Newspaper Page Text
Many good and strorr things were said in be
half of
M ISSIONS
During the Session of the
Southern Baptist Convention.
Subscribe to and read the Christian Index,
f you would keep informed.
ESTABLISHED 1821.
©Zxe ©hristain
Published Every Thursday at 57 South Broa
Street, Atlanta. Ga.
J. C. McMICHAEL. Proprietor.
Organ of the Baptist Denomination in
Georgia.
Subscription Price:
One copy, one year S 2.0
One copy, six months ••••• - 100
Obituaries.—One hundred words free of
charge. For each extra word, one cent per
word, cash with copy. . ,
To Correspondents.—Do not nse abrevia
tions; be extra careful in writingproper na mes;
write with ink, on one side of paper; Do not
write copy intended for the editor and busi
ness items on same sheet. Leave off personal
ities; condense.
Business.—Write all names, and post offices
distinctly. In ordering a change give the old
as well as the new address. The dateof laber
indicates the time your subscription expires.
If you do not wish it continued, order it stoo
ped a week before. We consider each sub
■criber permanent, until he orders his paper
discontinued. When you order it stopped pay
up to date.
Remittances by check preferred; or regis
tered letter, money order, postal note.
What queer fancies parents sometimes
indulge, when giving names to their chil
dren! Jesse Mercer had a sister “Mourn
ing,” and a brother “Mount Moriah.”
An insurance company in Paris shuts
out all persons who use hair-dye from
its list of patrons. It will take no second
risk on a life, on which the owner has
already taken so high a first risk.
After “the brazen altar” came “the
golden;” after sacrifice, incense; after
blood, fellowship; after the lesson of
pardon, the lesson of prayer; after the
gift of remission, tho grace of suppliant
trustfulness.
The papers say that “farmers in Mexi
co use oxen of one color in the morning
and of another color in the afternoon."
Is this custom the undetected survival of
some old theory in natural history, or
agriculture, or superstition? Or is it a
freak of the fashion which never adduces
a theory, because it never feels the need
of any reason except “its own sweet
will?”
There is no such means of discomfort
as money, as much money, to those who
do not know how properly to value it or
how to use it rightly. Into how many
indulgence-troubles, excess-troubles, dis
' appointment-troubles, e s t ran g e m e nt
tn nbles,remorse-troubles, pretension-
troubles, rivalry-troubles, disgrace
troubles,troubles of speculation,troubles
9' panic, troubles of loss and poverty, it
< sables a man to pay his way!
God did not make the waters of Marah
sweet, by his own immediate, isolated
working. There was a tree which he
chose for that purpose, and Moses cast
tfiat tree into the waters, Ex. 15:25.
Not that there was anything in the act
of Moses, not that there was anything in
the tree itself, to accomplish that result;
but that God uses means which are with
out power and puts his own power into
them. Without Him, nothing—with
Him, everything—blesses His own.
The German empror, it seems, on his
recent visit to Rome, when parting with
Pope Leo, gave that high functionary his
blessing. “A fair exchange.” it is said,
‘is no robbery;” and if the Pope and
emperor in exchanging blessings draw
mutual satisfaction from the bargain, we
see no reason why the world should
trouble itself with any question as to
which of the parties, if either, had the
advantage of the other. There is no
very great profit or loss on either side,
we take it.
The Kansas City (Mo.) Ministers’ Al
liance, recently carried with enthusiasm,
a proposition to play a game of base-ball.
Doubtless, these brethren, in taking sucli
a step, knew’ their own minds, whether
they knew their own business or not.
As for ourselves (who possibly know
neither) we have two things to say. If
they acted with a view to health, they
might have found more wholesome forms
of exercise. If they simply had recrea
tion in view, they might have found
forms of amusement more reputable,
and looking less like playing second fid
dle on the outskirts of “sporting life,”
where, by them at least, no fiddle ought
to be played.
