But an attentive consideration of the passages, prohibiting the bearing of burdens on the Sabbath, will shew that they relate to such burdens as were borne in the carrying on of trade or ordinary labors. If ye diligently hearken unto me, saith the Lord, to bring in no burden through the gates of the city, on the Sabbath day, but hallow the Sabbath day, to do no work therein." Jer. 17. 24.→→ So likewise in the book of Nehe-. miah. "In those days I saw in Ju not answer him again to these things. Luke 13, 15. 14, 3. These passages scripture clearly prove, that our Lord was not introducing any relaxation of the Sabbath, suited to the genius of the Gospel dispensation; but that he was speaking the language of the law as delivered to the Jews, and shewing, that acts of necessity, of mercy, and compassion, were duties suited to the strictest observance of the Sabbath. If this had not been the case our Savior could not have charged the ruler with dah some treading wine presses on hypocrisy, nor would his appeal to the law of Moses have silenced them who wished to accuse him of breaking that law. It has been thought by some, that our Savior exceeded the bounds of the Jewish law, when he directed the man whom he had healed at the pool of Bethesda, "to take up his bed and walk." John, 5. 8. because God had commanded the people, by the prophet Jeremiah "to bear no burden on the Sabbath day." Ch. 17. 21. Those who entertain such a thought, should consider that our Lord perfectly understood the law, and if this was a breach of it, he was directing the poor man to commit a heinous of fence against the state; for this as well as several others of the ten commandments, was incorporated into the civil laws of the Jews "Ye shall keep the Sabbath, for it is holy unto you. Every one that defileth it shall sure. ly be put to death." Exod. 31.14, the Sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also wine grapes and figs and all manner of burdens which they brought into Jerusralem on the sabbath dayNeh. 13. 15." The cripple, when our Savior had healed at the pool of Bethesda, was friendless as well. as poor; and probably had nothing but his portable bed or mattrass, whereon to rest bis weary limbs : the Lord Jesus, therefore directed him to take care of this neces sary piece of furniture, when he had strengthened the body of this indigent creature and enabled him to return to his own house. Another passage of the Old Testament may be thought to express a degree of strictness in the observance of the Sabbath which was peculiar to the Jewish dispensation. "Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitation on the Sabbath day. Exod. 35. 3.--But this, compared with its context, seems to relate only to fires de made for the purposes of labour. icy rather than to the religion of The whole passage runs thus; the Jews. "Six days shalt work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a Sabbath of rest to the Lord whosoever doth work therein shall be put to death. Ye shall kindle no fire &c." We may rest assured that he who prefers mercy to sacrifice, would not forbid the use of fire for the purpose of warmth in any country where the inhabitants might be compelled to say, "Who is able to abide his frosts ?" Nor is it probable, that he who vindicated the conduct of his disciples when they had plucked the ears of coru as they walked through the fields, for the purpose of satisfying their hunger would forbid the use of fire for the necessary preparations of their food. We may conclude, therefore, that the kindling of a fire, for the refreshment of the body, was not contrary to the Jewish law, On the whole, I see nothing in the duties of the Sabbath, as sub.. sisting under the Jewish dispensation, but a most spiritual and rational service, suitable, indeed, to the period of man's innocence, yet accommodated to the necessities which sin has introduced into the world. The sanctions of the Sabbath were undoubtedly increased, as the breach of it was, by that law, made a capital offence. But this was not peculiar to the fourth commandment, and was a circumstance belonging to the pol I cannot conceive a more lightful exercise to a heavenly minded person, than that of spending the day in the manner described by the prophet Isaiah. If the Jews, instead of confining their attention to these spiritual services prepared a number of unnecessary restraints, we must not form our Judgment of the real duties of the Sabbath from their conduct. We know that the farther they deviated from the pure word of God in other instances, the more careful they were to make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments; nor were they ever more strict in tything mint, annise, and cummin, than when they neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice, mercy and the law of God. W. H. agency" and reasons throughout The general Divine agency which his 2d and 3d heads on the supposition that it is in kind and degree the same agency which is exercised over saints; and because if he does not mean this, he is contending with a shadow for none who "acknowledge that the saint acts under a positive Divine Agency" deny that in some sense the Divine agency is concerned with every event in the Universe. Neither of your correspondent's objections, except the first, did ever hear made by any who be lieve in a positive agency in the case of saints; yet I am ready to admit, that he has fully answered them, and if he, or some other one, will as fully answer those of whick I have heard, I shall be gratified. Hoping that this may be done, or at least that some of your able correspondents will throw some light on a subject which is often needlessly darkened by the manner in which it is treated, & which is connected with the first principles of our religion, 1 shall state freely the difficulties to which I allude. upholds the moral faculties of the christian, is not enough; he needs a superadded positive or special agency to preserve him:--such an agency that he feels bound to ascribe his preservation to God and not to himself, though his actions were perfectly free. Now what man ever felt the need of such an agency to preserve him in a course of transgression, or indeed of any other Divine influence than that which preserves him a moral agent in the midst of temptation? The objection implies that the agency of God in the case of sinners as found by experience to be different, to be less direct & positive than that which is exercised in saints. II. It is inconsistent with the representations of Scripture.