Fictitious Names. In this view of the subject, we presume it In my late tour I found that some teachers will not be required of us to subscribe to any huwho, in conversation and in their public discour-man instrument of union, as the test of our docses, sometimes approved of the sentiments pub-trine or practice. For we cannot but believe, lished in this work, were wont to write against that the Holy Bible is as plain in expressing its them under fictitious names. The assuming of own truth as it ought to have been; and consea fictitious name, when writing against a person quently that no man can express more clearly who appears in his own proper name, appears than it does, what we are to believe and practo me a cowardly and unjustifiable course: and tise. If this be true, (and we presume it will I do think that every christian should be like not be denied,) it is useless for us, as a church, Nathaniel, "an Israelite indeed, in whom there or for any other body, to hold up a twinkling is no guile;" I therefore declare it my intention taper to give light to the world, when the sun henceforth to make no replies to anonymous op- shines in his meridian splendor. If the fear of ponents, always considering them as unworthy God and the love of the brethren will not hold the of notice, because of the suspicion inseparably disciples in union, upon the one foundation, we connected with the anonymous. Howbeit, this may forever despair of any such instruments of is not to be understood of my private correspon-union as creeds and confessions of faith obtaindents, nor of those whom I have already noticed ing so desirable an end. under the mask of an assumed name. This resolution will be carried into effect in relation to all those who may rationally be supposed to have seen it before they wrote. For in that case we will be authorized to conclude that they expected when writing to pass unnoticed, and feared to hazard an exposure.

No. 10.]

MAY 7, 1827.
Deferred Articles.

EDITOR.

THE following letter is from one of the most intelligent churches in the western states with which we are acquainted. It was addressed to a very respectable Baptist Association in the state of Tennessee, and we are happy to learn that this Association had so much intelligence and liberality as to accept it as the platform and basis of a union with it and the church who wrote it. So long as associations are kept up, we think that were they to act up to the principles herein stated and recognized, much less injury could result to the christian community from their meetings than has hitherto been the result of them. This is a good step and a rapid advance towards the introduction of a better order of things.-ED. The Church of Jesus Christ at Nashville, to the Concord Association, sendeth Christian Salutation.

Again-We understand the "constitution" of your body as saying, when it declares the association "shall have no ecclesiastical power," &c. that the association does not intend to interfere with any of the internal rights of the churches. That is to say: the association has no power to interfere with the order, doctrine, government, or practice, of any church, governed in all, by the great charter of our religious privileges-the New Testament of our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. We consider all these to be the "internal rights of the churches"-rights given them by the Great Head of the church-rights expressly defined and limited by Him, whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge;" and, therefore, rights which are inalienable, and over which no body of men on earth has any control. In short, we consider ourselves at liberty to appoint our own teacher or teachers, and all other officers, without molestation or assistance from any; and to judge for ourselves, when the sentiments delivered by our teachers, so appointed, are contained in the Holy Bible; without acknowledging the right of any others to interfere in the judicial investigation of such sentiments.

in

Indeed, brethren, we look upon your "constitution" as guaranteeing to every church connected with it, a full, free, and unmolested lib

DEAR BRETHREN, AFTER an interval of two years, we again address you by letter and mes-erty of conscience-a liberty unshackled by any sengers. Various circumstances induced us last year not to unite ourselves to any association, which circumstances it is not necessary to enumerate. We again present ourselves before you, and request to be admitted into your body.

Deeming it perfectly necessary that we distinctly understand each other, upon forming this union, we think proper to state our sentiments concerning associations, and the relation they bear to the churches composing them.

Your code of government, as published in 1825, declares that the association" shall have no power to lord it over God's heritage, neither shall it have any ecclesiastical power, or infringe upon any of the internal rights of the churches." To all this we cheerfully consent, and consider it an expression of our own feelings. We may not, however, understand it alike, and will therefore beg leave to exhibit our views of it.

We understand this sentence as saying, that the association has no power to determine what any church shall receive as her creed; or whether she shall have any creed or confession at all, other than the bible; and consequently that she has no power so to lord it over God's heritage, as to condemn any church for holding or teaching any scriptural truths, though they be at variance with the opinions of this body concerning such truths.

authority, except his who has set his people free; a liberty that is not, and will not be, used as a cloak for licentiousness by any one who fears God, and desires to walk by the light of the truth; and a liberty which none other than God who gave it has any right to destroy, and which this association, most certainly, will never assail.

