inducement to cease to do evil and to learn to do well, in all the laws of Moses, in all the statutes of Israel, in all the examples of patriarchs, saints, and martyrs, speaks such language, exhibits such motives, conciliates such regard, denounces such vengeance, attracts so much reverence, inspires with so much awe, wins by so much goodness, and reconciles with so much power as thy death? That heart, O Lord! that feels not the force of this argument-this omnipotent argument--to cease to do evil and to learn to do well, in vain will be assailed by moral suasion or by moral law. The thunders of Sinai-the flashing fluid of unmeasured force the rending echoes of the celestial trumpet -the nodding summit-the crashing rocks, and the trembling base of the smoking mount, veiled in the blackest darkness, cannot restrain nor allure it to righteousness, humanity, and the love of God. Philosophy, marching forth in all her imaginary strength, clad in all her fancied charms, is perfect impotence compared to thy doctrine. The example of patriarchs, of prophets, of saints, and martyrs, from Abel to Noahfrom Abraham to David-from David to John the Baptist, are inefficacious compared with thine. Moses and his fiery law, his statutes, and his judgments, as the body without the spirit is dead, are lifeless and inoperative compared with thy new commandment, thy piercing law, animated and quickened by thy life, confirmed and sanctioned by thy death. No; the statutes and ordinances commanded in Horeb the meekness of Moses-the patience of Job-the zeal of Elijah-the piety of Daniel-the pathos of David, and the wisdom of Solomon, will not, cannot illumine that understanding, captivate those affections, purify those desires, purge those motives, subdue those lusts, which thy doctrine, thy example, thy law, thy love, thy sufferings, thy death, thy resurrection, thy exaltation, fail to accomplish. But did thy character-thy doctrine-thy life-thy death-thy resurrection, and thy exaltation ever fail, when fully apprehended, ever fail to purify— to renovate to reform? No! never! never! Who can know thee and not love righteousness, and not hate iniquity? When the dying thief, in his day, saw thy character and heard thy fame, he entrusted his soul to thee, and preached righteousness to his companion. When the persecuting Saul saw thee, O Saviour of the world! enthroned in glory-when he heard thy winning voice, he fell beneath the rays of thy majesty, and from a lion put on the meekness of the lamb. "Yet having thy New Testament, ratified in thy blood, are we without a rule of life?-are we authorized to live as we list? The thought is impious! O Sun of Righteousness! thy salutiferous rays were long expected to enlighten, to cheer, and to quicken those sitting in darkness, in the region and shadow of death. Yet thou hast risen, and more glory shines from the clouded face of Moses than from thine! Great law-giver, the Gentiles long waited for thy lawand hast thou left them without law, to live as they list? Moses and Elias waited on thee on the holy mount-they laid their honours and their commission at thy feet. When they ascended to the skies, thy Father's voice commanded thy disciples to hear thy law -to yield exclusively to thee: and shall we not? Forbid it heaven! "Lord Jesus, may thy character open to our view, as depicted in thy doctrine-thy miracles-thy sufferings-thy death-thy resur rection, and thy glory; and then we shall not fear to put ourselves exclusively under thee as our law-giver, our prophet, our priest, and our king." This extract furnishes us with a luminous statement of your views on the subject in hand; and as often as I have read it, which I have never done without being delighted with the glow of eloquence which pervades the whole, it has always reminded me of a surly old mathematician, that we formerly had in this country, of the name of Vince. Whenever this good man's attention was called to a piece of fine writing, he rarely failed to meet it with the question-" Well; but what does it prove?” In his vocabulary, eloquence and argument were not convertible terms! Now, my dear friend, to apply this anecdote, I would say, that I greatly fear many of your readers are in danger of confounding these two things; they have been so charmed with the graces of composition and elegancies of style, as not to allow themselves to consider whether the reasoning be conclusivewhether the premises sustain the conclusion, or the conclusion flows legitimately from the premises. Let us examine this matter a little closely, and satisfy ourselves how it really stands. You commence with telling us that Moses delivered this law--the Decalogue, or ten precepts, as a rule of life to the Jews only-that it was given for a limited time-that when Messiah came its obligation