HERALD
OF THE
KINGDOM
AND AGE TO COME.
“And in their days, even of those kings, the God of heaven shall set up A KINGDOM which shall never perish, and A DOMINION that shall not be left to another people. It shall grind to powder and bring to an end all these kingdoms, and itself shall stand for ever.”-DANIEL.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN
THOMAS, Editor.
Volume
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID’S
THE THRONE OF JEHOVAH’S TERRESTRIAL DOMINION.
“Much has been written on either side of the controversy in reference to Christ’s session on the throne of David. The vast majority hold that Christ’s sitting on that throne began when he sat down at the right hand of the Father. Premillenarians, on the contrary, hold that the session of Christ on the throne of David will not, in the true and correct sens of the prophecy, begin till “His appearing and his kingdom.” The majority (the spiritualisers who make the word mean what it does not say. —Ed. H.) identify the Father’s throne with that of David: the premillenarians discriminate the throne of David as a throne plainly different from the Father’s, and peculiarly belonging to the Messiah. What, then, is the testimony of the scripture on the subject? In the first book of Chronicles, it is written,
“Then Solomon sat on the throne of Jehovah, as king instead of David his father”—1 Chronicles 29: 23.
And to the like effect it is written elsewhere,
“Blessed be Jehovah thy God, who delighted in thee to set thee on HIS THRONE to be king for Jehovah, thy God”—2 Chronicles 9: 8.
These passages seem to remove all the difficulties of the question. David reigned under a theocracy, as the Viceroy or representative of Jehovah, the King of Israel; therefore the throne of David is, in these passages of scripture, called Jehovah’s throne. The words plainly import not the throne of underived sovereignty on which Jehovah was sitting in heaven, but the throne of representative or delegated sovereignty, which, in God’s stead, David occupied on earth. The throne of the Father, as contradistinguished from that of David, means simply the throne of Jehovah’s eternal, underived, and irresponsible sovereignty; and, on the other hand, the throne of David means simply the throne occupied by the representative of Jehovah upon earth, a throne of sovereignty, derived, dependent, and responsible. There being, then, such a difference between the throne of David, and the throne of God in heaven, is it not as sound in theology as in logic, to make a corresponding distinction? Yea more, is it not reasonable to expect that, in due time, when things are ripe for such a manifestation, the distinction as well as the difference will be made not less perceptible to the purged eye of sense, than it is now to the purged eye of the understanding? Such an expectation is irresistibly impressed on the mind by many intimations of prophetic scripture. Of these the two following are very explicit:
“When the
Son of Man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then
shall he sit upon the throne of his glory”—
Matthew 25: 31.
Do our opponents maintain that this is the throne of the Father let down from heaven to earth? —if not, they admit that at the time referred to, the session of Christ on another and distinct throne, will have its commencement: that other and distinct throne, we, following the example of the scripture, designate by various names, and especially, in order to mark its representative character, we designate it “the throne of David.” Some of our opponents hold, in common with us, that the renewed earth will be, after the final judgment, (after the thousand years, or millennial period is expired. —Ed. Her.) the abode of the redeemed, and consequently, the scene of Christ’s personal and everlasting reign. That, where they are, Christ will for ever manifest his presence as the Son of Man, is a truth identified with all their hopes of glory. No Christian would venture to deny it. We ask, then, such of the brethren on the other side, as have been just now specified, if they believe that Christ’s session “on the throne of his glory,” which commences, as they say, on the day of final judgment, is to terminate as soon as the solemnities of that day are past? If so, on what throne do they expect Christ to reign for ever amidst his people on the renovated earth? Immediately after the day of judgment, shall “the throne of Christ’s glory” vanish from the scene, and the throne of the Father being let down to earth, shall Christ’s session on it then be resumed? We conclude this interrogatory argument by maintaining, on the ground of the text before us, that anti-millenarians (who are unbelievers of the gospel of the kingdom. —Ed. Her.) must either believe the throne of glory on which Christ sits at the final judgment to be the Father’s throne let down from heaven, or they must believe, in common with us, whom they oppose on this very point, that there are, indeed, too distinct thrones—one, on which Christ now sits at the right hand of the Father; and another on which he will not sit until “He come in his glory.” If they hold by the former side of the alternative, they place themselves on ground which cannot abide a scriptural examination; if they hold by the latter, they ought to treat what they regard as the premillennial theory of two thrones with a considerably greater degree of forbearance.
“The other scriptural intimation referred to on the subject is as follows:
“To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me on my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father on his throne”—Revelation 3: 22.
The distinction here made is no mere rhetorical flourish; no antithesis employed simply for the sake of euphony, or to arrest attention. It intimates plainly that there is a throne which belongs to Christ and is peculiarly his own—a throne distinct from his Father’s, and appropriated to the exercise of his delegated power. Were “his throne” identical with his Father’s, then, according to the promise of the text, his victorious followers must yet be exalted to a place on the supreme throne of Jehovah, and so be invested with the majesty of underived and irresponsible government—an exaltation, which is not only impossible, but the very thought of which is blasphemous. There, during the course of the great anti-christian rebellion, Christ can wield his meditorial power as well for the controlling of his enemies, as for the upbuilding of his elect. But the church, redeemed, as it is, from among mere creatures, dares not aspire after the divine honour of session on the eternal throne of God. Its destined privilege is to sit on the throne of Christ, with Christ its king, and to share with him in the exercise of his derived and representative sovereignty.”
The above is taken substantially, though with some omissions and emendations, from the Quarterly Journal of Prophesy, which contains much truth, forcibly put forth, but at the same time mixed up with sectarian philosophy which “we cannot but disapprove and discommend.”
EDITOR.
* * *
OF THE TEN TRIBES OF
“More
than two thousand five hundred years ago, the Ten Tribes of Israel were carried
captive into
“Who hath begotten me these? Behold I was left alone, these, where have they been?”—Isaiah 49: 21.
“Independent of the prophecies, there is reason to conclude that this people does still exist distinct from other nations. The grounds for this conclusion may be seen in the second volume of the Asiatic Researches. That the reader may judge for himself, I shall take the liberty of quoting the extract which we find in the Monthly Review enlarged—Volume 10 page 502. The account is whimsical enough, but considering the number of ages since the carrying away of Israel captive, their corrupt state at that time, their miserable condition since, their ignorance of printing, &c., it affords as much proof as can be expected, at the first dawn of their existence. When we are better acquainted with them, their manuscripts, customs, &c., we may expect more light.”
Thus much writes the Hebrew editor of the Occident. But before presenting our readers with the article from the Monthly Review he refers to, we shall produce an extract from the “Researches.”
“The
Tribes of Israel,” says Claudius Buchanan, “are no longer to be inquired after
by name. The purpose, for which they were once divided into tribes, was
accomplished when the genealogy of the Messiah was traced to the stem of David.
Neither do the Israelites themselves know certainly from what families they are
descended. And this is a chief argument against the Jews, to which the author
never heard that a Jew could make as sensible reply. The tribe of
“While
the author was among the Jews of Malabar, he made frequent inquiries concerning
the Ten Tribes. When he mentioned that it was the opinion of some, that they
had migrated from the Chaldean provinces, he was asked to what country he
supposed they had gone, and whether he had ever heard of their moving in a
great army on such an expedition. It will be easy perhaps to show, that the
great body of the Ten Tribes remain to this day in the countries to which they
were first carried captive. If we can discover where they were in the first
century of the Christian Era, which was seven hundred years after the carrying
away to
“Josephus,
who wrote in the reign of Vespasian, recites a speech made by king Agrippa to
the Jews, wherein he exhorts them to submit to the Romans, and expostulates
with them in these words: “What! Do you stretch your hopes beyond the river
“In the fifth century, Jerome, author of the translation of the Scriptures called the Vulgate, treating of the dispersed Jews in his Notes upon Hosea, has these words: “Unto this day the Ten Tribes are subject to the Persian kings, nor has their captivity ever been loosed”—Tom. vi. p. 7; and again he says, “The Ten Tribes inhabit at this day the cities and mountains of the Medes”—Tom. vi. p. 80.
There
is no room left for doubt on this subject. Have we heard of any expedition of the
Jews “going forth from that country since that period, like the Goths and Huns
to conquer nations?” Have we ever heard of their rising in insurrection to
burst the bonds of their captivity? To this day, Jews and Christians are
generally in a state of captivity in these despotic countries. No family dares
to leave the kingdom without permission of the king. (Joseph Emim, a Christian
well known in
“Mohammedanism
reduced the number of the Jews (professing Judaism) exceedingly. It was
presented to them at the point of the sword. We know that multitudes of
Christians received it; for example, “the seven churches of
“Calculating, then, the number of Jews who now inhabit the provinces of ancient Chaldee, or the contiguous countries, and who still profess Judaism; and the number of those who embraced Mohammedanism, or some form of it, in the same regions, we may be satisfied, “that the greater part of the Ten Tribes which now exist, are to be found in the countries of their first captivity.”
In
another place, Dr. Buchanan remarks, that Usbec and Independent Tartary are
“the country which Dr. Giles Fletcher, who was envoy of Queen Elizabeth at the
court of the Czar of Muscovy, has assigned as the principal residence of the
descendants of the Ten Tribes. He argues from their place, from the name of
their cities, from their language, which contains Hebrew and Chaldaic words,
and from their peculiar rites, which are Jewish. Their principal city
Samarchand is pronounced Samarchian, which Dr. Fletcher thinks might be
a name given by the Israelites after their own
The following is the extract from the Monthly Review reproduced in the Occident under the caption of
THE DESCENT OF THE AFGHANS FROM THE JEWS.