It is our desire, beloved brethren, to live harmoniously with all our brethren; and while we acknowledge ourselves to be "of you," we think that these are the only principles on which unity can be maintained.

We do not consider ourselves the guardians of the public faith; nor as having any right to direct what any shall believe. Error requires net human efforts to overthrow it: the exhibition of the truth in its simplicity, has ever been found, in the hands of God, a weapon most mighty to the pulling down of strong holds.

We trust, brethren, that while we deny the authority of men in matters of religion, we feel bound to endeavor to ascertain the will of our glorious chief; and so far as we know it, to observe it. We are far from supposing that all is known, at the present day, of the Records of Heaven, that can be known; and are therefore willing to learn "what is truth," whoever be the instrument of pointing us to it. That there yet remains much to be known concerning divine

things we must believe; for "if any man thinks | principle, that is to attract the disciples of Christ he knows any thing, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know."

Review of Tassey's Vindication, &c.—Continued from page 314.

one to another, and not the love of party nor of system," &c. &c. Our author next proceeds "to inquire into the particular and permanent officers requisite to a fully organized christian assembly." Of this description he finds but two, viz. the bishop and deacon; the former to rule and teach; the latterto receive and apply the contributions of the congregation to their proper objects. As for apostles, prophets, and evangelists, he shews that their offices were temporary, and could not by them be transmitted to others, because they could neither transmit their qualifications, nor yet the special commission under which they acted. That even Paul himself, though an apostle in the most strict and proper sense of the word, did not feel himself authorised to act under the primary commission given to the eleven, (Matt. xxviii.) nor did he assume it. "Christ," says he, "sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel." This he could not have truly said had he con

mission, or as included in it; for all such were expressly commanded to baptize as well as to preach the gospel. Our author further observes that all the churches planted and set in order by the apostles were furnished with a plurality of elders and bishops; and also, as far as appears, with a plurality of deacons: consequently, that each church, fully organized, had in itself an eldership or presbytery.

Part 2, Section 3d, Page 143. "HAVING fairly, and, we trust, impartially investigated the import and application of the word church, as it occurs in the New Testament, and shewn that no pari of the sacred scriptures gives any countenance or support to any description of ecclesiastical representation, or courts of appeal, by whatever name they may be called; we now proceed to inquire more particularly into the nature and constitution of a church of Christ; and to ascertain, from the test of all religious truth, what are its proper officers, ordinances, and particular duties. Long as this subject has occupied the attention of christians, it appears to be but partially understood; and among those who do know it, there are but few who have the resolution to stand for-sidered himself acting under the primary comward in defence of what the scriptures represent as the path of duty." In the investigation of this important part of his subject, our author evinces that believers only are the proper and capable subjects of the duties and privileges of a christian church; and that the members of the primitive churches were all considered as such; that, therefore, the constituent members of a christian church are, and must be, professed and manifest believers. He farther adds, (page 149,) that, "In order to become a member of any of the primitive churches, faith in Jesus Christ was the only essential qualification looked for, or acted upon, in that age of christian simplicity." Both these positions Mr. T. fully establishes by quotations and arguments evidently just, pertinent, and conclusive; and proceeds to observe that "We are indebted to the refinement and subtle distinctions of modern times for that long catalogue of terms of communion which the various sects have drawn up, by which they oftener shut out the true child of God from partaking of the children's bread, than they do the dogs which have no right to it." How true this is, every intelligent and attentive observer of the present conduct and state of the churches must be satisfied. He also justly observes, (p. 147,) that "it is not subscription to the same creed, or confession of faith, scientifically framed, according to the philosophical or school divinity of the day, which is to attract the disciples of Christ to one another. The true gravitating principle here, is the love of Christ. They must gather together in his name. Where this is wanting, or any other principle substituted in its place, the assembly, however designated, is not, nor can it be, a church of Christ. They must gather together in his name. Not only must his authority induce them to assemble, but their attachment to him, and love to his name, must be the grand prevailing principle which draws them together, and binds in one compact, united, and indissoluble association, every individual of them, or else they cannot be recognised as being blessed with his presence, nor countenanced by the King and Head of his church. "If any man love not our Lord Jesus Christ, let him be anathema maranatha."