ceased--and that, consequently, Christians are not under that law as a rule of life, but under the Gospel. This is the sum of what you teach on this subject. Now, admitting these principles to be correctly laid down, let us see what consequences must follow upon them. If the moral law was a rule of life to the Jews only-and if, as you say, Gentile Christians are delivered from it--free from it-dead to it; if it be done away--abolished-disannulled, like the Jewish ritual in general, then it can have no claims upon us for obedience--we are at perfect liberty to disregard, despise, reject, or renounce it. But, allow me to ask you, do you really feel yourself at liberty to do so? There can be no better way of testing this subject than by bringing it home to your own experience, convictions, and feelings. What are the requirements of this law? Our Lord has furnished an answer to this question, Mark xii. 30--" Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and soul, and mind and strength, and thy neighbour as thyself." This is the sum of the requirements of the two tables of the law. Now which of them has ceased to be binding upon you? But perhaps you will evade the force of this appeal, by telling me that you recognize your duty in reference to both God and your neighbour, because it comes to you armed with the authority of Christ and not of Moses. Well, then, let us turn to Exodus xx., 1---17, and examine these ten precepts, seriatim, as delivered by Moses, "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me." "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image," &c. "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain," &c. "Remember the Sabbath (or a seventh part of thy time), to hallow it to the Lord." "Honour thy father and mother." "Thou shalt not kill." "Thou shalt not commit "Thou shalt not bear false adultery." "Thou shalt not steal." witness," "Thou shalt not covet," &c. Now I ask you, my dear friend, which of these ten words has ceased to be imperative upon us? Which of them is abolished-done away--- disannulled? Which of them do you feel yourself at liberty to disregard or disobey? How many of these precepts can you break without bringing guilt upon your conscience? I need not wait a reply the thing speaks for itself. To what, then, does all your elegant declamation against the perpetual obligation of the moral law, as a rule of life to Christians, amount? Why, to a mere logomachy---a strife of words! When you can tell me, in plain terms, that you feel yourself at liberty to kill, steal, commit adultery, bear false witness, covet your neighbour's property, &c. and can do all this with a clear conscience, being persuaded that all these precepts, as given to the Israelites by Moses, have been done away by the Christian law-giver, I shall deem your objections valid, but not till then! : 66 My dear friend, I would fain persuade myself that I have said enough to induce you to review your sentiments on this subject; and I cannot but think, that if you do so with calmness and impartiality, you will find you are wrong. It is no uncommon thing for the cleverest men to lose their way in an argument; hence the proverb, every man trips at times." The great John Locke did so when he confounded innate ideas with innate principles. My brother Campbell does so evidently, when he identifies the standard of holiness-the eternal rule of right and wrong-which, in the nature of things, must be the same under every dispensation, with the motives to love and obedience, which vary according to circumstances. I find, by your published volume, that you have raised a host of opponents against you, by denying the moral law to be still binding upon Christians as the rule of their obedience--and how do you answer them? Why, by expatiating, in eloquent terms, on the all-paramount and powerful motives to love God and keep his commandments, which spring natively from the Gospel of divine grace, the death of Christ, and the blessings procured by it for the children of Probably not one of your opponents would hesitate a moment to admit the full force of all you say on this head; but what then? It leaves the point in dispute between you and men. them untouched. We say with you, in the language of the poet, "Talk they of morals? O thou bleeding Love! Thou maker of new morals to mankind! The grand morality is love of thee." That the love of Christ, in dying to redeem guilty rebels from everlasting misery, is the grand motive to universal holiness, we all admit; but to say that the death of Christ has annulled, abolished, and destroyed the eternal rule of righteousness, the standard of all holiness, is perfectly new doctrine to me, and what I think was never taught by either prophets or apostles! Pardon me if I add that there lies, somewhere