Biblical Essays
PRESENT CONDITION OF THINGS

Introduction
It has occurred to us that it might be unprofitable write an essay regarding the present condition of things in the religious world. It is certainly not a pleasant subject; and may prove to be unpopular; and this perhaps is one reason why we have adopted this method of dealing with it, in preference to a formal treatise attempt. There is a peculiar charm about an essay, because one can pour out his heart with a sense of freedom; almost forgetting that another eye might scan the material.

However, some may protest against wading through even a single line on such a depressing theme – taking up time with error, confusion and debris involved in thepresent condition of things. One may feel disposed to say, “I already know too much about that subject. I see no good in dwelling on error, failure and folly. I do not find such things in the precious catalogue penned by the inspired apostle in Philippians 4:8. I prefer those holy subjects instead of your proposed theme. It is infinitely better and more strengthening to dwell on the faithfulness of God, the moral glories of Christ, and the living depths of Holy Scripture, than on the low condition of things in the religious world. There is no comfort or power by looking at ruin and failure.”

We fully, cordially, and freely admit all this; and hence, were we to please self, or even to indulge our personal spiritual feelings; we would not write another line on the subject. But, though it may take us a long time to do so, we try to answer questions received from our online friends and yoke-fellows. This essay seeks to combine a variety of questions received regarding the condition of things in the church of our Lord today; thus the origin of the matter now in hand from which, Lord willing, we shall not shirk. May the good Lord vouchsafe us grace to do His will.

We are aware of the fact that people do not like to consider their ways. Self-judgment is not an agreeable task. None of us like to review ourselves or surroundings. But, at times, it is needful and healthful. It is always safe and good to judge ourselves, review our path, know the times, understand the real condition of things within and around and be divinely instructed regarding how we should carry ourselves in the midst of the actual state of the Lord’s church. One thing is certain; it is the height of folly to shut our eyes to the present appalling condition of religion in all its ramifications. Turn where we will, and we are met by the most unmistakable evidences of the downward course of the Lord’s church in our society.

Doubtless, this may sound morose and severe. Some may pronounce us gloomy croakers. We may be accused of gross one-sidedness and exaggeration, of willfully shutting our eyes to a thousand hopeful features in the scene, and deliberately over-looking many encouraging pledges of brighter and better days to come. We may be told to open our eyes and look at the progress of education – to mark the rapid strides of science; the onward march of civilization – to contrast the America of today with the America of a hundred years ago; and in the face of all this brilliant array of redeeming features, we may be triumphantly challenged to produce “evidences of the downward course of the church in this society.” Our attention may be called to the soul-stirring statistics of Bible Universities and missionary activities, of the various philanthropic and scientific associations of this highly-favored age.

To all this we can only say that we rejoice in every atom of good that is being done in this world, and in every encouraging feature on which the eye can rest. We bless God for all that He, by His Spirit and Word, has wrought in our midst, during the last few years. And further, we delight to think of those who are in the body of Christ who truly are living stones amid the debris; burning coals amid smoldering ashes. May God help us to look for and be aware of them – to appreciate them for what they are – lovers of God and seekers of spiritual truth. God forbid we should not.

But in the face of all that can possibly be presented of a hopeful nature, allowing as broad a margin as the most sanguine spirit can demand in which to insert all the encouraging features and elements that are traceable around us, we return, with calm decision, to our statement that, “On all hands we are met by unmistakable evidences of the downward course of the church of our Lord in this society.”

And why insist on this? Is it merely a morbid desire to dwell on the dark side of things? Is it that we would not rejoice as heartily as others in seeing the progress of what is true and good, if such were really visible? No; in our tiny measure we can say with the apostle, “Would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.” Assuredly, if the true and good were really in the ascendant, we would have our share in it as well as others.

But no; we believe that Holy Scripture and living facts coincide in demonstrating our statement regarding the downward course of things. If God permits, we shall furnish an array of evidence from the pages of inspiration and undeniable facts, proving to all who will only open their eyes to see that with terrific speed religion is traveling down an inclined plane to the blackness and darkness of an eternal night; that there is not the smallest shadow of Scripture authority on which to base a hope of improvement; and, finally, that there is not a single fact in religion’s history, not a single feature in religion’s present state that does not coincide with the predictions of our Lord Christ and His holy apostles, regarding what we are to expect. It is useless for men to shut their eyes to these things, or to set them aside. The Word of God and the facts of the case are against them. There is dire judgment impending over the scene. Before ever the beams of glory can shine forth on the world, the besom of destruction and the sword of judgment must do their appalling work. (Is. 14:23)

Part I
God has always had His people, blessed be His Name; amid all the darkness, gross evil, and puerile superstition of popery. All these will rise to meet their Lord, when He comes to gather His own. Not one shall be left behind. Every grain of genuine wheat shall be gathered into the heavenly garner. And this may take place tonight. And what then? Yes, we may ask, what then? We shrink from writing the answer; but it must be told – strong delusion and eternal perdition for religion and every Christless professor therein (2 Thess. 2:11-12).

There are three great facts presented throughout the inspired volume – facts with which no doubt most are familiar, but which we are persuaded must be laid hold of by a vigorous faith, if we would contemplate with a well-balanced mind the present condition of things throughout the religious world.

In the first place, we learn from Scripture that in every instance in which man has been set in a place of responsibility, he has utterly failed. From Paradise to Pentecost, total failure has marked man’s history. There is not as much as a single exception to the dark and melancholy rule. Let man be tried under the fairest possible circumstances, and he is sure to break down. There is no denying this fact – no getting over it. It runs like a dark, broad line along the page of human history, from first to last.

Let us refer to our proofs – a melancholy but necessary task. When man was first placed in the Garden of Eden, surrounded by all that the hand of an Almighty and Beneficent Creator could do to make him happy, he believed the serpent’s lie, and turned his back on God. He unmistakable proved that he had more confidence in the serpent than in Jehovah Elohim – more respect for the word of the devil than for the Word of the blessed Creator. He trusted Satan rather than God.

This is our first proof. Some may think it harshly stated. It may seem coarse, severe, vehement, and ultra. But no; it would not be possible for the human pen to portray, or the human voice enunciate this terrible proof in features too exaggerated, or in language too severe. The first man, the great parent stem of the human family, the head of the entire human race, was guilty of the terrible act of which we speak. He preferred the devil to God.

Thus the matter stands in its simplest, truest form. Men may speak to soften it down; but no softening can alter the essential features of this tremendous fact. There it is, recorded on the eternal page of inspiration – all the so called fine-drawn theories of philosophy; all the plausible reasoning of infidelity can ever alter its real nature, character, or bearing.

Perhaps it may be said that Adam did not know he was listening to the devil. But how does that affect the real merits of the case? It was not the way of the enemy to come forward openly and boldly, and say “I am the devil; and I am come to slander Jehovah Elohim, and get you to turn your back on Him.” Yet this was precisely what he did, no matter how he did it. He led man to surrender the truth of God, and to accept the lie of the serpent. Thus the fact stands before us, if we are to be guided by the imperishable testimony of Holy Scripture.

Not by any means do we intend to expatiate on the various links in the chain of evidence; but this first link is one of such grave moral import, that we cannot pass it rapidly by. We consider it a fact of overwhelming nature, that the head of the human family – the great parent stock – rejected the truth of God, accepted and acted on the serpent’s lie. This he did in the face of an array of evidence of the goodness, wisdom, and power of God that should have furnished a triumphant answer to the foul lie of the arch-enemy.

Most will no doubt agree with us in thinking that this fact demands our gravest consideration. Even though we were to proceed no further with proofs, it would go far to prepare us for the contemplation of the present condition of things, in which we shall find superstition and infidelity playing such an appalling part. If it be true – and who will deny it? That the first man, the head of the race, the parent stem, believed the devil instead of God; hearkened to the creature rather than the Creator. Need we wonder at the murky clouds of superstition that enwrap his fallen family, or at the audacious flights of infidelity in which so many of his unhappy children indulge? The heart of man; of every unrenewed man beneath the canopy of God’s heaven, is formed by the serpent’s lie. Not only formed, but filled and governed by it. Solemn thought. Fallen human nature is based on and characterized by a lie as to God; and hence it must be false as to everything divine and heavenly. Man’s moral being is false at its center – he is corrupt at his heart’s core. Thus he has a ready ear for everything untrue, impure, and unholy – everything against God. We will always find the human heart at the wrong side of any question concerning God and His truth. Therefore, no marvel that superstition and infidelity are rapidly gaining ground in religion today.

But we must proceed with our proofs.

Passing down along the page of man's history after the fall, we see him progressing with terrible strides, until at length his iniquity rises to a head, and God sends the deluge. Noah is carried safely through the judgment, and placed at the head of the restored earth, with the sword of government in his hand.

This was truly a high position – a place of immense power, privilege, and responsibility. How does Noah carry himself therein? He gets drunk, and degrades himself in the presence of his sons. Such is the plain, palpable fact. Men may reason as they will. They may seek to smooth, soften, and pare down, as is their way whenever any great truth is stated that bears down on human pride and self-gratulation. But they cannot set aside the humiliating fact that the head of the restored earth got drunk. Yes, the very man concerning whom his father Lamech prophesied, that “This same shall comfort us concerning our work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed” – This man “planted a vineyard; and he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.”

We do not dwell on this, but hasten on to another link in our chain of evidence. When Israel was redeemed out of Egypt, they deliberately undertook, and solemnly pledged themselves, to do all that Jehovah had spoken. What was the issue? Before they received the tables of the law, under the leadership of no less a personage than Aaron himself, they actually made a golden calf, and said, “These be thy gods, O Israel, that brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.”

How terrible; how deeply humiliating; how astounding to think of a whole congregation of men, headed by such a man as Aaron, actually accepting a golden calf in lieu of Jehovah. What a proof of our essay is here before us. Jehovah displaced by a calf. Who would have thought it possible? But the heart recurs to Adam accepting the serpent instead of Jehovah Elohim, and this prepares us for anything. We are not surprised, when we behold Noah lying drunk in his tent, or Israel bowed before a golden calf. Man fails always, and everywhere. Adam is driven from the garden; Noah despised by his son; and Israel sees the tables of testimony shattered to atoms at the foot of the palpable mount.

But Jehovah institutes priesthood. The very man who did all the terrible mischief is invested with the high and holy office. What is the issue? Strange fire; and Aaron never appears in the presence of God in his garments of glory and beauty.

One more proof – in process of time a king is set up. What follows? Strange wives, gross idolatry, and the nation rent in twain.

All these are plain, undeniable facts, that cannot be set aside, proving, so far as they go, the truth of our statement, that failure is stamped on man's history from first to last in characters deep and broad.

It should not surprise us to find that Christianity forms no exception to the melancholy rule we have been pursuing through the pages of Old Testament Scriptures. At the opening of the Acts of the Apostles we have a charming picture presented in the condition and practical ways of the early church. The very record is refreshing to read. What must the living facts have been? “Then they that gladly received the Word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostle’s doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles. And all that believed were together, and had all things common: and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all, as every man had need. And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and having favour with all the people” (Acts 2:41-46).

Here we have a lovely sample of true Christianity; some rich clusters of the fruit of the Spirit; the glorious triumph of grace over all the narrow selfishness of nature; the exquisite merging of all personal interests and considerations in the common good. “They were together,” and “they had all things common.” They were “Of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. Neither was there any among them that lacked; for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles’ feet; and distribution was made to every man according as he had need” (Acts 4:32-35).

It is impossible to conceive anything more lovely on this earth. It is a display of the moral glories of heaven – a fair and touching illustration of what it will be, by and by, when our God shall have things His own way, when He shall throw open the fair fields of the new creation in view of all created intelligences, when the heavens above and the earth beneath shall exhibit the Savior’s influence, and reflect the beams of His glory.

But this lovely picture was marred. There were unhallowed elements working underneath the surface of this fair scene, which speedily made their appearance. Covetousness, selfishness, hypocrisy and deceit broke out in the midst of all this moral loveliness, proving that man is always and everywhere the same. In Eden, in the restored earth, in Canaan, and in the very presence of the Pentecostal gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit, man utterly breaks down. From first to last, unfaithfulness, failure, sin and ruin are stamped on every page of man’s history. It is useless for anyone to deny this. The proofs are too strong. Every section of the melancholy story, every page, every paragraph, is but a tributary stream to swell the tide of evidence in proof of the fact that man is not to be trusted. In the bowers of Eden; amid the impressive scenes of the restored world; surrounded by all the splendor of Solomon’s reign – yes, in presence of the Pentecostal gifts and powers of the Holy Spirit, human sin and folly have always displayed their hideous forms. There is not so much as a solitary exception to the dismal and humiliating rule.

However, it may be that some will object to the use we are making of the covetousness and deceit of Ananias and Sapphira, and the murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews. It may be deemed unwarrantable to argue the failure of the entire Christian dispensation from a few plague spots appearing at the opening of its history.

