Newspaper Page Text
ESTABLISHED 1821.
©he ©hri«tian QnAex
lobllshed Every Thursday at 1G East Mitchel
Street, Atlanta. Ga.
j. c. McMichael,, pbophutob.
Organ of the Baptist Denomination In
Georgia.
SußScairnoN Paicx:
One copy, one yearl 2.00
One copy, six mouths 1.00
Obitvasiu.—One hundred words free of
Chaise For each extra word, one cent per
word, cash with copy.
To Cokbxbpondknts.—Do not use abrevia
tlons; be extra careful in writingproper names;
write with Ink. on one side of paper; Do not
writ© copy intended for the editor and busi
ness items on same sheet, beat e oft personal
ities; condense.
Bvsinbss.—Write all names, and post offices
distiijotly. In ordering a change give the old
as well astho now address. The date of label
indicates the time your subscription expires.
If you Jo not wish it continued, order it stop
ped a week before. We consider each sut>-
Slribor permanent, until he orders his paper
iscontlnued. When you order it stopped pay
up to cate. I
Kemittancbs by check preferred; orx egis
red letter, money order, postal note..
In these days of confusion .and embar
rassment and iinanefa! troubles Christians
should consider well their obligation to
God. We fear the trouble with Christian
business men is want of fidelity to God.
They will not enter into a straight-for
ward agreement with Him,to take Him as
an active, living partner. Christian busi
ness man, are you dividing your profits
with the Lord? You cast your cares upon
Him and call on Him in prayer to help
and when the results come do you use
all for self? Remember the Lord and in
turn be yourself blessed.
The Texas Baptist Standard waxes
warm at the idea suggested by Rev. Fred
.D. Hale, of Owensboro, Ky., "that if we
’are to have “a young peoples’ move
ment” in the South it should bo strictly
and distinctly Southern. The Standard
then proceeds to berate Southern Bap
tists for “blindly following self-consti
tuted bosses.” The Index is against
“bosses” of the kind spoken of whether
from the North or South. But if we
must have one let him be a southern
boss by all means. Wo have had enough
of the other sort already, and they have
all been “self-constituted.”
Much apprehension has been felt lest
the dreadful scourge, cholera, which has
' appeared ina number of cities on the con
)tlnent of Europe should find its way to
our shores. Dr. A. W. Wheeler, U. 8.
Marino Hospital surgeon, who was re
cently sent abroad by our government
to investigate the sanitary condition of
the ports whence most of the emigrants
to this country come, has made quite a
favorable report, except the ports of the
Mediteranean. There has been no re
currence of the disease at Hamburg, a
port from which we receive a large num
ber of emigrants. In spain, Portugal,
Italy, and Greece, sporadic cases of
cholera have occurred, but Dr. Wheeler
sis very hopeful that there will be no
iserious outbreak of the disease.
The Sorrows of life are many said
/Dean C. Vaughan and the Saviour made
'this one of his credentials, that he could
transfigure them all into consolation.
“The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me,
because he hath anointed me to preach
good tidings unto the meek: ho hath sent
me to bind up the brokeu-heartod,.. .to
comfort all that mourn.. ..” In that
life and that death, in that voice of sym
pathy and tiiat heart of love, in those
sayings and doings of Jesus Christ which
enter into all experience and reach
backward and forward into two eterni
ties, above all in that Person, God for us
and God with us, who was manifested to
bear our sins and carry our sorrows, on
f impose that we might never feel earth
onely nor heaven unreal, has been found
through eighteen centuries, is found
to-dny, shall be found in the ages to
come, a rest and a peace and a satisfac
tion which the world can neither give in
its joys nor take away in its bereave
ments. The comfort spoken of is no
childish soothing, no effeminate lulling,
no palliation of distress, no oblivion of
Borrow; it is what its name bespeaks it,
a strengthening and a fortifying thing,
because it both pierces to the depth of
the reality that is and rises to the height
of that other reality that shall bo. Com
fort is strength, anil comfort is fortitude,
and comfort is courage for two worlds,
and comfort is expansive and diffusive
as the love which breathes it, even as it
is written, “Who comforteth us in all
our tribulation.”