Having clearly evinced that faith alone, or a belief of the gospel, that is, the belief of what the apostles testified and taught concerning Jesus, is all that can be scripturally required in order to church membership; and that love to Christ, and to each other solely on his account, that is, on account of their common faith in Christ and attachment to him, is "the true gravitating

That the term Elder, Bishop, and Pastor, are indiscriminately applied to the same officer, and that the modern distinction of teaching and ruling elders is utterly devoid of scriptural authority-a mere human invention. P. 164. Adverting to 1 Tim. v. 17, upon which the above distinction is chiefly, if not solely founded, our author fairly shows that no such distinction can be intended; because all the elders there spoken of, however distinguished amongst themselves as to their respective talents or labors, are perfectly equalized as to office and maintenance; they all rule well, and are all accounted worthy of the same double honor; namely, respect and maintenance. "Again, we remark," says he, "that as the elders who labor in word and doctrine are evidently included in the general proposition, "the elders that rule or preside well," it naturally follows that all the elders spoken of were of one description; and although the passage plainly intimates that some may excel in one department of the pastoral office, while others may excel in another, yet they were all entitled to maintenance on account of their labor, and, therefore, were perfectly on a level-there was no disparity amongst them. But those who ruled well and devoted more of their time to teaching and preaching, were more particularly entitled to a double portion, because their expences would naturally be much greater." Now nothing could be more reasonable than this; for, as the apostle justly alleges, "the laborer is worthy of his reward." But, as our author observes, (page 157,) "It was the spirit of ambition and domination, which is not confined to secular rulers, but which has been felt with all its diabolical results, to pervade almost every department of trust in the religious community," that gave rise to this distinction, and, indeed, to all the other ambitious and anti-scriptural claims and pretensions of an aspiring clergy. And "that under whatever shape this aspiring spirit has thought proper to appear, the pretext for introducing it to the notice of mankind has uniformly been that of supporting and maintaining the unity of the church. Under cover of this pretended object

either of these theories. There was no Jesus, no Messiah, no Christ, no Son of God, no Only Begotten, before the reign of Augustus Cesar. The relation that was before the christian era, was not that of a son and a father, terms which always imply disparity; but it was that expressed by John in the sentence under consideration. The relation was that of God, and the "word of God." This phraseology unfolds a relation quite different from that of a father and a son-a relation perfectly intimate, equal, and glorious. This naturally leads me to the first sentence of John. And here I must state a few postulata.

remembered, that these remarks are solely intended to exhibit the relation which exists between a word and an idea, and that this relation is of a mental nature, and more akin to the spiritual system than any relation created, of which we know any thing. It is a relation of the most sublime order; and no doubt the reason why the name Word is adopted by the apostle in this sentence was because of its superior ability to represent to us the divine relation existing between God and the Saviour prior to his becoming the Son of God. By putting together the above remarks on the term word, we have a full view 1. No relation amongst human beings can per- of what John intended to communicate. As a fectly exhibit the relation which the Saviour held word is an exact image of an idea, so is "The to the God and Father of All anterior to his Word" an exact image of the invisible God. birth. The reason is, that relation is not homo- As a word cannot exist without an idea, nor an genial, or of the same kind with relations origi-idea without a word, so God never was without nating from creation. All relations we know "The Word," nor "The Word" without God; any thing of are created, such as that of father or as a word is of equal age, or co-etaneous and son. Now I object as much to a created with its idea, so "The Word" and God are corelation as I do to a creature in reference to the eternal. And as an idea does not create its original relation of God and the word of God. word, nor a word its idea; so God did not create This relation is an uncreated and unoriginated "The Word," nor the "Word God. relation.

2. When in the fulness of time it became necessary in the wisdom of God to exhibit a Saviour, it became expedient to give some view of the original and eternal dignity of this wonderful visitant of the human race. And as this view must be given in human language, inadequate as it was, the whole vocabulary of human speech must be examined for suitable terms.

3. Of these terms expressive of relations, the most suitable must be, and most unquestionably was, selected. And as the relation was spiritual and not carnal, such terms only were eligible which had respect to mental or spiritual relations. Of this sort there is but one in all the archives of human knowledge, and that is the one selected.

4. The Holy Spirit selected the name Word, and therefore we may safely assert that this is the best, if not the only term, in the whole vocabulary of human speech at all adapted to express that relation which existed "in the beginning," or before time, between our Saviour and his God.

These postulata being stated, I proceed to inquire what sort of a relation does this term represent? And here every thing is plain and easy of comprehension. I shall state numerically a few things universally admitted by the reflecting part of mankind:

1st. A word is a sign or representative of a thought or an idea, and is the idea in an audible or visible form. It is the exact image of that invisible thought which is a perfect secret to all the world until it is expressed.