The same objection may be urged in reference to all our proofs. What drove Adam out of Eden? Eating a little fruit. What degraded the head of the restored earth? Drinking too much wine. What stripped Aaron of his garments of glory and beauty? Strange fire. Thus, in every instance, it is not a question regarding the magnitude of the thing done, but the gravity of the principle involved. It is of the deepest importance to see this, in all cases. In our shallow judgment, what appears on the surface may seem trivial: but the underlying principles may involve the gravest consequences.

However, it is not to be supposed that as a witness for Christ on this earth we base our judgment as to the failure of Christianity on facts recorded on the opening page of the church’s history. Far from it. Our Lord’s prophetic teachings, delivered before the foundation of the Christian system was laid, furnish the fullest and clearest warnings regarding the future destiny of that system. What is the meaning of the parable of the tares? of the leaven? or of the mustard tree? “While men slept the enemy came and sowed tares in the field, and went his way.” We do not learn from this the uninterrupted progress of the good, the pure, the true; but the corruption of these latter by the mischievous hand of the adversary; the marring of the beauteous work of God, the hindrance of the divine testimony by adverse influences.

Similar is the testimony of the parables of the leaven and the mustard seed. Both lead us to expect the hopeless failure of man’s religions, through the unfaithfulness of man and the crafty vigilance of the arch-enemy. It is true that many look on the leaven as typical of the gradual progress of the Gospel. And in like manner, the mustard tree is viewed as illustrating the marvelous progress of the Christian system.

But it is not possible that in their teaching, the parables of the leaven and the mustard seed can contradict the parable of the tares; and most surely this latter does not teach the progress of good, but the sad admixture of evil. And further, how is it possible for the careful student of Scripture to admit that leaven is always used as a type of anything good? We believe that leaven is used only to set forth that which is evil. And as to the mustard tree, its character is stamped by the fact that its wide-spreading branches offer shelter to “the fowls of the air”; for where are those “fowls” ever used as a figure of what is holy or good?

But the entire New Testament actually teems with evidence in proof of our thesis. Every prophetic voice that falls on the ear, as well as every historic statement establishes beyond question the hopeless ruin of the church as a responsible witness for Christ on earth.

We are not now thinking of the church as the body of Christ. In this aspect, thank God, there can be no failure, no ruin, and no judgment. Christ will infallibly maintain His church according to the divine integrity of His own work. Before long, He will present His church without spot or wrinkle or any such thing. He has expressly declared that the gates of hell shall not prevail against His assembly.

On the other hand, looked at as a responsible witness for Christ, as a steward, a light-bearer in this world, the church, like every other steward or witness, has miserably failed; and is rapidly ripening for judgment. If we do not distinguish these two aspects of the church or Christianity, we shall be involved in thorough confusion.

But we must proceed with our chain of evidence.

Turn to that touching scene in Acts 20, where the blessed apostle is taking leave of the elders of the church at Ephesus. Let us hearken to the following words of deep solemnity, “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of [or from among] your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:28-30; emphasis added).

We feel assured there is something more in the above passage than the mere fact of a servant of Christ taking leave of the sphere of his labors, and fellow-laborers. We believe we have here that solemn epoch in the church’s history – being deprived of the personal presence of apostles. And what is she taught to expect? Is it spiritual progress? Is it the gradual spread of the Gospel over the world? Is it a succession of godly, devoted, earnest men who should carry on the blessed work begun by the apostles? Nothing of the kind – nothing approaching it. On the contrary, she is taught to look for “grievous wolves” – “men speaking perverse things” – perverters of the truth of God and the souls of men.

Such is the gloomy prospect presented to the church’s view in this pathetic farewell address of the most devoted servant that ever stood in the vineyard of Christ. It is utterly vain to attempt shutting our eyes to this solemn fact. We know people do not like to hear such teaching. Smooth things are far more agreeable and popular. But we seek truth; and dare not attempt to prophesy smooth things, crying out peace, peace, when there is no peace, but palpable ruin and imminent judgment. Of what possible use is it to daub the walls of Christianity with the untempered mortar of human thoughts and opinions? “Use,” did we say? It is cruelty; for as sure as God is in heaven, those walls shall, before long, be demolished and swept away by the stormy blast of divine judgment. Only the unmitigated wrath of Almighty God lies before the false root, trunk and branches of man’s religions. Is this a mere human opinion? No, it is the voice of Holy Scripture.

Let us listen to further testimony. Turn to Paul’s Epistle to Timothy. “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience, seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth” (1 Tim. 4:1-3).

Perhaps it will be urged by some that in the passage just quoted we have a photograph of popery. The features seem too salient; too striking, for the most cursory observer not to trace the picture of popery, with its monastic and ascetic absurdities.

But let us cull for protestantism a passage from the second Epistle. “This know also, that in the last days perilous [or difficult] times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves [not abstaining from anything that self may desire], covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away” (2 Tim. 3:1-5; emphasis added).

Here we do not have the superstition of the middle ages, but the infidelity of the last days of religion, with all its appalling adjunct so flagrantly displayed on every side, in this our own day. Thus in 1 Timothy 4, we have monastic and ascetic absurdities, found in popery; and in 2 Timothy 3, infidelity in man’s religious organizations, plainly delineated by the pen of inspiration. In neither are we taught to look for the progress of truth; but in both the progress of error and evil, and the consequent judgment of God.

Precisely similar is the teaching of the Apostle Peter, who tells us that “There were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not” (2 Pet. 2:1-3).

So also the Apostle Jude gives us a most appalling picture of the corruption, the ruin, and final doom of man’s creeds, dogmas, and traditions – his religious organizations. Nothing can be more awful than his delineations. “Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gain-saying of Core. These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds: trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever.”

Finally, when we turn to the addresses to the seven churches, the same solemn testimony is conveyed to the heart. Here the church of our Lord is under judgment. It has left its first love. Balaam, Jezebel, and the Nicolaitanes are at work. This responsible witness for Christ proves no better than all the rest. The ruin is hopeless; and nothing remains for the professing church but to be spued out as a nauseous and insufferable abomination.

Here we briefly pause. The chain of evidence is complete. It is impossible for anyone who bows to Scripture to resist or gainsay it. Our first point is established unanswerably: wherever man has been set in a place of responsibility, he has miserably failed. Hopeless ruin and judgment cover every page of human history, from Adam in the Garden of Eden down to the Christian era. There is not so much as a solitary exception to the gloomy and humiliating rule.

May our souls be kept above the murky atmosphere that enwraps the professing church, basking in the sunlight of our Father’s love, and realizing abiding fellowship with Him Who is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Part II
We now give attention to another great principle we have found most helpful in preparing the mind for contemplation of the present condition of things in the church – God never restores a fallen witness. When man fails in his responsibility, as we have shown he always does, God does not reinstate him. He brings in something better as the fruit of His own sovereign grace; but He never puts a new piece on an old garment.

Thus, when Adam failed in the garden, he was driven out, and never reinstated. “And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of Us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever: therefore, the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So He drove out the man: and He placed at the east of the garden of Eden, cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life” (Gen. 3:22-24).

There were two trees – the tree of responsibility, and the tree of life. Having utterly failed regarding the former, man could not be allowed to eat of the latter. His title to the tree of life was hopelessly forfeited. He had lost his innocence, never to regain it; he must leave the garden, never to be reinstated. True, God could give him righteousness instead of innocence; heaven instead of Eden – a far better thing and better place. But He drove him out of Eden; and not only drove him out, but placed an insuperable barrier in the way of his return – “a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.”

Now this is truly a weighty principle, and it runs throughout the Word of God, side by side with that on which we have dwelt up to now. The first man fails in everything, as already proven beyond question. Under his hand, everything he touches goes to ruin. On the ground of unfaithfulness he is turned out of stewardship, never to be reinstated. God never re-constructs a fallen economy. He introduces a new thing on a new footing, and through grace, leads the true believer into enjoyment of it; but the first man is completely set aside, his history forever closed. The cross is the termination of the lifer of the first man; and the second Man, risen from the dead, is the basis and center of God’s new creation. He is invested with all the dignities and glories. All that the first man lost, the second Man regained. He won back all and much more beside. He glorified God in every position in which the first man had dishonored Him. He faithfully discharged every responsibility and executed every stewardship. By His accomplished atonement, He laid the foundation of all the eternal counsels of God, so that He can associate true believers with Himself in the new creation of which He is the glorious Head and Center.

But, it may be that some would at this point feel disposed to inquire, “Whatever can all this have to do with the present condition of things in the church of our Lord?” Much in every way. Has the church failed in its responsibility? Has the Christian system utterly broken down? Has Christianity hopelessly failed as a witness, a steward, a light-bearer for Christ in this world? While most may have little or no question regarding this, still, many others may seriously doubt if, in fact, the church has signally failed.

They look on the church as a splendid success. They consider that the Gospel, like the rider on the white horse, has gone forth conquering and to conquer; that it has achieved glorious triumphs. They look back to the opening of the fourth century, when persecution ceased, and when Constantine spread his sheltering wing over Christianity, as a glorious epoch in its history – the commencement of an era that has continued increasing in brightness from that day until now.

Such seems to be the fondly cherished opinion of ninety-nine out of every hundred professing Christians in this age. But we are thoroughly persuaded that Scripture and facts are entirely against them. We fully believe that Scripture is enough in the establishment of any position: and we think we have presented a body of evidence drawn from Scripture that is sufficient to carry conviction to any mind that will bow to the authority of the Word. We have quoted historic records and prophetic announcements – all tending to prove that the church, as a responsible witness for Christ on this earth has failed, like all other witnesses, stewards and office-bearers. The parables of the leaven, the tares, the mustard tree, and the ten virgins, all combine to establish our thesis. Paul’s farewell address to the elders of Ephesus; his first and second Epistles to Timothy, to say nothing of the close of his own ministry and disastrous voyage to Rome – all go to prove the utter ruin of the church in its earthly service and testimony. So also the Apostle Peter in his second Epistle; and Jude in his appalling picture, set forth the same solemn truth.

And as for John, he names the church only once in his Epistles, speaking of it as governed by the spirit of Diotrephes, excommunicating the brethren, and actually refusing the apostle himself. Finally, in the closing section of the book of Revelation, the church is presented as under judgment. Hardly was it set up, before it left its first love; and its progress is only downwards, until it is spued out of the Lord's mouth as a nauseous and insufferable abomination; and finally is flung, like a great millstone, into the lake of fire.¹

Perhaps some may call in question our right to adduce the seven churches in evidence, because they were addressed as distinct local assemblies which passed away like numerous other churches. But we believe it will be admitted by most who have studied the book of Revelation that those seven addresses have a double character. They are historic and prophetic – historic of what has existed; prophetic of what would exist. True, there were those seven local churches actually existing, and in the exact spiritual conditions indicated by these addresses. But why were those seven selected? Simply because their respective condition served to illustrate the various phases of the church’s history from the moment the first symptom of decline manifested itself until it would be finally lifted up by Christ, when He returns.

However, as to this last link in our chain of evidence, we have only to say, “I speak as to wise men, judge ye what I say.” Our thesis is unanswerably established without the proof drawn from the seven churches of Asia. Scripture establishes beyond question the fact of the ruin of the church as a light-bearer for Christ on earth; and regarding facts, we have but to say, “Take a good look at the religious world today, and see how many features of resemblance are traceable to the church as presented in the New Testament.”

Where is the one body? Suppose a letter was addressed “To the church in America;” to whom should it be delivered? Who could claim it? The postmaster and the letter-carrier would be sorely perplexed to know what to do with it; and no doubt, it would ultimately find its place in the dead-letter office. Could any of the various religious organizations of the day – the sects and parties of man’s dogmas, creeds, and traditions claim it? None could demand the letter, because of the simplest reason – none of them is the church of our Lord, as revealed in the New Testament.

No, we must admit that as far from being successful, man’s religions have proved a deplorable and humiliating failure. They have not continued in the goodness of God. What therefore? “Thou also shalt be cut off.” Is there no restoration for the creeds and traditions of man? As well might Adam have thought of getting back to innocence and to Eden. As well might Aaron or his sons after him have attempted to seize and put on the garments of glory and beauty.

It cannot be. The attempt to reconstruct the religions of men is as futile as the attempt to build the tower of Babel, and will issue in the same confusion. Men may say, “The bricks are fallen down: but we will build with hewn stone.” It is all vanity. The bare idea of men (whether we call them churchmen or dissenters); attempting to form or re-form; constructing or reconstructing their organizations, is a hopeless labor. The very bodies we carry about might tell us a tale if we would only bend our ears to listen. Can they be restored? No; they must die or be changed; never reconstructed. God will give a body of glory; but never patch up a body of sin and death.

The history of man’s religious organizations on earth is one of failure and ruin, of sin and judgment, and all human efforts to mend or remodel will prove vain. By-and-by, Christ will present the true church to Himself, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing – like a bride adorned for her husband, shining in all the brightness of the glory of God and the Lamb. But as for the false, the faithless, the corrupt religions of men nothing remains but the winepress of the wrath of Almighty God; the lake of fire; the blackness of darkness forever.