“The Afghans call themselves the posterity of Melic Talut, or king Saul. The descent of the Afghans, according to their tradition, is thus whimsically traced:
“In a war which raged between the children of Israel and the Amalakites, the latter being victorious, plundered the Jews, and obtained possession of the Ark of the Covenant. Considering this the God of the Jews, they threw it into fire, which did not affect it; they afterwards endeavoured to cleave it with axes, but without success: every individual who treated it with indignity, was punished for his temerity. They then placed it in their temple, but all their idols bowed to it. At last they fastened it upon a cow, which they turned loose into the wilderness.
“When the prophet Samuel arose, the children of Israel said to him, “We have been totally subdued by the Amalakites, and have no king. Raise to us a king, that we may be enabled to contend for the glory of God.” Samuel said, “In case you are led out to battle, are you determined to fight?” They answered, “What has befallen us that we should not fight against infidels? That nation has banished us from our country and children.” At this time the angel Gabriel descended, and delivered a wand, and said, “It is the command of God, that the person whose stature shall correspond with this wand, shall be King of Israel.”
“Melic Talut was at that time a man of inferior condition, and performed the humble employment of feeding the goats and cows of others. One day a cow under his charge was accidentally lost. Being disappointed in his search, he was greatly distressed, and applied to Samuel, saying, “I have lost a cow, and do not possess the means of satisfying the owner. Pray for me that I may be extricated from this difficulty.” Samuel perceiving that he was a man of lofty stature, asked his name. He answered, Talut. Samuel then said, “Measure Talut with the wand which the angel Gabriel brought.” His stature was equal to it. Samuel then said, “God has raised Talut to be your king.” The children of Israel answered, “We are greater than our king; we are men of dignity, and he is of inferior condition. How shall he be our king?” Samuel informed them that they should know that God had constituted Talut their king by his restoring the ark of the covenant. He accordingly restored it, and they acknowledged him their sovereign.
“After Talut obtained the kingdom, he seized part of the territories of Jalut or Goliath, who assembled a large army, but was killed by David. Talut afterwards died a martyr in a war against the infidels; and God constituted David king of the Jews.
“Melic Talut had two sons, one called Berkia, and the other Irmia, who served David and were beloved by him. He sent them to fight against the infidels, and by God’s assistance they were victorious.
“The son of Berkia was called Afghan, and the son of Irmia was named Usbec. These youths distinguished themselves in the reign of David, and were employed by Solomon. Afghan was distinguished by his corporeal strength, which struck terror into demons and genii; Usbec was eminent for his learning.
“Afghan used frequently to make excursions to the mountains, where his progeny, after his death, established themselves, lived in a state of independence, built forts, and exterminated the infidels.”
With this account we shall subjoin a remark of the late Henry Vansittart, Esq. He observes, that—
“A very particular account of the Afghans has been written by the late Ha Fiz Rahmat Khan, a chief of the Rohillas, from which the curious reader may derive much information. They are Musselmans, partly Sunni, and partly of the Shiah persuasion. They are great boasters of the antiquity of their origin and reputation of their tribe; but other Mussulmans entirely reject their claim, and consider them of modern and even base extraction. However, their character may be collected from history. They have distinguished themselves by their courage, both singly and unitedly, as principals and auxiliaries. They have conquered for their own princes and for foreigners, and have always been considered the main strength of the army in which they have served. As they have been applauded for virtues, they have been also reproached for vices, having sometimes been guilty of treachery, and even acted the base part of assassins.”
A specimen of their language (the Pushtoo) is added, and the following note is appended by the president:
“This account of the Afghans may lead to a very interesting discovery. We learn from Esdras, that the Ten Tribes, after a wandering journey, came to a country called Arsareth, where we may suppose they settled. Now, the Afghans are said by the best Persian historians to be descended from the Jews; they have traditions among themselves of such a descent, and it is even asserted that their families are distinguished by the names of Jewish tribes, although, since their conversion to Islam, they studiously conceal their origin. The Pushtoo language, of which I have seen a dictionary, has a manifest resemblance to the Chaldaic, and a considerable district under their dominion is called Hazarch, or Hazarel, which might easily have been changed into the word used by Esdras. I strongly recommend an inquiry into the literature and history of the Afghans.”—From Bichano’s “Signs of the Times.”
Besides these testimonies, we would add the following upon this interesting subject. In the sixth year of Hezekiah, king of Judah, and in the ninth of Hoshea, king of the Ten Tribes of Israel, Samaria, the metropolis of Israel’s kingdom, was taken by Shalmanezer, king of Assyria. Having abolished the government, he next deported the inhabitants beyond the Euphrates into Assyria, “and placed them in Halah, and in Habor by the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes”—2 Kings 17: 6. This is termed “removing them out of Jehovah’s sight”—2 Kings 17: 18. Not that he could no longer see them, because “the eyes of the Lord are in every place;” but because the scripture represents his eyes as resting upon the Holy Land as they do not on any other country: —it is “a land,” says Moses, “which Jehovah thy God careth for; the eyes of Jehovah thy God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year, even unto the end of the year”—Deuteronomy 11: 12. Hence for Israel to be removed from this land, was to remove them out of His sight as beholding the land, and the things upon it. It may be also remarked in passing, that as to send the Ten Tribes into captivity was to remove them out of Jehovah’s sight, so to bring them back into the land is for them to “live in his sight.” Hosea, in speaking of their captivity and return, has this passage, which we present in the form following:
Jehovah—“I will go and return to my place, till they acknowledge their offence,
and seek my face: in their affliction they will seek me early.”
The Ten Tribes—“Come, and let us return unto Jehovah; for he hath torn, and he will heal us; he hath smitten, and he will bind us up. After two days will he revive us: in the third day he will raise us up; and we shall live in his sight. Then shall we know if we follow on, to know the Jehovah, (eth-Yehowah:) His going forth is prepared as the morning; and he shall come unto us as the rain, as the latter and former rain unto the earth”—Hosea 5: 15; 6: 1-3.
But to return to the passage in Kings, which Gesenius translates thus:
“And placed
them in Chalcitis and on the Chabor, a river of Gozan, and in the cities of the
Medes.”
This is certainly to be preferred to the common version. In this Habor, or properly Chabor, would seem to be a city or province watered by Gozan. “By” is not in the original, and Gozan appears to be a province or people, rather than a river—2 Kings 19: 12. The root of “Chalcitis” is evidently in the Hebrew Chalch, converted into Chalach by the pointing of the Masorites. We like Gesenius’ rendering, which cannot be improved. It makes the river to be the Chabores, which is regarded as the Chebar of Ezekiel. But we doubt the correctness of this. The orthography is not the same. Ezekiel’s river is Kebar, or Kor, in the land of the Kasdim, or Chaldeans; while the other is Chbor, or Chabor, which empties into the Euphrates in the northern part of Mesopotamia. Ezekiel says he was “among the captivity by the river Kebar.” There were two captivities at the time. He was with that in Chaldea proper at Babylon; and not with that in the Chaldea which had then acquired the name of Aram naharaim, Syria of the Rivers, or Mesopotamia. Ptolemy in his Geography, v. 18, calls the region lying between the rivers Chaboras and Laocoras, by the name of Gauzanitis, Hebraically, Gozanitis; there is also a district in Media termed Gauzan, between the rivers Cyrus and Cambyses, which fall into the Caspian.
The region, then, west and south of the Caspian, and north-east of Samaria, was the first resting place of the Ten Tribes. Their sojourn there, however, was not permanent. If any dependence can be placed upon Esdras, which is very doubtful, after their transportation to Assyria, “they entered into the Euphrates by the narrow passages of the river,” which “they passed over” dry shod. He says they journeyed “a year and a half” to Arsareth; they would therefore pass up between the Euxine and Caspian Seas through the Asiatic Sarmatra, until their march would bring them to the Tanais or Don, or to the Rha, or Volga, rivers, or to the isthmus between the two. There is no historian to inform us what counsel they took at this juncture. We can see, however, from the map, that whichever way they went, they would penetrate more deeply into the country inhabited by the Scythian aborigines of what is now called the Russian empire. The probability is that some ascended along the Volga and Don into Meshech or Moscovy, and thus finding their way into Poland; while another party would cross the Volga and Ural rivers, and descend between the Caspian and Ural mountains into Independent Tartary, and in the course of time make their way into Afghanistan, and the farther East. In this way the Parthians, who lay to the east of the Caspian, and around its southern extremity, and thence to the Euphrates, would come to be placed between the Ten Tribes and the Holy Land, to which Agrippa alluded in his speech to the defenders of Jerusalem, as reported by Josephus.
The Ten are often spoken of as the Lost Tribes of Israel. We do not, however, regard this as appropriate. We believe that the multitudes of Israelites in Russia, Poland, &c., are the descendants of a migration from Assyria, whose communities have grown up to maturity with the growth of the Moscovite nation. The greater part of the Ten Tribes are evidently regarded by the prophets as being in the country north from the Holy Land; for they make the exodus of Israel from the North, in their redemption by Messiah, as greatly transcending in celebrity the exodus of the whole nation from Egypt under Moses.
