Page images
PDF
EPUB

WHERE DID YOU COMMENCE THIS YEAR? Some make a practice of commencing the New Year in the sanctuary, in their closets, or, in meditation, upon their beds. Others, in the social meeting, in the party of pleasure, or in sinful indulgence. But some have comienced this year on beds of sickness, in foreign lands, within prison walls. Where did you commence it? And where will you be at its close? In this world or in the next? in time or in eternity? in earth, in heaven, or in hell?

HOW DID YOU COMMENCE THIS YEAR? Some entered upon it full of joy in the Holy Ghost, in meek faith upon Jesus Christ, or crying out, "Lord, save or I perish." Others commenced it convinced but not converted, hoping for heaven but preparing for a world of torment, or without God in the world or hope for their immortal souls. How did you commence it? And how do you expect to feel at its close? Joyful or sorrowingbelieving or doubting-anxious or careless?

YOU HAVE SEEN THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE YEAR; WILL YOU ALSO SEE ITS CLOSE? The year will come in which you shall die: is it this? Thousands will this year perish: will you be one? Should the pestilence return, are you ready to meet it? Should disease be now lurking within you, are you prepared for its results? Should sudden death attack you, can you encounter it?

66

Who of us will pass into eternity before this Year shall close ?--who before Autumn fades?—who before Summer ripens?-who before the voice of Spring is heard? One at least will fall ere we meet you again. Lord, is it I? and am I ready for so great, so solemn, so speedy, so entire a change?" Go, my dear reader, as a guilty, helpless sinner to the cross of Christ for salvation. Cry to Him to save you from your sins, and from divine wrath. And though your sins were as scarlet, they should be as white as snow; though red like crimson, they should be as wool. For "this is a faithful saying, that CHRIST JESUS CAME INTO THE WORLD TO SAVE SINNERS, even the chief."

THE APPEAL;

A Magazine for the People.

"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good."

[blocks in formation]

TEMPORAL EFFECTS OF DRINKING AND OF ABSTINENT HABITS.-Cover, p. 3.

"HOW DO YOU DO?"-Cover, p. 4.

PRICE ONE HALFPENNY.

LEEDS:

JOHN HEATON, 7, BRIGGATE;

LONDON: SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, & CO., ARTHUR HALL & CO., BENJAMIN L. GREEN; GLASGOW: J. M'COMB.

May be had by order of any Bookseller.

ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS.

A correspondent asks "how it can with truth be said by Matt. ii. 23, that the prophets foretold that Christ should be called a Nazarene." It is no doubt singular that while Matthew's other quotations are so easily found, no passage should clearly answer to this one. Yet the fact that he is so at home in the prophecies assures us that he had good reason for referring to this prophecy as he does. It is also clear that writing to Jews (as Matthew did), in whose language the prophecies were written, he could not have hoped to deceive them on such a point, even had he wished. Even infidel critics have therefore allowed, and correctly, that the reference was to prophecies which even his unbelieving countrymen would own did really refer to the Messiah. Which were the prophecies referred to? In Isaiah xi. 1, the Hebrew word by which the Messiah is spoken of, is that which answers to the Greek word Nazarene. But it is more likely that, as a Nazarene was a name for a vile worthless fellow (see John i. 46), Matthew's reference is to such passages as the 22nd Psalm and the 53rd chapter of Isaiah, where the Messiah is described as being thus called and looked upon by men.

"How can it be reconciled with the bible being the word of God, that the four Evangelists all give a different account of the inscription on the cross? The original words must have been the same." These words are the substance of a very proper question which we have received. Let us put their accounts clearly before us.

Mark. "The king of the Jews."

Luke. "This is the king of the Jews."

Matt. "This is Jesus, the king of the Jews."

John. "Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews."

We see that all give the main part of the inscription, that in which contempt for Jesus and for the Jews was expressed, that which attracted so much attention that the chief priests feeling the insult to the nation asked Pilate to alter it (John xix. 21); while the three latter Evangelists added each a little more of the merely legal, formal, and, therefore, less important part. John, who beyond all doubt wrote for Gentiles, gives the inscription most fully. Now, as the inscription was written in three languages, it is very likely they were different slightly in each language. John gives that which was written for the numerous foreigners who always came to Jerusalem at the Passover, and which would need to be the most explicit; and this undesigned agreement of John's narrative with the knowledge of the parties he wrote for, would be a striking evidence of its truth.

It will perhaps please our more intelligent and candid readers if we add a few observations on the remarkable fact, that while the Evangelists frequently agree to a word in reporting the sayings of our Lord, they yet often differ in words.

1st. We remark that their value as witnesses is increased by their verbal differences, if they never contradict one. It shews, what in a Court of Justice is justly held to be of the highest value, that the witnesses have not learned of one another-that there has been no collusion. Now no case of contradiction has been discovered.

2ndly. That one reporting a sentence, a speech, or a parable more fully only than another is no contradiction. It is done in all reporting to this day.

3rdly. There is a reason for differences in words, the sense remaining the same, which our readers who have learned any other language than their own, as French or German, will easily understand. Our Lord spoke much in the language of the Jews. His followers wrote the New Testament in Greek, because this language was known in every city at that time of the civilized world. Now, just as four Englishmen who knew French could each of them give the sense of an English sentence in several ways in that language, so could the Evangelists translate our Lord's meaning frequently by different words, and all be nevertheless perfectly faithful accounts of his sayings.