On account of his cold manner, Jules
Ferry was once told by his friend Gam
betta, that he produced the effect of a
rose-tree on which nothing grew but
thorns,” whereat Ferry retorted that
“there were roses in the tree, only they
grew inside.” The austerity which with
inside-roses has only thorns on the out
side, is bad enough. But far worse is
the treachery which with only rose* on
the outside, has intide-thorn*. In the
one case, the thorns repel and the fra
grance of the roses is lost; in the other,
the roses attract and the sharp points of
the thorncs pierces the unsuspecting,
sensitive flesh.
We wonder why the fact that a new
book is a Georgia book, should be suffi
cient to secure for it a frigid or a luke
warm reception throughout the State.
Take, for example. “All Sorts of State
ments,” by Carlton Hillyer. Esq., of Au
gusta. Beyond dispute, this is a racy
book from start to finish. It is as strong
ly marked by the individuality of the
author as if Montaigue or Heine had
written it. Here is striking paradox;
here is unique conception; here is quiet
humor; hare is pungent satire; here Is
subtle speculation; here is proverbial
compression; here is poetic imagery: and
yet, the literary element of our popula
tion will affect to know nothing of it,
will lie quite sure there is nothing in It,
because it bears the imprint of no North
ern publisher, and the stamp of no North
ern critic. This augurs badly for us of
tho South, since only a self-respecting
people can ever produce a literature
worthy of the world * respect.
Me Mrfetian
b!vTBWs» Vs /
> , *94
THE MILLENNIUM.
BY S. G. HILLYER.
In approaching this subject, the
first thing to do is to ascertain its
meaning. The word millennium, is
plain enough: it means a period of
one thousand years. But there have
been, already, mjiny millenniums in
the history of our globe, and nearly
six in the history of our race ; and,
no doubt, there are many yet to
come. When, therefore, we speak
of the millennium as distinct from
all others, which one do we mean ?
This question is important, because
it marks the line of difference be*
tween two great classes of religious
writers. Some hold that the millen
nium denotes the period of a thou
sand years which shall precede the
second advent of Christ. Others
bold that, it denotes the thousand
years that shall follow his advent.
If the views which I shall offer,
shall prove to be in harmony with
scripture and corroborated by science,
I think the discussion will go very
far towards reconciling these con
tending parties.
It will help us, in this investiga
tion, to bear in mind the conclusion
reached in the article on the “Morn
ing Star.” It was there shown that
the Scriptures teach that the Chris
tian dispensation embraces two peri
ods of time distinguished from each
other by different degrees of Gospel
light. The first period was symbol
ized by the morning star, which evi
dently represents a period of twilight.
The second w r as symbolized by the
rising sun, which of course denotes
the full and perfect day. It was also
shown that the twilight period has
not yet ended. It has already con
tinued through nearly two millen
niums and they may be fully com
pleted before the wide spread dark
ness which still covers the moral
world shall be entirely dispelled.
But the sun will rise. It shall bring
the full and perfect day when “the
knowledge of God shall cover the
earth as the waters cover the deep.’’
It is the promise of the Prophets
and it is the hope of the Jews and
of Christians. That day shall come >
and it will be the second period of
the Christian dispensation.
Don’t forget: wo are now* search
ing for that period of time which is
properly denoted by our current
phraze, “the Millennium.” I am
aware that many writers regard the
“thousand years,” mentioned by
John, a round number, not intended
to be taken literally, but as denoting
an indefinite period of long duration.
Such a use of round numbers is not
uncommon. But, I think, it will be
noticed in all cases where round
numbers are so used, that the facts
are such as to put the hearer or
reader on his guard not to take the
words literally.
One may say, speaking of an ini.
pending election, A. will beat his op
ponent 1,000 votes, tho by-stauders
would certainly not hold him to the
exact number. They would under,
stand him to mean a large majority
Not only so: if the speaker was
making a public address to a crowd,
and had occasion to repeat the
majority several times, we should
expect him to modify the number
in some way. He might say, in his
second statement of the majority
“at least a thousand,” or “more than
a thousand,” thus showing tho as
sumed majority to be indefinite.
