or opinions concerning the Holy Spirit, I cannot certainly tell, as he has never condescended to favor the world with the article of his creed in relation to this important subject; but holds his sentiments in this particular, to all intents and purposes, as private property. But that Mr. C. admits among the articles of his creed, (held as private property) the divinity of the Holy Spirit, or his coequality and unity with the Father and his only begotten Son—or, in other words that he believes this third person of the Godhead, to be that "eternal Spirit" through whom Christ "offered himself once for all without spot unto God," it is supposed is more than doubtful; inasmuch as Arians and Unitarians, and indeed all, by whatever name they may choose to be distinguished, who deny the divinity or coequality of the Son of God with the Father, (as does Mr. C.,) also deny the divinity and coequality of the Holy Spirit.

But be that as it may, it is evident from the whole tenor of his reply to his correspondent, that, (in A. D. 1827,) by the grace of the Holy Spirit, he meant no more than that inspiration whereby we are favored with the written word, or revealed will of God; and by the spirit of adop tion, which he believes he has received, he does not mean the Holy Spirit of God, but a filial disposition of mind, whereby he is inclined to cry Abba, Father. This will more clearly appear in that part of this account of the debate, which notices his version of the New Testament. The Spirit of adoption, then, which Mr. C. has received, is very different from that spoken of by the apostle, as having been received by the believing Romans, (Rom. 8:15,) and also by the Galatians, (Gal. 10:6,) to whom he declares: "And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father."

66

After having given to his correspondent a "disclosure of" his "experience," he adds, among other things, the following opinions concerning faith, which would seem evidently a deduction from such experience: If by your own efforts' you can believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God-by your own efforts' you can believe in him to the saving of your soul. That is saving faith,' (for there is but one faith,") which purifies the heart and works by love." That is, if his correspondent could, by his own efforts, believe that Jesus is the Messiah, &c., after the same manner that he believed that Rome was situated on the Tiber, that is saving faith, which purifies the heart!!* May God of his infinite mercy and goodness, deliver an anxious inquirer after truth, from the dangerous influence of such ghostly advisers as Mr. A. Campbell!

NOTE B.-page 38.

That Mr. C. belonged to this class in Ireland, I will not undertake to say. It is nevertheless a fact susceptible of proof, if it should be denied, that his family, or to speak with more precision, his father's family, when they emigrated, or at least, when they came to Western Pennsylvania, were in circumstances so straitened, that contributions were made by congregations belonging to different branches of the Presbyterian church, for their relief. This fact, however, is not mentioned by way of, casting any reproach upon Mr. C. or his

* If this doctrine be true, a sinner, however he may feel oppressed under a sense of the moral pollution and obliquity of his nature, has no need to pray, as did David: "Create in me a clean heart, and renew a right Spirit within me."

family, because he or they were poor. Far from it. Whilst a rich man is not to be accounted a sinner, simply because he is in possession of riches, so a man is not the less worthy of respect and esteem, merely because he is poor. Besides, we are informed by the most undoubted authority, that it is for the most part among this class, that we are to expect to find the true people of God. The father of Mr. C. was at the time of emigration from Ireland, a Presbyterian minister, and we know, notwithstanding all the outcry which his son has, through a series of years, raised against the ministers of the gospel belonging to this denomination, that but few of them indeed, at least in these United States, are rich,-as he is said and believed now to be. The great majority of them have but the means, with great frugality, of obtaining the common comforts of life, and of maintaining a decency of apparel, corresponding to the nature of their office, and to enable them to have access to persons of wealth to do them good.

But the object of mentioning the fact stated above, is with a view to expose the arrogance, as well as ingratitude of Mr. C. He would fain have it believed that in emigrating to this country, he turned his back upon bright and attracting prospects, and voluntarily relinquished many advantages which he could not here enjoy. And notwithstanding a debt of gratitude, at least, is due from him to a portion of the Presbyterian church, there is no sect that has, perhaps, shared so liberally in the abuse and slander with which his writings and public harangues abound.

NOTE C-page 40.