Do we not all long to see the Lord’s people rightly instructed regarding this? Is it not deplorable to see them attempting to form churches and organize bodies, as they say, on the apostolic model? Where is their warrant? Where is the power? Nowhere; they are seeking to do what God never does. The Word of God is against them. Where do we have a line of instruction in the New Testament pertaining to forming a church? Where is such a thing hinted at in a remote manner? That which God set up at the first has failed in man's hand. It was set up in power and beauty; but man ruined it. And now what do we see? Churchmen and dissenters presuming to model and re-model churches after the apostolic pattern will soon learn their sad mistake.

But what is to be done? That is another question altogether; and one answered when we ask it on right ground and spirit. But first, have we learned that the religious world is a ruin, and that it is not God’s purpose to restore it? If we have really learned this, we shall be in a moral condition to receive an answer to that oft put question, “What is to be done?” If we take our true ground regarding this matter; if we see and own the ruin; if we confess our individual part in that ruin; if we make the church’s sin our own (as every truly spiritual person will); if we are truly broken and penitent before God; then verily we shall put far away from us all proud pretensions and futile efforts to set up a church of our own devising and workmanship. We shall learn something very different from this. We shall see that our place is to bow down in lowliness and meekness at the feet of our Lord, confessing our sin and shame, taking our place amid the ruin to which we have so largely contributed, and instead of busily asking, “What is to be done?” we shall learn to cast ourselves on the rich mercy and sovereign goodness of God, and the boundless resources treasured up in Christ, our glorious Head and Lord Who can sustain, comfort, feed, nourish, strengthen and encourage all those who in true devotedness of heart and humility of mind cast themselves on His faithfulness and love.

This principle fills the heart of every faithful servant of Christ with rich consolation. In all ages and under all the dispensations of God, whatever may have been the condition of God’s people as a whole, it was the privilege of the individual believer to tread as lofty a path and enjoy as high communion as ever was known in the brightest days of the dispensation.

Such is our present thesis which we hope to prove from the Word of God. We have sought to prove that in every instance in which man has been placed in a position of responsibility, he has failed. And, further, that God never restores a fallen witness. We trust we have fully established these two points. Our present task is a much more pleasing one, because it involves setting forth the great truth that, in darkest days, faith has always found its spring in the living God Himself, and, therefore, the deeper the moral gloom all around, the brighter are the flashes of individual faith. The dark background of the corporate condition has thrown individual faith into bright and beauteous relief.

We confess that this line of truth has peculiar charms for us. For many years we have found in it solace and encouragement; and have often dwelt on it. It is not possible to overstate its value and importance, and we are thankful for this opportunity of bringing it out and throwing it into permanent form.

In this age, there is a strong and constant tendency to lower the standard of devotedness to the level of the general condition of things. This must be carefully guarded against. It is destructive of service and testimony. “The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His. And, Let every one that nameth the Name of Christ depart from iniquity” (2 Tim. 2:19).

In its brief compass, this passage embodies the whole subject we desire to unfold in this part of our essay. God is faithful. His standard always remains the same. His foundation can never be moved; and it is the province and privilege of the individual believer to rest on that foundation and abide by that standard, come what may. Faith can count on God, and draw on His inexhaustible resources, though the public condition of things be characterized by hopeless ruin. Were it not so, what would have become of the faithful in all ages? How could the Baraks, Gideons, Jephthahs, Samsons, have stood their ground, and wielded the sword against the uncircumcised, if they had allowed themselves to be influenced by the general condition of the people of God? If, because of the state of the nation, any one of these illustrious servants had folded his arms and abandoned himself to the paralyzing power of unbelief, what would have been the issue? Assuredly they would never have achieved those splendid victories which the Holy Spirit has graciously recorded for our encouragement and which we may study with such spiritual delight and profit.

We seek to prove and illustrate this thesis by revealing in orderly manner some prominent cases in which its truth is specially exemplified. We shall not attempt to offer apology for copious references to Scripture; or, if needs be, elaborate quotation from it. We fancy hearing, “By all means provide Scripture. There is nothing like the Word. It must be our only standard of appeal – our one grand authority that settles all questions, solves all difficulties, and closes all discussion. Give us Scripture.”

Therefore, to Scripture we shall turn, in dependence on the guidance and teaching of Him by Whom that Scripture was indited.

The first proof we shall offer will be found in Exodus 33. What was the condition of the nation of Israel? Let Exodus 32 furnish the sad and humiliating reply. The highest and most privileged man in the whole congregation had made a golden calf. Yes; here is the terrible record: “And when the people saw that Moses delayed to come down out of the mount, the people gathered themselves together unto Aaron, and said unto him, Up, make us gods, which shall go before us! for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him.”

What a picture of the debasing and absurd folly of the human heart. Think of a whole congregation of people giving utterance to such gross and palpable absurdity – “Make us gods.”² We listen with amazement to such accents, emanating as they do from the lips of those who not long before had lifted their voices to heaven in a triumphal hymn of praise. Who would have thought that the worshippers on the shore of the Red Sea would ever give utterance to such words as “Make us gods which shall go before us”? They had said in their magnificent song. “Who is like unto Thee, O Lord, among the gods? Who is like Thee, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders?” Had they now found out some like Him? It would seem so. And who? A golden calf. How dreadful. And yet this is man. Yes; man, in every age. If we ponder the scene of the golden calf; if we thoroughly seize the moral of it; if we fully apprehend its teaching, it will go far in preparing us for some of the grossest features in the present condition of things. “These things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come” – Literally, “upon whom the ends of the ages have met.”

But let us proceed with our subject. “And Aaron said unto them, Break off the golden earrings which are in the ears of your wives, of your sons, and of your daughters, and bring them unto me. And all the people brake off the golden earrings which were in their ears, and brought them unto Aaron. And he received them at their hand, and fashioned it with a graving tool, after he had made it a molten calf: and they said, These be thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt. And when Aaron saw it, he built an altar before it; and Aaron made proclamation and said, Tomorrow is a feast to the Lord. And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt-offerings, and brought peace-offerings; and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.”

What a picture. In a moment, the entire nation of Israel sunk into absurd and degrading idolatry. A whole assembly – all with one consent bowed before a god made of the earrings which a little before had hung from the ears of their wives and daughters. And this, too, in the face of the mighty acts of Jehovah they had witnessed. They had seen the land of Egypt trembling under the successive strokes of His judicial rod. They had seen the Red Sea laid open before them, and a pathway formed by His omnipotent arm through these very waters that proved a grave for Egypt’s armies. To meet their need, He had sent down manna from heaven, and brought forth water from a flinty rock. All this they had witnessed; and yet they could forget this marvelous array of evidence, and mistake a piece of gold for the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. This is a terrible exhibition of what is in man, and of what we are to expect from him if left to himself.

Nor should we ever forget who it was that led the people into this disastrous course of action. It was no less a personage than Aaron – the elder brother of the lawgiver himself. It may be deemed a digression to refer to this; but it is a profitable digression; because it tends to illustrate the exceeding folly of leaning on, or looking to, the highest and best of men.

In the early part of the book of Exodus we find Moses shrinking from the divine legation. He hesitated to go into Egypt at the bidding of God, though assured again and again that Jehovah would be with him; that He would be a mouth and wisdom to him. Nevertheless, he shrank and would have retired from the responsibility. But the moment he heard that Aaron would accompany him, he was ready to go. And yet this very man was the source of the deepest sorrow that Moses ever tasted. This was the man who made the golden calf.

How admonitory. What a sad mistake to lean on an arm of flesh. And yet we are prone to do so in one way or another. We lean on our fellow-mortal instead of leaning on the living God, and in the sequel we find we have been trusting a broken reed. “Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble is like a broken tooth, or a foot out of joint.” “Cease ye from man whose breath is in his nostrils; for wherein is he to be accounted of?”

But we must return to our theme, and consider the path of the man of God in the face of the condition of things with which he was surrounded – a gloomy condition, to say the least.

The heart of Moses might well sink and cower as he beheld the whole congregation of Israel, with Aaron his brother at their head, sunk in abominable idolatry. All seemed hopelessly gone. But “the foundation of God standeth sure.” This is a grand and immutable truth in all ages. Nothing can touch the truth of God. It shines out all the brighter from amid the deepest and darkest shades into which man is capable of sinking. We can form little idea of what passed through the heart of that beloved and honored servant, Moses, when he saw his Lord displaced by a golden calf. But he could count on God. Yes, and he could also act for God. The two things always go together. The man of faith cannot afford to spend his time in unavailing lamentations over the condition of things. He has his work to do, and his path to tread, and that work and path are never more marked than in the midst of abounding error and hopeless confusion. “The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His. And, Let every one that nameth the Name of Christ, depart from iniquity.”

See how blessedly this principle was carried out by Moses, the man of God – a principle as true in the day of the golden calf, as amid the appalling ruins of the religious world today. “And Moses took the tabernacle, and pitched it without the camp, afar off from the camp, and called it the tabernacle of the congregation. And it came to pass, that every one which sought the Lord went unto the tabernacle of the congregation which was without the camp.”

Here we have what may be called a bold and magnificent piece of acting. Moses felt that Jehovah and a golden calf could not be together, and hence if a calf was in the camp, Jehovah must be outside. Such was the simple reasoning of faith; faith always reasons that way. When the public body is wrong, the path of individual faith is outside. “Let every one that nameth the Name of Christ, depart from iniquity.” It can never be right, and is never necessary to go with iniquity. No, “depart” is the watch-word for the faithful soul, when iniquity is in that which assumes to be the witness for God on the earth. Cost what it may, we are to depart. It may look like exclusiveness, and being holier, better and wiser than our neighbors. But no matter what it looks like, or what people may call it, we must “depart from iniquity.” “Every one which sought the Lord” had to go outside of the defiled place to find Him, and yet that very place was none other than the camp of Israel where Jehovah had taken up His abode.

Thus, on this occasion, we see that Moses was preeminently a man for the crisis. He acted for God, and he was the honored instrument of opening up a path for God’s people whereby they might escape from a scene of hopeless pollution, and in an evil day enjoy the rich and rare privilege of communion with God. And as for himself, we learn what he gained by this marvelous transaction from the following record, “And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face as a man speaketh unto his friend.”

Part III
We never intended such a long essay; but somehow thoughts accumulate, and the pen runs on. But we are glad to do so, and pray it may be of some small help to fit us for contemplating and grappling with the present condition of things in the professing church.

It seems that we are in imminent danger of yielding to the current, and allowing ourselves to be carried down the stream, because it appears so hopeless to think of making a firm stand for Christ and His cause. Against this we must jealously watch and vigorously strive. Nothing can ever justify the individual believer lowering the standard, relaxing his grasp, or yielding the breadth of a hair, in the grand struggle to which he is called. The fact of the ruin of the body corporate is the urgent reason for personal devotedness – the more chilling and withering the surrounding atmosphere, the greater the demand for personal energy. Even though we cannot reckon on the countenance or support of a single individual, it is our duty and high privilege to plant the foot of faith firmly on divine ground, and there to be steadfast and unmoveable; always abounding in the work of the Lord. A regiment may be cut down to a man; but if that man is able to grasp and defend the colors, the dignity of the regiment is maintained. So also if a single individual is able to hold up the standard of the Name and Word of Jesus, he may count on present blessing and a future bright reward. “To him that overcometh will I grant . . .”

But we must proceed with the living illustrations drawn from the inspired pages of the Volume of God – that peerless, priceless, eternal Revelation that we may truly say teems with evidence in proof of our thesis that, “Whatever be the condition of the public body, it is the happy privilege of the man of God to enjoy the highest communion and occupy the highest ground.” This is our present subject; and it is a subject of deepest interest to us – one in which the heart finds peculiar solace, strength and encouragement.

We have contemplated the magnificent conduct of Moses, at the foot of Mount Sinai. We must now consider the conduct of Elias, on the top of Mount Carmel. Both these honored servants of God are closely linked together on the page of inspiration.

In the eighteenth chapter of the first book of Kings, we have one of the brightest scenes in the life of Elijah the Tishbite. We are not going to attempt an elaborate exposition of this chapter. We select only one fact recorded in the thirty-first verse, “And Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, unto whom the Word of the Lord came, saying, Israel shall be thy name. And with the stones he built an altar in the Name of the Lord” (1 Kings 18:31).

Here we have faith taking its stand on God’s own ground, acting according to the integrity of Divine revelation, and confessing the indissoluble unity of Israel’s twelve tribes; and this, too, in the presence of Ahab and Jezebel and eight hundred false prophets; and also in the presence of a divided nation. Israel’s visible unity was gone. The ten tribes were broken off from the two. The entire condition of things was depressing in the extreme.

But, on the top of Carmel, this illustrious witness Elijah was able to look beyond Israel’s practical state, and fix his believing gaze on God’s immutable truth. Elsewhere it was different. Under the juniper tree, and on Mount Horeb, we do not see the same lofty range, for “Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are,” and as such he sometimes fell far below the moral elevation of the life of faith.