But there is nothing like this, in
the way John talks about the “thou,
sand years,”—the millennium. His
“thousand years,” (see Rev. 20:1,6)
denote a period whose beginning
and end are marked by stupendous
events. Its beginning is indicated
by the imprisonment of Satan, and
the resurrection of the martyrs who
died for the testimony of Jesus. Its
e nd is indicated by the release of
Satan “for a little season.” In the
brief space of six verses John delare g
six times, that the time intervening
between the first resurrection and
the release of Satan' shall be a thou
sand years, and without one modify
ing particle. I hope the reader will
turn to Rev. 20: 1,6 and read it. I
tbink he will agree with me, that
John himself contemplated the time
as a literal thousand years, no more
no less. Thus we have found the
answer before us. When we speak
of tho millennium, par excellence,
we should mean that thousand years
which shall be introduced by tho
first resurrecti?o.
ATLANTA. GA.. THURSDAY. MAY 25.1893.
Hero another question arises:
Shall this millennium embrace the
entire second period of the Christian
dispensation? This surely cannot be
the true interpretation. Christ has
been reigning, with his saints on
earth, already nearly two thousand
years; and through all these centu
ries the Church has enjoyed only the
light of the Morning Star. Shall tho
period of Gospel light which the
rising sun shall reveal, last only half
as long as its own twilight? This
would contradict the teachings of
the metaphors. Were we to press
the metaphors to the extent of their
logical meaning, wo should find that
the period of the Church’s complete
triumph over the world shall be as
much longer than the period re
quired to attain its triumph, as a
natural day is longer than its morn
ing twilight. This proportion would
give us about 24,000 years during
which Christ shall reign in noon-day
splendor over mankind. But such is
tho nature of metaphors we need noj
always press them to their full signi
ficance ; nevertheless we are bound
to give that significance great weight.
Hence, without insisting upon the
time above indicated, we may safely
conclude that there shall be many
millenniums of Gospel glory before
the resurrection of the Martyrs.
The foregoing views are certainly
in harmony with the Scaiptures. The
messianic prophecies, how muchso
ever they may vary in form and in
detail, have two ideas common to
them all. One is tho universality of
Messiah’s reign, and the other is the
continuance ot his kingdom “for
ever.” This word gives us a period
long enough for many, very many
millenniums. But these views, if
not confirmed, are at least corrobo
rated by the teachings of Science. It
tells us that this globe has a history
embracing, perhaps, a million of
years,—a thousand millenniums. It
tells us also that these millenniums
are included in six distinct periods
long since completed, and in a part
of the seventh period which is now
in progress. Divide a million by
seven and the quotient is more than
140,000, which would be the avera"e
length of each Geological period.
The figures here given arc, I think
far below what many Scientists
would claim; but they are amply
sufficient to show that we have yet
remaining, in the present Geological
period, ample time for all the mil
lenniums that the above interpreta
tions may require.
According to these views, the
Church has before her a glorious
future, reaching even to the general
resurrection, and to the final judg
ment.
Here let me say, parenthetically,
—when I speak of the Church, in its
collective sense, I mean that great
ecclesia (assembly) of true saints who
together make up tho body of Christ-
This is the church which he loved
and which he has redeemed, and
which shall share at length the gio.
ries of his reign even on earth.
Such is the Church of which I
speak.
Hitherto her experience has been
checkered with sad vicissitudes. One
well might weep in reading the story
of her sufferings. But the day of
her triumph shall come.
72 Wheat St., Atlanta, Ga.
(To be continued.)
A GOLDEN 0B A WOODEN LIFE.