in your reasonings on this subject, a fallacy which remains to be detected. Perhaps it may, under the blessing of God, assist you in discovering the lurking traitor if you weigh well the following things 1. The Moral Law, or Decalogue, is not a positive or temporary institution, but founded on the very nature of God--being a transcript of his holiness, justice, and goodness---on our relation to him as his creatures, and the subjects of his moral government--and on our relation to one another, as possessed of the same common nature, and connected by various ties. It stands upon the immutable and essential distinction between moral good and evil, right and wrong; and, consequently, in substance, must remain the same under every dispensation. It was written on the heart of Adam as the law of creation; and notwithstanding the fall, there are traces of this law still remaining in the conscience of every man, sufficient to constitute him a sinner, render him inexcusable, and condemn him. It is from these natural notices of God and his law, that the Apostle convinces the heathen of sin.-Rom. i., 20—22, and ch. ii., 14, 15. 2. When the Most High entered into covenant with the Israelites at Mount Sinai, he delivered this law to them as the very words of that covenant, and wrote it with his own finger, in ten precepts, upon two tables of stone.-Exod. xx. and xxxi., 18. Now, as delivered to this people, the Apostle Paul teaches us that it had a two-fold aspect, which he distinguishes into flesh, or letter, and spirit. For as it stood in that peculiar covenant, it was suited to the manifestation which Jehovah made of himself to that earthly nation, as their God who redeemed them out of Egypt. It bound them to observe all the statutes and judgments, ceremonial and judicial, contained in the law of Moses. Thus it was the rule of their national righteousness, according to which they enjoyed the good things of the land of Canaan---and it was sanctioned by temporal rewards and punishments, suited to that worldly establishment, in which God stood related to them as their political sovereign. This was the letter of the law; and touching the righteousness which is in it, the Apostle says he was blameless.---Phil, iii., 6. And it is in this sense, and this sense only-viz., as forming a part of the old covenant, that we can consider it as no longer binding on Gentile Christians. For when we view this law as requiring perfect love to God and our neighbour-forbidding every lust and irregular motion of the heart---promising eternal life upon condition of perfect obedience---and denouncing the curse upon every the least failure, it is evident that neither ancient Israel, nor any of the sinful race of Adam, could ever personally stand in covenant with God, or obtain eternal life by it. In this sense it was given to convince of sin, and stop every mouth--it was given with a view to the promised seed, who was to come of that people, to be made under the law, to fulfil it--bear its curse for his guilty people of all nations, and thus obtain for them the remission of sins and the eternal inheritance. Hence, you, 3. When our Lord entered upon his public ministry, as the great prophet and law-giver of his Church, he thus addressed his disciples" Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For, verily I say unto Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or tittle shall in nowise pass from the law till all be fulfilled."" And so he adopted the moral law, the eternal rule of righteousness, as the law of his kingdom-delivering it to his disciples as the rule of their obedience and conformity to him, and that in a way corresponding to the more perfect state of matters under the new covenant.--Matt. v., 17-20. Instead of being "done away-annulled-abrogated," &c., we here find it ESTABLISHED by the anthority of the Christian law-giver as the law of his kingdom, and none of the least of its precepts is permitted to be broken. Accordingly we find his Apostles, throughout the whole of their writings, teaching the disciples to observe this law, both in its general principle and particular precepts.--See Rom. xiii., 8-11; 1 Cor. vi., 9, 10; Gal. v., 14; 1 Tim. i., 5-12 ; James i., 25, and ch. ii., 8---13. He I have only room to add an apology for the liberty I have taken with my esteemed friend in this letter, and I shall do it in the words of a late writer, hoping you will subscribe to their truth, and allow them their full force. "The man who undertakes to correct one's mistakes, does one A GREAT HONOur. remonstrates in the hope of reclaiming; but before he can hope to reclaim, he must pre-suppose all those amiable dispositions, which enable a man to say, "I am mistaken."--Farewell, my dear friend, and believe me, as ever, Yours, faithfully, W. JONES. |