t In France there were 74,774 fewer
births in 1800 than in 1886, while the
number of marriages were 20,223 more
in 1886 than in 1890. The statistics of
enlightened nations are in harmony with
these figures, and the civilized world
presents a startling picture of decrease
both injyoportion of marriages to popu
lation and the proportion of births to mar
riages. It is a significant fact also, that
this falling away in matrimony and in
parentage is found spreading more and
more in the more cultured countries
communities and classes. The infer
ence seems to be that civilization, at least
in its modern type is unfriendly to the
existence of,the human race and already
threatens to arrest its growth, rendering
the birth rate to-day just what the death
rate was a quarter of a century ago. But
not to rest in vague generalities the
stream of evil influence may be traced
to the spring head of the age’s laxity in
religious belief or [as a more fitly discrip
tive phrase in many cases] irreligious
disbeliefs. It is morality that guards the
sanctity of marriage and parentage: it is
religion that rears strengthens heightens
the walls and towers of morality; it is
revealed theology that serves as the
quarry and mine from which religion
draws the stones that build and the pre
cious stones that adorn these towers and
walls. Reject Christianity as an outworn
tradition and accept the materialism of
science as the subsratum and the sum of
human knowledge thou religion has lost
the indispensable aid of theology, and
morality has lost the indispensable aid
of religion, and marriage and parentage
has lost the indispensable aid of moral
ly.
There needs only time to show the re
ality and gravity of these losses: only
time and experience to demonstrate that
the first blow-the blow against revealed
theology, is the one that costs, and that
it is under the far-reaching and keen
cutting edge of that blow in fact that pa
rentage and marriage and civilization
•nd society are receiving a wound unto
death. Only Christ will not suffer
THE CHRISTIAN IXIW.
A DIBOOUHBE ON THE 50TH- PBALM-
BY REV. F. C. JOHNSON.
i. El. Elohim, Jehovah hath
spoken and called the Earth, from
the rising of the sun unto the go
ing down thereof.
This verse presents us with three
names, all designating Him, whose
offspring we are, whose image we
bear, in whose earth we live, for
whose glory we were created, and
to whom we shall render account,
for the deeds done in the body,
whether they be good or bad.
These names differ, and they
form a climax, gradually ascending
in dignity.
There is one other place, and on
ly one other place in the Hebrew
Scriptures, where we meet these
three names thus placed. This
place is Joshua, 22 chapter, 22v.
Let one read this whole chapter in
Joshua throughout, and he will see
that these three names so arranged,
and twice repeated. El, Elohim,
Jehovah —El, Elohim, Jehovah, He
knoweth etc., were employed on
an occasion of the greatest solem
nity.
In this place in Joshua, our trans
lators render, The LORD, God of
Gods. Jehovah which stands last
in the Hebrew, they put first, ren
dering it Lord, and printing all the
letters as capitals, to let us know
that in the original, the word is Je
hovah. El, which they render God,
they put in the middle, and Elo
him, which they render Gods, they
put last. In this Psalm, they ren
der “the mighty God, even the
LORD.” Mighty God, is El Elo
him, El being rendered by the ad
jective mighty, and Elohim, being
God. This is a little curious. In
the very same collocation of the
words, and where there is not the
least difference of meaning, we
have El rendered in one place God,
and in the other mighty, Elohim,
in the one place “of Gods,” and in
the other God. The Hebrew Punc
tuators of the text, considered them
separate, distinct, names in opposi
tion, all designating the one object
of Israel’s worship.
From Exodus vi 53 we learn that
God appeared to Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob, as El Shaddai, but that
his name Jehovah was unknown to
them. In confirmation of this it is
said Genesis, 17 chapter, that Je
hovah appeared to Abraham and
said, “I am El Shaddai, walk be
fore me and be pc. feet” and Jacob
48th. Genesis, says to Joseph “El
Shaddai appeared to me at Luz in
the land of Kanaan and blessed
me.”