The gross absurdity as well as unscriptural character of Mr. Campbell's position, (upon which he frequently harps, both in his writings and public addresses,) that faith consists in the belief of facts, and not doctrines, was farther, in this part of the debate attempted to be shown, from the utter impossibility of separating the latter from the former. It indeed must be evident to every reflecting mind, that if a person even historically believes the facts narrated in the New Testament, he will, or, to speak more definitely, he must therewith receive or imbibe certain doctrines or sentiments, concerning the nature and design of the Christian religion, as also concerning the nature and true character of its great Author. It does not, however, necessarily follow, that every historical believer will receive or embrace, even speculatively, the system of truth or form of doctrine" contained in the New Testament. For as it was in the days of the Apostles, so it is yet, "there be some that trouble" the church of God, "and would pervert the gospel of Christ." Hence those holy and inspired men, in their writings, speak of "good doctrine," of" sound doctrine," and of "the doctrine that is according to godliness." On the other hand, they speak of those who hold the doctrine of Balaam;" of others who maintained “the doctrines of the Nicolaitans," and of those also, who, in the latter times, should" depart from the faith giving heed to seducing spirits, (or false teachers,) and doctrines of devils."

We may therefore see how fallacious, as well as destructive, is the notion, that it is a matter of small moment what may be the system of

doctrines which a man may adopt or receive, provided, only, he is sincere in his belief of them, as being true and taken or deduced (as he supposes) from the word of God. On the contrary, it is of vital importance, that with the belief of the gospel facts, we cordially receive, and from the heart, not only obey, but abide in the true doctrine of Christ; and be not "carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the slight of men and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive." It is of vital importance, because it is "the form of doctrine" which any one receives and obeys "from the heart," rather than the belief of the gos pel history, that constitutes such a person a true follower of Christ. If a man truly receives and obeys his doctrine, it will, through the power and grace of his Spirit, which works in all true believers (as in the Apostle to the Gentiles) mightily, have a purifying and saving effect upon the soul. Thus a sinner, through obedience of the truth, receives, in a measure, the same mind that was in Christ; and his Spirit, without which he could be none of his. We accordingly hear the apostle Peter addressing true believers, as those who had purified their "souls in obeying the truth, through the Spirit, unto unfeigned love of the brethren."

Whilst it is the peculiar characteristic of every true Christian,-— whereby he is especially distinguished, not only from the sceptic and the infidel; but also from the nominal, or, which is substantially the same, the historical believer,-that he obeys "from the heart that form of doctrine" contained in the word of God; it is not intended here to assert that every, or indeed that any such true Christian, receives or embraces every tittle of that system of truth which the scriptures contain. This, however, does not arise from the want of a disposition to embrace the whole system: but through remaining infirmity, he may not as yet be able to discover that system in all its parts, or by reason of the imperfection of that spiritual discernment with which he is endued, as a consequence of having passed from a state of spiritual death to that of spiritual life, he is not able perfectly, in all things, to discriminate between truth and error. But if a person be a Christian, not merely in name but indeed and in truth, it follows of necessity that he must have, cordially, and with his whole heart, received the great and leading doctrines of the gospel as the precious truth of God. For such as are indeed saints, are chosen to salvation, (2 Thess. 2:13,) not only "through sanctification of the Spirit," but "the belief of the truth."

It is, then, evident, that this part of the scheme of Mr. C. is not only as absurd as it is unscriptural, but that the belief simply of the facts of the gospel, were it possible to separate them from the precious doctrines with which they are connected, would be no more calculated to sustain a principle of spiritual life in the soul, or to nourish the church of God,* than would the bones of the paschal lamb, stripped of all their flesh, have been calculated to satisfy the hunger or increase the strength of the Israelitish families who by divine command, and at stated seasons,

*The Apostle assures Timothy, (1 Tim. 13: 6,) that if he put the brethren in mind of certain things concerning which he had given him charge, he should be not only "a good minister of Jesus Christ," but be also "nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine," whereunto he had attained.

partook of the feast of the passover. And indeed it may, with emphasis, be asked whether the whole system of Mr. Campbell's theology, so far as he has thought proper to disclose it, is not to the soul that really hungers for the bread of life, what a mess of bones would be to a man ready to die for the want of food?-a mere mockery!

NOTE D.-page 40.

Mr. C. professes to believe immersion for the remission of sins to be all-important, not only as he holds this to be the only mode of obtaining pardon, but that "the blood of Jesus Christ" doth not "cleanse us from all sin," as the apostle John has taught us, (1 John 1:7,) unless it be washed away in water by immersion.