4thly. We think every impartial reader will feel satisfied should he find passages in which he must conclude that the apostles, being literally unable to report all (John xxi. 25), gave the sense of our Lord exactly, devoting their attention, as they must condense, to the spirit more than to the letter.

We shall be happy to hear from our friend again if he wishes anything further.

Two important questions more we must leave till next number. Other questions we shall be glad to receive and answer. We should be furnished with them, however, not later than the 7th instant. (See January Number.)

"THE TRUE CROSS."

Fifteen hundred years ago the mother of the first christian emperor* discovered amidst the ruins about Jerusalem, the veritable Cross on which Jesus was crucified! She knew it from the other two which were found near it, by its instantly restoring to health an invalid who touched it! She honoured and treasured it carefully, and by the time of the Reformation it is said to have furnished fragments enough of the "true cross" to build, if put together, a man of war! Over such miserable superstition and imposture shall we smile, reader, or grieve? We cannot easily avoid either.

In this present year, one thousand eight hundred and fifty years nearly after “the Crucifixion," we see "the Cross"-exalted on the summit of lofty erections—frequently in stone as if fossilized, frequently gilded, a melancholy intimation always to us of what the Cross has become "a gilded cross." Yes, the "offence of the Cross" is vanished if it wear a golden aspect, if it proffer gold to its ministers and its worshippers. And of smaller dimensions we see it also worn as an ornament; but it is often made of "gold, silver, or precious stones," the adorning which one "who witnessed the sufferings of Jesus did not think meet ornament for christian women." (1 Pet. iii. 3, 4; v. 1; 1 Tim. ii. 9, 10.) Verily, neither gilded nor golden crosses are "the true Cross."

No, "the true Cross" was, indeed, a rough and homely object,— untrimmed wood,-the carpentry of the hour,-fit only for fuel when its work was done, and no doubt used for that or some other humble purpose. So mean was the altar, so utterly unfit to be preserved as a memorial, on which was shed "the precious blood of Christ,"- -on which that victim was offered, and that death took place, which never can be forgotten in the history of the world, or throughout eternity itself!

Let us look at the TRUE Cross. All the previous scenes-the Scourging, crowning with thorns, the mock trial-are over; and a condemned criminal stands in the hands of four soldiers beside the barbarous engine. Weary, pale, with a whole night's maltreatment, yet serene, benevolent in aspect. How different his appearance from that of the two highwaymen in the like condemnation ! "His countenance more marred than any man's;" yet it was innocence, holiness, and dignity. The robber saw it and bore witness, the centurion saw it and bore witness, "this was surely a righteous man;" yes, he "had done nothing amiss." The sun, the rocks, soon added their testimony, and confirmed this reversal by his executioners and fellow-sufferers, of his unjust judge's verdict; and on the third day, the vanquished * We only regard him as the first of the numerous imperial and royal personages who have corrupted christianity by State pay and for State purposes. His life was like that of all his class-anti-christian.

tomb-the first time it was ever vanquished confirmed also the reversal of his unjust judgment.

Still, beside the true cross, stands the innocent victim. But all is ready. Four soldiers seize each a member, and nail it to the cross as it lies on the ground; in a minute more it is erected, placed in the ground, and made fast in the earth; the malefactors on each side are treated in like manner; and thus, and in the midst, hangs the holy sufferer on the True Cross.

Thus much was true to even the eyes of the many; but more was surely true. This was not only a righteous man, he was surely a good man too. No one ever denied that he went about doing good. Hundreds of relieved sufferers were witnesses of that. If he sometimes sent the rich empty away," no one denied "that he had holpen the poor." He was no common man. His wisdom, although he had not studied at their schools, continually put the Sadducees and Pharisees (the Sceptics and Puseyites of that day) to silence. And he was undeniably an open worker of innumerable miracles,-innumerable works HE did which no other MAN did,-a man who never flattered the common people," yet was beloved by them,—a man whose teachings the Hierarchy of that day, and of all days, abhorred, yet could never refute,—all this, at the least, was plainly true of Him who now hung on the "true Cross." He was not mere man!

And it was true, also, that he was in his own judgment, and according to his own teaching, the long promised ONE, the hope and desire of all nations, the Son of David, and yet mysteriously his Lord, THE SON OF THE MOST HIGH. Was he wrong in this judgment? Let his resurrection from the dead reply. (Rom. i. 4.)

But look once more at "the true Cross." The sufferer is not yet dead; he might live for days in his torture-his fellow-sufferers would have done so, but they were killed prematurely. Hark! a loud and touching call! It says that his God has forsaken him!" The forsaking of all others he had borne; but his God's forsaking him, this has overpowered him. Yes, completely overpowered his humanity; the grief literally burst the muscles of his heart, and he almost immediately expired! How can we account for all this-such innocence and dignity, such composure, such sudden and fatal sorrow? He himself has told us how.

There was yet one thing more on "the true Cross" invisible, indeed, to the bodily eye, yet visible to the faith of all who believed his own express words. He had said that he gave "his life a ransom for many," that he "laid down his life for his sheep," that "no man took it from him," but that "he laid it down himself;" in a word, that he died to atone for the sins of men. Look, then, at the "true Cross" again,-look at him who hangs thereon,-look at his INTENTION in hanging there. What Pilate intended, what priests intended, that is nothing to us; but what HE intended, that is every thing to us. That

« PreviousContinue »