Now these two words El Shad
dai our version renders “God al
mighty, as if one of them was a
noun and the other an adjective.
They are both properly adjectives
and signifying “mighty,” and they
are used separately as names of
God. Power is the predominant
idea in both. Power is the first at
tribute that strikes the senses. But
power is shdwn in two ways, pow
er to save, and power to destroy.
El is God, as the almighty to
save: Shaddai is God, as the al
mighty to destroy. Put together
El Shaddai, the meaning is, “He
that is able to save and drstroy.
James, iv :i2.” ’’There is one law
giver who is able to save and to
destroy.” El is the God of salva
tion, as in Psalm 68:21. “Our
God, (El) is the God (El) of Sal
vation,” Shaddai is the almighty
to destroy. Joel, 1:15. Alas for
the day! For the day of Jehovah
is at hand, and as a destruction
from the almighty (Shaddai) shall
it come.”
Elohim is a higher name. It is
the name of the Creator. “In the
beginning God (Elohim) created
the heaves and the earth.” And
this is the only name used through
out the ist chapter of Genesis. El
ohim, is plural, not singular. Both
powers, the power to save and the
power to destroy belong to this
name. But farther, this name, de
notes Him the “One lawgiver able
to save and destroy” revealed by
his great works the heavens and
the earth, the infinitily loving, in
finitely wise and infinitely mighty
God of law. Science, whether it
does or not, ought to recognize El
ohim. For it is the sole business
of science to investigate the works
of Elohim.
Jehovah, this the last name of
the three, is the highest in dignity,
the greatest in meaning, and in re
spect to our knowledge of it pecu
liar. Scholars arc now generally
agreed that the true pronunciation
of it is Yah-veh. It is in Hebrew
written with four consonants. In
the Hebrew alphabet there are 22
consonants, and no vowels. The four
consonants composing this name,
are J H V H.
Long before there was any such
language us the English, the Jews
had a superstitious reverence for
this name and it was held a heinous
sin to pronounce it, except by the
high priest, and by him only in
the sanctuary. On the greatest of
all days in the Jewish Calendar.
For it they substituted the word
Adonai, which vre render Lord, and
always write it LORD, to distin
guish it from the common word lor<|.
When now tlm vowel points were
ATLANTA, GA., THURSDAY. AUGUST 10.1893.
-
invented, when they came to this
word, they used the Vowel points
for Adonai, except in a few cases,
where they put the vowel points of
Elohim. And that is the way, that
Yaveh has come to be pronounced
Jehovah, J and y being the same.
The Jews still observe this custom,
and pronounce Adonai instead of
Yahveh. In our, and indeed in all
translations of the old Testament
this Jewish superstition has gov
erned Christians In the English, the
only exception that I can think of
just now occurs in Isaiah, 26 :j.
This name science which investi
gates the work of God, the heavens
and the earth, which the senses can
observe, and wherein we can see no
evidence of anything but law, in
exorable, pitiless law. This name
Science could never discover. This
name was revealed to Moses, the
man of God. It’s significance was
revealed to him, by God himself,
and further in the Apocalypse its
meaning is given by him, who if
all that ever believed, wrote the
last book of the Bible which is call
ed par excellence Revelations. Je
hovah is the covenant name. I
have said it is the greatest name for
Jehovah, is at once God almighty,
the creator of the heavens and the
earth. It therefore embraces all
that El Shaddai, and Elohim mean,
but it means still more and much
more. It’s meaning you may learn
from Exodus 34 15, 6,7, “And Je
hovah descended in the cloud, and
stood with him there, and proclaim
ed the name of Jehovah. And Je
hovah passed by before him, and
proclaimed, Jehovah, Jehovah, God
merciful and graeious, long suffer
ing, and abundant in goodness and
truth, keeping mercy unto the
thousandth generation, forgiving
iniquity and transgression and sin,
and yet will not leave wholly un
punished ; visiting the iniquity of
the fathers upon the children, and
upon the children’s children unto
the third and unto the fourth gene
ration.” These 3 verses in Exodus
I think to be the text of the 115th
Psalm. In Revelations 1 :6, “I am
Alpha and Omega, the beginning
and the ending, saith the Lord,
which is and which was, and which
is to come, the Almighty.” The
words “which is and which was,
and which is to come,” stand for
Jehovah, Jehovah I may add is
the proper name of him, whom we
call God. God is not a proper
name but Jehovah is the proper
name of Him who in the begin
ning made the heavens and the
earth.” We say William the Em
peror of Germany, just so the scrip
tures say Jehovah the God of Isra
el. William is the proper name of
an individual man, who would re
main William, though he should
cease to be Emperor of Germany.