2d. All men think or form ideas by means of words or images; so that no man can think with out words or symbols of some sort.

3d. Hence it follows that the word and the idea which it represents, are co-etaneous, or of the same age or antiquity. It is true the word may not be uttered or born for years or ages after the idea exists, but still the word is just as old as the idea.

4th. The idea and the word are nevertheless distinct from each other, though the relation between them is the nearest known on earth. An idea cannot exist without a word, nor a word

without an idea.

5th. He that is acquainted with the word, is acquainted with the idea, for the idea is wholly

in the word.

Such a view does the language used by John suggest. And to this do all the scriptures agree. For "The Word" was made flesh, and in consequence of becoming incarnate, he is styled the Son of God, the only Begot ten of the Father. As from eternity God was manifest in and by "The Word," so now God is manifest in the flesh. As God was always with "The Word," so when "The Word" becomes flesh, he is Emanuel, God with us. As God was never manifest but by "The Word," so the heavens and the earth, and all things were created by "The Word." And as "The Word" ever was the effulgence or representation of the invisible God, so he will ever be known and adored as "The Word of God." So much for the divine and eternal relation between the Saviour and God. You will easily perceive that I carry these views no farther than to explain the nature of that relation uncreated and unoriginated which the inspired language inculcates.

These views place us on a lofty eminence whence we look down upon the Calvinistic ideas of "eternal filiation," "eternal Generation," "eternal Son," as midway betwixt us and Arianism. From this sublime and lofty eminence we see the Socinian moving upon a hillock; the Arian upon a hill; and the Calvinist, upon a mountain; all of which lose their disproportion to each other because of the immense height above them to which this view elevates us. The first sentence of John I paraphrase thus: From eternity was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was, I say, from eternity with God. By him all things were made, and he became flesh and dwelt among us. He became a child born and a son of man. As such he is called Emanuel, Jesus, Messiah, Son of God, Only Begotten of the Father.

I can give the above views upon no other authority than my own reasonings. I learned them from nobody-I found them in no book. It is true, indeed, I have held the idea for sixteen years that Jesus is called the Son of God, not because of an "eternal generation," (which I conceive to be nonsense,) but because he was born as the angel described to Mary. This is now pretty generally received by a great many christians. Nor would I dispute or contend for this as a theory or speculation with any body. I could, indeed, amplify considerably, and perhaps obviate some difficulties by following up farther the hints submitted; but such are my views

the import of the beginning of John's testimony, You will remember that I make no systems, and although there are some abstract reasonings upon terms (as indeed much of our reasonings about language are) in the preceding, it is only for the purpose of getting into the sacred import of a style from which we have been proscribed by a speculating philosophy. I have acceded to your request with more ease than I could have done, had it not been for a few prating bodies who are always striving to undo my influence by the cry of Unitarianism, or Socinianism, or some other obnoxious ism. From all isms may the Lord save us! Yours truly, EDITOR.

the deacons attended to all pecuniary matters, and out of the same fund three set of tables were furnished. These were the Lord's table, the bishop's table, and the poor's table. A plurality of deacons was in most instances necessary because of the attention required from them and the trust reposed in them. It was not so much per annum to the bishop, nor so much per annum to the poor, nor so much per annum to the Lord's table; but according to the exigencies of each and the ability to contribute, was the extent of the treasury and the distributions of the stewards or deacons of the congregation. In this state of things the deacons had something to do. They were intimately acquainted with

A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things. the families and wants of the brethren, and in

No. XIX.

The Deacon's Office.

