ever, it is to be expected that the faithful exhibition of it will be the occasion of divisions among men. 1. From the fact, that the natural heart of man is strongly opposed to its doctrines and duties. The gospel represents men to be, by nature, guilty, condemned and ruined creatures; destitute of holiness, and possessed of hearts deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. It strikes at the root of all their pride and selfishness; and informs them, that they cannot merit the favour of God, against whom they have rebelled. It throws them into his hands, and represents him as angry with them every day. It gives him the throne of the universe, and declares that he works all things after the counsel of his own will, and that he has mercy on whom he will have mercy. It informs them that it is indispensably necessary for them to be born, not of the will of man, but of God, in order to be qualified for heaven, and admitted to its enjoyments. The gospel requires men to love God with all their hearts, and to act with a supreme and constant reference to his glory. It enjoins upon them repentance towards God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, as the condition of forgiveness and salvation, and expressly informs them, that except they repent they shall perish; and except they believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, they shall be damned. To these doctrines and duties, and to others implied in them, the natural hearts of men must, from the nature of the case, feel strong opposition. It is, then, to be expected, that a faithful exhibition of the gospel will be the occasion of divisions among men. Its enemies will manifest their opposition to its doctrines and duties by opposing those by whom

they are faithfully preached and cordially embraced.

2. From numerous passages in the volume of inspiration. "I am come, said our Saviour, to send fire on the earth, and what will I if it be already kindled? Suppose ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, nay; but rather division. For, from henceforth, there shall be five in one house, divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law." On other occasions he said, "Beware of men, for they will deliver you up to councils and they will scourge you in their synagogues, and ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my sake. And the brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child, and the children shall rise up against their parents and cause them to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake... If they have called the master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household. Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and shall cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man's sake. If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love its own, but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore, the world hateth you." Who that considers these and similar passages, can

tion of the gospel will be the occasion of divisions among men?

"In

the preaching of the gospel at Thessalonica and at Athens, and in every place where it was then preached. After the death of the Apostles, divisions continued. The same cause produced the same effects wherever it operated. The arm of civil power was soon raised against the Christian Church. In the course of a few centuries, thousands and thousands of Christians suffered the cruelties and tortures of a malicious and ferocious persecution. From that period down to the present day, a faithful exhibition of the great truths and duties of Christianity has not failed to produce divisions among men. Here, I might advert to Luther and his colleagues at the time of the reformation in the sixteenth century. Through their instrumentality a broad line of distinction was made between the friends and the enemies of truth. Wherever the gospel is faithfully preached in the time in which we live, divisions are created to a greater or less extent. some, divine truth is gladly heard and cordially received; by others, it is heard with disgust and rejected. It becomes the occasion of animosity and contention on the part of those by whom it is not believed. But the thing which has been, is that which shall be, and that which is done, is that which shall be done. From the fact, that a faithful exhibition of the gospel ever has been the occasion of divisions among men, we may, with great certainty, infer, that it will continue to be the occasion of them.

3. From the fact that a faithful exhibition of the gospel always has, in a greater, or less degree, been the occasion of divisions. It was so when the gospel was preached by Christ himself. the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, if any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink. Many of the people, therefore, when they heard this saying, said, of a truth, this is the Prophet. Others said, this is the Christ. But some said, shall Christ come out of Galilee? And there was a division among the people because of him." While some of the Pharisees said, this man is not of God, others asked, how can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? "And there was a division among them." The common people heard Christ gladly, while the Pharisees and other great men of the Jewish nation, treated both him and his doctrines with contempt. A faithful exhibition of his gospel did not cease to produce divisions among men after his ascension to heaven. By the preaching of Paul and Barnabas at Antioch, many of the Jews, religious proselytes and Gentiles, were brought to embrace the gospel. "But the unbelieving Jews stirred up the devout and honourable women and chief men of the city against Paul and Barnabas and expelled them out of their coasts. When they preached at Iconium a great multitude both of the Jews and Greeks believed; but the unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles and made their minds evil affected towards the brethren. The multitude of the city was divided, and part held with the Jews and part with the Apostles. Simi

VOL. III.

By

such a kind of preaching prevalent, at the present day, is an undeniable fact. It disrobes the Saviour of his divinity, does not admit his sufferings and death to be a proper sacrifice for sin,overlooks the entire depravity of the unsanctified heart, rejects the doctrine of regeneration by the Holy Spirit, rings perpetual changes on the beauty of virtue and charity, implies that nearly all persons are real Christians, and seldom says any thing respecting the punishment of the wicked in a future state. Against such preaching, it is well known, that no opposition of heart is excited. And why should there be, since it accords with the feelings of the unsanctified heart? But in what estimation is such kind of preaching to be held? Is it not to be regarded as essentially unlike that of the Prophets, of Christ, and of his Apostles? Did not their preaching meet with violent opposition, and occasion divisions among men? If Christ were again to appear and should preach the same doctrines and duties which he inculcated while he tabernacled with men, can there be the least doubt what would be the result? Suppose that Paul were to descend to earth and preach all those things which are found in his Epistles? would there not be divisions? Would multitudes be any more reconciled to them dispensed from his lips, than from his pen? It requires no small share of selfdenial in a minister, to read without note or comment, some parts of his Epistles, to many congregations in the nineteenth century. Observe, then, the striking difference between much of the preaching which is desired and is current in some places, and that of

Christ and of his Prophets and Apostles.

The truth of the general proposition suggests the remark, that ministers who faithfully preach the gospel, cannot reasonably expect to escape opposition. The Prophets, were hated and opposed on account of the messages of God which they delivered. "Woe is me, my mother," exclaimed Jeremiah," that thou hast borne me a man of strife and of contention to the whole earth. I have neither lent on usury, nor have men lent me on usury, yet every one of them doth curse me."