So Jehovah is the proper name of
that Spirit, who would still remain
Jehovah, though he should cease to
be God of Israel. Now there is an
exquisite fitness between these
three names, El, Elohim, and Jeho
vah, and the subject matter of the
Psalm. The mighty to save, the
being who created the earth and
the heavens, the merciful and gra
cious, long suffering and abundant
in goodness and truth &c. He call
eth the earth from utmost East to
utmost West. The distance East
and West is greater, than from North
to South. The Creators voice is
audible throughout the Earth
which his hands made.
Deaf must he be that hears it not.
Os this deafness we read in 58th
Psalm, “They are like the deaf ad
der that stoppeth her ear, which
will not hearken to the voice of
charmers, charming never so wise
ly.”
Fearful his guilt who hears, and
regards not. “See that ye refuse not
him who speaketh : For if they es
caped not who refused him that
spake on earth, much more shall
we not escape, if we turn away
from him that speaketh from heav
en : whose voice then shook the
earth, but now he hath promised,
saying, Yet once more I shake not
the earth only, but also heaven.”
Hebrews 12 125, 26.
What word is this that calls the
earth from East to West? ’Tis
the Gospel. “Go ye into all the
earth, and preach the gospel to ev
ery creature.” This is that word
celebrated in the 68th Psalm 1 ith v.
“The Lord (Adonai) will give the
word : the proclaimers, a vast host.”
There are now in these United
States some 70,000 of them, in all
the earth I take it not less than
300,000 proclaimers of this word.
No other King has so many messen
gers.
V. 2, “Out of Zion, the perfec
tion of beauty. God hath shined.”
This word “Out of Zion,” shows
that in v. x, he did not mean the de
livery of the Law from Sinai. Be
cause at that time God did not call
the earth from the rising of the sun
unto the going down thereof. His
voice then sounded only within the
narrow triangle formed by the
mountain range Jcbcl cl Tik and
the two arms of the Red Sea. It
was only Isreal’s tribes, that were
then called. But this shining forth,
is the going forth of the law from
Zion, and the proclamation of Je
hovah’s word from Jerusalem, spok
en of by Isaiah 2 iw then all na-
tions hear it, and it is addressed to
all the people of the earth, Gentiles
as well as Jews.
Zion is called “the perfection of
beauty.” This Sinai was not.
Sinai, rugged, barren, bleak, in
hospitable, repulsive. Sinai was
rendered still less attractive, and
still more frightful, at the time of
giving the law, by reason of that
dark and threatening cloud that
covered it, and threw over the des
ert its gloomy shadow, and by the
fierce flame that shot up out of the
cloud, burning unto the very heart
of heaven, and so terrible was the
sight that even Moses feared and
quaked exceedingly. TKe law of
sin and death was not that blessed
radiance that gives light, and guides
life. Rather was it the lightning,
which issuing from the black cloud,
blinds and consumes.
Zion means Sunny. What Sinai
means I know not, but Horeb the
mountain whereof Sinai is a peak,
means the dried up, the parched,
desolate. n The word translated
“shine forth” means the breaking
forth »f the sunlight, and when
used metaphorically of Igod, it al
ways means his coming to our sal
vation, coming in the splendor of
grace as the golden tressed sun.
Never is it used of the lightning.