To be a Christian is to love Christ
to trust him, to obey him, to imitate
him from the heart. It is a vastly
important question that confronts a
man, Am I a Christian. It is Christ
that saves, not a creed, nor tho con
duct. But a Christ, intelligently
held by the heart, makes a creed and
begets a conduct. When a man has
passed into the Christian life, another
question of (ar reaching moment
confronts him—What kind of a
Christian am I. There are grades
in the quantity and in the quality of
the Christian life. In Matt, xiii 23
Jesus speaks of saved men yielding a
varying fruitage. A hundred fold
is worth far more to Christ than a
thirty fold man. Tho throe kinds
of men are equally saved, they are
unequally effective in their service
In Luke xix Jesus speaks of one
servant whose pound had produced
ten pounds, of another whose pound
bad produced five pounds. There
was a differing efficiency, a differing
reward. Peter speaks of some who
have an abundant entrance into the
Heavenly Kingdom. Paul speaks in
1 Cor. iii 12 of Christian men who
build lives, some of gold, some of
wood. In the churches there are
middling good men, there are good
men, there are very good men. All
of them aro confessedly Christians,
they have a good hope, they will
enter Heaven. But it is possible
for men on the one foundation to
erect lives that shall be utterly un
like each other. It was so in the
first century, it is so in the nineteenth
Century.
There are gradations in goodness.
There arc silver lives, golden
lives, lives made up of pre
cious stones. Whore shall one
get the material with which to
build a golden life? The heart
within, the desires, the plans of life,
the will with its decisions, the open. 1
ing opportunities, these gy e the I
material out of which to ffa 3
that may be either gold, or wood-
There comes a temptation. If it be
met, fought with outright, defeated,
the common life is changed into
gold. If that same temptation come
with its allurements, if it be talked I
with, listened to, gradually yielded
to, the life becomes a life of wood.
There comes a provocation to anger.
If the tongue be used to utter bitter,
stinging words, the life is a common,
wooden thing. If the tongue be
used to speak kind, helpful words
there will be the gradual upbuilding
of a golden life. Th» material i K
given us, in the rough, each day. It
depends on the. chemistry of the
heart, of tho decision .whether this
material shall be wood or gold. What
a Christian life will ba, and will do
does not depend so much on the
time, or the social standing, or the
ten talents, or the wealth that a man
may command as on the attitude of
the heart, tho willingtjhdedness, the
consecration, tho desii-pi-to be used
by and for Christ." Ihe sincere and
devout heart can make every thing
that the life touches turn into gold,
to make the life larger syd richer.
Paul wa* a man <4. hq.9lM>tumate
ability. mak#hjs
upon men Anywhere. He had a
small stature, his way was hedged
about, slander followed him every,
where. The inner life turned every
thing into a help for more holy and
useful living. Laura Bridgman was
shut in from the outer life. She was
blind and deaf and mute. But she
managed to build up a life that was
spotless and useful. It is possible
for each Christian to build a life
that shall be spotless, honest, prayer
ful, in love with duty, desirous of
being conformed to Christ’s will and
supremely useful to those around.
Every Christian life ought to be a
transfigured, transformed, transpa
rent, shining life. The qualities that
make up such a life are the common
and every-day qualities of faithful
ness, prayerfulness, watchfulness,
devotedness, a love of duty, the doing
of the things that lie next, the spirit
of willingness. The common things
of life become uncommon, when they
are done with a high motive. Th}
pillar like man upon whom Cbrisi
aud the church can lean is made, not
by outward surroundings, but by the
inner, controlling plans of life. If a
Christian is intent only on getting
to Heaven and living a life that
will not bring reproach upon the
church, he may live n decorous life
but he will not be a shining and
useful Christian. Christ should not
be used simply as a stepping stone
for Heaven and Salvation. He
should be used as the model and the
inspiration of tho fife hero, his yoke
should be the companion, of the daily
life. The end of tho Christian life is
a transfiguied character, a character
moulded into the imuge of Christ.
There oight to be. a plan for the
life. No nan will ever become a
good man >r a use Jul man by acci
dent. No man st jmbles on a golden
life. No nan w ill ever go beyond
his aims, h.s pla'iu. for the life- If a
man plans to ba an excellent man,
he may fal short of this. There is
a loss in nttur.HJ from friction, there
is a loss ii tUc moral life. If a man
aims to b< a, moderately good man,
he will live, a poor and impoverished
life. The man who lives an excel
lent life, ipproved by God and by
men, is o great worth in tho world.
