, bapti
-20 is left untranslated—- hence also, the
preposition en is translated with against
all rule and common sense, to favor sprink
ling, which, as a rite, had lately been
transported into England from Geneva.”
Why not have the bible revised accord
ing to “rule-and common sense f” Say
why not? | • * • *
I>ffm exceedingly well pleased with the
note on the 16th verse, where he reviews
Millers nonsense in reference to the
non-immersipn of p au l. Let any one read
hie remarks int-fiie verst alluded to, and
he will find Dr. S. is able to wield a lance
in the field of controversy. I almost wish
he had “sympathy” with the Revision
m<n ement. It is a pity he should work
alone in revision. Well, I shall not for
bid him, “because he followeth not with
us; for he that is not against us is for us.”
But in Matt. 4: 2. “An hungred is
a barbarism.” Why not free our bible
of barbarisms ? But at verse 24, “Pos
sessed with devils or demons .” There is
but one devil—■-but demons are many.—
Matt. 5: 5. “Inherit the earth” Land
would probably be a better translation.—
Verse 16tli, “ Bushel”■—measure or vessel
is the proper translation. “Lamps were
in but not candles,” in Judea. Chap,
xi. 15, “ 7T ho hath ears,” dec., is plainer
than the common version, and is gram
matical, whereas the other is not and can
not be parsed. Revisers want a bible free
from barbarisms and that can he parsed.
There is certainly a richness in the notes
on the 17th verse of the 18th chapter of
Matthew, not found in any Commentator
I have ever read. Mark 15: 25. “But
Jesus cried after this with a loud voice.”
Nailed him to the cross is probably the
better version. Why not let us have “the
better version ?” We want the best trans
lations in all other books. Shall the Bi
ble be an exception ?
I must bring this notice to a close. I
am glad Dr. Sherwood has written so
good a book; an(f ft assure him and all
wiio may read communication, that I
a p y I segi>
*37 lsTtof rny intention
ments, though like every thing done by
man, there are doubtless defects in it.—
The author does not claim for himself in
falibility. It would be folly for his friends
to claim it for him. I regretted to see his
letter to brother Campbell. But when I
saw his book I felt satisfied it had claims
which would secure for it a general circu
lation anfong the numerous friends of re
vision. To them I would say, let not any
prejudice of this kind prevent you from
pnrcliasing the work.
BAR SAMUEL.
1 i .
That’s me.
A poor Hottentot in Southern Africa
lived with a good Dutchman who kept up
family prayer daily. One day he read,
“Two went up into the temple to pray.”
The poor savage, whose heart was al
ready awakened, looked earnest at the
reader, and whispered,
“Now I’ll learn how to pray.”
The Dutchman read on : “God, I thank
thee I am not as other men ”
“No! lam not; but lam worse,” whis
pered the Hottentot.
Again the Dutchman read: “I fast
twice in the week. I give tithes of all I
possess.”
“I don’t do that. I don’t pray in that
manner. What shall Ido ?” said the dis
tressed savage.
The good man read on until he came to
the publican, who “would not liftsomuch
as his eyes to Heaven.”
“That’s me,” cried the hearer.
“Stood afar off,” read the other.
“That’s where I am,” said the Hotten
tot.
“But* smote upon his breast, saying,
God be merciful to me a sinner ”
“That’s me, that’s my prayer,” cried the
poor creature, and smiting on his dark
breast, he prayed, “God be merciful to me
a sinner!” until, like the poor publican,
he went down to his house a saved and
happy man.
A Wrong Translation.
Let me call vour attention, also, to Ti
tus ii. 14: “Looking for that blessed hope,
and the appearing of the Great. God and
our Saviour Jesus Christ.” This passage
is wrongly translated, for the Great God
our I atner is never said to appear a sec
ond time; it is literally rendered, “That
blessed hope, that glorious personal ap
pearance ot Jesus Christ, our great God
and Saviour,” where our Redeemer is call
ed the great God and Saviour. When Ho
comes a second time, then “we shall see
Him as He is,” we shall reign with Him
in heaven, we shall dwell with Him in
glory-— Gumming's Signs of the Times,p
If it is wrong, why not revise it ?
NUMBER 36.