APOSTLES.

Query-PERMIT me to ask of you occasionally to explain difficulties that may present themselves to the young learner. I find a fetter written by Paul, and Sylvanus, and Timotheus, to the church composed of Thessalonians, in which they speak of themselves as being Apostles. See 6th verse of the 2d chapter. Were Sylvanus and Timotheus APOSTLES? If so, how will we prove that the Apostles have no successors? We could not prove that Sylvanus or Timotheus ever saw Jesus Christ? &c. Enough has been said to explain the difficulty. Yours in the Lord, M. W..

Answer. There are three orders of Apostles spoken of in the New Testament.

1st. Jesus Christ is called the Apostle of God, or the Apostle of the christian religion, (Heb. iii. 3.) in the same sense as Moses was the Apostle of the Jews' religion. Shiloh, (from shileh, to send,) is applied by the Hebrews to the minister of the synagogue, as negotii aedis sacrae curator, i. e. curator or president of the business of the sacred house. One sent by God with authority to preside over his house, fills the outlines of the Hebrew word Shiloh, to which the Greek word Apostolos is made to correspond by the Seventy and by the New Testament writers. John xvii. 18. Jesus, by a periphrasis, calls himself the Apostle of the Father: "As thou hast constituted me thy Apostle, so have I constituted them my Apostles to the world."

Of this order there were but two Apostles-Moses and Jesus; Apostles of God, persons called and sent by God, with authority to call, organize, and preside over his family.

The second order are the Apostles of Jesus Christ, called and sent by and from him, with authority to call, organize, and preside over his family, or that family which God has given him. Hence the christian assembly is the congregation of God as well as the congregation of the Lord Jesus Christ. Such were the twelve Apostles of the Lamb.

The third order are the Apostles of the congregations. These were persons chosen and sent by the congregations on special errands, and therefore are called in the original apostoloi ecclesiou, (Apostles of the churches.) 2 Cor. viii. 23. Paul himself surnames them the Apostles of the churches, and calls Epaphroditus the Apostle of the Philippians, ch. ii. 25. The three orders in contradistinction are appropriately styled the Apostles of God, the Apostles of Jesus Christ, and Apostles of the congregations.

It might be added that some individuals in the first age were by some special suggestions of the Holy Spirit sent out by the christian congregation on special missions. The Holy Spirit suggested not to themselves that they ought to go forth, but to the congregation to send them forth as aids of those immediately called and sent by the Lord Jesus in his own person. Thus Barnabas was sent forth in company with Saul, not to transact any special business for the congregation

that sent him, but to be a fellow-laborer in a special mission from the King. "The Holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul to the work to which I have called them." Barnabas is on this account associated with Paul as an Apostle in a subordinate sense of the

term.

BARNABAS,

Joses, a Levite of Cyprus, obtained a high renown in Jerusalem among the Apostles for his liberality, and especially for his powers in exhortation. They surnamed him Barnabas, which signifies a son of exhortation.* Thus our Lord surnamed James and John Boanerges, (sons of thunder,) for their zeal and power. As an exhorter Barnabas was renowned. Acts xi. 23, 24. He was first an Apostle of the congregation in Jerusalem, (Acts xi. 22,) sent to Antioch, where he was renowned as a prophet and exhorter. He was with Paul again sent by the Antiochans as their Apostle to Jerusalem, and thence returned to Antioch before he and Saul were sent out by the command of the Holy Spirit ou a general mission from Antioch They had John for their attendant. Luke records certain incidents in this mission and tour which occurred in Salamis, Paphos, Perga, Antioch in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe of Lycaonia, and Attalia, until their return to Antioch in Syria. Thus they traversed the three provinces of Pamphylia, Lycaonia, and Pisidia. From Antioch they were sent to Jerusalem to consult the Apostles and Elders in that church on the much vexed question about the circumcision of the Gentiles. From Jerusalem they returned to Antioch, accompanied by two other Apostles of the church in Jerusalem, viz. Silas, or Sylvanus, and Judas, surnamed Barsabas, (son of rest.) These were chief men among the brethren in Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas continued some time in Antioch; and upon a proposition from Paul to revisit the congregations, they disputed on the propriety of taking with them John Mark. Thus, after travelling and laboring together for almost seven years, these renowned men and mighty Apostles so fiercely disputed on a question of expediency as to separate from each other and never again to labor in the same field conjointly for any length of time. Barnabas and Mark turned their faces to Cyprus, the country of their kindred; while Paul and Silas directed their course through Syria to Cilicia, the province of Paul's nativity.