As this note, by the deceased author, was not completed, some extracts from the pamphlet of the Rev. Andrew Broaddus, of the Baptist denomination, in which he replies to "Mr. A. Campbell's Millennial Harbinger, Extra, on the remission of sins," are added, as suitably filling up this note, and clearly refuting the interpretation which Mr. C. gives to certain passages of the sacred Scriptures to prove that what he calls "an act of faith," (viz. immersion,) "and not faith itself, changes our state." Though we cannot extract all of Mr. Broaddus' remarks on the passages adduced by Mr. C., we hope we shall do his able production no injustice by the following extracts. Mr. B. says: "The first passage brought forward for this purpose," (to prove that remission of sins is by immersion)" is the answer of Peter to his convicted hearers, on the day of Pentecost. They were informed (says Mr. Campbell) that though they now believed and repented, they were not pardoned; but must reform and be immersed for the remission of sins.' And this testimony, when the speaker, the occasion, and the congregation, are all taken into view, is itself, (Mr. C. thinks,) alone sufficient to establish the point:' p. 14, We think not.

"Now, as respecting the testimony that faith is the instrument of justification, it appears (we must think) not only direct and explicit, but, withal, incapable of being made to yield to Mr. C.'s interpretation. Review some of this evidence. Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on me hath everlasting life.' This divine blessing is coetaneous, coexistent with faith; and no medium, no bodily act is interposed.— By him all that believe are justified from all things.' It is not said they shall be, or may be justified through some other medium.-' Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness.' Is this example produced by the Apostle, to show that there was some bodily act interposed as the medium? Rather, to show that there was not: See Rom. 4:1-10. In these testimonies all bodily acts, considered as media between faith and the blessing of justification, are not only omitted, but excluded: nor can any person find room to interpose any such act, as a medium through which the blessing is conveyed.

"With respect to the passages of Scripture brought forward by Ma C, whatever favorable aspect some of them may seem to wear towards his theory, we are well persuaded that they are capable of a fair and rational interpretation, in perfect consistence with the actual justifica tion of the soul by faith. And be it observed, that where a point has been established by explicit testimony,-testimony that cannot be made to yield to a different construction; in such a case, no apparently

contravening matter, capable of a rational construction consistent with such testimony, ought to be brought forward, for the purpose of establishing a contrary fact. This is a canon of interpretation, the soundness of which, I think neither Mr. C. nor any person exercising candor, will attempt to controvert.

"For a more full elucidation of this matter, (says Mr. Broaddus,) I offer the following remarks; which though rather of a more critical character than the general tenor of this work, will be found, it is hoped, sufficiently plain for the comprehension of most readers.

"John did-preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."-"Be baptized for the remission of sins."

"Mr. Campbell knows (and every Greek scholar knows) that the preposition EIS, here rendered for, might, with equal propriety be rendered into, in several places where a different English word occurs in the translation;-into being, indeed, its primary signification. Thus, to mention only a few instances: Matth. 3:11. "I indeed baptize you (EN UDATI) in water, (EIS METANOIAN) into repentance." 1 Cor. 10:2. "And were all baptized (EIS TON MOSEN) into Moses,' &c. In Romans 6.3. the preposition, in a similar connection, is rendered into: 'Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized (EIS CHRISTON IESOUN) into Jesus Christ,' &c. Mark 1:4. 'John did-preach the baptism of repentance (EIS) into the remission of sins.' And lastly, this passage, where the same expression occurs: Acts 2:38. Repent, and be baptized,' &c. (EIS) into the remission of sins.' Now these expressions give rise to a few remarks.

"When it is said, 'I baptize you into repentance;' we do not understand that repentance was actually produced or brought about by baptism; but that the people were baptized into the doctrine and profession of repentance So, when the expression occurs, 'be baptized into the remission of sins;' let us not understand that the disciples really obtained the blessing of pardon by this act; but that they were baptized into the profession of this glorious truth.

"Our author's second appeal for evidence (p. 14.) is to Peter's second discourse-pronounced in Solomon's portico; Acts 3:19. Repent and be converted, that your sins may blotted out,'' &c. Much ingenuity is here displayed, in accommodating these expressions of Peter to the idea which we have been considering; and the tact of the writer (as our politicians say) certainly cannot be denied. He considers immersion and conversion to be the same thing: consequently, that when Peter enjoined on his hearers to be converted, he meant, that they should be baptized; and so the blessing is attached, as on the day of Pentecost; there it was "for the remission of sins;" here," that your sins may be blotted out.” That baptism was considered as attached to the character of the convert ed, we do not deny; but that conversion is to be identified with baptism, we cannot allow; and we think it will presently appear, from one of Mr. C's own testimonies, that this is not the case.

"In the next quotation (p. 15.) produced in favor of this point, it would puzzle the reader, methinks, without the help of Mr. C. to find the sem. blance of evidence; though he thinks (and what may a man not think, when his heart is set for it?)-he thinks it "a very strong expression, declarative of the same gracious connection between immersion and remission." It is found in the close of the same discourse; and here it