However, we are now focused on Elijah on Mount Carmel, and with the altar of twelve stones which by faith he was able to erect there in the face of all the ruin and corruption around him. Had he looked at the things that were seen – had he been governed by Israel’s moral condition – had he shaped his way and regulated his conduct by the state of things around him, he could not have built an altar of twelve stones. Unbelieving nature might reason thus, “This is not the time for an altar of twelve stones. The day is gone for that. It was suitable in the days of Joshua the son of Nun, and in the brilliant days of Solomon. But to think of it now is the height of folly and presumption. You should be ashamed to refer to such a thing just now, because it only rebukes the condition of the people. How much better, more becoming, and more morally suitable it is to lower the standard according to our true condition. Why assume such high ground in view of our low estate? Why seek to maintain such lofty principles in the face of such humiliating practice?”

But what is faith’s reply to all this worthless reasoning? Simply this – “God’s standard or nothing.” If the truth of God is to be accommodated to the condition of God’s people, there is an end to all true testimony and acceptable service. It is true that at one time a certain course of action may be right and not at all right at another. This we can understand; but the truth of God never changes. “Forever, O Lord, Thy Word is settled in heaven.” We must maintain the eternal stability of the truth of God, even though that truth reveals our fallen condition.

Most will no doubt agree there is something uncommonly fine in the actions of our prophet, on Mount Carmel. It does the heart good in this day of miserable laxity – this day of playing fast and loose with the truth of God, to see a man unfurling the divine standard in the face of eight hundred false prophets, with Ahab and Jezebel at their back.

If there is one feature of the present age more deplorable than another, it is the loose way in which the truth of God is held. On all sides, we see a tendency to lower the standard of obedience. It is deemed narrow-minded to contend for the paramount authority of Holy Scripture. The Word of God is fast losing its place in the hearts and minds of even professing Christians. That familiar motto, “speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent,” if it ever was true (which seems doubtful), it is certainly not true now. There is a determined effort, throughout the length and breadth of the religious world to eliminate – to get rid of the Word of God as a paramount infallible authority.

This may seem a strong, harsh, ultra statement. We may be deemed narrow-minded bigots for such words. We cannot help it. We are convinced of the truth of what we say. We believe if one looks closely into the proceedings of the various religious organizations of men – if one examines the public preaching and teachings of the day – if one will give close attention to what emanates from the press, pulpit, and platform, throughout the length and breadth of the religious world, one will find that we have strong and ample ground for our statement.

Thanks to God there are here and there some bright exceptions. Occasionally we may hear a voice raised for the truth of God – for the plenary inspiration and absolute authority of Holy Scripture. But the voices are few, feeble, and far between. Viewed as a whole, the professing church is gliding rapidly down an inclined plane. The progress of infidelity is truly appalling. We remember in the days of childhood, how that a feeling of horror was awakened in the heart by the very mention of an infidel, or of anyone who dared to speak against our adorable Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, or deny the inspiration of the Word of God.

How changed is the aspect of things in this age. We cannot allow ourselves to go into details in the way of evidence; but we are thoroughly persuaded of this fact: the religious world is hastening on to a fearful moment in her history, in which she could actually reject the Word, Christ, and the Spirit of God. Wherever we might look, we are struck with the fact that the ignorance of superstition and impudence of infidelity are fast gaining sway over the minds of millions.

Regarding superstition, what has this so-called enlightened age witnessed? What are the fruits this pernicious tree has produced at the close of the nineteenth century? In the first place, millions have professed their belief in an immaculate woman; and, in the second place, their belief in an infallible man. How could anyone in his sober senses give assent and consent to two such things? Does it not look like that “strong delusion” which God will, before long, send on those who believe such a lie?

Regarding infidelity – in its audacious tampering with the Word of God, its calling in question the divine integrity of the sacred Volume, its scornful rejection of the plenary inspiration of Holy Scripture, its blasphemous assaults on the Person of the Son of God Who is over all – we have only to look around us on every side, to see the tributary streams rushing with terrible vehemence, to swell the tide of evidence in proof of the melancholy fact that infidelity is raising its head with proud audacity, throughout the length and breadth of the religious world.

It is the deep and settled persuasion of this that makes one prize all the more the faith and faithfulness of those worthies of old who stood firm in the face of a hostile world, and boldly maintained the truth of God, in spite of the palpable ruin and failure of the people of God. It is delightful to contemplate the prophet Elijah the Tishbite, standing by his altar of twelve stones, and offering his sacrifice to the living and true God – the Jehovah of Israel. He was simply standing on the same platform as Moses (See Exodus 33). It is the blessed platform of faith whereon each true believer can take his stand, in calm and holy confidence, and there abide with God.

The standard of God must never be lowered the breadth of a hair. Like Himself, it is unchangeable. It was as much the duty and the privilege of Elijah to act under that standard, as it was of Solomon, David, Joshua, or Moses. Israel might change, but Jehovah or His Word never can; and it is with Him and His eternal Word that faith has to do, in all ages. Come what may, we are to walk with God, to lean on Him, cling to Him, draw from Him, find all our springs in Him – springs of peace and power; the power of personal communion, worship, service and testimony. He never fails a trusting heart; never has; never will; never can – no, never. Therefore, in spite of everything, let us abide in Him and hold fast His Word. While seeing, feeling and owning the real condition of things around us, let us never forget that individually we have to do with God and the Word of His grace.

Part IV
We cannot attempt to adduce all the evidence that Old Testament Scripture affords in proof of our present thesis; but there are two or three cases to which we must call attention, in addition to those which we have already considered.

We would like to linger with the interesting history of Hezekiah – full of comfort and encouragement; affording a powerful illustration of our subject; but we shall pass on to a later section of the inspired history, and take up the case of Josiah, who ascended the throne of his fathers at a time when the nation had almost reached its lowest point, and the moral horizon seemed overcast with many a dark and heavy cloud.

We need hardly say that we are not going to here enter on an elaborate exposition of the history of the deeply interesting reign of Josiah. This would demand a volume instead of essay. We merely refer to it now for the purpose of proving our thesis, “that no matter what at any time may be the condition of the ostensible people of God, it is the privilege of the individual believer to tread as lofty a path, and enjoy as high communion as ever was known in the highest days of the dispensation.”

The condition of things when eight year old Josiah came to the throne was as gloomy and depressing as it could be. He was surrounded by the accumulated rubbish of ages. He had to grapple with errors and evils introduced by no less a personage than Solomon himself, the wisest of men.

If anyone desires to have a correct idea of the practical state of things in Josiah’s day, let him muse over 2 Kings 23. The record is appalling. There were vessels made for Baal in the temple of the Lord. There were idolatrous priests, burning incense in the high places, in the cities of Judah, and in Jerusalem – incense to Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, to the planets, and to all the hosts of heaven. There were Sodomites. There were those who made their sons and daughters to pass through the fire to Molech. There were horses that the kings of Judah had given to the sun. There were high places that Solomon had built for Ashtoreth the abomination of the Zidonians, and for Chemosh the abomination of the Moabites, and for Milcom the abomination of the children of Ammon.

Only conceive the man who was used by the Holy Spirit to pen the book of Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles, building altars to all these false gods. And these abominations had been allowed to stand amid the reformatory movements of such men as Hezekiah and Jehoshaphat, and to descend, hoary with age, to the days of the youthful Josiah. Indeed we can hardly imagine anything more depressing than the condition of things that surrounded this young monarch. It seemed hopeless. His spirit might sink within him, as he beheld such an enormous pile of rubbish, the lamentable and humiliating fruit of many years of gross unfaithfulness and departure from the truth of God. How could it ever be removed? How could he, a mere youth, grapple with such formidable evils?

Then, again, his heart might suggest, “Am I the man for such a work? Is it becoming in me, so young and inexperienced, so little versed in men and things to set myself up against such a man as Solomon? Why should I pretend to have more wisdom than my father? All these institutions have lived on through the times of men far more devoted and holy than I. Surely the things that Hezekiah and Jehoshaphat have left standing, I have no right to abolish. Besides, the case is hopeless. Judgment is inevitable; the decree has gone forth. Jehovah has signed the death-warrant of the guilty nation. Already, I hear the thunder’s roll. It is not possible for a feeble creature like me to stem the tide of corruption, or avert the terrible avalanche of divine judgment. There is no hope. Things must take their course. I am not the man, nor is this the time for reformatory action. I can only yield to inevitable destiny, bow my head, and let Jehovah’s governmental chariot move on.”

Can we not easily imagine Josiah adopting such a line of reasoning? More than likely, it is the line that many of us would adopt, were we in his position. But, thanks be to God, His beloved servant was graciously preserved from all such cowering and contemptible unbelief. He was able to take his stand on the immutable truth of God, and by that perfect touchstone to reject all those errors and evils that he found existing around him. Josiah felt – and he was divinely right in the feeling – that there was no necessity why he should go on with anything that was contrary to the mind of Jehovah. It did not matter the weight of a feather to him – nor should it to anyone – who had originated the error or evil. To him it was sufficient that it was error and evil. His one business was to reject it all with holy decision and unswerving purpose of heart. It might seem presumptuous in him, so young a man, to lay a disturbing hand on institutions which had been set on foot by Solomon; but with this he had nothing whatsoever to do. It was not a question of Josiah versus Solomon; but of truth versus error.

This is a grand point for this age. Here and there and everywhere, we hear much about the traditions of our fathers, the education of the learned and good men. And then again, some talk loudly about the necessity of cultivating largeness of heart, breadth of mind, liberality of spirit, and such like. All this sounds plausible; and, with a large class of people, it has great weight. But the whole question hangs on this: Do we have the truth of God, or not? Has God revealed His mind to us through His Holy Word so that we may know it with all possible certainty? Are we left to human opinion? Have we nothing to go on or rest in but the ipse dixit of some erring mortal like ourselves? Is it a question of human authority? Are learning and antiquity sufficient guarantee for infallible truth? Can we rest the salvation of our souls, or the guidance of our conscience, or the ordering of our service on a church, a council, or any body of men under the sun?

Perhaps we can anticipate the reply of some to these queries. We are persuaded, and diligently pray, that many in this age regard the opinions, creeds, traditions and dogmas of men as small dust of the balance, when it is a question of authority. All human writings, ancient, medieval or modern, are interesting as references; perfectly worthless as authorities. There is but the one supreme and absolute authority – Holy Scripture; that peerless, priceless revelation which our God has, in infinite grace, put into our hands, which all may possess if they will, and which possessing, they are rendered blessedly independent of every human authority, past or present.

And this leads us to the special point in Josiah’s history which we consider so peculiarly applicable to the present condition of things in the religious world. We refer to the discovery of the Book of the Law. “And when they brought out the money that was brought into the house of the Lord, Hilkiah the priest found a book of the law of the Lord given by Moses. And Hilkiah answered and said to Shaphan the scribe, I have found the book of the law in the house of the Lord. And Hilkiah delivered the book to Shaphan. And Shaphan carried the book to the king . . . then Shaphan the scribe told the king, saying, Hilkiah the priest hath given me a book. And Shaphan read it before the king. And it came to pass, when the king had heard the words of the law, that he rent his clothes.”

Here we have what may justly be viewed as the grand fact in the life of this most interesting man: the discovery or recovery of the book of the law – the letting in of the full light of divine revelation, first on Josiah’s conscience, and, secondly, on the entire condition of things around him. It is a serious thing for anyone (man, woman or child) to stand in the searching light of God’s Word. That Word judges everything. It makes no terms with the flesh or the world. It cuts by the root all within and around us which is not according to God. All this is serious work, and leads to serious results. So Josiah found it in his day, and so all must find it. It is one thing to judge our surroundings by the Word, and it is quite another thing to judge ourselves. Josiah began with himself. Before he ever called on others to listen to the utterances of the law, he rent his own clothes, in true self-judgment beneath their searching power.

We cannot help but believe that this is precisely what is needed in the present moment, throughout the religious world. We need to realize the searching power and accept the commanding authority of the Word of God – its searching power in the heart and conscience – its commanding authority in our whole life. The two things will always go together. The more deeply we feel the action of the Word of God in our own heart, the more we shall feel and exhibit its formative influence on our entire course, character, and conduct. The Word of God is intensely real and practical. It addresses itself in living power to the soul, and lets in on the moral being the light of God Himself. It applies itself in divine energy to all the details of life and conduct – our habits, associations, and our common every-day concerns; and leads us to judge ourselves and surroundings in the searching light of the throne of God.

All this is serious work; and we must go through it if we are to be used as God’s instruments to act on others. So Josiah felt and proved it in his day. First of all, he did not rush forth to attack the errors of others. No, he first rent his own clothes, as one thoroughly humbled and self-judged. Then he called his brethren together, that they too, might hearken to the same powerful testimony and take the same ground of self-judgment and brokenness. This, he felt, was the only true road to blessing.

Perhaps some may object by saying that there is no analogy between our time and that of King Josiah, because the church has had the book of the law in her possession for centuries, whereas in the case of Josiah it was a new thing. There is no force whatsoever in this objection. We need to see the powerful manner in which the Word of God acted on the heart of Josiah and his brethren. True, the church has had the Scriptures in her possession for ages; but is she governed by them? This is the question. Of what possible use is it to make our boast of having the Bible, if, with regard to our lives, that Bible is but a dead letter? And where, we ask, throughout the religious world, is the governing power of the Word truly accepted and adhered to? Is there a single religious system under the sun that can stand the test of Holy Scripture? Take any religious body you please, Greek, Latin, Anglican or other, and see if you can find in the New Testament the foundation of its ecclesiastical policy, clerical orders, theological creed, or practiced traditions.