Now the Law is not the means of
salvation, for “by deeds of the
law shall no flesh be justified, for
by the law is the knowledge of
sin.” And again in Habakuk iii :q,
describing God’s coming at Sinai it
is said “He had horns coining out
of his hand: and there was the
hiding of his power. Horns or rath
er a pair of horns, meaning the two
tables of the law. In the law, then
was not the shining forth of God’s
power, but the hiding of it. For
in the law that works wrath, God’s
power to save does not shine forth,
but is hidden in it. Even as the
cloud covered Sinai and made it
dark, so the Law hides God’s pow
er to save. But the gospel is the
power of God to save and therefore
it is said out of Zion, the sunlit,
and not out of Sinai the cloud
covered.
Therefore is Zion the perfectly
beautiful, for it was irradiated with
the splendor of that true light,'that
enlighteneth every man that com
eth into the world. There it be
gins, but stays not, but from thence
spreads, until all nations are blessed
with the light of salvation, as St.
Luke hath it. “That» repentance
and remission of sins sTiall be
preached in his name among all
nations beginning at Jerusalem.”
[to be continued.]
"THAT MAN OF SIN.” 2 THES- 11
BY 8. G. HILI.YER.
The Thessalonians had, some how,
become impressed with the belief
that the “day of Christ” was “at
hand.” Paul having learned this
fact, and seeing that they might be
come so disturbed and excited upon
the subject as to neglect, in some
measure, more or less hurtful to
themselves, the pressing claims of
their daily religious obligations to
their families and to their fellow
men, wrote his secoued letter to cor
rect this impression. He shows them
that the “day of Christ” should be
looked for in the far distant future.
He had already told them, in his
first letter, that its coining should be
as a “thief in the night; ” thus indi
cating that no man knows when it
will be. But in bis second letter he
assures them that they need not look
for it till after certain other very im
portant events that must precede it.
And it is worthy of notice that he does
not say how long after those events
it would be, before the day of Christ
should come. Ilis words are :
“Let no man deceive you by any
means; for that day shall not come,
except there coine a falling away
first, and that man of siti be revealed
the son of perdition, who opposeth
and cxalteh himself above all that is
called God, or that is worshiped ; so
that he as God sitteth in the Temple
of God showing himself that ho is
God.” 2 These. 11; 2-3-4.
These words foretell distinctly two
events which must precede the “day
of Christ.” First, “a falling away,”
—an apostacy (Gr. apostasia), and
then, afterwards the revelation of
the “man of sin.” Now, about “the
falling away,” we should notice, that
the form of the Apostle’s statement
plainly shows that the “falling away,”
and “the revelation of the man of
sin stand, to each other, in the rela
tion, both of antecedent and conse
quent in the order of time, and in a
very important sense, in the relation
also ol cause and effect. The words
certainly imply that the “apostacy”
would furnish the occasion,—the op
portunity—which should make it
possible fur the development of the
man|of sin, and natturally load to it.
In perfect harmony with this view
the Apostle tells us that, “the mys
tery of iniquity” was, even then, at
work among the churches. “Ini
quity” here does not exactly express
the idea of the original; hence the
R. V. gives us, “lawlessness,” which
denotes a state of mind that re
nounces legitimate authority. Let
me emphasize this definition. Wher
ever there is any degree of legitimate
authority, resistance to it, is, to the
same degree, lawlessness. No mat
ter how limited may be its power, or
how narrow its range, provided the
authority be legitimate wilful resist
ance to it is lawlessness. The defi
nition will meet every possible case
that can occur whether in Heaven
or on earth. And it will be found
in every case, that the guilt of the
transgressor varies “directly” (as a
mathematician would say) “in the
compound ratio” of the dignity of
the authority, and the intelligence of
him who sets it at naught.
Such was the “mystery of lawless
ness” which was beginning to work
even in the time of the Apostles.
As long as they lived, they were the
divinely appointed, and living wit
ness for Christ among all nations ‘
and their words, whether spoken or
written, constituted the only author
iative exponent of Christianity,
known men. And, for a time,
all true believers did accept the
Apostles’ words as their only and
paramount rule of faith and of prac
tice ; and, then, they had one Lord,
one faith and one baptism.
But all were not true believers.
