Sidor som bilder

troduce this subject? Why the directions which follow; “Look not dismal as the hypocrites when you fast," if fasting be not a duty ? If you know these things, happy are you " if you do them.”

ADELPHOS. CONFORMITY TO THE WORLD. MR. EDITOR. - I have recently been thinking on the duty we owe to society at large, and, particularly, the obligations we, as Christians, are under to our children. I should like to know whether or not it is lawful for those who profess to be labouring to restore Christianity to its original purity, both in doctrine and practice, to follow what is called the fashionable amusements of the age—such as sending our children to balls and dancing schools? You know that Paul says, that “whatever we do, in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God, even the Father, by him." Now the inquiry is, Can parents who send their children to dancing schools, honestly say they do it in the name of the Lord Jesus? And can they devoutly thank God that he, in his kind providence, has blessed them with plenty of the unrighteous mammon thus to educate their sons and daughters? And farther, can they, with grace in their hearts, thank God for the graceful facility with which their chil. dren hop about the room at the sound of the violin? Again, does the divine injunction on parents to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, admit of parents encouraging their children in all the vanities and follies of the day? Or does it mean, as some of us have been in the habit of thinking, that Christian parents are bound, as far as possible, to instil the principles of Christianity into their tender minds, and restrain, as far as possible, those committed to their charge, from the vanities and follies of the world? We would like to hear your views on these things, in all plainness ; for some of us do not feel pleasant under the present state of things.

A Lover of Christian Behaviour. The very statement of the question in our brother's communication is a suitable answer to it. To which I need only add a song for a Christian dance.

Thus says the prophet of the Turk:-
Good musselman, abstain from pork;
There a part in every swine
No friend or follower of mine

May taste, whate'er his inclination,
| Upon pain of excommunication.

Such Mahomet's mysterious charge,
And thus he left the point at large.
Had he the sinful part express 'd,
They might with safety eat the rest:


But for one piece they thought it hard
From the whole hog to be debarr'd;
And set their wit at work to find
What joint the Prophet bad in mind,
Much controversy straight arose-
These choose the back-the belly those;
By some 'tis confidently said,
He meant not to forbid the head;
While others at that doctrine rail,
And piously prefer the tail.
Thus conscience freed from ev'ry clog,
Mahometans eat up the hog.

You laugh. 'Tis well: The tale appli'dl,
May make you laugh on t'other side.
Renounce the world, the preacher cries;
We do, a multitude replies.
Wbile one as innocent regards
A suug and friendly game at cards ;
And one, whatever you may say,
Can see no evil in a play:
Some love a concert or a race;
And others shooting, and the chase:
E'en dames, their fortunes to enhance,
Will have their children learn to dance,
And ape the fashions late from France. J
Reril'd and lov'd, renounc'd and follow'd,
Thus, bit by bit, the world is swallow'd;
Each thinks his neighbour makes too free,
Yet likes a slice as well as be:
With sophistry their sauce they sweeten,
Til quite from tail to snout 'tis eaten.

THE GOSPEL. The gospel brings such revelations of the love of God, such assurance of pardoning mercy, mercy helping grace, preserving care, unchangable loving kindness, that when it is really apprehended and believed in as the truth of God, it is life from the dead to the soul.

There,' saith God, is the gospel of Jesus Christ, take pardons for all! I have pitied you, though you have hated me! My beloved Son has atoned for those sins of yours! I am satisfied through his work when you are content to plead it!!

Reader! Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved,” for true faith in him, will produce true obedience to him.