The men of whom the world is not
worthy ae tho real wealth of the
world, f each member in any Bap
tist churh in our land would say
with his mart, —I wish to widen and
deopen ry life, what a power that
church w’ould be. It is not required
that a man shall form visionary plans
for the life, not needful that he
should get conceptions of life like
those of Thomas A’ Kempis, that
life must get its holiness by abandon
ing the outward life. It is simply
needful that he should use his own
capacities, his own surroundings, his
own opportunities, not abandoning
life but consecrating it. There is no
man who cannot be more prayerful
more on the lookout for useful living,
more intent on winning men, more
circumspect in life, more willing in
service. Jonathan Edwards was a
master man in native endowments
and in the spiritual life. When nine
teen years of age he wrote in his
diary these words. “If there can be
1 but one man supremely good in any
I one generation,resolved so to live to
be the one man who in my genera
tion should be well pleasing to God.”
It is not a source of wonder that
there came out of his holy desires a
life of wonderful beauty and power.
It is not possible for us to assort
I men into their fitting classes. We
do not know the heart. We do not
know how g eat are the bad inherited
tendencies to fight. We cannot tel)
the life that is lived for show. But
we may discover what is the govern,
ing motive of our own lives. We
remember that there is a silver life
that may become golden, a golden
life that may become one of dia
monds. There is also an almost
useless Christian life of wood, of hay,
of stubble. There may be a down
grade in the Christian life. On the
one foundation that saves there may
be lived a fife that will not weigh
much in its impress on the world.
There are Christian lives that grow
backward. Paul met them in the
church in Corinth. The letter to the
Hebrews speaks of dwindling Chris,
tian lives. The one foundation wa s
Christ, the building was wood. A
golden creed ought not to be joined
to an earthenware life. A hope in
1 Christ in tho heart ought to be fol
* lowed by the erection of a' life worthy
of the foundation. The longer the
life of discipleship,the more like gold
should it be. The first story of a
Christian life ought not to bo gold,
the second story, wood.
O. P. E A CHES.
Hightstown, N. J.
DID MOSES MARRY A NEGRESS?
It is stated positively, by Moses
himself, that he “had married an
Ethiopian woman.” (Num. NIL, G.-
7. 8. 9.) Was this woman a negress?’’
All authorities agree that the
Ethiopian race inhabited that part
of Africa which “lies above Egypt,”
that .is, the country south of Egypt
on the upper tributaries of the Nile.
“As regards the physical character
of that race, they were negroes,”
says Dr. Charles Anthon, the eini
inent Greek scholar. The Greeks,
he says, “always spoke of the Ethi
opeans as we speak of the negroes
as if they were the blackest people
known to the world.” Theodectus
says they were not only black, but
had woolly heads and fiat noses;”
and be offered the opinion that these
| physical peculiarities were caused
by climatic environments.
The only escape from the conclu
sion that the Ethiopians were gen
uine negroes is by the supposition
I that the ancient Greeks and the lie.
I Vews were not acquainted with any
| ifcople exactly resembling those of
Guinea and therefore applied the
terms “black,” “woolly haired,” “fiat
n<ied”etc., to people who had these
characteristics in a much less degree
th.iu those whom we now term ne
Bibik record, the whole human fam
ily skirted from a common centre in
the plains of Shinar after tne flood,
and ifeiiHt, of necessity, have been
much less widely dispersed in the
1 days oi Moses and the ancient histo
rian* tian at present. Moreover)
ac< ording to the Record, tho early
s descendants of Noah were so averse
to separation that even their partial
■ dispr rsiort was affected only by tho
con fusion of tongues at Babel.