SILAS.

Silas and Sylvanus are certainly two names for the same person. Silas and Tertius, (Rom. xvi. 22.) are the same person. Silas signifies the third; and when writing, as Paul's amanuensis, to the Latin church in Rome, he translates his name by Tertius, which in that tongue signifies the third. He first appears as a chief brother in the Jerusalem congregation, where most of the renowned chiefs in the christian army received their christian education. He was made an Apostle from that church (Acts xv. 29.) in the mission to the Gentiles in Antioch. Paul chose him as a companion after his separation *This rendering will be sustained in the third edition of the new version.

from Barnabas; and being recommended to the favor of God by the congregation in Antioch, in Syria, he travels with Paul as an Apostle in the room of Barnabas. They make a tour through two provinces, Syria and Cilicia, before a third person was associated with them.

TIMOTHY.

Timothy, or Timotheus, joins them at Derbe, Paul circumcises him because of the Jewish prejudice, and chooses him as a companion, who, with Luke and Silas, accompany him for some time. Paul recommends him as "his fellow-laborer," as "a minister of God," and the brethren receive him and sustain him as such.

It would appear that not any of the epistles now extant were written by Paul during the years in which he and Barnabas labored together. The first epistle to the Thessalonians, most probably the most ancient of all the apostolic epistles, was written while Sylvanus and Timotheus were his companions and fellow-laborers. Sylvanus being well recommended by the brethren in Jerusalem, and Timothy by the brethren in Lystra and Iconium, and both of them equally called with Paul in a vision from the the Lord to go into Macedonia to preach the gospel, Paul hesitated not in the inscription of his letter to the Thessalonians, to associate them with himself, and to call them in common with himself Apostles of Christ; (ch, ii. ver. 6. 1st Ep.) for so they were to the Macedonians. To no other church does he thus speak of either of them. In his letter to the Corinthians he calls himself an Apostle and Timothy a brother. In his letter to the Philippians he styles himself and Timothy the servants of Jesus Christ; and to the Colossians and Philemon he introduces Timothy as a brother.

EPAPHRAS.

Epaphras being a contraction for Epaphroditus, as Demas is for Demetrius, is supposed to be the same person called Epaphroditus in the letter to the Philippians. He was a member of the church in Colosse, and in that letter is called Epaphras, while in that to the Philippians he is called Epaphroditus. He is styled the Apostle of the Philippians and a faithful minister for the Colossians.

The

Thus from the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles, we learn that any person sent by God was called his Apostle. One sent by Jesus Christ was his Apostle, and one sent by a congregation was the Apostle of the congregations that sent him. original word apostolos is found in these three acceptations in the New Testament. Any one sent by Jesus Christ to preach the gospel to those who had not before heard it; whether that sending was by a command of the Holy Spirit, as in the case of Barnabas, or by the congregations with the choice of the Apostles, as in the case of Silas and Timothy, was in a subordinate sense called an Apostle of Christ. So far the New Testament bears witness. But in the full official import of the term in its primary signification, it applied only to Moses, Jesus Christ, and the twelve Apostles of Jesus Christ. Paul, as high in office as any of the twelve, felt and acknowledged the difficulty of applying this term

to himself in its primary official import. He was born too late; yet that deficiency was more than compensated by the abundance of visions, revelations, and powers with which he was distinguished. At present we have three orders of Apostles-tnose sent by men in the flesh; those sent out by the congregations; and those sent by themselves. The first is an Apostle of men; the second, an Apostle of the church that sends him; the third is an Apostle of himself. As for succession in this office, there never was such an idea suggested in the New or Old Testament. Moses had none; Jesus Christ had none; the twelve Apostles had none; Silas, Timothy, and Epaphroditus had Our present Charge des Affaires at the Court of St. James is as fully the successor of the Apostles to Ghent, who finished the last treaty of peace with Great Britain, as is any man now living the successor of the Apostles Peter or Paul. EDITOR.

none.