THE BIBLE. It has beer alleged that the “ Bible was presented to us by a barbarous and ignorant people, and was written in an age when they were yet more barbarous." Whence, then, came the only theocracy —the only unmixed theism—the only religion, may we not say on

earth during many ages, in which the only living and true God was worshipped, and human sacrifices never burned nor bled ? By what rude hand of barbarous man was ever a pure, enlightened, and comprehensive moral code, or decalogue, written like that of the two tables of stone which Moses cast down and brake at the sight of an act of idolatry in Israel ? How would the most barbarous among any of its tribes, have blasphemed the Holy One of Israel, and renounced their faith, by mingling in the idolatrous and impure orgies or festivals, and rites reputed sacred, wherewith the gods of the heatheus were honoured among the most civilized, as well as savage nations of the earth? Whether does a barbarous age, as respects religion, lay better claim to the temple-worship of Jerusalem, or to the saturnalia of Greece and Rome and their imitation still, through. out great part of Europe, under the auspices of the latter city? If an age or people are to be reprobated as barbarous, in a religious and moral sense, let Judea in the days of Joshua and the precepts of the law, which every father had to teach to his children, stand up in judgment to condemn Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Ireland, and the authorized “commandments of the (Romish) Church,” in which thousands are instructed, if instructed at all, in the nineteenth century. Who, in the whole world, and throughout many ages, stood erect before an idol—but Israelites alone? What other people were ever stigmatized by idolators as impious, because of their idolatry, and of the truth and purity of their creed, as all science confirms, and all nature ratifies it, “ the Loril our God is one Lord, besides whom there is no God ?Of what other people does any ancient geographer or historian speak, as Strabo speaks of the exclusive purity of the worship practised by Moses and his followers, who went forth from Egypt to establish their faith in Canaan? What other people have ever been set apart from the nations as the custodiaries of the law, the testimony, and the oracles of truth, the writings of those Prophets, before whose word the mightiest nations have disappeared, and the greatest cities bave fallen ? And in what other book, confirmed by past history and existing facts as the word of the living God, could the promise of a Messiah have been given, but in the Bible alone ?—Communicated by T. Langlands.


Council of Toulouse, Nov. 1229.- Canon 14th. “We prohibit the laics from having the books of the Old and New Testaments; unless it be, at most, that any one wishes to have, from devotion, a psalter, a breviary for the divine offices, or the honour of the blessed


Mary; but we forbid them, in the most express manner, to have the books translated into the vulgar tongue." - Labbei, Concil. Tolosa, Tom. 5, p. 1784-1786, et Sig. Fleury, Hist. Ecc. liv. 79, N* Vide Sismondi, p. 227. Also, Du Pin, vol. ii. p. 450.


1 Kings vi. 1. A CORRESPONDENT inquires for a solution of the chronological problem contained in 1 Kings vi, 1. The passage reads thus-—" And it came to pass in the 100th year, after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month Zif, which is the second month, that he began to build the temple of the Lord.” Now this text is a nut which chronologists have found to be too hard to crack; hence, like the fox and the grapes, they regard it as " at least doubtful," that is, whether it contains a kernel, or if so, whether it be fit to eat: for, say they, "it was 621 years from the fourth of Solomon's reign to the exodus from Egypt," and that “ Jahn, in his Hebrew Commen. wealth, shows it to be so, as it now stands." I shall, however, show that there is no room for doubt at all.

In the first place it is regarded as doubtful upon the assumption, that the historiographer calculated the 480 years from the Exodas from Egypt. This does not appear from the text. He says, "480th year after the children of Israel were come out," and not 480th year from their coming out of Egypt. But a question here :-How long were they come out of Egypt before the 480 years commenced? The sacred writer informs us in Joshua, that they “were come out of Egypt” 40 years before they entered Canaan. It would have been a superfluous, or redundant, calculation to bave computed agam from the Egyptian Exode.

The chronographer in 1 Kings vi. 1, has accurately recorded the time. The indication of time in this text appears to stand thus, First, it is affirmed, that there was a period of 480 years after the exodus, but he does not say when these years began, nor when they terminated ; if he had said " and it came to pass from the departure from Egypt to the 4th year of Solomon, which was the 480th year," there would have been no room for difference of opinion; but he does not do this. Secondly, he indicates another epoch, namely, the fourth year of Solomon ; but how long a time elapsed between the end of 480 years and the 4th year, he does not say in this place. The truth is, he doth not calculate the period from the first of Saul to the fourth of Solomon any more than he doth from the departure out of Egypt to the invasion of Canaan, which was 40 years. The chronographer's style of computation appears to be a calculation, or

« FöregåendeFortsätt »