صور الصفحة
النشر الإلكتروني

"making provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof,” should they not rather “mortify," or “crucify” it in themselves, and also in others, so far as the means are within their power ? Is not this the command of Christ their Lord and Saviour ? In other words, without saying that it is unlawful or sinful to partake even of the strongest of intoxicating drink, as such drink of every kind is of the most insinuating and ensnaring nature, is it proper in professing Christians to tamper with such a temptation ? Or, in tampering with it, are they in the way of duty ? Or, without limiting the power of God, and saying that “the grace of God cannot, except by a miracle, prevent a man from being a drunkard, if he drinks,” is it right in them to “tempt the Lord their God” by a frequent use of intoxicating drink, or by any other than a medicinal or sacramental use of it? In using it at any time, except when there is an absolute “need be” for it, are they in the way of duty ? On the contrary, should they not be “not conformed to this world” in its drinking customs, in public and in private, as well as in every thing that has the appearance of drunkenness? Especially, in the existing circumstances of the Church as well as of the country, should they not make non-conformity to the world in this sense their ruling motto? In this, as in other things, should there not be manifested the widest distinction between them and the men of the world? Would not this be discharging their duty to others, as well as to themselves ? Would not this be acting as worthy members of the community, as well as of the Church? Would not this be their interest, as well as their duty, in each of these respects ? For would it not be promotive of their own good and the good of others; of good to the body and good to the soul; of good for time and good for eternity; of good for the country and good for the Church; and also conducive to the glory of God?

On the other hand, if in this, although not in other things, professing believers are “conformed to the world,” may it not well be asked, in our present peculiar circumstances, what practical power does their Christianity possess in meeting one of the greatest of evils, or rather the two-fold grievous evil of drunkenness and the drinking customs? As pattern is more powerful than precept, if they are conformists instead of nonconformists, must it not be confessed, that so far as their pattern goes, the Christianity of such persons is powerless ? The more godly, also, such persons profess to be, will not their conformity to the world in its drinking customs be the more influential for evil and not for good; or at least prove, more or less, a barrier to the breaking down of these customs ? How careful, therefore, .should all professing Christians be lest their conformity to the world in this, if not in other things, operate as a practical stumblingblock to their fellow-saints and fellow-sinners, if not to themselves; and “their table become a snare before them, and that which should have been for their welfare, a trap ?”

With you, my dear readers, who profess to be Christ's, are you, or are you not, conformed to the world in this respect? If not, is it, in the spirit of Christian love, going too far to say that you are not such true practical non-conformists as the times require, nor such true practical Christians as Scripture commands ; or such as your duty to Christ, to yourselves, and to others, imperatively demands ?




“Hail! sacred day of holy thought,

Sweet Sabbath of serene repose :
Be earth's low pleasures all forgot
In joys the worldling never knows."

But again, all true Christians must "not be conformed to this world” in the practice of any kind of Sabbath profanation. To glance at the authority which we have for observing one day in seven altogether differently from the rest—we need scarcely remark, that the institution of the Sabbath was coeval with the creation of the world. For, while we read that “God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good; and the evening and the morning were the sixth day,” it is added, that “God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.” Thus, the Sabbath became the “weekly memorial of the finished work of Jehovah-Jesus in creation," or of his creationrest. On this account itself, the Sabbath cannot be said to be a Jewish, but an Edenic institute ; and in this respect, it resembles the ordinance of marriage. From the circumstance also, that Cain and Abel, “in process of time,” or literally “ at the end of days," that is, at the close of the week, brought severally an offering to the Lord—the one of the fruits of the ground, the other of the firstlings of his flock, as a type of Christ, the true atoning sacrifice-it would seem that from the earliest age, the Sabbath was that day which was specially appropriated for the worship of God. From the most ancient records, likewise, of profane history, it appears that the seventh day was universally regarded as "a sacred, holy day."

Accordingly, after the Israelites were delivered from the bondage of Egypt, where the observance of the Sabbath had most probably fallen into abeyance, when God gave them manna in the desert, we find the Sabbath then expressly referred to, not as a new, but as an established divine ordinance, as when it is said, “to-morrow is the rest,” or sabbatism,“ of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord; see, for that the Lord hath given you the Sabbath; therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days.” And as the people at once looked upon the Sabbath in this light without any explanation, so they“ gathered twice as much bread on the sixth day" as on any other.

« السابقةمتابعة »