“Go, and proclaim these words toward the north,” saith the prophet, “and say, Return thou backsliding Israel, saith Jehovah.” “In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers”—Jeremiah 3: 12-13.
So also another prophet intimates by the words,
“Behold, these shall come from far; and lo, these from the north, and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim”—Isaiah 49: 11.
Again,
“I will say to
the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring my sons from
far, and my daughters from the ends of the earth.”—
That is, “I will say to Russia, give up; and to Egypt, keep not back; bring my sons from Afghanistan, &c., and my daughters from the farthest east.” In another place,
“Behold the days come, saith Jehovah, that they shall no more say, Jehovah liveth who brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt: but Jehovah liveth who brought up and which led the Seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them: and they shall dwell in their own land”—Jeremiah 23: 7-8.
“Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, saith Jehovah; for I have spread you abroad as the four winds of the heaven, saith the Lord”—Zechariah 2: 6.
But we need not adduce more proof to show that the country north of the Promised Land is the great sepulchre in which the tribes are entombed—it is the amplest of the political graves in which the children of Israel are buried. But Jehovah has promised that he will open their graves and bring them up out of them, and thence into the land of their fathers. The north will not be disposed to give them out any more than Pharaoh was in the days of old. The King of the North, by ukase in 1843, ordered all Jews to move from the frontiers of Poland into the interior, under pretence of preventing smuggling. But it will be all to no purpose. The ukase of Israel’s King has been long since proclaimed, that—
“They shall
come again from the land of the enemy to their own border,” for “there is hope in their end, saith Jehovah”—
Jeremiah 31: 15-17.
EDITOR.
* * *
THE TEN TRIBES OF ISRAEL.
Dr. Asche, who recently started from Jerusalem to trace out the Ten Tribes, has returned unsuccessful. He penetrated into the interior of Cyabech, where he heard that, at a distance of fourteen days’ journey, Israelites were living in the desert, who distinguished themselves by their strength and valour. He determined on seeking them out; but, when he had entered the desert, he was surrounded on all sides by the inhabitants of the wilderness, wild beasts and robbers, the latter of whom stripped and plundered him, so that he hardly escaped with his life.
* * *
JESUS NOW UPON DAVID’S THRONE!
—IMPROVED VERSION—LOOSE QUOTATION.
“The Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.”—Gabriel
As a note appended to an “allusion,” or more properly an illusion, made in the seventh question of Mr. Campbell’s essay “No. 1,” on the Acts of the Apostles, in his Feb. Harbinger, is the following extraordinary specimen of the wisdom which distils from the alembic of Sacred History in a theological laboratory of the west.
“To prevent misconception of this allusion to the throne of David,” says Mr. C., “I simply remark for the present, to be developed, probably, more fully again, that the throne of David was, in fact, the earthly throne of God, in the midst of ancient Israel. David was his Viceroy, that is, the Lord’s anointed, a fact not well understood by the church, and still less by some untaught and unteachable dogmatists of the present day. It was necessary to the plans of Jehovah, which are all sublimely grand and wonderful, that he should have two thrones—one on earth and one in heaven—for a time occupied one above, by himself, and one below by his vicegerent, called and constituted by him; and therefore his solemn oath or covenant with David, that he would raise out of his person, in fulness of time, one that would occupy both thrones. Hence said the inspired bard of Israel, “Jehovah said to my Jehovah, sit thou on my right hand till I make thy foes thy footstool.” It is beautifully in accordance with this fact, that Mary the virgin was the last bud on the tree of David which could blossom and fructify, and bring forth a representative of David. So that if Jesus be not the heir of David’s throne, there never can be one born, and God’s covenant has failed. This is a death-blow to Jewish infidelity, if their eyes were not closed and their ears sealed. But Jesus was the son of David, and born to be a king, as he told Caesar’s representative. ON THE THRONE OF DAVID, as King of kings, HE NOW SITS, and also on the throne of God; for he has all crowns upon his head, and affirms that all authority in heaven and on earth is given to him.”
In the above our logical friend admits that the throne of David was the earthly throne of God, occupied by his anointed as his viceroy. We are glad he has learned so much as this, for it is a truth scarcely at all known to what he calls “the church.” That David’s was Jehovah’s throne in Israel, is a startling proposition to sky-kingdomers; and that it will be his throne there again, neither “the church,” nor the church’s illuminator, our sagacious friend, are able to comprehend. He professes to believe that David’s throne on Mount Zion was once Jehovah’s; but he has not faith enough to believe that it will be so again. This is just like our historical friend; —he can believe history, “sacred history,” any thing in short, but the written promises of God. The things set forth here do not accord with his reading and experience; they are too marvellous for his matter-of-fact organization, therefore he repudiates the things they declare with ineffable and sovereign contempt. How unlike Abraham, who “believed all things, and hoped all things,” and “therefore his faith was counted to him for righteousness!” But our unfortunate friend is not so. If justification be by faith, as it unquestionably is—faith in what God has done and promises to do—our didactic friend’s sacrae-historical creed will leave him in the lurch, the naked denizen of outer darkness. We beseech him therefore to look into this matter before it be “too late;” for even in our own time, “too late” has lost a kingdom.
Our “sublimely grand and wonderful” friend opines that the plans of Jehovah require that he should have “two thrones, one on earth, and one in heaven.” He has not vouchsafed to tell us what plan or plans necessitate this. In the absence of light, then, we would suggest that he is certainly mistaken. If Jesus in heaven have “many crowns,” as he says, why are only two assigned to Jehovah in heaven? The number of crowns indicate the number of thrones. The truth rather is, that Jehovah has as many thrones in the universe as there are inhabited spheres in boundless space; but on earth he has only had one, which was David’s, and since that was demolished he has had none; but he has revealed his intention not only to recover David’s, but also to take possession of every other upon the earth; so that His authority alone may be acknowledged here. Let our knowing friend ruminate upon this awhile!
Our critical friend favours his readers with an “improved version” of a sentence in the one hundred and tenth psalm. He quotes it, “Jehovah said to my Jehovah, &c.” we submit to our learned friend that David wrote no such thing. Great Hebraist as our friend may be, he must surely have been taking a siesta from which he had scarcely recovered when he penned it. He has been misled by the supposition that where “Lord” occurs in the English version, it is Yehowah in the Hebrew, and should therefore be rendered Jehovah. But this is incorrect, as proved in more places than one in the psalm before us. David’s words are, “Neum YEHOWAH la-ADONI,” Jehovah said to my Adon. In the second verse, “Lord” is Yehowah; also in the fourth: but in the fifth verse, David addressing Jehovah concerning “the Man of his right hand, even the Son of Man, whom he made strong for himself”—Psalm 80: 17, says “Adonai al-yeminekah, the ADON at thy right hand.” We are aware, that the Athanasian lexicographers, and perhaps Jewish too, who are opposed to the idea of “the Man Christ Jesus” sitting at the right hand of Jehovah, pretend that Adonai is exclusively applied to the Uncreated One. This, however, is mere Masoretic trifling. Adonai is the same word as Adoni in the first verse, only with a Kamitz under the Noon instead of a Chirick. Now, the pointing is very convenient for pronunciation, but of no authority in interpretation. We would therefore translate both words in the same way, rendering the fifth verse as the first, to wit, “My Lord at thy right hand (O Jehovah) shall strike through kings in the day of his wrath;” that is, when by Jehovah’s aid his enemies are made his footstool. We trust our learned friend will dig about and mellow the soil, hard-baked upon his Hebrew roots, before he undertakes to solve “the greatest question of the age,” as he facetiously styles, we suppose, the translation of the scriptures into the latest English! He must forsake his sky-kingdom before he, or the Bible Unionists, will be able to present the world with a version really improved, and beyond the reach of emendation.
Our valiant friend will pardon us for saying that with all his prowess in fight he is the last man in creation to deal “a death blow to Jewish infidelity.” If he strikes Judah home on the personal identity of Jesus with the son promised to David; they strike him into nonentity by saying, “granted; but if Jesus is not to sit upon the throne of David in our ancient city, as you affirm, then he is not the Messiah of whom Moses and the Prophets wrote; therefore we look for another.” Judah and “the Church” are both infidel, our galaxical friend among the number, the only difference between them is, the several points on which their unbelief is manifested.
In conclusion, the proof given by our demonstrative friend of the Lord’s present occupancy of his father David’s throne is, that “he has all crowns upon his head, and affirms that all authority in heaven and on earth is given to him.” All crowns! Ah, then must David’s be among them! But knowing how loosely our friend quotes the word, we cannot admit the proof until we look for ourselves. We find that he has not quoted the text correctly. It does not say, “all crowns were upon his head,” but it says “and upon his head many crowns.” Many is not all, therefore David’s may be among the missing. But we object to our friend’s hermeneutical chronology as well as to his philosophy. Jesus with many crowns upon his head is seen in a vision which represents events between the Battle of Armageddon in which Nebuchadnezzar’s Image is broken; and the complete subjugation of the nations, or reduction of the Image-fragments to impalpable dust. The “many crowns,” with David’s among the number, are acquired by the victory of Armageddon; all crowns, when “the kingdoms of the world become our Lord’s and his Anointed’s,” at the final overthrow of the Beast, the False Prophet, and Kings of the earth by the conclusion of the Post-Adventual war.