— These representations accord exactly with the experience of true christians. from the manifest reason that they are delineations of those emotions which true christians feel. They represent that we are naturally prone to evil exclusive I. The doctrine is contrary to ly and continually, that we are the experience of christians. Christians feel, and frequently say, that if left to themselves, in their unrenewed state, they should have gone on in sin; and if left to 'themselves (i.e. without any different kind or degree, of Divine influence than they had before conversion, they should, after regeneration, fall away and perish. led captive by Satan at his will; that we are drawn away by our own lusts, and not tempted of God, when we commit iniquity; that when God takes away the restraints which his influence imposes upon sinners, withdraws his spirit from them and leaves them to their own ways, they rush on to hopeless ruin. On the other hand, they represent saints as kept by the power of God; God hath made them to differ from others; as to their good deeds, it is not they who do them, but Christ who dwelleth in them; the Lord inclines their hearts to his statutes and keeps their feet in his way. The agency of God is exerted and is efficient in both cases, (i. e. accomplishes all which God designs) but in one case it is privative or indirect and general, in the other, it is positive, direct and special. In one case, it merely preserves the ordinary laws of mind and does not prevent their natural effect, in the other, it counteracts the influence of these laws or creates new ones. Just as the agency of God is as real and efficient in causing a stone to fall to the ground when unsupported, as in causing it to fly off unpropelled, whilst there is yet a manifest difference in the agency exerted in the two cases. The Scriptures also represent the human mind as the scene of a controversy between God and the adversary of souls. God invites, urges, threatens sinners in order to lead them to holiness. Satan allures, flatters, deceives, in order to keep them in sin. Now if the agency of God is equally direct and positive on both sides of this controversy, there would seem to be an incongruity in the repre sentation. Again; the scriptures speak of the actions of good men as if the credit of these actions were to be ascribed to the Divine agency which prompted them, in some respects as the credit of the reformation of a voluptuous youth is ascribed to the kind friend whose persuasion induced him to reform, or the guilt of his vicious course to the man whose counsels and influence led him astray. Now if the agency of God is the same in the hearts of sinners, as of saints why does it not follow that the actions of the wicked are to be ascribed to God in the same sense as the holy actions of the right eous. Ill. The doctrine is not in the Bible. If this objection can be fairly set aside freely acknowledge that the doctrine must be receiv. ed, whatever difficulties may attend it. The text to which your correspondent alludes Ex. 9. 12. "The Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh and several others which he might have named, prove, (what indeed nobody doubts) the existence of some divine agency in the actions of wicked men; do they prove that this agency is positive or direct; and that it is the same as in the actions of holy men! If they do not, they leave the objec tion unaffected; if they do prote this, the objection will be answer ed by showing how they prove it. With a few remarks upon your ་་་ but correspondents principles of interpretation I shall close. He says he knows of no principles of logic or interpretation which allow of such license" as ascribing to God what man does 1 profess no skill in the rules of logic or interpretation" with which your correspondent seems familiar, but I have been accustomed to regard the principles which he thinks so inadmissible, viz. that it is proper to ascribe to God in one sense, what is done by man in another sense as of fundamental and indispensable importance in the explanation of the scriptures.Nor do I see how your correspondent can without it dispose of the very text he adduced, viz. “The Lord hardened the heart of Pharaoh," for the same chapter repeatedly assures us that Pharaoh bardened his own heart. I know of no way to avoid this difficulty, but by adopting the principle in question and saying "God hardened Pharaoh's heart by employing another" (i. e. Pharaoh himself) "to do it." Again; it is said Il. Saml. 24. 1. "The Lord moved David to number Israel and I. Chron. 21. 1. that Satan moved him to the same thing; yet II. Saml. 24. 10, 17 and I. Chron. 21. 8, 17 the transaction is spoken of as if David's agony was alone concerned in numbering the people. Will your correspondent inform me by what "principles of interpretation" he reconciles these without admitting that the Lord moved David, by employing satan to move him? Indeed the whole number of texts in which the actions of men are ascribed to God, seem incapable of explanation without admitting that God is said to do, what in his providence he employs others to do.* The truth is we cannot tell from the terms employed, whether the Divine agency in particular cases, is the same or different, direct or indirect, for the manifest reason that agencies are spoken of in the same terms which are in other parts of the scriptures determined to be different. The objections mentioned go to show that this is the case in the agency exercised in the hearts of sinners and of saints and it may be well for your correspondent to answer the real objections of those who differ from him before he very confidently concludes their opinion to be false. If the reasonings on the rules of interpretation, to which he objects, are invalid, it will tend much to the conviction of those who adopt them to have this invalidity pointed out. XANTHUS. See an admirable illustration of this principle in a Sermon of the Rev. Dr. Emmons relative to Pharaoh. Friendship. A false friend is like the shadow of a dial, it appears in clear weather, but vanishes on the approach of a cloud. |