Paul gives evidence, not only in the
passage now before us, but in other
epistles, that there were some who
would not accept “sound doctrine.”
All such "were disposed to set at
nought the authority of the Apostles.
In all such was working the “mys
tery of lawlessness.”
But at the time Paul wrote, that
hurtful influence was held in check.
Now, what was that restraining
force? The Thessalonians already
knew what that hindering cause was ;
for Paul had told them, while he
was with them, (see verses 5,6.)
Hence he omits to mention it in his
letter. So we are left to conjecture.
But, I think a careful study of the
facts will enable us to answer the
question. That which held in check
the “mystery of lawlessness” was the
persecution to "which Christians were
exposed. It is worthy of notice,
that when Paul alludes, first, to this
hindering force in verse 6th, he calls
it “that which” (or the thing which,)
in the neuter gender; thus suggest
ing the hindering cause as a thing,
to which the word persecution fairly
answers. But in the next verse he
speaks of it as a person, as he who
now letteth, etc.,” —to which the
word “persecutor” evidently answers.
The persecutor might be' a Jew or
Gentile, a riotous mob, as at Philippi,
or the edicts of Caesar executed by
the prefects of the empire. .Which
ever of bo active! at any
particular time or place th® result
was persecution.
This was the force that was bold
ing in check the “mystery of lawless
ness.” That it should have a res
training influence we might, “a pri
ori,” expect from the well-known
principles of human nature. The
Christians of that day, literally dwelt
in the midst of their enemies. They
were in jeopardy every hour, —ex-
posed to a common danger. What
could be better calculated to unite
and hold them together? Or, what
could be bettor calculated to make
them abide fast by the inspired teach
ings of the Apostles? And what
was better calculated to keep the
church free from the influx of trim
mers, self-seekers and hypocrites?
Hence, so far as persecution would
naturally exert all these effects, just
so far it w’ould hold in check the
spirit of lawlessness; and thus delay
the revelation of the “man of sin.”
But this restraint was not completely
effective. Paul’s keen discernment
discovered this lurking enemy creep
into the churches; and he foresaw
what would come to pass, when the
hindrance should cease to be. He
was acquainted, no doubt, with the
story of Simon Magus. He knew
personally Hymeneus, Alexander and
Diotrephes, and perhaps others,
whose names were not recorded. He
saw in them all a disposition,—a
spirit—to set at naught the teachings
and the institutions of the Apos
tles.
But this class of people were even
not yet very numerous. The fear of
persecution kept many of these per
sons out of the church.
But when Constantine repealed
the edicts against the Christians,
which his predecessors had enacted,
then persecution ceased. But “a fal
ling away” from the faith and prac
tice of the Apostles had already
made some progress among the
churches, giving rise to some inno
vations. Among these, infant bap
tism was conspicuous. Its evil ef
fects, however, had been, in some
measure, restrained by the perils of
persecution. But when that was
removed, the unconverted members
whom infant baptism had introduc
ed into many of the churches, camo
to the front, and “the falling away”
was accelerated. A profession of
Christianity was no longer a reproach
but rather a recommendation to im
perial favor, and to political advance
ment. Hence the “world” pressed
into the churches, heresies were mule
tiplied, and controversies becam
inore bitter and violent. Such was
the state of things towards the close
of the fourth century.
True, there wore many, who, dom
inated by sincere reverence for the
legitimate authority of the inspired
writings, stood “for the faith once
delivered to the saints.” But others,
dominated by the spirit of lawless-
ness, rejected that
stood for their various
These had evidently fallen
the true faith. It was this
furnished the opportunity
revelation of ‘.‘the man of
finally led to it.
Constantine saw and
dissensions of Christiane. WlrWer
prompted by his own feelingfc or
whether his interference was invoked
by some of the contending parties,
we need not stop to enquire. It is
enough to know that he invited the
bishops of all the churches to meet
in a general council at Nice to dis
cuss their differences and to adopt
a creed upon which they could all
unite. Accordingly about 700 bish
ops came together at Nice. The
Emperor himself was present and, no
doubt, did all he could to bring
peace to the churches.