As to all authority in the sense of power in successful rule, being now possessed by the Lord Jesus, facts are against it on every side, whether we consider the state of “the church” or the world. Jesus said, All exousia, or power of doing as one pleases, in heaven and upon earth is given to me. He did not say this as proof that he was sitting upon any throne; but as the ground of his commanding the apostles to go and preach the gospel of the kingdom, and repentance and the remission of sins in his name. Though a king, and born to be king of the Jews, and to be the Prince of many kings and lords, his glorified brethren reigning with him over the whole earth, he has at present no kingly or political authority. If he have we would like our inventive friend to tell us where, that we may go and live under its just, merciful, and benevolent influence. We forbear to add more at present, except to commend the first article of this number on David’s throne to the calm, candid, and dispassionate consideration of our untaught, but, we trust, not unteachable contemporary.
EDITOR.
* * *
A WOODEN SWORD BRANDISHED AT ELPIS ISRAEL—SIR KNIGHT DISARMED, AND
HIS WEAPON SHIVERED TO SPLINTERS.
“We war casting down imaginations and every lofty notion exalting itself against the knowledge of God.”—Paul
As a part of his note on the Throne of David, our refined and polished friend over the mountains writes concerning Elpis Israel and its author, in the following chaste and classic style! It may be regarded as a specimen, doubtless, of the “pure literature” and the Christian spirit it exhales, for the development of which Bethany College, as a Queen of the West, is presented as a nursing mother to Zion, that is, spiritually, “the church!” Is it not extraordinary that with such elegant impromptus thrown off from time to time from the pen of our amiable and celestialised friend, that “the brotherhood” is so irresponsive to his eleemosynary hints, exhortations, and demands! Wonderful indeed that “the disciples” do not bestir themselves amain, and without delay secure “a little stock in the Bank of Heaven,” by contributing to its endowment that the nursing Queen may forever bless the world with dainties such as we now present:
“Any one,” says Mr. Campbell, “who wishes to peruse the most conceited, consequential, and dogmatical treatise, based upon a hallucination, and a parody of the words ELPIS ISRAEL, will, if he have a dollar to throw away, have a demonstration of a disease called in Kentucky “the big head,” probably unequalled in this century; making the Hope of Israel—indeed the Hope of the Gospel in full development, to consist in raising up again a throne of David in Palestine or Jerusalem; as if that throne had been vacant now for 1800 years, or as if Jesus Christ would remove his throne out of the Heavenly Jerusalem, to rebuild and locate it in old Jerusalem, and there to aggrandise the empire of the universe!! But this only in passing, as one of the specimens of the power of the love of notoriety or of the marvellous, in wrecking and bewildering the human mind. We regard this development of the passion for notoriety as one of the most admonitory dispensations in our immediate circle of observation. It has made a man that might have been useful, worthless to himself, worthless to his friends, and worse than worthless to the world.”
While we were in England our loving friend favoured us with one of his characteristic notices in which he styled us “the erratic materialist and rather plausible sophist of no-soul memory.” Previous to this, he announced us to the public as “a half-sceptic, half-christian, fit only for the society of Voltaire, Tom Paine, and that herd;” and now the climax is capped by proclaiming us as utterly worthless! —yea more, afflicted with one of the worst diseases, if we rightly guess what in the “half-horse and half-alligator” country they elegantly style “the big head”—as an incurable leprosy, and therefore in our influence upon society “worse than worthless!” Really, when we look at ourselves in the manuscript before us, with this long handle to our name, we inquire of ourselves, is it possible that we are such a character as our sweet friend declares? Why the most worthy candidate for penitentiary distinction cannot be worse than our unfortunate self! But, even supposing we be as wretched an outcast as our gracious friend affirms, we humbly suggest that it is not very agreeable to be published as such to all the world. Impartial judge as he is in matters affecting himself, still it is not comfortable to be accused, condemned without a trial, or being permitted to show cause why sentence of death should not be pronounced against us, and to be summarily executed. We don’t altogether relish this nephew-of-my-uncle style of administering law, especially when we are to be victimised by it. It is bad enough in theory, and it is by no means better in practice. Our judicial friend, however bright the attribute of jealousy may shine in his celestial crown, has not displayed towards us an overflow of mercy—and he should remember that “mercy and truth meet together” in the true believer, and that “mercy boasts itself against judgment”—in the treatment he has dealt out to us these seventeen years. He has, or has had, thousands of readers, to whom he has declared on the faith of a man aspiring to celestial honours and sublimities in the Milky Way, that we are every thing that is contemptible in faith, opinion, acquirements, and character. This has been the general indictment, a sort of summary compilation of pestiferousness, by which a prejudgment has been secured against us. The counts of the indictment have been predicated upon garbled extracts of very scanty dimensions, and on no extracts at all. Our disinterested friend out of kindness to us has had it all his own way, taking care for the good of the cause, that is, the cause of Origenic sublimities and the vested interests dependent thereon, that we should not be permitted to speak to his readers to whom he had written such creditable and delightful things concerning us! Hence, say what we might in our own paper, those to whom we were accused saw nothing of it, because they were not our readers, but his alone. This policy having been carried out for so many years has not failed to cause us to be esteemed by those who know us only by name, and as our ingenuous friend has misrepresented, as just such a worthless character as he affirms. We are said to be “hallucinated,” “mad,” “a devil,” and many other things known, or supposed to be known, by like respectable appellatives. It seems strange, yet so it is; though we can produce several of the most compos mentis people in society, of good and honourable standing, who know us intimately, and readily testify that we are the very opposite to what our benevolent friend and his reflectors, who have no personal acquaintance with us, aver. But unfortunately, as soon as a respectable man testifies in our favour, the tables are forthwith turned upon him, and he is regarded as no better than ourselves! This is the way the Jews serve the witnesses for Jesus. So long as they are his enemies their testimony is considered as credible and respectable; but so soon as the truth converts them into friends, immediately they are set down as liars, and not to be regarded. Thus it has been from the beginning, and, we suppose, will be to the end. Error and errorists are essentially oppressive and tyrannical. The part of truth is to contend, protest, reason, testify, and endure, until Christ shall come and “break in pieces the oppressor,” when the truth will prevail gloriously, and all its suffering friends rejoice together in his presence. It is a consolation to know that contemptible and worthless as we are esteemed by worldly-minded men, we cannot be more sovereignly despised than were Jeremiah, Paul, and his co-labourers by their contemporaries, who made them “as the filth of the world, the offscouring of all things unto this day”—Lamentations 3: 45; 1 Corinthians 4: 13. Misery loves company; it is therefore very consoling when that company turns out to be the very salt of our groaning world.
But, be we ever so pestilent that does not nullify the Kingdom of God as expounded in Elpis Israel. The building up of the kingdom and throne of David as in the days of old is not disproved by declaiming against us, or proving us to be as worthless as it is said. Our extreme worthlessness does not alter the testimony of the prophets and apostles, who both declare that Messiah shall restore them. Our fri8end likes to talk about logic, but what logic is there in reviling a book and its author in support of any opposite theory? But, we suppose, we must pardon our celestial friend the indiscretion of which we complain. He is doubtless in a super-excited state, and scarcely knows whereof he affirms. Some months ago before he had read the book, he said that we had “proved all the apostles to be wrong in making the resurrection to eternal life the hope of God’s people, and for it, had substituted another terrestrial paradise. True,” said he, “I have never read the new book, or the newly discovered Elpis Israel, but am informed that it is maintained by some Jews of the present day, as a substitute for the hope of the resurrection of the just.” He afterwards tells us what his hope is not. “It is not,” says he, “the literal return of the true Messiah to reign in Palestine, or on earth, or in any portion of the solar system.” But since telling his readers what we had done in Elpis Israel before he had read it, our intuitive friend has probably read it. His report, we think, ought to induce every one to seek to possess it, as a literary curiosity if upon no other grounds. Our critical friend says it affords “a demonstration probably unequalled in this century.” We believe he is right in this. We know of no other book that contains a similar demonstration of the truth. Our pathological friend calls it “a demonstration of a disease,” &c. He is excusable in this; for it is natural enough that he should style that a disease which demonstrates his sky-kingdom throne of David, his trans-solar new heavens and earth, and his Origenic sublimities, to be mere “philosophy and vain deceit.” The reading of Elpis Israel has evidently transformed our ordinarily meek friend into a wide-mouthed vial of wrath. He calls the book hard names as well as its author having no other arguments to bring against it. He finds that it does not even attempt to prove the apostles wrong in any thing; and that it does not substitute a terrestrial paradise for the resurrection to eternal life; but that while it maintains that the promised “Paradise of God” is to be established on earth, it also shows that the dead must be raised to eternal life to inherit its good things for ever; and the living believers therein contemporary with its formation changed in the twinkling of an eye for the same purpose. Our sky-kingdom friend, we presume, is mortified to find that his informant led him into such an inconvenient error about our substituting one thing for another when there is not a word of truth in the allegation. His honest and virtuous indignation, doubtless, would make his studio too hot to hold said informant. Still the discovery of the imposition upon his credulity has not put our friend, ever great and undogmatical, in a sweeter disposition towards our unoffending self. We sent him a present of the book all the way from London; studiously avoided alluding to him, or to his reformation in its pages; and endeavoured simply to show what the Bible reveals as the destiny of the earth and of man upon it. But instead of sending us a polite note, gratefully acknowledging our kindness and thoughtful consideration of him though so far away, our astonishing friend falls into a paroxysm of interjections as the only defence he can offer against the overwhelming evidence with which Elpis Israel has assailed and demolished his entrenchments. There is nothing easier than to prove the truth of the things that excite his astonishment—that the Hope of Israel and the Hope of the Gospel are identical; that the throne of David will be re-established in Jerusalem; that the Lord Jesus will sit upon it there; and there aggrandise the empire of the whole earth. These are truths which shine from the sacred page as the sun in the midst of heaven; and blind, very blind, yea even stone-blind, must be the man who says, “I cannot see them there.”