paying a christian regard to these and the duties of their office they obtained an honorable rank THE time once was that every christian con- and great boldness in the faith, or fluency in the gregation had a treasury. In those days they doctrine of Christ. Conversant with the sick required a steward, a treasurer or a deacon, or and the poor, intimate with the rich and more more than one, as the exigencies demanded. affluent brethren, familiar with all, and devoted For, although the terms steward, treasurer, to the Lord in all their services, they became almoner, and deacon, are not perfectly synony-eminent for their piety and charity, and of high mons, they nevertheless express the office and reputation amongst their brethren. Once every duty of the scriptural deacon. The term dea- week these contributions were made, and as ofcon, as all know, is equivalent to the English ten were the appropriations made in times and cirword servant, but the word servant is a very cumstances that required them. Out of the general term, and in the state signifies every church's treasury, then, the poor and distressed public officer, from the President down to the widow above three score, or the sick and afflictconstable. They are all servants of the state. ed disciple was relieved. The Lord's table was So the apostles, evangelists, prophets, and bish- continually furnished with bread and wine. ops were all servants of the Lord and of the The bishops' also, according to their labors and church. But there was one set of servants in their need, were supplied. And thus every the apostolic churches who were emphatically thing was promptly attended to in the Lord's inthe servants of the church in its temporal con- stitution which could afford spiritual and temporcerns. These were the deacons, or stewards, or al comfort to all the subjects of his kingdom. treasurers of the church. For as the deacon's office had respect to the temporalities of the church, and as these are in general some way connected with pecuniary matters, the office of treasurer and almoner is identified with, or is the same as that of deacon; so much so that some translators have, out of regard more to the application than to the literal import of the term , uniformly translated it almoner. The plain and simple state of the case is this: Christian congregations in primitive times, had need of money or earthly things as well as They had rich and poor members. Their poor were such as could not, either through bodily infirmities, or through the inadequate proceeds of their labor in times of embarrassment, furnish their own tables. Those who had to spare were then called upon to supply their wants. And in many instances they not only contributed to the wants of their own poor, but to the wants of those of remote christian communities, in times of general scarcity or pecuniary difficulties. Contributions, generally called the fellowship, were statedly attended to in all their meetings. So Paul gave directions to all the churches in Galatia and elsewhere to replenish the treasury every first day, as the Lord had prospered them in their temporal avocations. A deacon or deacons had the charge of this treasury, and were ex-officio treasurers; but this was not all. They were not only to take care of the contributions, but to dispense or appropriate them according to the directions of the brethren. Thus they were stewards. And as the poor were those in whose behalf this fund was created, and as the deacons dispensed to them, they became ex-officio almoners of the poor.

we.

As they had not in those days of primitive simplicity so many different sorts of funds and officers as we have in this age of complexity;

Amongst the Greeks who paid so much regard to differences of sex, female deacons, or deaconesses, were appointed to visit and wait upon the sisters. Of this sort was Phebe of Cenchrea, and other persons mentioned in the New Testament, who labored in the gospel. The seven persons mentioned and appointed to the service of tables, Acts vi. though not so denominated, were nevertheless invested with and fully possessed of this office. The treasury was entrusted to them-the widows' tables, and every table which required service was attended by them. The direction given to the Corinthians respecting the treasury, and the instructions to Timothy and Titus concerning the choice of deacons, also concerning the support of widows and bishops, all concur in furnishing the above views of this office and work.

But how has it degenerated in modern times into a frivolous and unmeaning carrying about a plate once a quarter, in all the meagre pomp of a vain world!-a mere pompous etiquette, without use or meaning. Often we find the office of treasurer and deacon contradistinguished, as that of moderator and bishop in the same congregation. It is a scriptural insult to appoint a moderator where there is a bishop, and the same to appoint a treasurer where there is a deacon. The deacon is, ex officio, treasurer, and the bishop, ex officio moderator or president. To appoint a president in any meeting where there is an appointed bishop, it is in effect saying that the bishop is not qualified to keep order; and to appoint a treasurer where there is a deacon, it is in effect saying he is not to be trusted, or not qualified for his office. The office itself suggests the propriety of those directions and qualifications laid down for both the deacons and deaconesses in Paul's letters before mentioned. What a wise, benevolent, and independent in

stitution, a christian congregation is! Nothing is left out of view which can contribute to the temporal and spiritual weal of the brotherhood. They meet in full assembly once every week to remember, praise, and adore the Lord; to share in the participation of his favors. The temporal state of the brotherhood is not overlooked in these meetings. Contributions are made for the necessities of saints. The deacons are acquainted, and, through them, the whole fraternity, with the circumstances of all. Under its wise and wholesome discipline care is taken that every member capable of labor, work with his own hands, diligently at some honest calling. The contracting of heavy and oppressive debts is proscribed. No brother is allowed to enthral himself or others in any sort of worldly speculations which incur either anxiety on his part or inconvenience to others. The aged, feeble, and helpless are taken care of by the brethren. The indolent, slothful, and bad economists are censured, admonished, and reformed, or excluded. The Lord's table is constantly furnished. The bishops' wants and necessities always supplied, and no one deprived of any necessary good. There are persons fitted for every service; and those who attend continually on this good service, become eminent in the faith, and after refreshing others are again in turn refreshed themselves. In this view of the deacon's office, we cannot but concur with the sayings and views of the primitive fathers who considered the deacons as the treasurers of the congregation, and as appointed to the service of tables, viz. the Lord's table, the poor's table, and the bishop's table. EDITOR.