[continued next week.]
INFERENCES.
SOME JUST, AND SOME UNJUST ;
TAKE YOUR CHOCE.
There is no danger of Bible teach
ers knowing too much; but some
times they tell us more than they
know. An instance or two of this
fault occurs, we think, in the Sunday
school comments for July 2nd. On
Acts 16 : 3 are these words, “Tim
othy, a convert of the first journey
joins them.” Does the expositor
know he was a convert of the first
journey? We would not call any
reader stupid if, reflecting on Paul’s
allusion to Timothy’s grandmother
Lois and his mother Eunice, 2d
Tim. 1:5. he should gather the im
pression that Paul, before be became
a persecutor of the church, knew
well the Timothy family. And it
would be no wild conjecture to sup
pose it possible, or even probable,
that, when Paul had returned from
Damascus to preach Christ in his
native Cilicia, he found the Timothy
family ready to coalesce with him in
accepting Christ as the Messiah, and
that Timothy was among the first
that he baptized there.
But the expositor says it w'as on
Paul’s second journey when he had
found Timothy at Lystra, that he
“solemnly ordained him and set him
apart for the ministry.” Now it is
true that Paul did sometime or other
lay hands on Timothy, Timothy
thereby receiving “the gift.” But
does the expositor know that it was
at Lystra, or on that (Second journeyl
of Paul? We would be far from'
stating mere conjecture as fact, for
this is what we complain of in others,
but we do volunteer a conjecture of
our own here, worth more we think
than what the expositor presents as
fact. As we have already said, it
betrays no lack of sense to suppose
Timothy was among the first bap
tized by Paul in Cilicia and of course
several years before his first mis
sionary tour. The conjecture we
now make is that, on those (Tim
othy included) who were then bap
tized, bauds were laid whereby they
received “the gift”—whether of
tongues, or of healing, or both—
just as the first baptized in Samaria
and at Caesarea of nearly the same
date received it; just as those be
lievers at Ephesus at a subsequent
date received it from Paul himself.
We claim that what we here set
forth as conjecture is fully as apt to
be truth as what the expositor pre
sents as fact. Suppose, when the
honest reader is told how Paul at
Lystra or Inconium “solemnly or
dained Timothy to the ministry” on
that second tour when Silas was with
him, suppose we say, the reader
turns to Luke’s narrative—What
does he see? Anything that hints
at such an ordination ? Nothing
whatever; but instead of this, he
sees that careful statement how
Paul did circumcise Timothy. And
we here submit that the reader, if a
sou of Erin, would take the teach
ing of the expositor to bo that Tim
othy was set apart to the ministry
by administering to him the rite of
circumcision!
Hero note: the very pen that as
signs as matter of fact the conver
sion of Timothy to Paul’s first
journey and his “ordination” to the
second, refers to him admiringly as
a “tender youth of fifteen” at the
time of the first event, (and by con
sequence only seventeen at the time
of his “ordination.”) Now this is
but a blundering fancy, and we can
account for it only in one way. A
man of becoming research might
say Timothy was probably about
fifteen when he espoused the cause of
Christ in baptism. But this man
must have his reasons for supposing
Paul had been preaching in his na
tive Cilicia five or six years when
Barnabas found him at Tarsus and
took him to Antioch. He must
further suppose that Timothy was
among the first Cilician converts
under Paul’s preaching there. This
would place Timothy at the .mature
age of twenty-four when he became
a partner with Paul and Silas in
their memorable mission. Evidently
our expositor has grasped at the
age of fifteen, but stupidly
blundered as to when Timothy was
fifteen, putting it so late that it
makes him only seventeen, instead
of twenty four, when, fortunate for
Paul and Silas and the world itself,
he became their worthy associate.
OL. 70-NO. 31.
We feel quite assured that Tim
othy, wherever he lived at the time,
became well posted as to Paul’s first
tour, that a. change of residence or
in secular affairs took him into the
scene of those missionary labors,
perhaps Derbo first, which was not
far from the confines of Cilicia—
that he became interested in the
newly planted churches, and that
there Paul and Silas found him
prosecuting a kind of voluntary
ministry and ready to become God’s
own man to fill the place of Mark.