This short denunciatory paragraph suggests to us that our friend does not suspect the reason of the King of Israel’s prolonged absence at the right hand of power. We will inform him. It is, because there is no throne of David for him to sit upon. Had this throne existed when he was on earth, or had all things been ready for its erection anew, Jesus would have remained upon earth and in Palestine to enter upon his reign, and to proceed in the work of aggrandising his dominion until it should extend over the whole earth. But the then unknown time, the knowledge of which the Father reserved to himself, had not come to erect the throne; therefore he departed to remain in a far country until the time to put down the enemy should arrive, which is equivalent to setting up the throne and kingdom of the united Twelve Tribes of Israel.
Again, we perceive that he uses the phrase “the universe” in an unscriptural sense when speaking of the chieftaincy of the Lord Jesus. Universe is not used in speaking of Messiah. The universe comprehends all created things in boundless space. This is the Father’s dominion, not Christ’s. We have no where hinted the idea of the Lord Jesus aggrandising the empire of boundless space from “old Jerusalem.” No such empire is promised to Messiah. The promise to him is,
“Thou shalt
have the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth
for thy possession.”
Jerusalem and Zion restored, and invested with their beautiful garments, are to be the seat of the government of Messiah and his brethren over this empire. The empire of the universe ruled by Jesus in any Jerusalem is one of the many fictions which compose the philosophical religion of our romantic friend; who, being a man of lively fancy and boundless imagination, delights to vary the monotony of terrene pursuits by ideal flights among the nebulosities of the Galaxy even to the jumping-off place of immensity, until by oft-repeated excursions, like fabulous relations oft-told, he comes to believe them real, and speaking as he believes, publishes them to his admirers as the first principles of the oracles of God! Elpis Israel, however, takes all this wind out of his sails. It tolerates no flights of the imagination; but brings every high-flown speculation to the Law and Testimony. But this is a test the articles of our friend’s creed cannot endure. Hence his restiveness in gear. But what doth it avail? It is hard for him to kick against the goads. His acceptance or rejection of Israel’s Hope will make or mar his destiny for ever.
EDITOR.
* * *
MODERN SERMONISING.
Mr. Editor:
It is not often that I enjoy an opportunity of sitting under the pulpit ministrations of “this Reformation.” On the 5th Lord’s day afternoon of February, however, I listened to a discourse pronounced at the “Reform church” in our village by “Elder Jas. W. Goss.” The reputation of Mr. G. as a florid declaimer had drawn together an audience sufficient to fill two-thirds of the building. What do you think was the topic of the discourse to which he treated his hearers? You would hardly guess in a century—it was “the personality, the origin, nature and character of—the Devil!” Verily “this Reformation” must be “waxing old and ready to vanish away.” Only think of it! Nearly two hours devoted to an eloquent sketch of his Satanic majesty, during which the audience were gravely assured that it was a matter of the greatest importance that they should have right views of the Devil, and that it was rank infidelity not to admit his personal attributes, accomplishments, &c., and the address closed by the formal announcement, as if the “roaring lion” had not been quite fairly caged, that the subject would be resumed at night.
As
the congregation dispersed I could not forbear remarking to a friend, who
demanded my opinion of this “gospel discourse,” that we had often heard that
faith in Christ was an indispensable condition of our salvation, but that I
thought our orator deserved a medal as the first discoverer of the doctrine
that faith in the Devil was equally important, for so, in effect, he had
affirmed. In my simplicity I had supposed that the less we knew of the Devil
the better, seeing that Christians are commanded to be “wise
concerning that which is good, and simple concerning that which is
evil.” Oh! the times! the manners! How many discourses do you suppose Paul
ever preached on “the personality of the Devil?” What a pity that Luke, in
his “Acts,” or the apostle himself, in his copious writings, has never told us!
Perhaps he thought we would be satisfied—whatever we might think of the
“personal” character of the Old Serpent—with the assurance he gives us, in
Hebrews 2: 14-15, that Jesus will “destroy him that hath the power of
death, THAT IS, THE DEVIL, and deliver them who thro’ fear of death were all
their life subject to bondage.”
But
to be serious, what solemn trifling is all this “speculation”—these “untaught
questions?” the people are perishing for lack of knowledge of God’s Word—of the
gospel of the kingdom—of the glad tidings of great joy which shall be to all
people—and these “apostolic and primitive Christians,” as they style
themselves, can find nothing better to lay before them than dry disquisitions
and barren conceits about the “personality of the Devil.” Surely such facts, of
daily occurrence, afford certain proof that we are “in the latter times”—for
(see 1 Timothy 4) here “the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter
times, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits
and doctrines of (or concerning) Devils,”
&c. Certainly, if the Adversary be the sagacious being he has the credit
for, he could not be better pleased than to have the people of God absorbed in
the important enterprise of showing him up in odious colours, and thus
silencing the apostolic proclamation of “Christ Jesus and him crucified.”
I hope Mr. Goss will remember this the next time he indulges his taste for “speculations.”
A. B. MAGRUDER.
Charlottesville.
* * *
OUR VISIT TO BRITAIN.
EXCURSION TO
HELENSBURG AND THE QUEEN OF THE HEBRIDES.
The nervous debility consequent upon such frequent speaking, and more continued excitement than our physique was accustomed to—organic inaction, or irregular action, dependant on undue exertion—began to impair our general health. Acidity of the stomach, hacking cough, affection of the throat almost to loss of voice occasionally, and other symptoms, admonished us that we must seek repose of mind, and recreation. We accordingly accompanied a friend down the Clyde on a flying visit to Helensburg, about five miles in the distance opposite to Greenock on the bay shore. We dined there with a Mr. D., a retired Glasgow merchant, who is rusticating in the outskirts in the most pleasant manner possible. He has peculiar views on religion and diet. He believes in the personal advent and reign of Christ over the nations upon earth; but though immersed, he does not think, if we remember rightly, that baptism is at all essential. He preaches at a place of his own; the attendance is said to be small. In diet he is a “vegetarian;” though he was kind enough for our sakes’ to supply his board with a little meat extra the vegetables upon that particular occasion.
Besides this pleasant excursion we accepted the invitation of another kind friend to spend a few days with him at Bowmore, “the commercial capital” of Islay. We set out for this island of the sea, so celebrated for its whisky all over the drinking world, on the morning after the “soiree” at 6. 30A. M. It lies about 20 miles west of the peninsular of Cantyre, sometimes called Kintyre, and about 14 hours steam from Glasgow. The following letter written to our daughter, the companion of our travel, then in London, will afford the reader a better idea of our excursion westward than we can give from memory at this distance of time and place.
Bowmore, on Lochendaul,
Islay, October 19th, 1848.
My Dear Eusebia:
I arrived at this beautiful island, styled “The Queen of the Hebrides,” on Friday evening at 8 P. M. The voyage was very interesting amid the wild scenery of the Western Highlands. We steamed down the Clyde, touching at Greenock, Dunoon, and Rothsay, into the Frith, passing between the isles of Bute and Arran whose lofty mountains towered far above the sea. We put in to Loch Fine which runs up into the main land of Caledonia as far as to Inverary. I landed from the steamer bound for this place, at a small fishing town called East Tarbert, situated at the head of an indentation of the land, which, if it had been deepened about two miles more, would have converted the peninsula of Kintyre into an island. There is nothing remarkable about the town that arrests a stranger’s eye; though, it is probable, that many a deed of violence and blood has stained the page of its early history, when all such places on the coast were exposed to the incursions of marauders from the Scandinavian countries of the north. I may tell you, however, that a castle formerly existed here originally built by Robert de Bruce, which was repaired and garrisoned by James IV in 1494. But castles are of little use now; therefore, as in the case of Tarbert, their condition is mostly ruinous. Having engaged a boy to carry my carpet bag, “we twa paidelt o’er the braes” to another Tarbert at the head of West Tarbert Loch. We had not walked more than a quarter of a mile when a lady and gentleman, two travellers in an opposite direction, accosted me by name. Would not this have been alarming had I been on the wing escaping from pursuit because of evil deeds? To be addressed by name in such a remote and heathen corner of the earth, it was really puzzling to conceive how one could ever have been heard of there! The lady was from Port Ellen in Islay, and was acquainted with our excellent friend Mr. John Murdoch, whom she had seen that day; and from whom she learned that he was expecting a visit from Dr. Thomas, whom she might know, if she met him between the Tarberts, by wearing the beard. I learned this afterwards from him; and obtained from her on the spot the agreeable information, that he would meet me at Port Askaig to conduct me to Bowmore. You would be amused at the strange sounds they call language in these parts. They style it the Gaelic, which like the Welsh and the Irish, is a dialect of the ancient Celt. “Co fare ar shin?” inquired some Gaels of the boy beside me as we were jogging along westward. He uttered some uncouth sounds in reply which I am unable to turn into manuscript. “What was that he asked you, my lad?” “What person is that?” and he added “they set a great eye upon you, sir.” How so? “Because of the beard you wear.” The Gaelic I collected on my route is soon told. Tha signifies a house; nocght mah means “good night;” po, a cow; man, a woman (well there is some sense in that; for a woman is man, but a man is not a woman—“God made man; male and female made he them;”) oe signifies a point; moigne, peat; coel, coal; &c. Thus we beguiled the way until West Tarbert of miserable aspect appeared in view. Here I parted from my guide, and soon found myself on board the Islay steamer.