The Lord Jesus Christ was, also, violently opposed, on account of the doctrines and duties which he preached. And he forewarned his first ministers, that they would be hated and persecuted on the same account. Accordingly we find that they were strongly and constantly opposed, wherever they preached the gospel. With two or three exceptions, they were all put to an ignominious death. Can, then, the faithful minister of the gospel, at the present day, expect to escape opposition? He preaches the same doctrines which were preached by Christ and his Apostles. The hearts of men are the same now as they were in the apostolic age. In the moral, no less than in the natural world, it must be expected, that similar combinations of causes, operating under similar combinations of circumstances, will be productive of similar effects. There is, therefore, no principle on which the faithful minister of the gospel can reasonably found an expectation of escaping opposition. He may not, indeed, be persecuted unto death, by the civil power; but the enemies of the truth will mani

fest, in some form, their opposition to those by whom it is dispensed.

It is a fact well known, that sinners frequently go from the sanctuary, disturbed with the doctrines of the gospel which they have heard. This is not to be considered as an unfavourable circumstance. So long as sinners are undisturbed by a faithful exhibition of the gospel, it cannot be expected, that the word will be instrumental of their conversion. This can be looked for only, when the word awakens their attention, convinces them of sin, and leads them to inquire what they shall do to be saved. But when these effects are produced, they are disturbed, and are disposed to complain, either of the preacher, or of the sentiments which he advances. Their condition, under such circumstances, is more hopeful than that of those who are never disturbed in their moral slumbers, by a faithful exhibition of divine truth. They will be more likely to search the Scriptures to see whether things are so, and to come to a knowledge of the truth, as it is in Jesus Christ.

It may yet further be remarked, that divisions among men will be occasioned by a faithful exhibition of the gospel, until the Millennium. During that period, which will be at least a thousand years, all will know the Lord, from the least to the greatest, and the people will be all righteous. Until that time, divisions will continue. The grand reason why a faithful exhibition of the gospel now occasions divisions among men, is, because their hearts are naturally opposed to its holy and humbling doctrines and duties. These will, no doubt, continue to be inculcated until

the Millennial day, and there will, until that time, be wicked men in the world. Hence divisions will continue. It is, in itself considered, to be lamented, that any should hate and oppose the truth. But where religious divisions exist, in consequence of a faithful exhibition of the gospel, the blame is to be attached, not to the gospel itself, nor to those by whom it is dispensed, but to those by whom it is opposed. The religious divisions which are so frequently occurring in New England at the present day, are, in many instances, the natural consequence of a faithful exhibition of truth. The existence of them affords evidence, that the truth as it is in Jesus, is in many places, faithfully preached, and that the cause of the Redeemer is yet maintained in this region. Is it not more desirable that religious divisions should be multiplied, than that the gospel should not be faithfully preached, and men, in thick succession, should go undisturbed to endless ruin?

From the Christian Observer.
PART IV.

THOUGHTS ON THE SABBATH.

[Continued from page 23.]

F.

ANSWERS TO OBJECTIONS. WHEN I sat down to communicate my Thoughts on the Sabbath to the Christian Observer, my design was to avoid, as much as possible, the appearance of controversy; and merely to state what I conceived to be the doctrine of scripture. But as this subject has been treated at large by a modern author, of high reputation in the learned world, who has shown the great utility of sabbatical institutions, but whose views do not altogether coincide with mine, it

might appear supercilious in me to omit taking particular notice of the arguments which he had adduced to prove that the Sabbath was not instituted till after the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, and remained in force only during the Jewish Dispensation. In my preceding papers, I have not been inattentive to the arguments of this author, and have already, in effect, given a reply to some of them. I now proceed to consider those of which I have hitherto taken no notice, or to which my answers have not been sufficiently explicit.

f. This author candidly acknowledges, that "if the divine command was actually delivered at the creation, it was addressed, no doubt, to the whole human species alike, and continues, unless repealed by some subsequent revelation, binding upon all who come to the knowledge of it."*

It becomes us, then, to weigh, with the utmost caution the words of scripture, respecting the transactions of the seventh day, as recorded in the book of Genesis. If this passage declares, that God then blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; all debate about the extent of the obligation of a sabbatical institution is precluded.

But it is objected that "the words" (Gen. ii. 3) "do not assert that God then blessed and sanctified the seventh day; but that he blessed and sanctified it for that reason,;" because that on it he had rested from all his works, &c.; and if any ask, why the Sabbath or sanctification of the seventh day was then mentioned, if it was not then appointed; the answer is at hand-the order of connexion and not of time, intro

*Paley's Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. 8vo, ed. vol. ii. P. 80.

duced the mention of the Sabbath, in the history of the subject which it was ordained to commemorate."*

I am here at issue with the author whom I have quoted, as, in my apprehension, the words in Genesis do clearly assert, that God then blessed and sanctified the seventh day as well as that he sanctified it, because that on it he had rested from all his works of creation.

In the first and beginning of the second chapter of Genesis, we have a distinct chronological account of the first seven days, after it had pleased God to begin the stupendous work of creation. The transactions of the seventh day are as distinctly marked as those of any other day, with this difference only, that with respect to the six preceding days, the work is first mentioned and then the day; whereas with respect to the seventh, the day is first mentioned and then its transactions are enumerated.

On the first day, God said, Let there be light, and there was light. On the sixth God created man in his own image; and on the seventh day, God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all the work which he had made; and God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; because that on it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. All the transactions enumerated in this passage belong to the seventh day as clearly, in my ap. prehension, as the creation of man belongs to the sixth; nor can I discover any thing in the passage, except the division into verses, which could mislead a reader of plain understanding. On the seventh day God ended his work and

Paley's Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy, Svo. ed. vol. ii. p. 76.