REMARKS ON PHILALETHES.

Dear brother Campbell,

I HAVE read the criticism of Philalethes on "Matheteuo” over and over again, and cannot for my life see, that in his views, he departs materially from the views of haptism which have been exhibited by yourself and others, and which, in fact, were exhibited by the Apostles themselves. It is "Matheteuo," as used in what is generrally called the apostolic commission, or (as Philalethes will have it) command, to which our attention is particularly called:-and to what conclusion does P. bring the matter? Why, that we are to understand this term by the context, and that this context shows that the command to the Apostles was to go forth and "induce the nations" to become not secret or private disciples, but open and avowed disciples. The inevitable inference is, that the Apostles could not have been considered as having fulfilled their commission or "command," unless they had made such disciples as are contemplated by the commission. Philalethes' views, then, are, that unimmersed disciples, however "real," are not such disciples as the Apostles were commanded to make; and although an individual might know privately that he was a "real" disciple of Christ, yet he would not have been recognized as such by the Apostles unless baptized.. This brings us then to ask this question-Who would be right in this matter-the private individual or the Apostles? The unimmersed person says, I know I am a “real” disciple. The Apostles say, We cannot consider you as such; you are not such disciples as we were charged to make. "Not he who commendeth himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth.” I say, then, Philalethes' views are, that no unimmersed person can be such a disciple as the Apostles were commanded to make; and therefore none of us who acknowledge the authority of the Apostles, and who have contended that a disciple is not made until immersed, need alter our course in this matter. It is true that P. uses the words "real" and "hypocrite" in such a way as rather to cast dust into our eyes while reading his learned production: but let us, little folk, not

be alarmed; Philalethes is still with us; let us go on, and make disciples, "immersing them, and teaching them to observe all things whatsoever Christ commanded," even though some should hanker round the school, and hear the lessons which are given, and become good scholars without ever having entered the school. One question, however, I would leave with P. before I leave this part of the subject. He considers "obedience" as one of the "elements" of a christian, and doubtless means obedience to the gospel. Will he please inform us whether an unimmersed person, under any circumstances, has obeyed the gospel! And "if his answer be affirmative, he is requested to specify the evidence which has engendered in his mind this conviction or belief."

The above I offer as a commentary (seeing commentaries are fashionable) in part, upon the production under consideration. This I should not have ventured upon, had it not been that some of our opponents in this quarter, as well as our good friend and brother "John," seem to think that our learned old Scotch 'brother has flown the way, or rather dissents materially from us in this matter. It is true, I fear, John will feel rather sore, after the severe (what shall 1 call it?) castigation of our good old brother. But I hope he will bear it patiently, and recollect that it is one of the privileges of the aged not to be very ceremonious to the young, especially when the odds of learning are, as they seem to be in this case, so much on the side of age. I say, then, to John, faint not under this rebuke, but bear it with patience.

But, sir, although I thus speak to John, and prescribe this line of conduct to myself, let us not be so modest as not to acknowledge that, unless P. will give us a concordance, we are utterly unable to make such a commentary on the 14th and 15th paragraphs of "Philalethes" Strictures on John" as will not conflict with the general tenor of his communications in the second and third numbers of the 2d vol. of the Harbinger, particularly the 15th paragraph. Will Philalethes be pleased to show how to reconcile the following quotations? Harbinger, vol. 2. page 131. "The saints have not only the information necessary to enable them to perform their Master's work with dignity and success, within their own minds, but they have an infallible medium or instrument of communication provided and prepared for their use, and actually put into their hands, externally, even God's own unadulterated, unmixed message, contained in sacred writ." Vol. iii. p. 59th. "But we cannot forbear to pity and feel for the man, who, without any better authority than a blundering translation, ventures to assure his fellow-creatures, that he is publishing to them God's message, and nothing but God's message?" I forbear to make any remark on the above, save that they appear to me contradictory. I beg Philalethes will, in the spirit of meekness, and from the abundance of his superior knowledge and literary attainments, show us how to reconcile these apparent contradictions. His object in writing is, I presume, to enlighten his brethren; and surely he ought to explain what we cannot understand. Let not Philalethes consider this