Having taken in her living freight, and in a short time cleared the rocks at the entrance of West Tarbert Loch, the vessel bore off towards the going down of the sun, leaving Kintyre astern and the north of Ireland to the south on her larboard side. After the haze of distance was dispelled by our nearing the land, we had a fine view of “the Paps of Jura,” two lofty mountain peaks, after the form of those of Otter in the Blue Range of Virginia, exalting their heads like giants towards heaven. We entered the Sound of Islay between 7 and 8 P. M. This is a narrow sea passage running between Islay and Jura, about a mile wide and fourteen long, and terminating in the Atlantic ocean, with which you have formed a tolerably intimate acquaintance. Port Askaig, our place of debarkation, is neither a Liverpool nor a Piraeus; but a miserable collection of huts at the foot of a steep hill, where cattle and other passengers are embarked for Glasgow. Uninviting as it is, we were glad to see its lights flickering in the windows, a token that our voyage was about to end.
On landing I was rejoiced to find our friend there, as the lady had said, waiting with a policeman to conduct me to Bowmore. Surely Burns, who was of the same official fraternity as Mr. M., if he had seen me in such custody, would have said “The De’il hae got ye now!” Though I believe it was the devil ran off with the exciseman; be that as it may, “circumstances alter cases” you know, and I doubt not, that there are hundreds of Islaymen concerned in the running off of whisky, who would be ready to testify that a man in the hands of excise and police familiars might as well be possessed of devils for any good that would come of it! But our friend and his policeman were only “a terror to evil doers” in the island. I found them worthy of all praise; for instead of leaving me all night at Port Askaig Hotel (!) to recreate, and wish myself at Jericho instead of Islay, he had provided a gig and a policeman to drive me to Bowmore. This was “a friend in need,” and therefore not the De’il that had got me, but “a friend indeed,” as you have heard Mr. Murdoch is at all times. All being ready we set out, he on his pony and I and the policeman in the gig. The road was good, and the night bright moonlight. My “whip” drove as if in chase of a smuggler; happily, however, our Rosinante was sure footed, and the tackle sound. We passed Bridgend in the centre of the island, and the seat of government; for a Branch of the National Bank of Scotland is located there, and where the money power holds its court, there is the real throne of an earth-born dominion. After leaving Bridgend, Lochendaul opened upon our view, shining in all the light of “the silver moon;” or as Job more beautifully expresses it, in all the radiance of “the moon walking in brightness.” Bowmore was yet three miles in the distance. The road, however, along the Loch was soon travelled, and a flight of 12 miles from Port Askaig satisfactorily terminated by the side of a blazing peat fire at the hospitable dwelling of Mr. M.
Bowmore, where I am now, is, I believe, the largest village in Islay. It is situated on the right shore of Lochendaul, and dates its origin with the Parish church in 1768. We have a good view of the Loch from the back windows of Mr. M’s house whence in the distance on the opposite shore we can descry Port Charlotte. To one accustomed to the elegant buildings of London, and other cities of Europe and America, Bowmore is a mere sepulchre of a place. It is the works of God only that are interesting here for their beauty, leaving man’s so completely in the shade, that we feel only pity and aversion to his deeds. Lochendaul and Lochgruinard are two indentations of the coast which penetrate so deeply into the land as nearly to divide the island in two. Lochendaul witnessed the shipwreck of my friend Alexander of Bethany, in October 1809, being forty years ago on the 9th instant. He was on his way to Philadelphia from Londonderry in the north of Ireland. Lochendaul, however, has witnessed more terrible scenes than this. It is famous for shipwrecks, murder, and piracy. On the fourth of October, 1813, a piratical vessel from the United States, called “The True Blooded Yankee,” arrived in Lochendaul about dusk. She was a fine man-of-war brig, pierced for 26 guns, and carrying 260 men. Having been boarded by two experienced pilots, she cast anchor near Port Charlotte. The harbour happened to be crowded with merchant vessels of all sizes. Duplait, the captain of the pirate, set them all on fire together; having previously rifled each of such articles as he coveted, especially the Registers. Between 20 and 30 vessels were either burned or stranded by his orders in one night, thereby occasioning a loss of private property amounting to about £600,000. She was afterwards made a prize of by the British, who carried her into the river Plata, where she was condemned.
While
among the horrors I may tell you that Port Askaig locality is not without its
interest. In the fall of 1778, the famous Paul Jones with his privateer of 50
guns, called “The Ranger,” made a descent upon Islay; and having entered the
Sound seized the Packet which conveyed passengers and merchandise between West
Tarbert and the island. Among these was the late Major Campbell, who had just
returned from India with an independent fortune, the most of it being in gold
bars and other valuables; so that as he was about to land on his native island
the whole of his wealth was seized by Jones, and the Major, who a few hours
before was vastly rich, landed penniless, though not so “poor as Job.” Thus it
is that often-times “riches make to themselves wings, and fly away as an
eagle toward heaven,” and the Major found experimentally that “they
profit not in the day of wrath.”
On Monday I accompanied Mr. M. over the grounds of the large and princely residence called Islay House, the dwelling place of the late Laird of Islay—a Mr. Campbell, who became bankrupt in the sum of £800,000, so that the island was to be sold on November 8, to pay his debts. The simple people of Bowmore amuse themselves with the supposition that I have come from the Far West to view the land before buying it. The price is not less than £500,000, and as much more as the bond-holders and personal creditors can get. The rents amount to £19,000 per annum, and with good management might be doubled. Islay House is situated about a quarter of a mile from Bridgend at the head of Lochendaul. It is surrounded by extensive plantations, and the pleasure grounds, private drives, and walks, around and connected with it, are ample and varied, and laid out with much taste and judgment, suitable in all respects for convenience and recreation. The gardens, hot-houses and fountains, are said to be superior to any private gardens in the West of Scotland. There is a fort mounted with guns, but no garrison, which well mounted would from its position prove rather inconvenient to visitors of hostile intentions.
On Tuesday we procured ponies (mine was about the size of a donkey) for a day’s riding towards the west. We headed the Loch at Bridgend, and after riding along shore a while struck off inland over the hills to the western side of the island, about 15 miles by this route from Bowmore. We were near but did not visit the Sanaig cave, which is a perfect subterranean labyrinth. The entrance to it is difficult. The most remarkable peculiarity connected with it is its reverberation. By the discharge of a single gun a stranger would suppose that a royal salute had been fired. It was near this cave that the Exmouth, from Londonderry, bound to America, was dashed upon the rocks, April 27, 1847, when 248 souls, passengers and crew, perished. Three of the crew happened to be on the yards at the time, so that when she struck they dropped off on the land. She then bounded from the precipice and went down. These three were all that escaped.
Our ride was highly interesting, but cold. My little short-stepping pony was very sure-footed, but gave me such a jolting as I had never experienced before. We went down hill at a rapid trot. If we had stumbled it would have been a ludicrous scene for a spectator; for the dog and its rider must have made a somerset together—I say dog, for I have seen a large Newfoundland almost as large; the ponies of these islands are remarkably small. You see many like them in London, imported from the Orcades, or Shetland isles, to the north of the Hebrides. We got some refreshment in the form of milk and biscuit at a hovel-inn. I know not what else to call it. My friend called to collect some excise dues from “mine host.” The sow, a large and gentle creature, was reclining in great comfort seemingly, on the earthen floor of the apartment. It appeared to be a place of call for the faithful where they might obtain lawful whisky after church. If not, I cannot tell why the only buildings on the land are the manse, the tavern, and the kirk. The minister’s manse was very pretty, and decorated with a happy combination of things, known as simplicity with neatness. But we had no time to linger here. The sun was fast hastening to his dip in the western wave, and we had fifteen miles to trot ere we could say we were “at home.”