These may seem bold questions; but we must speak boldly. We ask any upright mind to examine in the light of Scripture the religious institutions of what is often referred to as “Christendom” – see if they can stand the test. Is this asking too much? Is Scripture to be our guide or not? Is it a sufficient guide? Does it furnish all that is needed for any good work? The inspired apostle says, “Yes” (2 Tim. 3:16). What do we say? Are we at liberty to think for ourselves? What is the meaning of that popular phrase, “The right of private judgment?” Is there really such a right? Can we speak of having any right at all, save a right to the flames of an everlasting hell? It is the height of folly for man to talk of rights. God has a right to rule. It is ours to obey. Doubtless Solomon and many of his successors exercised the right of private judgment when they set up the varied abominations to which we have called attention. Did Josiah exercise his right in abolishing them? No, he acted on the authority of the Word of God. This was the secret of his power. It was not a question of man's judgment; had it been so, one man, of course, would have had as much right as another. But it was the supreme authority of God’s Word. This is what we earnestly desire to establish. It is precisely here, we believe, lies the grand deficiency of the day in which our lot is cast. The divine sufficiency and absolute authority of Scripture are virtually denied though nominally accepted. We have the Bible in our hands; but how little we know of its teaching. We go on, from week to week, and year to year, with things which have no foundation whatsoever in its pages – yes, with things utterly opposed to its teaching; and, all the while, we boast of having the Scriptures. We are just like the Jews of old, who made their boast of having the oracles of God, while those very oracles condemned them and their ways, and left them without a single plea.

The more deeply we ponder the intensely interesting history of Josiah, king of Judah, the more convinced we are that it has a special voice, and a special lesson for the religions of men in this our day. We refer particularly to the beautiful way in which he bowed to the authority of the Word of God. We are assured that Josiah would have had not one atom of sympathy with the spirit and principles so rife at the present moment, or with the teachings of those whose aim and object seem to be to rob us of that inestimable treasure we possess in the Holy Scriptures. He felt and accepted the power of the Word of God, its power over his course and conduct. On one hand, he did not question whether or not God had spoken; and, on the other, whether or not God could make him understand what He said.

These are the two great questions of the day. With bold and impious front, infidelity stands before us and raises the question, “Has God spoken? Has He given us a revelation of His mind?” Superstition, with an air of ignorant piety, admits that God has spoken, but raises the question, “Can we understand what He says? Can we know it to be the Word of God, without human authority?”

These questions, though apparently differing widely in tone, spirit, and character, meet in one point – they are essentially one in their effect as to the Word of God, because they both completely rob the soul of its power and authority.

The infidel denies altogether a divine revelation. He presumes to tell us that God could not provide a full and perfect revelation of His mind such as we have in the Holy Scriptures. It seems, infidels can tell us – and certainly they do tell us plainly what is in their minds; but God cannot tell us what is in His. They say there is no such thing as a book-revelation of the mind of God. Though we have plenty of book-revelations of the mind of infidels; God cannot give us anything of the kind.

Such is the monstrous, bare-faced, audacious ground taken by the infidel, skeptic, and rationalist. Excuse our strong language, but we find it impossible to speak in measured terms of what we call the impudence of infidelity that presumes to tell us that our God cannot speak to us; cannot communicate to us what is in His heart; cannot do what any mere earthly father can do with his children – that He cannot express His will.

And why not? Because infidels tell us so. And we are to believe what infidels tell us, though we cannot believe what God says. We are to trust the Lucians, the Paynes, the Voltaires, and thousands of others of the same school; but we must not, cannot, trust God. And what warrant do we have for putting our trust in them? What security do they offer for the truth of their statements? What do we gain by rejecting the Word of God, and accepting the speculations of infidelity? Have we a more solid ground to rest on?

The one grand object of infidelity in all its phases, in all its stages, in all its varied shades of thought and argument, is to shut out the blessed light of divine revelation from the human soul. And we think most will agree that when once that light is shut out, there is no consistent standing ground short of the pantheism which declares that everything is God, or the atheism which declares there is no God at all.

We confess we are deeply impressed with the awful solemnity of all this. People are not aware of what is involved in the very first and faintest shade of skepticism. They do not see that to admit into their hearts a doubt regarding the divine authenticity of the Bible is to get on the edge of an inclined plane that leads directly down to the blackness and darkness of atheism. The only real knowledge we can have of God is contained in the Scriptures; and if we are deprived of them we are deprived of God.

The infidel may tell us that God is to be known in creation. Did anyone ever find Him out there? No doubt, creation does prove the existence of a Creator, as we read in the first chapter of the epistle to the Romans, “The invisible things of Him from the creation are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse.” Creation yields a testimony that the heathen were bound to receive, and, had they received it, a higher light would assuredly have shone on them. But they did not receive it; no, they actually worshipped the things that were made, instead of the One Who made them. Philosophers talk of rising from nature up to nature’s God. But nature is a ruin, and man himself a ruin in the midst of ruin; and instead of rising to nature’s God, he makes a god of nature, and degrades himself below the level of a beast (See Rom. 1:21-32).

The plain fact is, we cannot do without a divine revelation; and that revelation we possess in the Holy Scriptures. God has given us a Book that speaks to our hearts with divine power and clearness. There is no mistaking it; it carries its own credentials with it. It thoroughly judges us, unlocks every chamber of the heart, discloses the deepest moral springs of our being, lays bare every motive, every thought, every feeling, every desire and imagination. It is, as the inspired apostle tells us, “Quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Heb. 4:12).

Not only has He given us a Book; but He can make us understand what it says. And here we triumphantly and thankfully join issue with the ignorance of superstition. We confront the cool impudence of infidelity, with the calm and firm statement that our God has spoken. We meet the blind ignorance of superstition with the distinct and decided declaration that our God can make us understand what He says.

We believe this is the true way to meet both one and the other of these evil agencies of the devil in this age. As we have said, they both rob the soul of the inestimable boon of Holy Scripture. It is well that especially our young people should be convinced of the fact that they are as thoroughly deprived of the Word of God by superstition as by infidelity. If we must look to man to assure us that Scripture is the Word of God or to interpret its meaning, then we maintain that it is not the Word of God at all, and our faith does not stand in the power of God, but in the wisdom of man. If God’s Word needs man’s guarantee or interpretation, it ceases to be a divine revelation to the soul.

Not that we would undervalue what are called external evidences in proof of the divine authenticity of the Bible; nor yet that we do not prize human ministry in the exposition of Scripture. Nothing of the kind. We highly estimate both one and the other. But we feel it is important that the Word of God be received in its own divine sufficiency, authority and supremacy. It needs no credentials from man. It is perfect in itself, because it is from God. Not a single jot or tittle could be added to the power, value, and authority of Holy Scripture by the sayings of all the councils that were ever convened; all the PhDs that ever taught; all the fathers that ever wrote; or the voice of the religious world for the last twenty centuries. It could not touch in the smallest degree the integrity of those peerless writings though all these authorities that we have named were to call in question their divine inspiration. If the Scriptures be not received on their own authority, if they need human testimony to assure us of their divinity, or if they need human aid to enable us to understand them, then they are not the Word of God. But, being the Word of God, they are divinely perfect, not only for the salvation and guidance of the individual soul, but also for all the exigencies of the true church during its entire history in this world.

This is the solid ground on which we stand – all praise and thanks to our God for giving us such a ground. We firmly and reverently believe in the divine authority, the all-sufficiency, and the absolute supremacy of Holy Scripture. The speculations, the reasoning, the learned argument and fine-drawn theories of all the infidels, skeptics, and rationalists that ever lived or are now living on this earth, have no more weight with us than the pattering of rain on the window. And why? Because we know we have a divine revelation. How do we know it? Ask a man at the side of a mountain how does he know the sun is shining? Tell him that many learned men have found out by their learning that there is no sun; while others declare that though the sun does shine, he cannot enjoy its beams without their assistance. Can we not imagine his reply? No doubt he would say, “I know nothing and care nothing about learned men, but I know the sun shines, because I have felt the power of his beams.”

We are quite sure that learned infidels would sneer at such a mode of settling the question. But we are disposed to think it is the best mode. We do not see that much is gained by arguing with infidels. It is well to help souls that are afflicted with honest doubts, or troubled by the suggestions of the infidel mind. But to attempt to argue with infidels about the divine inspiration of the Bible is about as hopeless a task as to discuss the differential calculus with a five year old. The power of the Word must be felt in the depths of the soul. Where this is the case, no argument is needed. Where it is not, no argument will avail. “Come, see a Man which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?” This was sound reasoning. Yes, and it is equally sound for us to say, “Come, read a Book, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Word of God?”

Yes, we do believe the internal evidences of the Word of God are the most precious and powerful of any that can be produced. If it be true that God is His own interpreter in providence, it is none the less true that He is His own interpreter in Scripture. If God cannot make us understand what He says, no man can; if He does, no man need. When this solid ground is clearly seen and firmly occupied, we are prepared to meet the insolence of infidelity, the ignorance of superstition, and the feebleness of modern apologies for the written Word of God. And, in addition to this, we are in a position to estimate at their proper value all the external evidences that can be produced in proof of the divinity of our precious Bible. Such evidences are of interest. Who, but the most thoughtless, can fail to be arrested by the history of the Book? Take the one fact that for over a thousand years it has been in the custody of the corrupt and apostate religious of men – religious organizations among which some would have willingly crushed it into annihilation. For instance, the peerless Volume lay buried in the dark cloisters of Rome, chained, like a hated prisoner, in the gloomy vaults of her monasteries. Who watched over it there? Who preserved it? Who warded off the destructive hand? Who but the One Whose Spirit penned its every line? Who can fail to see the Hand of God in the preservation of the Book, just as distinctly as we recognize His Spirit in its inspiration?

Assuredly we can say, “It is not that we value external evidences less, but we value internal evidences more.” By the marvelous array of facts in the history of the Bible, a man might be intellectually convinced that it is the Word of God and yet never have felt its living, quickening, saving power in his own soul – whereas the man who has felt the latter, though prizing the former, is entirely independent of them.

But before closing this part of our essay, there is one other fact to which we must call attention – the honor and dignity put on the Holy Scriptures by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. In His conflict with Satan in the wilderness, His one reply was, “It is written.” In His conflict with wicked and wily men, His one standard of appeal was the Holy Scriptures. When equipping His servants for their work, He opens their understanding that they might understand the Scriptures. And then, just as He is about to ascend into the heavens, He casts them simply on the same divine and eternal authority, the Holy Scripture – “It is written.”

What an answer – both to infidelity and superstition. He gives us the Holy Scriptures, and He enables us to understand them. What a mercy. What an unspeakable privilege. What a grand reality. Each one of us individually possess that precious Book on which our blessed Lord Himself always fled, by which He lived as a Man in this world, by which He shaped His way, by which He silenced every adversary, that He always used in His public ministry and in His private life – the blessed Word of God which He Himself has put into our hands, in order that we may find it to be what our adorable Lord and Master always found it, in the whole of His marvelous life and service.

Part V
We shall now linger a little longer over the stirring times of Josiah, king of Judah; but only for the purpose of looking at one grand effect of his beautiful subjection to the authority of Holy Scripture. We allude to the celebration of the Passover, that great foundation feast of the Jewish economy. If we mistake not, we shall find in this event not only a striking illustration of our thesis, but also some valuable instruction bearing pointedly on “the present condition of things.”

“Moreover Josiah kept a passover unto the Lord in Jerusalem: and they killed the passover on the fourteenth day of the first month.” This was acting according to the highest principles of the institution. Hezekiah kept the Passover in the second month, thus availing himself of the provision which grace had made for a defiled condition of things (See Num. 9:3; compare with vv. 10, 11). But Josiah took the highest ground, as simple faith always does. God’s grace can meet us in the lowest condition we may be found; but He is always glorified and gratified when faith plants its foot on the loftiest ground, as presented by divine revelation. Nothing delights the heart of God as much as the largest appropriation of an artless faith. “And he set the priests in their charges, and encouraged them to the service of the house of the Lord. And said unto the Levites that taught all Israel [not merely Judah], which were holy unto the Lord, Put the holy ark in the house which Solomon the son of David king of Israel did build; it shall not be a burden upon your shoulders: serve now the Lord your God, and His people Israel. And prepare yourselves by the houses of your fathers, after your courses, according to the writing of David, king of Israel, and according to the writing of Solomon his son. And stand in the holy place, according to the divisions of the families of the fathers of your brethren the people, and after the division of the families of the Levites. So kill the passover, and sanctify yourselves, and prepare your brethren, that they may do according to the Word of the Lord by the hand of Moses” (2 Chron. 35:1-6; emphasis added).