Il has b*en said that “the Ethi
opian woman” who so excited the
disgust of Miriam and Aaron, was
none other tLin Zipporah tho daugh
ter of J thro, priest of Midian. In
other words, that she was a Midian.
ite, or possibly a Moabite, and not an
Ethiopian at all, except possibly by
short residence in Ethiopia.
This seems wholly improbable.
Suppose a descendant, of Abraham
and native of Germany, while trav
eling in Africa were to meet and
marry a Jewess born and reared in
Cairo, could we reasonably assume
that his brother and sister in Ger
many would ridicule and upbraid
him for marrying an African? Be
sides, such an hypothesis invalidates
the Bible account of the affair.
Moses was his own autobiographer
in so far as he wrote the Book of
Numbers. But is it likely that any
autobiographer would say of him
self that be had married an Ethio
pian or African when in point of fact
he had only married a woman of
his own race and nationality while
residing or sojourning in Ethiopia
or Africa. And if we assume that
Moses made a verbal mistake and
wrote “Ethiopean” when he really
meant “Midianitish” or “Moabitish,”
we necessarily discredit him not
merely as an inspired writer, but as
a profane historian as well. On the
other hand, if we suppose that Zip
porah was a genuine “Ethiopean
woman” residing in Midian at the
time of her marriage to Moses, then
Jethro, the honored priest of Midian
whom Moses treated with such
marked deference and courtesy in
the wilderness, must have been him
self and Ethiopean or African, since
he was Zipporah’s father. But al'
though Moses did obeisance to aud
even kissed Jethro, neither Miriam
nor Aaron bad a word to say against
it. On the contrary, it is distinctly
stated that Aaron himself participa
ted in the ceremonies (Ex. chap,
xviii.)
The only rational way out of the
difficulty is, it seems to me, in the
assumption that Moses was twice
married—-once to “the Ethiopean
woman” and once to Zipporah, the
daughter of Jethro. This not only
harmonizes the Bible record, but is
supported by extraneous testimony.
We have seen the absurdity of its
supposition that these two women
were one and the same. It neces
sar.ly follows then that the passages
of Scripture referring to those wo
men, point to two separate and dis
tinct marriages. And this is con
firmed by Josephus, who next to the
Bible, is the the very highest author
ity in Jewish history. In his “An
tiquities of the Jews” (Book ii- chap.
10) he gives an account of Moses as
the general-in-chief of the Egyptian
forces in Ethiopea; which account
according to the translator is omitted
in our Bibles but appears in fragmen.
tary form, in the collections of Iren
aeus. Josephus states that Saba,
the royal city of Ethiopea, was so
encompassed by the upper Nile and
its confluents, and by “high strong
walls and ramparts,” as to render
its capture impossible.” Moses was
in great perplexity how to proceed
with the seige. Meantime however
Sharbis, daughter of the king of
Ethiopea had frequently seen Moses,
as he passed with his guards around
the walls, and had fallen desperately
jn love with him. She finally sent
him her trusted servant to sound
him on the subject of marriage, as
was then the custom among the
ancient peoples of the East, and is
still the practice in many parts of
Asia. Moses, in high favor at the
Egyptian court, and laudably am
bitions as a soldier, thought only of
the capture of the city. So he ac
cepted Sharbis’ off er of marriage on
condition that she would previously
procure the surrender. She faith
fully carried out her part of the
agreement; and when Moses had
taken possession, he would not
break his promise to the dusky
maiden, but married her and took
her with him. In the very next
chapter, Josephus describes the light
of Moses to Midian and his marriage
to Zipporah the daughter of Jethro,
in substantially the same manner as
it described in the Bible; the cir
cumstance* of the accidental meeting,
courtship and wedding being totally
different from tlioso under which he
had married Sharbis, “the Ethiopean
woman.”