On Wednesday we set off in another direction. We mounted our ponies and rode over hills, along the sea shore, and over mountain ridges, then through a wretched looking place called Port Ellen, to Arbeg some two miles beyond. From the ridge overlooking the port we had a fine view of Rathlin, an island off the north coast of Ireland. We staid at Arbeg all night. In the morning, after breakfast, we walked about three miles to Ardimersay. This is a marine residence and hunting seat of the Laird, in the southeastern part of the island—a truly charming retreat, beautifully situated amid wood and rock scenery. After viewing all the points of interest here, we strolled off to the grave of Ella, in one of the most picturesque spots of the whole island. Her resting place is marked by two grey stones, about thirty feet apart, at Bealachdearg, to the north of the beautiful and well sheltered bay called Loch-a-Chnuic, which penetrates the hazel woods which adorn and shelter the Cottage of Ardimersay. She was the daughter of one of the Norwegian viceroys who resided in Islay when in the possession of the Danes. The natives generally suppose that the island derived its name from her; but of the origin of its name none have arrived at certainty. Having refreshed ourselves at the Ardimersay forester’s on excellent butter, milk, bread, and cheese, with an appetite such as exercise and sea air alone can give—an appetite with a relish—we returned to Arbeg, where we dined. At this place there are some fine old castle ruins, beetling the heights and frowning o’er the sea. Who the robber chieftain, and what his history, that built it for his strong-hold, I do not remember if I ever knew. It was doubtless famed at some time for its deeds of treachery and violence, for this whole island appears to have been a perfect field of blood. “Almost all its history,” says a native writer, “is taken up with the deeds of the great, the people being lost sight of almost entirely, excepting as so many passive creatures, fit for war or the payment of rent, and responsible to no authority but that of the owners of the soil. As the island passed from one lord to another, it did so with its unwilling compliment of serfs, called tenants, almost as completely and virtually as a South Carolina plantation does with its pack of Negro “servants.” The apologists of British slavery may say that “tenants” are at liberty to leave their country, whereas American slaves are not. True; and they are also at liberty to perish for want of food, whilst the land lies waste, because they cannot pay an exorbitant price for liberty to till God’s earth at home!” When things come to this, it is time that lairds become bankrupt, and the land be distributed upon easy terms among the poor.
Though “after dinner” it is well to “sit awhile,” (Abernethy used to say sleep three hours,) we were under the necessity of riding fourteen miles to supper. I confess I did not like the prescription, but there was no help for it. We therefore mounted our ponies and set off. Five miles of the way were along the sea shore, upon hard sand, as smooth and level as a floor. We gave our land-clippers the bridle here to enjoy their own speed. Having soon cleared the sands, we turned off to the in-land; over hill and dale we sped our way. The legs beneath us knew they were going home, and gave us the satisfaction of sitting by a cheering fire in Bowmore before the twilight was altogether gone. This was my last night in the Ebudes, as the ancients styled these western isles. In the morning a conveyance was at the door to convey me to Port Askaig, whence I was to re-embark for West Tarbert. I left Bowmore at 7, in company with Mr. M. We arrived in good time, indeed, too soon, for the steamer was detained much after her appointed time, by the perverseness of the cattle, who instead of going on board in a peaceable and orderly manner, manifested a decided inclination not to tread the gang-way at all. The sheep occupied the quarter-deck. There were none in the cabin, it is true; but little room remained, between flocks and herds on deck, for men, women, and children, of whom there were “a good few.”
While they are belabouring the beasts, twisting their tails, and hauling them by the horns, one by one, to compel them to embark for market, I will conclude this long letter by informing you that the extreme length of Islay from the southern point of Oa to the northern projection of Ru’mhail is nearly 31 English miles: and its breadth from Ardmore point, on the east to Sanaig, is nearly 25 miles. The superficies of the island is estimated at 154,000 imperial acres. It extends to 500 square miles, of which about 35 are covered by lakes and rivers. The coast is generally bound by low rocks, or by flat shores and sandy bays; and is justly regarded as very dangerous to shipping. The surface is hilly on the east side, and in some places wooded to the water’s edge. The mountains here attain to an elevation of nearly 1500 feet. The greater part of the island, however, is sufficiently level to be susceptible of cultivation to the summit of the highest hills.
In 1841 the population was 18,071, whilst in 1831 it was 19,700. Emigration has drained away a considerable number of the best of the population, so that now it is reduced to about 15,000. The Total Abstinents do not reckon Islay among their conquests. Barley is raised in large quantity, and is mostly used by the Distilleries, of which there are eleven in different parts of the island. “Islay whisky,” and black cattle, are the chief articles of export. Sheep are exported in great numbers, and of the cattle, about 3,500 are sold annually. Talking of cattle, the steamer’s bell is now sounding, the herd is all aboard, and those who are not fellow-travellers with the cattle must go ashore. The best of friends must part, and I am happy in being able to number Mr. John Murdoch, of Islay, among the best I have. He is a lover of the truth, which is the ground of our friendship and the bond of union between us. His poetical and musical talents you are not a stranger to. To him, and a professional friend of his, I am indebted for all that may interest you in this concerning Islay. I bid him adieu regretfully, and under lasting obligation to him for his kindness, and the gratification he had afforded me during my sojourn among the Gaels. Our moorings being loosed, we put out into the sound; Port Askaig was soon far astern, and by degrees both Islay and the Paps of Jura receded behind the veil of heaven’s azure hue.
Hoping to see you soon in London, in the mean time accept this as an assurance that, though far away, you are ever in the heart of your affectionate father,
JOHN THOMAS.
* * *
WORD FROM AFAR.
Geneva, Kane county, Ill.,
February 26th, 1852.
Beloved Brother Thomas:
After waiting anxiously to hear from you, or to receive the “Herald,” I got No. 1, of new volume this morning. I am very sorry to hear that your advocacy of the truth, in publishing the “Herald,” is endangered for the want of means. I would that it were in my power to materially assist you. If distance did not prevent, I would gladly devote a portion of time to either the composition or press work of the “Herald;” that being in my line of business. I can truly sympathise with you over delinquent subscribers, as for four years I published a weekly newspaper, and have now hundreds of dollars standing out, which will never be paid in. But I can scarcely estimate the callousness of that man’s conscience, who, after reading the “Herald,” neglects or refuses to pay the editor and publisher. He cannot be governed by christian principle, or even common honesty. We cannot do without the “Herald.” It ought not—it must not be discontinued; and yet we cannot expect you to do all the work, and at the same time suffer considerable loss; you have done this long enough. The “Herald” is the only medium, that I know of, through which the “Faith once delivered to the Saints” is strenuously contended for; and the only true “Millennial Harbinger,” published at the present time. The times in which we live seem to demand its continued existence; the wants of many disciples need supplying with its true and literal interpretations of the “sure word of prophecy,” and its beacon-fire is needed by many sincere inquirers after truth, at present groping their way through the darkened paths of mystic Babylon. Stir up your friends repeatedly—do it in every number. I am glad you do it occasionally; —do it oftener. They can bear it. Their minds need reminding of their duties and responsibilities. We are all liable to forget. The “cares of this life” are noxious weeds, very apt to choke even the good seed of the kingdom; they need the vigorous application of the hoe, and if you can bring such delinquents back to duty, it will be far better for them, than to be cut off as unprofitable servants.
The congregation here still continues to meet together every first day, for the purpose of attending to the “all things” commanded for them to do. We are increasing in knowledge, and I hope in the favour of our Lord Jesus Christ; but not much in numbers. The truth is unpalatable to many minds—especially those steeped in sectarianism—it is unpopular, and opposed to the “thinking of the flesh.” Since I wrote you last we have immersed several on a profession of their faith in the good news.
Hoping that an interest may be awakened in the minds of the believers of the “things of the Kingdom of God,” for the proper sustaining of the “Herald,” I subscribe myself, dear brother,
Yours in the Hope of Israel,
BENJAMIN WILSON.
* * *
TO THE FRIENDS OF TRUTH.
One of the most desirable things to me, is to know the truth practically. The apostle says,
“They who are Christ’s, have crucified the flesh with the affections
and lusts.”
He says,
“I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless, I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: for the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.”
We find these sayings in his Epistle to the Galatians. In the same epistle, he declares the works of the flesh to be manifest, which are these, “Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like; of which I tell you before, as I have told you in time past, that they which do such things, shall not inherit the Kingdom of God.”
Should we not examine ourselves closely, to ascertain whether we are living in the works of the flesh? It is a tremendous catalogue of them, which he sets forth. In his Epistle to the Colossians, he calls them our members which are upon the earth. He means the same, when he says,
“The
old man with his deeds.”
This old man of the flesh, must be mortified or put to death by crucifixion. Now what can induce and strengthen us to endure the cross. Jesus was crucified, having been nailed through the hands and through the feet. — Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews, says that it was for the joy, which was set before him, he endured the cross, and despised the shame. Peter says the same substantially, as recorded in Acts 2nd.
“I foresaw
the Lord always before my face; for he is on my right hand, that I should not
be moved; therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover,
also my flesh shall rest in hope: because thou wilt not leave my soul in the
grave; neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy one to see corruption.”
Peter applied this to the Messiah, citing it from the 16th Psalm. — Turning to the context in the Psalm, we hear Messiah saying in David:
“In thy
presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand are pleasures for ever more.”
Now we must be influenced in the same way, and strengthened to deny self, to carry the cross, to follow Jesus. Accordingly, he has given us the gospel of the Kingdom of God, and in this fulness of joy, and the pleasures, which shall be for ever more. — If we deny our flesh with the affections and lusts, we are said to crucify them, and in practising this self denial and crucifixion, we need powerful considerations to strengthen us, to enable us to go through. These considerations we find in the gospel, glory, honour, incorruptibility, eternal life, &c., &c., &c.