The “sudden sickness which detained
Paul in Galatia” we are told delayed
him on this second journey. But
does the expositor know it was on
this second journey ? After taking
Timothy into their company it is
said “They went on their way
through the cities” (this shows that
the gospel was preached and church
es started in many places that are
not named in the sketch of the first
journey)—And “the churches were
established in the faith and in
creased in numbers daily.” This
brief statement indicates quite a
protracted service apparently em
bracing all that Paul contemplated
as to the regions traversed in the
first journey outside of Cyprus.
What then ? “And they went
through the region of Phrygia and
Galatia—and passing by Mysia they
came down to Troag.” There is
no chance given us in the narrative
to suppose the writer conscious of
anything like what the expositors so
positively assert about a “prolonged
delay on account of Paul’s sickness.”
—But there is Paul’s letter to the
Galatians, from which we know
there was a period when his regular
mission work appears to have been
suspended on account of bodily ills.
During this suspension he was in
Galatia. But he had not come there
for mission work. Evidently then
he bad turned aside from the scene
(proper) of his gospel labors for the
purpose of being in Galatia as a
place favorable to recovery from his
maladies. Where in time then shall
we put this divergency from his
route—this episode in his labors,
this “sickness, the occasion of pro
longed delay in Galatia;” in his sec
ond journey with Silas after Tim
othy had joined them? or, sometime
during his first journey when Bar
nabas was with him? We permit
ourselves here to say that the
teacher, preacher, or expositor
(who indeed is expected to deal in
inference, if only it is just) who,
commenting on ihe allusions Paul '
makes to his retreat among the Gal
atians—their care for him in his sad
condition when with them the “first
time,” can be so forgetful of the
words “once was I stoned”—for
getful when and where this occurred
and so thoughtless of the long repose
necessary in convalescence, as to
trace that “sickness” which in its re
sults is well presumed to have
proved his “thorn in the flesh,” to
his second mission tour, instead of
the first, is truly to be pitied for so
useless a service in his calling.
Whence is it necesssry to suppose
that when, during the period of his
first [mission he had been stoned,
his body dragged out of the city and
left for dead, and he came to life, —
whence we ask is it necessary to
suppose that he was not so injured
that his recovery was by a slow pro
cess.? Though not so specially in
jured internally or disabled in his
lower limbs but that he could stand
up and tl.e next morning start off
with Barnabas, or be taken by him,
(no body knows how many of the
new brethren [helped him on) to
Derbe, yet is it necessary to suppose
that the missile for the effect inten
ded were not so aimed as to inflict
on the upper part of his person such
wounds as were weeks and months
in healing—wounds about his face
that marred his features and left in
effaceable scars—ulcers about his
head and, alas, his eyes! How can
the expositor, here bringing Paul’s
“thorn in the flesh” in connection
with the scars that he bore and an
incurable malady in his eyes, tell us
these things belong to the second
journey through Asia-Minor, (dur
ing which Luke gives no trace of
any interruption whatever) instead
of the first journey during which we
know that terrible instance of ston
ing did occur from which thought
ful readers so commonly think he
never fully recovered?
The narrative of the second tour
gives us to understand that when,
after Timothy joined them, the three
companions had completed the cir
cuit of the churches, they went
through the region of Phrygia and
Galatia. Now Galatia as here pre
sented was far north, unvisited as we
may well suppose, in the journey of
Paul and Barnabas. But we learn,
and it is probably true, how the peo
ple known as Galatians (Gauls) had
during a previous century spread al
most everywhere in Asia Minor and
whilst their chief domain was far
north and west, a part of it in the
age which concerns Luke’s narrative
extended far to the Southeast, its eon
fines lapping, bo to speak on those
of Lycaonia. In our view the
“churches of Galatia” were in this
region and easily reached at the
same time with Lycaonia, all of
which, though their distinctive loca
tion, if not named was the first to
receive the attention of Paul and Si-