Here we have an uncommonly fine illustration of the first part of our thesis – “whatever may be the condition of the public body, it is the privilege of the individual believer to occupy the highest possible ground.” In the above passage, we find Josiah going back to the divine standard in reference to the great central feast of Israel. All must be done “according to the word of the Lord by Moses” – nothing less, nothing lower, than this would do. Unbelief might suggest a thousand difficulties. The heart might send up a thousand reasonings. In the face of the general condition of things, it might seem presumptuous to think of aiming at such a lofty standard. It might seem vain to think of acting according to the Word of the Lord by Moses. But Josiah was able to plant his foot on the loftiest ground, and to take the widest possible range. He took his stand on the authority of the Word of the Lord by Moses; and, as to his range of vision, he took in nothing less than the whole Israel of God.

We are thoroughly persuaded that Josiah was right. We feel assured that no other line of action would have been according to the integrity of faith, or to the glory of God. True, Israel’s condition had sadly changed, but no change had come over “the Word of the Lord by Moses.” The truth of God is always the same, and it is by that truth and nothing else, that faith will always shape its way. God had not varied His instructions to the celebration of the Passover. There was not one way for Moses, and another way for Josiah, but God’s way for both. Josiah felt this, and he acted accordingly.

And note the result: “So all the service of the Lord was prepared the same day, to keep the passover, and to offer burnt-offerings upon the altar of the Lord, according to the commandment of king Josiah. And the children of Israel that were present kept the passover at that time, and the feast of unleavened bread seven days. And there was no passover like to that kept in Israel from the days of Samuel the prophet; neither did all the kings of Israel keep such a passover as Josiah kept, and the priests, and the Levites, and all Judah and Israel that were present, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem. In the eighteenth year of the reign of Josiah was this passover kept” (2 Chron. 35:16-19).

Surely, this is something worth pondering. We have here a striking proof of our statement, that “In darkest days it is the privilege of faith to enjoy as high communion as ever was known in the highest moments of the dispensation.” Is it not magnificent that when the whole Jewish polity was on the eve of dissolution to behold in the days of Josiah the celebration of a Passover exceeding any that had ever been kept from the days of Samuel the prophet? Does it not prove to our narrow unbelieving hearts that there is no limit to the grace of God, and no limit to the range of faith?

Assuredly it does. God can never disappoint the expectations of faith. He did not, He would not, He could not tell His servant Josiah that he had made a mistake in taking such high ground, that he had entirely miscalculated, that he should have lowered his standard of action to the level of the nation's moral condition. No; this would not have been like our God at all. Such is not His manner, blessed and praised be His glorious Name for evermore.

Was it that Josiah did not feel and accept the general condition of things as also his own personal failure? Let his tears and rent garments answer. “As for the king of Judah, who sent you to inquire of the Lord, so shall ye say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God of Israel concerning the word which thou hast heard. Because thine heart was tender, and thou didst humble thyself before, God, when thou heardest His words against this place, and against the inhabitants thereof, and humbledst thyself before Me, and didst rend thy clothes, and weep before Me; I have even heard thee also, saith the Lord.”

Josiah certainly felt the ruin, and wept over it. But he could not surrender the truth of God.

He could rend his garments, but he could not, and would not, lower God’s standard. The reason why he should keep very close to the Word of God is that all was in ruin around him. What else did he have to cling to? Where was there a single ray of light, where one atom of authority, where a single hair’s-breadth of solid standing ground, save in the imperishable revelation of God? And was not that Word for him just as distinctly as it had been for Moses, Joshua, Samuel, David, and Solomon? Was not he to listen to its voice, and bow down to its holy authority? Were not its priceless lessons as distinctly for him as for all those who had gone before him?

We have no difficulty determining the true answer to all these inquiries. But there are many today who would fain persuade us that the Bible is not a sufficient guide at this stage of the world’s history. Such changes have taken place; such discoveries have been made in the various fields of scientific investigation that it is puerile to contend for the all-sufficiency of Scripture at this advanced period of the world’s history. In fact, they would have us believe that man’s mind has exceeded the mind of God – this is the real argument. This is what it means, if it means anything. God has written a book for man’s guidance, but that book is now found to be insufficient. A flaw has been discovered in the revelation of God by man’s sagacious and powerful intellect.

What, then, are we to do? Where are we to turn? Can it be possible that God has left His people to drift about in a wild, watery waste, without compass, rudder, or chart? Has our Lord Christ left His church or His servants without any competent authority or infallible guidance? No; He has given us His own perfect revelation – His own precious Word which contains within its covers all we can possibly need to know, not only for our individual salvation and guidance, but also for the most minute details of His church’s history, from the moment in which it was set up on this earth until that longed-for moment in which He will take it to heaven.

But we must not pursue this line further just now, deeply as we feel its immense importance. We have referred to it in a former part, and shall now seek to briefly point out what we consider to be a grand lesson for this age – one strikingly taught in Josiah’s Passover.

Invariably, we find that the heart of every pious Jew – everyone who bowed to the authority of the law of God – turned with a deep, fond, and intense interest to that central and foundation feast of the Passover, in which, among other things, the great truths of redemption and the unity of Israel were strikingly shadowed. Every true Israelite, everyone who loved God and His Word found delight in the celebration of that precious institution. It was the impressive memorial of Israel’s redemption – the significant expression of Israel’s unity. According to all its divinely appointed rites and ordinances, its strict observance was an obligation binding on the whole congregation of Israel. The willful neglecter of it was to be cut off from the congregation. It was neither to be neglected on the one hand, nor tampered with on the other. We could not conceive a faithful Israelite altering a single jot or tittle of the prescribed order of the feast. Neither, as to the time nor the mode of its celebration, was there the slightest margin left for the insertion of human thoughts on the subject. The Word of the Lord settled everything. The idea of anyone undertaking to alter the time or manner of keeping the all-important feast would never enter the mind of any pious God-fearing, member of the congregation. If we could conceive anyone having the boldness to say that it was quite the same whether the Passover was celebrated once a year, or once in three years; and, further, that it was the same whether the paschal lamb was sodden or roast, whether there was unleavened bread or not. In short, provided people were sincere, it did not matter how the thing was done. How would such a one have been dealt with? Numbers 9 supplies a brief, but solemn, answer – “He shall be cut off.”

We take for granted that most will agree with our thinking that what the feast of the Passover was to a faithful Israelite, the feast of the Lord’s Supper is to a true Christian. That was the type, the memorial of the death of Christ. This, we presume, will not be called in question by any devout student of Scripture.

We are not now going to attempt an elaborate exposition of the principles of the Lord’s Supper. Here we merely call attention to the facts in connection with it, i.e., that in no other way than by eating the Lord’s Supper do we set forth the great truth of the unity of the body – in no other way do we set forth the death of our Lord. We may speak of these things, hear of them, write about them, read about them, sing about them, profess to hold them as true; but only by eating the Lord’s Supper according to the Word of God do we give expression to them.

As to the first of these facts, 1 Corinthians 10 is conclusive. “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one loaf, one body: for we are all partakers of that one loaf.”

This is most instructive, teaching us that the Lord’s Supper is pre-eminently a communion feast. It cuts up by the roots the notion of anyone receiving the Lord’s Supper as a mere individual. Not only is there no meaning and no value in such a thing, but it is false and mischievous, because antagonistic to Holy Scripture. “The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?” To make it an individual thing – to set aside the thought of the body – is to mar the integrity of the divine institution, and break the bones of the paschal lamb. It is essential to the true celebration of the Lord’s Supper that the unity of the body should be set forth in the one loaf, of which we all partake. If this be set aside or tampered with, we do not keep the feast according to the mind of Christ. The one loaf on the table of our Lord sets forth the one body, and by partaking of that one loaf, we give expression to our holy fellowship in the unity of that body.

It seems to us that this is an important aspect of the Lord’s Table, and one not sufficiently understood or carried out in the professing church. We speak not of the gross error involved in speaking of the Lord’s Supper as a sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead, or as a sacrament or a covenant between the soul and God. All this would be unhesitatingly rejected by the majority of true Christians.

But is it not striking that we are all deficient in apprehending and expressing the precious truth of the unity of the body in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper? Is there not a strong tendency in our minds to make that precious feast merely an individual thing between our own souls and the Lord? We think of our own blessing, our own comfort, our own refreshment; or, it may be that many go to the table as a means whereby they may be brought somewhat nearer to Christ, thus placing it on an utterly false basis, and surrounding it with a legal atmosphere.

All this demands serious consideration. It behooves all true Christians to look well to their foundations regarding this matter. In this important question, with all humility of mind and teachableness of spirit to the Word of God, we need to come and bend our attention to its teaching. If it is true that partaking of the Lord’s Supper in the Lord’s appointed way is the only act in which we express the unity of the body, should we not examine whether, in this matter, we are acting according to the mind of Christ? Is it not a serious thing to neglect the Lord’s Table? Must it not grieve the heart of Christ to find men satisfied to go on from week to week and month to month, without keeping the feast? Is it possible that a true Christian can be in a right state of soul who habitually absents himself from that feast which alone sets forth a truth so precious to Christ, i.e., the unity of His body? Or can any true lover of the Lord Jesus be satisfied to go on for weeks and months without partaking of that which alone calls his crucified Lord to remembrance: The New Testament teaches us that “on the first day of the week” the Lord’s people “came together to break bread.” “The Lord’s supper” and “the Lord’s day” are blessedly linked together by the teaching of the Holy Spirit. Have we, then, an authority to tamper with this divine order? Are we authorized to alter the time or the mode of keeping the feast? Have we any right to make it once a month, once a quarter, or once in six months?

These are plain questions for the heart and conscience of every true Christian. We shall leave them to act.

Part VI
The Lord’s Supper is a subject that has especially engaged our attention, i.e., viewed as the index of the state of the religious world – the state of the hearts of professing believers with reference to our blessed Lord Jesus Christ.

This has interested us a good deal. We referred to it briefly in part V, but, we shall now attempt to go a little more fully into it.

We feel warranted in viewing the history of the Lord’s Supper as a remarkable moral indicator of the true practical condition of the religions of men – of the real state of the hearts of professing believers toward our Lord Christ. We would be justified in concluding that, had man remained true in heart to Christ, the Lord’s Supper – that inexpressibly precious memorial of Himself in His death – would always have maintained its divinely-appointed place, exhibited its divinely-appointed elements and set forth its grand and important truths. Instituted, as it was, by our blessed Lord, “the same night in which He was betrayed” – appointed by Him expressly to be the affecting memorial of Himself in His death – to call Him to mind, in that marvelous scene in which He gave up His life for us, we might expect that all who really loved Him, all who had been taught to prize His death as the only, the necessary, and the everlasting foundation of all their blessedness – all who truly loved and reverenced His precious commandments – would be jealous in their affectionate maintenance of all the features, facts, and elements of the Lord’s Supper. He Himself has said, “If ye love Me, keep My commandments.” And again, “He that hath My commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Me.”

We know that on the eve of His departure out of this world, when the dark shadows of Gethsemane, and the yet deeper and darker shadows of Calvary, were falling on His spirit, He expressly appointed the supper as a pledge of His love for His own, and as a memorial of Himself to be observed by His disciples during His absence.

Surely no one will object to bringing out the entire body of Scripture evidence on this most interesting question. It is only by having that distinctly before our minds and in our hearts that we shall be able to see how soon, how sadly, and how completely, man has departed from the truth regarding the Lord’s Supper; and, furthermore, how forcibly that departure proves the deplorable state of the heart of the religious world pertaining to Christ. If His own institution has been neglected, it is but the expression of the terrible neglect with which He Himself has been treated. If His supper has been marred, mutilated, and flung aside, it only indicates the moral distance to which man has traveled from Him. In this most weighty matter, His commandment has not been, is not, kept; and what does this prove but that He is not loved? We may talk of loving Him, but if we do not keep His commandments, the talking is a lie and a sham – a heartless, shameless mockery.

We turn to the testimony of Holy Scripture. In Matthew 26 we read, “As they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake, and gave to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is My body. And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them saying, Drink ye all of it; for this is My blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins” (vv. 26-28).

In Mark 14 we read, “And as they did eat, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake, and gave to them, and said, Take, eat; this is My body. And He took the cup, and when He had given thanks, He gave it to them; and they all drank of it. And He said unto them, This is My blood of the new testament which is shed for many” (vv. 22-24).

The record in Luke is deeply affecting – so tender, so touchingly personal. “And when the hour was come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him. And He said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer: for I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves; for I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God shall come. And He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake, and gave unto them, saying, This is My body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of Me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you” (22:14-20).

It may be said that in all the above passages we have no warrant for extending the holy obligation and privilege of the Lord’s Supper beyond those persons who sat around our blessed Lord on that last solemn occasion. It may be objected, there is not a single clause admitting others to partake of the precious benefit. Hence, therefore, had we no further instruction than what is furnished by the three synoptical Gospels, the celebration of the Lord’s Supper would not be binding on true believers now; or rather – to so delightful and precious a privilege – true believers now might deem themselves shut out from what every spiritual mind must regard as the most blessed institution in which the Christian can take part.