By faith in the prophetic and the apostolic testimonies, let us contemplate Messiah in Jesus, in words, and in mighty deeds, and in sufferings, unto death. Let us stand where Mary his mother and John his beloved disciple stood, nigh the cross, and learn from the great Master how and why to endure. He bore our sins in his own body on the tree. Shall we sin again those sins for which he died?! O let us stand and gaze, until we get our consent to be crucified with him, putting to death, all our own lusts. Brethren and friends do we expect him from the heavens? Do we look for his kingdom? Are we hoping to sit with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the prophets, in the Kingdom? — Let us then strive to enter in the straight gate; we must enter through afflictions and trials. Let us then live in the Spirit. Let us meditate in the word of God, day and night, in order that we may not fall. Many are called; few are chosen. May the gracious Lord Almighty strengthen us, establish us, and make us, worthy through the Lord Jesus Christ. It will be awful to be disapproved at last. Let us love one another, let us encourage, and help one another, to conquer and to triumph. Adieu, dear brethren.
ALBERT ANDERSON.
A FEW MORE WORDS.
I wish to say some little more to the Christian Disciples. Allow me brethren beloved, to remark with the emphasis of all earnest affection, that each disciple should count it not merely his duty but one of his greatest privileges, to labour, not for his own salvation only, but also for the salvation of others. Paul is a great example in proof of this. He urged the same in Timothy, telling him how he might save himself, and them who heard him. Every one who hears the word of God, is divinely authorised to invite others to hear the same. In proof of this we read, (in Revelation,)
“The
spirit and the bride say come; let him who hears, say come.”
Some of the brethren appear diffident of their own abilities; and some who admit the capability of the editor of the Herald, let them persuade such as are able to pay for his paper, or his book, “Elpis Israel,”—to subscribe to one, or to both, and thus do themselves the honour of helping him to advocate the truth. — The sisters might do something in this matter. Paul makes very honourable mention of some women who laboured with him in the Gospel. They helped him, no doubt with regard to the necessaries of life. — There were also some females, pious ones, who ministered to the Lord Jesus. The sisters are not limited, however, to this humble office. They can comfort and strengthen one another. They can also persuade their sisters in the flesh, to hear the Gospel. They can tell them what this gospel is. We need the combined, earnest, prayerful, effort of all the disciples, both males and females.
Again, for the sake of practice, why not have, occasionally at least, gatherings, or schools of disciples alone, for the purpose of the brethren’s speaking to one another in assembly? There are some brethren of talents and yet too diffident to speak publicly before the world. It is altogether probable, that they could and would speak, if none but brothers and sisters might be present. They would not dread the criticism of beloved brethren and sisters, for such could not and would not criticise with severity, but would rather encourage, the diffident brethren in their efforts to improve themselves and their brethren. — Thus, some able and valuable advocates of the truth might be gradually raised up in the schools of disciples. This is all a matter of practice, divine practice, for the good of the great cause in which we are comparatively languishing at present. Oh for a knowledge all divine, and a zeal proportionate to the glorious gospel of the kingdom of God! We have access to inexhaustible resources of wisdom, and knowledge, and righteousness, and peace, and joy, and honour, and glory; brethren, let us make large draughts upon these resources; they will not fail. Suffer, this word of exhortation, and exhort me in turn, and I will thank you for it. May the good Lord save us, and preserve us unto his heavenly kingdom is the humble prayer of
ALBERT ANDERSON.
* * *
TABLE TAPPINGS NOT SPIRIT-RAPPINGS.
An esteemed correspondent from Cambridge, Ohio, says:
“There is a religious deception practiced in this country of which I had never heard till a few weeks ago. It is called “Spiritual Rappings.” I suppose you will know more about the delusion than I can tell you. About a week or ten days since a few persons assembled at my employer’s to perform the ceremony, in order to convince me, by ocular demonstration, that “the spirits” do answer by raps and movements of the article on which the necessary groups of hands is placed. Accordingly four persons placed their hands on a small table, each one having their right hand above their neighbour’s left; and care is necessary that the upper hand touch not the table. The question was then asked in the usual manner, “If there be any spirit present in this room let them signify it by a rap.” This was replied to by a sort of rap or jerk of the table. I am satisfied, however, that the farce is worked by sleight of the hands on the top, and not by a spirit under the table. Being requested, I asked some questions. I first asked, if the spirit present were material or immaterial? If material, I wished the table to rise in one direction; if immaterial, in another. It accordingly rose in the immaterial direction. I then asked, if it were a something or a nothing? The table was raised, signifying that it was a something. I then asked, if it were a something, how many like it could sit upon the point of a needle? In answer to which the table was raised three times. I then requested it to make its appearance on the top of the table, if it were something? But nothing appeared, although many of the persons present were afraid they would see something. After those who could and did work the farce were done, my employer, myself, and other two, got our hands arranged upon the table according to rule; and as we were unbelievers in such nonsense, we had to hold our hands on for twenty minutes before asking a question. We kept them on about three quarters of an hour, during which time a great many questions were put; but the table would neither rap, rise, nor move for us, our hands being too honest! While those who could were working the farce, I asked, how long my brother Thomas had been dead? The table rose eight times. I then asked, how many years my brother William had been dead? Upon which it rose eleven times. This led me to remark, that it must surely be a lying spirit, for Thomas died in 1841, and William in 1835!”
Thus writes Mr. John Swan, a man of veracity, and a competent witness in a matter of fact. He does not believe in disembodied-soulism; and we suppose these table-tappings were played off as evidence in proof of its veracity, and of the erroneousness of the doctrine which teaches immortality of the body to them only who are accounted worthy of the kingdom of God and the Age to Come, by a resurrection from the dead. Disembodied souls and table-legerdemain assort well together. The more ignorant the spectator of the testimony of God, the profounder will be his faith in such creations of the fleshly mind.
But granting, as a fact, that the table rose without any cunning or deceit on the part of the operators—that their hands were perfectly honest, which our friend rather doubts, —how are its movements to be accounted for without recourse to superstition? Upon the same principle that a loadstone, or electro-magnet, lifts a piece of steel, or that the compass-needle is drawn to the north magnetic-pole of the earth. The sun, moon, and stars, are magnets. The earth also is a magnet, and every thing upon it, animate and inanimate, magnetic, naturally, or induced. Immensity is filled by spirit, which is all-pervading, and styled by philosophy, electricity, magnetism, and so-forth. Man is pre-eminently electrical; some men, however, more so than others. His electricity is generated mainly by the processes of digestion and respiration, which, from the nature of their substance accumulates intensely upon the brain and spinal column, which thus become magnetic by induction, and capable by the peculiarity of their organization of throwing off, by the system of efferent nerves, the electro-magnetism produced. The hands of four or more persons arranged on a table, form with the table an electro-magnetic chain or circle. They are then en rapport. The will and thoughts of the most powerful brain among them directs the mentality of the whole. They have strong faith, not in divine revelation, but confidence in the certain accomplishment of what they propose to do, because they have succeeded in the experiment frequently before. The divine teachings of the prophets are nothing to them, being ignorant of what they are. The spirit-answers to their questions by the bungling contrivance of electrical crackings, knockings, or thunderings, and table-liftings, or through clairvoyant seeings and speakings, are mere reflections of the foolishness indoctrinated into them by preachers, and teachers, and the trashy literature they are educated by. A question is put. The most active and powerful brain immediately conceives an answer. That conception flashes through the other brains in the electrical circle. They all will to knock or rap. The electrical fluid is thrown off intensely towards the table; and in leaving them, and meeting with the negatively excited table—excited by the hands upon it—a rap, or succession of cracks, is the result; as many as the positively excited brains guess will meet the question. Table-lifting is on the same principle as table-tapping, dependant on the will of the united brains. The hands become strongly attractive, and the table is moved any way the theory of the operators requires. It may not be possible to explain all the phenomena reported as proved facts by the laws of electro-magnetism, electricity, &c.; because all the laws, according to which this subtile, universal, and powerful fluid, by whatever name called, operates, are not known. Indeed, very few of them are known; for the science, or knowledge, of this great physical element of the universe is scarcely born.
In the case reported by Mr. Swan, the manipulators were immaterialists, or nothingarians. Had they believed that the nothings they call spirits were material or something, the taps would have been on the other side of the question. Their hands were no doubt honest, but the thinking of the fleshly tables of their hearts, was perverted by a mischievous and foolish theology. One anti-theologist in a circle would be enough to mar the experiment; for the circuit would be in an interrupted, and therefore, unworking condition. Hence the raps and liftings could not be manifested with him in the chain, or circle, willing against them as sheer nonsense, or slight of hand. We have seen many curious experiments in human electro-magnetism, biology, neurology, &c., several of which we have performed ourselves. They were all explicable, however, on electrical principles. The psychology of magnetism, that is magnetic soulology, exactly reflects the theology of the pulpits. It cannot rise above it; for the theology is the carnal mind’s interpretation of divine and unseen things derived from its own propensities and imaginings. The two ologies stand or fall together. Neither of them speak in harmony with Moses and the Prophets. Hence all the spirits they start between them are lying spirits, and not to be believed, though occasionally they should happen to stumble upon the truth. The spirit of God always speaks in harmony with the written word, and says neither more nor less than is written there. Hence the absence of all necessity that he should speak any more at all till the Lord comes to utter his voice, and to send forth the Law from Zion, and the Word of Jehovah from Jerusalem—Isaiah 2: 3.
EDITOR.
* * *
INTERPRETATION NOT SPECULATION.
“And many there be who think I dare