Moreover, all ancient geographers
Agree that Saba, (or Meroe as it
was afterwards called,) was a royal
city of Ethiopea proper -that is, of
Western Ethiopea—and situated
‘‘far to the South of Egypt.” Hence
Sharbis (or Tbarbis as the name is
sometimes written,) the king’s daugh
ter, belonged to the Western tribes
of Ethiopea—a race which according
to ancient historian*, had “very
black skins and woolly hair.” Thus
Brother Minister,
Working Layman,
Zealous Sister
Wearestrlvlngto make
Tlie Index
the best of Its kind. Help us by securing*
new subscriber.
VOL. 70—NO. 21
we have not only the nationality,
but the very name of “the Ethiopean
women” whose presence in the cam
pus of Israel gave such offense to
Miriam and Aaron.
The almost necessary inference is
that, in the general exodus from
Egypt, Moses carried his Ethiopean
wife with him—for it would have
been less dishonorable to break the
original promise of marriage, than to
forsake her under such circumstan
ces—and because he had thus, like
an honorable man, made the best of
a bad bargain, his sister Miriam and
and brother Aaron were disgusted
and sought to supplant him in influ
ence with the people. Under all
the circumstances of the case, the
Lord rebuked them for their med
dlesomeness, and gave them to un
derstand that the matter in question
concerned them not. At least that
is Moses own version of the matter,
for he is generally credited with the
authorship of the Book of Numbers.
He does not fail to tell us however,
before he gets through with the au
tobiography, that at some period in
his life (ho does not say when) he,
in some way, committed an offense
which debarred his personal entr
ance into the Promised Land. He
gives us no very direct intimation of
the nature of this offense; but he
leaves the impression on the mind
of the reader that there was, most
likely,” a woman in the case,” and
that the woman was not Zipporah.
William L. Scruggs.
BROTHERLY LOVE-123RD PSALM-
If I were asked to say in one word
what is the religion of Jesus Christ,
that word would be a monosyllable,
love.
But this is also true even of the
Mosaic dispensation. For in Mathew
22 chapter, it is related that a law
yer came to him tempting him with
this question, “Master, what is the
great commandment in the law?»
Jesus said unto him. “Thou shal
lava tlua Lr.rd, with. tuX tLy
heart, and with ah thy soul, and with
all thy mind.” This is the first and
greatest commandment, and the sec
ond is like unto it, “Thon shalt love
thy neighbor as thyself. On these
two commandments hang all the law
and the prophets.
Now I think it is Jesus Christ who
first brought to light this truth, that
love is the root of the law and the
prophets. And He also made it as
conspicuous and perspicous in the
New Testament as He could, that
love is the essence of his religion.
There were two things that hin
dered the Jews, eyeu the best of
them, from a full understanding of
the second commandment, on which
hung all the Law and the Prophets.
In Moses it is said, “Thou shalt
love Jehovah thy God.” In the Jew
ish mind the emphasis was on the
pronoun thy. Jehovah was his God,
the God of Isreal. A national God,
with whom other nations had noth
ing to do. In their mind the great
ness of God was diminished. Not
with humble gratitude, but with
haughty disdain of others, thy Jeho
vah, my God. In their national over
weening conceit He was their pro*
perty. They said my God, some
thing as they said my house, or my
vineyard.
And any love, as a nation, they
ever had to Jehovah was like the
love they Lad to their house, and
their vineyards. They were not His>
He was then's. No purifying infl
uence had this love upon the nation.
They never were better than the
Greeks and Romans.
Again thy neighbor. Neighbor in
their apprehension meant a Jew. The
rest of mankind were not neighbors,
and they never dreamed of loving
them. Jehovah as the God of the
whole world, and father to all man
kind, whom nil men, when they pray,
(should) call father; that never en
tered their minds, that all men ar«
brothers, and to be loved as such, is
as unjewish as it is ungreek or un.
roman.
Now love to God as father, and to
man as brother, is just that "which
Jesus of Nazareth exalted to the
first place in teaching. His disciples
since, the first century and the death
of the men who drew their religion
directly from the great lover of men,
I say these disciples have not in their
hearts, in their teachings, and in their
examples taught this.
With them faith, that is, a creed,
setting forth some abstract principle