Furthermore, it may be said – has been said by a large class of professing believers – that to insist on the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper is a descent from that higher spirituality to which we are called; a return to “weak and beggarly elements.” Hence, to that group of professing believers, the institution is wholly set aside.

Both these objections, if they ever possessed any weight (which they do not), are completely swept away as we pursue the further history of the Lord’s Supper, as unfolded in the Acts and the epistles.

It is interesting that, as we have the supper instituted in the Gospels, we have it celebrated in the Acts; and in the epistles we have it expounded. And we may assert, with all possible confidence, that the celebration and exposition completely demolish the objection founded on the institution; and not only so, but they wither up the absurdity of classing the precious supper of our Lord under the head of “beggarly elements,” and prove the fatal error of setting it aside altogether.

What do we find in the opening of the Acts of the Apostles? Was there any difficulty felt by the many thousands of true believers in the city of Jerusalem as to their sweet privilege of sitting down at the table of their Lord? Or, further, we ask, did the twelve apostles and those happy thousands, filled, taught, and animated by the Holy Spirit (just come down from the risen and glorified Head in the heavens), consider it a descent from a higher spirituality, or a return to “weak and beggarly elements,” to remember their beloved Lord in the breaking of bread, according to His own most gracious appointment? Let us read the answer, in the glowing words of the inspired historian: “Then they that gladly received his Word were baptized: and the same day there were added about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship and in breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and having favour with all the people” (Acts 2:41-47).

We do not gather from this passage that the breaking of bread was confined exclusively to the Lord’s Day, or first day of the week; but we see very distinctly that these early Christians, in the bloom and freshness of their first love, were in the constant habit of breaking bread, in affectionate remembrance of their Lord. They were so filled with the Holy Spirit, that Christ was always before their hearts, and they delighted to celebrate that precious feast which, according to His own express word, was the affecting memorial of Himself in His death. If anyone had spoken to them about its being a descent from a higher spirituality, or a return to carnal ordinances, thus to break bread in loving memory of their Lord; or if anyone had suggested the idea of having the Lord’s Supper once a month, once a quarter, once in six months, or of setting it aside altogether as a beggarly element – we would be delighted to hear what kind of a reply would emanate from eight thousand loving hearts filled with the Holy Spirit, filled with ardent love to the precious Savior, Who, though He had passed through the heavens, and taken His seat at the right hand of the Majesty in the highest, had nevertheless left it as His last request that His people remember Him in that special act of breaking bread. There is little difficulty in conceiving what that reply would be. We may rest assured those early Christians, with the twelve apostles at their head, would have scouted all such notions with a holy indignation commensurate with their deep personal affection for their Lord.

But let us pass on.

In Acts 20 we find the Apostle Paul and his company at Troas, where he tarried seven days, possibly in order to spend the first day of the week with the brethren there, in order that they might break bread together. If this were so, it would lead us to the conclusion that the first day of the week, or Lord’s Day, was pre-eminently the day set apart for the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. One thing is evident, even from this Scripture; that the apostles and the early disciples were in the habit of coming together on the first day of the week for the express purpose of breaking bread, not for preaching, though Paul did preach, but especially to remember the Lord in His own appointed way. “And we sailed away from Philippi after the days of unleavened bread, and came unto them to Troas in five days, where we abode seven days. And upon the first day of the week, when we [thus the four editors render it] came together to break bread . . .” (emphasis added).

Here we find the Apostle Paul proving by his presence at the Lord’s Supper his appreciation of the holy privilege, and that he at least did not consider that to partake of that precious feast was a descent from a higher spirituality, or a return to weak and beggarly elements. In other words, we learn from our two quotations from the Acts, that, in the days of the church’s first love, when all was in lovely freshness and bloom, in the full power of the Holy Spirit, in the plenitude of apostolic gift and grace, the whole church, together with the twelve apostles and the Apostle Paul himself – the greatest teacher the church has ever had; the special minister of the truth of the church – were in the habit of coming together on the first day of the week, the Lord’s Day, the resurrection day, to break bread. And, before we go further, we ask if this is not a fact well worthy of the earnest attention of true seekers of spiritual truth in this age? We may be somewhat premature in putting forth this practical question just now, because our object is to unfold, first of all, the truth of Scripture on the subject of the Lord’s Supper, and then to bring that truth to bear on the present condition of things in the religious world.

But let us press this question. Is it not more than interesting – is it not important to notice the fact of the frequent celebration of the Lord’s Supper by the apostles and the early church? Always on the first day of the week, often more frequently at the first; no hint at such a thing as a monthly, quarterly, or half-yearly celebration of the feast. Indeed, we feel persuaded that no such thing would be thought of, understood, or tolerated by those beloved early Christians. They loved their Lord too much to neglect that most precious and affecting memorial of His love which He had appointed on the very night in which He was betrayed. And if anyone had hinted at such a thing as setting it aside altogether as a mere carnal ordinance, unsuited to a higher range of spiritual life, we can hardly conceive in what terms they would couch their reply.

No, we cannot but see that in proportion as people loved Christ, loved His Word, were filled with the Holy Spirit, did they delight to flock to His table, to remember Him, and in happy and holy communion show forth His death until He come. And if this be so are we not justified in concluding that when men can go on for weeks and months, and some altogether without keeping the blessed feast, their hearts must be cold as to Christ? If we love a dear absent friend, we shall delight to gaze on any special memorial that he may have left us. Now, in appointing the bread and cup to set forth His body and blood, our loving Lord separated one from the other, that is His death, as an accomplished fact, made use of these most touching words, “Do this in remembrance of Me.” Would not, then, every true lover of Christ delight to remember Him? Could such a one be satisfied to go on for weeks or months without ever calling Him to mind in this special way?

And be it carefully noted, that it is only by partaking of the Lord’s Supper that we so remember Christ – that we show His death – that we give expression to the great truth of the unity of the body. We question if generally this is fully seen by professing believers. It is to be feared that the Lord’s Table has lost its true place, lost its true import, lost its solemn interest in the hearts of men in this age. The Lord’s Table, has, in many cases, been flung into the shade of the pulpit – the Supper has been displaced by the sermon. And when we come to view all this as the index of the state of our hearts toward Christ, it is calculated to awaken solemn reflections. We speak not of it now as a departure from the authority of Scripture – which it most surely is – but as the sad and painful evidence of the gross neglect with which our beloved Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is treated by those who profess His Name.

When we come to the exposition of the Lord’s Supper as given in the first epistle to the Corinthians, we find much additional light poured on it by the inspired apostle. Had we merely the record of the institution as given in the Gospels, or of the celebration as given in the Acts, we would have an imperfect apprehension of its deep and wondrous significance.

True (and this is most precious to the heart), if we had only the Gospel narratives, we would have what is of infinite value to every true lover of Christ. In those priceless records, we have Him and His precious sacrifice set before our hearts, in a vivid and touching manner. We hear our adorable Lord and Savior saying, as He hands us the bread, “Take eat; this is My body which is given for you.” And again, as He hands us the cup, “This cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you.” And further, we have those most affecting, soul-stirring words, “This do in remembrance of Me.”

All this is of the deepest possible interest to the true Christian. A person may be ignorant of the truth communicated by the risen and glorified Christ to His servant Paul, and in the power of the Holy Spirit unfolded by the latter for the guidance of the church in all ages. But not withstanding this, he can taste the divine sweetness of that feast which brings his Lord before him in all the depth, tenderness, and reality of His love – a love stronger than death that many waters could not quench – a love that led Him down to the dust of death for us. Blessed be God, it is not a question of intelligence but of true affection for the Person of Christ. And we have no doubt that many precious souls throughout the religious world, receive the Lord’s Supper in connection with error and darkness; but they are sincere in their hearts, and not occupied with the error; it may be they have never thought of it – never searched the Scriptures in reference to the subject. They have just the one thought before their minds; they remember their Lord, and feed on the precious mystery of His death.

We confess it is a relief to think of such, when one looks forth on the present dark and confused state of the religious world. The Lord has His hidden loved ones everywhere; and whenever there is a heart that beats true to Christ, that heart will enjoy the Lord’s Supper, even though surrounded by a quantity of things having little or no foundation in Holy Scripture.

But while we fully admit all this we would nevertheless, earnestly and lovingly seek to instruct the beloved lambs and sheep of our Lord’s flock, and lead them into the knowledge of their true place and portion in Christ. And it seems to us, that the laxity, error, confusion, darkness, and indifference so painfully manifest on all sides in reference to the Lord’s Supper, affords a sad but powerful demonstration of the way in which both the Person and Word of Christ are flung aside. We cannot but believe that, were His blessed Person more the object before the hearts of His people, and if His Word had its proper authority over their consciences, His table would have its right place in their thoughts and practice.

However, we must turn to the first epistle to the Corinthians, where we have the exposition of the Table and Supper of our Lord. In chapter 10 the cup is noticed before the bread. This may be due to the moral condition of the assembly at Corinth which was such that the apostle felt it needful to depart from the usual order of the feast, in order to bring into special prominence before the heart that cup which sets forth the precious blood of Christ – the divine and everlasting basis of our peace and blessing – the most powerful moral lever that could possibly be brought to bear on the spiritual condition of the church. The Corinthians needed a word of warning to “flee from idolatry;” and how could such a word be more powerfully enforced than by bringing before their hearts the moral mystery of the blood-shedding of Christ by which alone they were brought, as purged worshippers, into the presence of the one living and true God. At a glance, we can see that the fact of presenting the cup out of its usual order gives it a special emphasis; and the reason for such emphasis is found in the spiritual state of the people addressed.

We shall now quote the passage at length. “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The loaf [aptos] which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? Because we, the many, are one loaf one body, for we all partake of that one loaf” (emphasis added).

This is a powerful passage. It gives peculiar prominence to the truth of the one body. Of course, we take it for granted that most will agree with us in judging that the word “body” in chapter 10, refers to Christ’s body the church; as the word “body” in chapter 11, refers to the body of our Lord – His own literal body given for us, and bruised on the cursed tree as an offering and atonement for our souls. The “one loaf,” laid on the table symbolizes the unity of the church. The “loaf” broken and eaten in the Supper symbolizes the body of our Lord in the which He bare our sins (not up to, but) on the cross.

Some may feel led to ask, “How is it that we have nothing in the Gospels, or in the Acts, in reference to this truth of the one body?” Simply because the time had not come and things were not ripe for the unfolding of this great mystery. In what have been called the three synoptic Gospels, as well as in the Acts, the testimony to Israel is maintained. God is seen lingering, in long-suffering mercy, over the blinded nation, if haply they would repent and turn to Him. In the Gospels we have the testimony of the Baptist and our Lord Himself – righteousness and grace. In the Acts, we have the testimony of the Holy Spirit; and then the special mission of the apostle Paul which closes, as to Israel, in the last chapter, where he shuts the nation up under the judicial sentence uttered centuries before by the prophet Isaiah.

Thus, we have a marvelous chain of testimony to Israel: John the Baptist; the Messiah; the Holy Spirit; the twelve apostles; the apostle Paul – all rejected, and as a consequence the nation given up to judicial blindness.

We refer to it now simply to show that, pending the testimony to the nation of Israel, it was not possible that the truth about the one body could be unfolded. But in the ministry of the apostle Paul, we have not only a testimony to Israel, but also the unfolding of the glorious mystery of the church, composed of Jew and Gentile, baptized into one body, associated with the glorified Head at the right hand of God. This is the mystery that was “hid in God, from the beginning of the world” – “not made known, in other ages, to the sons of men – kept secret since the world began.”

There was absolutely nothing known of the truth of the church until it was revealed to the apostle Paul, and by him unfolded in his epistles. It can be of no possible use for anyone to deny this, or to maintain that the truth of the body was always known to the people of God; and that the saints of Old Testament times and those of the New are all on one common ground. The Word of God is against them. The passages just quoted from Romans 16 and Ephesians 3 prove, beyond all question, that the truth of the one body, composed of Jew and Gentile, was “hid in God” not hid in Old Testament Scriptures; but hid in God, for most assuredly, whatever is contained in the Scriptures is no longer hidden but revealed.

But we shall not pursue this line any further, as it would draw us away from our more immediate object. We merely add that regarding the strong opposition shown in certain quarters, to the special place and portion of the true church – the body of Christ, we have found it to be in many cases, the sad result of worldliness, prejudice, false theology, and lack of childlike subjection to the authority of Holy Scripture. Anyone who bows to the Word of God must see that the grand doctrine of the church, its special place, portion, and prospect, was never made known to any mortal until the days of the apostle Paul. And it seems to us to be time and labor lost to argue on the subject with anyone who does not submit his whole moral being to the divine authority of Scripture. A man, who will not yield to the plain statements of the Word of God, is not likely to be converted by the arguments of a man.

However, we now know and believe the precious truth of the one body; and, according to the teaching of 1 Corinthians 10, we can never sit down to the table of our Lord without thinking of every member of that body. We cannot gaze on the “one loaf” without having our hearts directed to the blessed Head above and to each and all the beloved members on earth.