To" Paulinus."—Letter III. MY DEAR SIR-THE sentence in the Preface to the Epistle to the Romans, which to you appears objectionable, is the following: "And here let it be noted that the justification by works, and that by faith, of which Paul speaks, and of which our systems speak, are quite different things. To quote his words and apply them to our questions about faith and works, is illogical, inconclusive, and absurd." When I penned this sentence, I anticipated objections to it, and knew that it would be out of place to obviate them in that preface. The question then was whether should I withhold or bestow it. The fact of its appearance shews my decision of that question. I am glad you have called upon me for an exposition of it. I trust I will be able to satisfy you and others who have objected to it. We shall now make the attempt.

his offspring by Sarah would be as innumerable as the stars, or sands on the sea shore-"therefore it was counted to him for righteousness.” By a reference to the 11th Heb. it will appear that the faith by which the ancients obtained a good report was as different as their names. In other words, the faith spoken of was the belief of particular promises or revelations made in their days. Their believing was the same, but the things believed were different. In every age of the world the faith of the approved consisted in the truths revealed to them and of the promise given them. So Paul, after speaking of Abraham's faith in God's promise to him, being accounted to him for righteousness, adds, "It was not written for his sake; but for us also, to whom faith shall be accounted for righteousness, if we believe the promise made to us, viz. that Jesus died for our sins, and was raised for our justification." Paul argues here that not his fleshly works of circumcising himself nor his children, nor his servants, justified him; but his faith in the promise, "So shall thy seed be." Again, the law was not given to the seed of Abraham with a reference to Canaan. "The inheritance was not by law, but by promise." Canaan was unalterably promised four hundred and thirty years before the law; or the law was four hundred and thirty years after the promise-consequently no works of that law were spoken of in the case of Abraham. Neither the faith of Abraham nor the works of Abraham, here spoken of, are akin to our systematic faith and works. The affirmation in the above sentence is therefore true.But what is gained by the affirmation? I answer, Accuracy in noticing the meaning, and correctness in applying the sentiments of scripture. A loose and indiscriminating citation of scripture words, without regard to their scriptural meaning, is the cause of nine-tenths, at least, of the errors of this age. And I would not prove a scriptural truth, by misquoting a scriptural passage, for the sake of the dearest sentiment I hold. Some quote the scriptures as if they thought it right to bring every word that can be cited from any similarity, in proof of a favorite point. Now a good cause is often more injured by one misapplied text, than it can be aided by a dozen of good arguments. On this subject I would be precise even to squeamishness. I would, in other words, object as much to a citation of scripture made at variance with the design of the passage in aid of my own most favorite topic, as I would to an erroneous argument advanced by an opponent.

But again, more is at issue than has yet been noticed. "Good works," "trusting to works," and "justification by works," are words and sentences of general currency. Many class under the head of good works-prayers-praises-baptism-the Lord's supper, and all acts of devotion; and seeking to be justified by these is often viewed as seeking justification by works; and it is supposed that Paul had such works in view when he spake of works of law and justification by works.

The 4th chapter was that portion of the epistle to which I referred in that sentence. Now it must first be asked, What were the works of which the apostle there speaks? It will be admitted in the case of Abraham, from whose works and faith the apostle here argues, that the faith of Abraham was a belief that his seed would be as numerous as God had promised him: "so shall thy seed be." This promise he believed, notwithstanding all in nature and experience was against it. He considered not his own body now Once more, "good works" are identified with dead, neither the deadness of Sarah's womb.- "works of law" and works of human contrivAgainst all hope founded on the nature of things, ance; and the consequence is, that what is said he believed in hope of being the father of na- about good works in scripture is very generally tions by the aged Sarah. It was not his faith in misunderstood and confounded with works of a Messiah which was accounted to him for right- law. All these mistakes can only be corrected eousness as our systems speak. It was not his by a minute attention to the scripture style.faith in a Messiah that constituted him the father And, as you know, I deal much in assertions of all believers. Others believed in the Messiah sometimes, especially when I have neither time as firmly as he. But relying on the faithfulness nor room for the proof, I will assert that all works and power of God alone, he was confident that|called good in scripture have men for their object;