<< Back |
Chosen no: R-423 a, from: 1882 Year. |
Change lang
| |
An Unpleasant Duty.
Duty is not always pleasant but it
would be sin to shirk it.
Less than a year ago, and frequently
since, we warmly commended to our readers a publication called "Zion's Day Star." This
we now regret, because that commendation makes necessary a statement to the
opposite effect concerning that paper.
We are not of those who
disfellowship christian brethren on account of some differences of opinion, but
when it comes to the point of denying the very foundation of all christianity,
we must speak out and withstand all such to the face, for they become "the
enemies of the cross of Christ." (Phil. 3:18.) This
opposition to the cross, the world has always had. The thought of
"redemption through his blood" has always been to the Greek (earth's
wise) foolishness, and only the faithful have recognized the cross as the power
of God unto man's salvation from death.
"Zion's Day Star" at the time of our
commendation was in fullest accord on the fundamentals of christianity;
teaching that the death of Jesus was the ransom price paid for our liberation
from sin and its penalty, death--that "Christ died for our sins according
to the scriptures." And its editor was then so true and faithful to the
foundation doctrines, that he refused the articles of a valued correspondent in
Michigan,
because said correspondent had repudiated the Rock foundation, viz: our being "bought
with a price, even the precious blood of Christ." But we are pained to
say, this is all changed, and the "Day Star" has locked arms with
those who deny that the Lord BOUGHT them.
Not only so, but as though anxious
to lead in the race for open infidelity, the "Day Star" openly
affirms that Jesus was the Son of Joseph as well as of Mary, thus implying that
he was as much a sinner through partaking of Adamic imperfection and curse as
any other man. It not only implies but asserts that he by nature was a child of
wrath even as others; and then adds, "By and by as the truth (?) shines
more clearly, it will be seen that the difference between Jesus, and the
members of his body, is not so great as has been supposed." This it
characterizes as a "grand truth."
One wrong step leads to another, so
we are not so much surprised to find an attempt made to cast discredit on the first
chapters of Matthewand Luke, giving the impression that they
are Papal interpolations to prove the doctrine of the "Immaculate
conception."
We protest against such misleading
statements*. Many who have no access to proofs on these matters, might
reasonably suppose that there existed some good ground for questioning the
authority of the scriptures referred to, while the truth is, there is no ground
for the statement whatever. All of the oldest and recognizedly reliable MSS.
contain these chapters which record the fact of Jesus' miraculous conception
and birth, a fulfillment of the prophecy: "A virgin shall conceive and
bear a son and shall call his name Immanuel." Such a method, of saying of
any text which does not fit human theories--it is evidently an interpolation--would
soon destroy the Bible as a teacher, for thousands of people know thousands of
texts which oppose their theories, and which they would like to think and to
have others think spurious. We are very glad that few are so bold as to make
such claims where they have no foundation whatever in fact.
*We purpose, the Lord willing, to
perfect arrangements by which any of our readers who desire, may possess at
small cost a copy of the N.T., which will give the various readings, omissions,
etc., of the three oldest and best Greek MSS. of the N.T., viz: the Sinaitic, Vatican,
and Alexandrian. Those who have the Emphatic Diaglott will find the various
readings of the Vatican MSS. in the foot notes. The Diaglott was ready for
press before the readings of the Sinaitic, the oldest and last found MSS. were
obtainable in full.
The fact that the "Day
Star" does not advocate the more open and blasphemous forms of infidelity,
makes it none the less poisonous and injurious. The Apostles say little about
the general unbelief of the world, but they do warn us repeatedly of those who
will privately bring infidelity into the church. Peter says: "among you
will be false teachers who will privately introduce heresies of destruction,
even the having bought them, Sovereign Lord, denying." (2
Pet. 2:1, literal Greek rendering of Diaglott.)
We are well aware that the foregoing
remarks will be misunderstood by some, and credited to wrong motives. It will
be thought uncharitable and unkind. To such readers we can only say, that
personal feelings for the Editor of the "Day Star" are warm and
strong, and it gives us more pain to thus write, than you to read. But it
becomes a matter of duty to God, and to His children to show errors in their
true light, particularly when so fearfully destructive. We can only say with
Paul when writing under Similar circumstances. "It is a very small thing
that I should be judged of you," [R423 : page 8] (your
human judgment.) "Yea I judge not mine own self" (by my own human
judgment.) "He that judgeth me (and all of us) is the Lord," and his
judgment is expressed in his Word.
True, there are several other
publications teaching very nearly the same things, which we do not thus
publicly oppose, nor have we ever publicly commended them. Should the "Day
Star" at any time alter its course, and return to the rock foundation of
faith--the ransom given for our sins--we shall gladly and warmly welcome it
back, and in that event, you may expect that its name will again be mentioned
in the TOWER approvingly.
One word more--regular readers are
well aware that while we are neutral on no doctrine, we believe that liberality
should be exercised by all christians, to all christians who are building on Christ
the Rock, even though they are building poorly; but we call you all to witness
that the differences above alluded to, are most vital. They assault the foundations
of christianity, who deny the ransom price. It became a question of whether we
would be faithful to God in defending his truth, or be acceptable to men by
passing quietly by and ignoring error. The latter course would have been the easiest
and most agreeable to the flesh, but the former was duty and has been performed
to the best of our ability.
W.T. R-423 a : page 7 – 1882 r.