We repeat the words, “on earth,” and invite special attention to them. Not that we imagine anyone having difficulty or question in reference to them; but one finds a good deal of confusion in the minds of professing believers regarding whether the body is presented only on earth, or partly on earth, and partly in heaven. Scripture plainly teaches that the place of the body is on earth, for there the Holy Spirit is, there the gifts are. From the Day of Pentecost until the moment of the Lord’s second coming, the place of the body is on earth. For the present, those that have fallen asleep do not count of the body. Some are passing away, and others are being incorporated; but the body is on earth. Just like a regiment of soldiers; for instance, forty years ago we met a member of the 17th Lancers in England, and we know him still; but he is no longer in the regiment; still the regiment exists, has the same colors, the same discipline, is subject to the same code of rules, the same military regulations, it is, in short, the same regiment though its component parts have changed many times.

We were recently struck with that expression in 1 Corinthians 12:27: “Now ye are the body of Christ.” An objector might ask, “Can a single assembly of believers be said to be ‘the body?’ Are there not saints in Philippi, Colosse, Ephesus, and Thessalonica? How then can the Christians at Corinth be designated by such a title?”

The answer is simple. Each assembly, wherever convened, is the local expression of the whole body; and hence what is true of the whole is true of each local expression. There is no such thing as independency in the New Testament – no such thing as being a member of a church – no such thing as joining a congregation. When one is truly converted, the joining is done.

How blessedly true – yet how little understood. At the time of our conversion, God joined us by His Spirit to the one body, and any other joining after that is clearly a step in the wrong direction, which must be retraced, if we would “keep the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of peace.”

What then is a person to do, when converted? Look about for some Scriptural body, church or congregation to join? Nothing of the kind. There really is no such thing within the covers of the Bible. For men to set about forming churches is as unscriptural an assumption as though they were to set about framing a new plan of salvation, or making out a new kind of righteousness. And if it be wrong for men to form churches, it must be wrong for any to join such. In fact, to form the church is God’s work and His only – and as none but God can form the church, so none but He can join anyone thereto.

But again we say, “What is the young convert to do?” Wait on God in humility of mind for guidance. Prayerfully search the Scriptures, and ask the Lord to lead him to His own table where he can remember Him, according to His own appointment, showing forth His death, and giving practical expression to the truth of the one body. In this way he is sure to be guided correctly. “The meek will He teach His way.” And again, “With the lowly is wisdom.” But if we are full of ourselves – full of our own notions; full of prejudice and religious pride – unbroken, unsubdued, unteachable, we shall assuredly be left to follow our own devices. To discern the Table of the Lord in a day of confusion like the present requires a broken will, a teachable spirit, an eye anointed with heavenly eye-salve. If we are occupied with self or looking at people, comparing this person with that person, we shall surely be perplexed and bewildered – an unhappy stranger to peace and progress. But, on the other hand, if, in singleness of eye, we look to God for guidance, He will guide us as surely as He has saved us. He will cause us to find our place in His assembly and at His Table. He will give us such light and authority from His own Word that we shall have no more doubt as to being in our right place than we have as to our eternal salvation.

It is impossible to shut our eyes to the peculiar difficulties of the day in which we live. We often feel deeply for young converts and for all who really desire to know the way of truth, but are sadly perplexed by conflicting opinions, and opposing sects and parties. But we are increasingly persuaded of this fact, that if in self-distrust a soul will only wait on the Lord and ask Him to point out the way – His own blessed way, He will assuredly do so, according to His own sweet promise, “I will guide thee with Mine eye.” It is not cleverness, long-headedness, intellectual power, or logical skill that will avail in the search after truth. No; if all these things are not brought under the sentence of death, they will prove so many barriers or stumbling-blocks in our way. “A little child” is the model on which we must be formed for entrance into the kingdom; and we may depend on it – unless we cultivate the spirit of a little child, we shall never be able to thread our way through the intricate labyrinth of the religions of men in order to find the New Testament church; the true church of our Lord.

Blessed be God, “There is a way which the vulture’s eye hath not seen nor the lion's whelp trodden,” and in that way it is our happy privilege to be found. If viewed from the standpoint of human nature, it may seem rough, narrow, and lonely, but it is a way on which the light of our Father’s approving countenance always shines, and in which the companionship of our Lord Christ is always enjoyed – and is not this enough?

Part VII
We must still linger over the interesting subject of the Lord’s Supper, though it may seem to be a digression – and a lengthened one, too – from the main line of things proposed in this essay. But in reality it is not a digression, because it would hardly be possible to write on “the present condition of things in the religious world” without touching on the important subject of the Table and Supper of the Lord.

We have spent a considerable amount of time on that part of 1 Corinthians 11 that bears on the question of the Lord's Supper. It seems to us a striking and affecting proof of the value and importance attaching to this most precious institution, to find that our Lord Jesus Christ not only instructed the twelve apostles in reference to it, but actually appeared to His servant Paul, in heavenly glory, and gave him a special revelation designed for the church in all ages. This weighty fact furnishes an unanswerable argument against the notion that the Lord’s Supper partakes of an earthly or Jewish character, or that it in any way involves a descent from that higher spirituality to which true Christians are called. And not only so, but it also speaks in accents of power to all those who, willfully or indolently, absent themselves from the Supper of their Lord.

We say “willfully or indolently absent themselves,” for we find the two things operating in the religious world. Some can readily attend a preaching, a lecture, or a soiree, but rarely present themselves at the Table. Others are so indolent regarding spiritual things, as not to care much about any meeting.

1 Corinthians 11 meets both one and the other. Let us bend our ears and our hearts to its weighty instruction. “Now in this that I declare unto you, I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together, in assembly [thus the four editors read it,]³ I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together, therefore, into one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s supper. For in eating every one taketh before his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken” (emphasis added).

How marked the distinction between “the Lord’s supper” and “his own supper.” Is it not striking that in the former we have the grand idea of the whole body; while in the latter we have a miserable selfish individuality? We cannot partake with spiritual intelligence of “the Lord’s supper,” without having before our heart the blessed truth of the whole body and every precious member thereof. If partaking in communion with the heart and mind of Christ, we cannot forget a single one of those so dear to Him, and so intimately associated with Him. In short, when we eat “the Lord’s supper,” we think of Christ and His beloved members. When we eat “our own supper,” we are occupied with the miserable occupation of self and its interests. Well might the inspired apostle exclaim. “What! have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the assembly of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you, Shall I praise you in this, I praise you not.”

Has all this no voice for us? Do we thoroughly apprehend the real secret of the apostle’s appeal? Are we to pass over this passage of Scripture as a reproof administered to a disorderly company of people recently converted from the gross abominations of heathen idolatry, and not yet instructed in the common refinements of Christianity? We do not think so. We believe there is a holy lesson in this Scripture for us.

True, we do not see such a thing as drunkenness at what is called the Lord’s Supper, but is there not a “despising of the assembly of God?” Are there not heresies and schisms in our midst? And where are these as flagrantly and painfully apparent as in immediate connection with the Table and Supper of the Lord? If we are to be taught exclusively by Holy Scripture, we cannot fail to see that the Table of the Lord, with its one loaf, sets before us the truth of the “one body” – a truth deeply precious to the heart of Christ. Where is this maintained in the religious world? Where is there anything approaching an expression of it in the celebration of the Lord’s Supper?

Let us not be afraid to look this weighty question straight in the face. We have no personal interests to serve, no party cause to further. We have for many long years been outside the camp, in that large and wealthy place from whence we can look around us at all that is going on, and test everything by the unerring Word of God. We are outside of all religious organizations of the day; but for that reason we are in a position to embrace, as in the affections of the heart of Christ, all the members of His blessed body, wherever we may find them.

And we may add that in proportion as we recognize that body, and seek to embrace those members, shall we become painfully conscious of the mode in which both one and the other are lost sight of in the celebration of what is called the Lord’s Supper. In fact, communion of the one body is ignored, and the precious feast intended to set forth that communion is looked on as a means of grace to the individual communicant.

Nor is this all; we further ask, how is it that professing believers of various denominational enclosures, either go without the Lord’s Supper for weeks, or, if they have it at all, they do not partake on the ground of the body, but as members of a mere human organization – call it what we please. Why not meet on the first day of the week to break bread? How is it that millions of professing believers only have the communion once a month, and many more only once in six months? How is it that some set it aside altogether? How does it come to pass that in one section of professing believers, the Lord’s Supper is called “a sacrifice”; in another “a sacrament,” and in another “a covenant”? Suppose the Apostle Paul were to arrive in New York next week, where could he go to break bread? Where could he celebrate the precious feast according to the order which he had received from our Lord Christ, and imparted to the church? He might go to one place and see a man calling himself a priest, arrayed in vestments and offering up what he calls “an unbloody sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead.” He might go to another place and find a man more simply arrayed, no doubt, but a man in the capacity of a priest, giving the sacrament to a number of people, without any question regarding whether they are converted or not. He might go to other places, and find no table or supper at all; and if he were to inquire what brought them together, he would be told that they assembled, not to break bread, but to hear a sermon.

What would the apostle do? What would he say? Could he sanction such a state of things? Could he countenance such a palpable and gross departure from the teaching of his Lord; such an ignoring of the “one body”; such neglect of the Head?

We do not write this to wound the feelings of the feeblest lamb among professing believers. As God is our witness, we would lay down our pen forever rather than do so. But we must deal with the facts – the plain, palpable facts actually displayed in the present condition of the professing religions of men. We cannot see any object or reason in writing at all, if the plain truth is to be cushioned; and if the statement of truth wounds one, we cannot help that. We would ask the thoughtful student of God’s Word to look around, and see where the Lord’s Supper is celebrated according to the teaching of Holy Scripture. Where will he find the Lord’s people gathered in assembly on the Lord’s Day, the first day of the week, to break bread, as set forth in the New Testament? We would ask such an one if he himself is in the habit of meeting for this grand object. There is nothing of higher importance in the entire range of the church's history, nothing of deeper interest to the heart of Christ, nothing more precious, nothing more solemn and significant, nothing more binding on the hearts and consciences of all true believers, than the Lord’s Supper. If this be so – and who can deny it? – does it not become us all to not in any way sanction neglect of the Lord’s Supper, or any infringement whatsoever of the divine principle set forth in its celebration according to Scripture. We maintain that every true lover of Christ is bound to solemnly protest against any departure from the due order of this most precious institution. Can we suppose for a moment that the blessed Apostle Paul would be found in any place where the Supper was set aside, or interfered with in the smallest degree? Would he be satisfied to go on for several Lord’s Days without the feast at all, or to see it, where professedly celebrated, marred, mutilated, or tampered with in any way? We do not, and cannot, believe it. We cannot conceive the writer of 1 Corinthians 10 and 11 giving the sanction of his presence to anything but God’s due order in this matter.

Will anyone say, “It makes no matter how we celebrate the Lord’s Supper, provided we have it at all, and are sincere in our observance of it.” We ask, are the Lord’s Table and the Lord’s Supper to be observed according to the Lord’s Word, or according to man’s notions? Is it true that the Lord’s Supper, as presented in His Word, is designed to set forth the unity of His body, to show forth His death, and to recall Him to remembrance in the way of His own special appointment? No, more – the Lord’s Supper is the only way in which the church can truly give expression to these grand realities. We confess we do not see how this can be called in question. Well, then, can we with impunity neglect or tamper with the holy institution? Why, when it was merely a question of a woman having her head covered or uncovered, the inspired apostle is so peremptory on the point, that he closes all discussion by the authoritative and withering statement, “If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.” What would he say to any interference with the time or mode of celebrating the holy Supper of the Lord?

But we must draw this part of our lengthy essay to a close, and shall do so by quoting the remainder of the Spirit’s teaching on the great subject that has been engaging our attention. From it we shall learn the lofty source from whence the inspired apostle derived his knowledge of the truth respecting the Supper of his Lord; and we shall also be able to form a judgment regarding the weight, importance, interest, significance, and value attaching to that institution in the mind of God. “For I have received of the Lord [not merely from the twelve] that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed [how sweetly touching, how deeply affecting] took bread: and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take eat, this is My Body which is broken for you:⁴ this do in remembrance of Me. After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in My blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He came. Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily [in an unworthy manner], shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body [that is, His own literal body given and bruised for us on the Cross]. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you and many sleep. [They were judged in their own persons, and visited with bodily sickness and death, because of their neglect of the Lord’s Supper]. For if we judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world” (1 Cor. 11:23-32; emphasis added).

After presenting such a body of Scripture evidence on the subject of the Lord’s Supper, is it asking too much of any professing believer if we entreat him to judge, in the light of such evidence, the present condition of things in the professing religions of men in this age, in reference to the celebration of the Lord’s Supper? We anticipate reply of most. For our own part, as we compare Scripture with facts around us, we can only exclaim, what has the professing religious of men done with the Lord’s Table? What have they done with the Lord’s Word? What have they done with the Lord’s Christ?

Here we must close our essay. We pray the Lord will abundantly bless each serious student of His Holy Word, and make them each one a blessing.

---

    

Copyright © StudyJesus.com