70 OBLIGATION OF THE SABBATII. 



The Council at Jerusalem. 



PART III. 



" Whosoever therefore shall break one of tLese least commandments, 

 and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of 

 heaven ; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be 

 called great in the kingdom of heaven." — Matthew v. 19. 



I SNATCH time from repose to finish my Reply to W. B. T. 

 Some of my friends liave been pleased to express their ap- 

 proval of my last article on all points but one — its length. 

 But it seems to me, on tliis score, 3/ow, Messrs. Editors, have 

 the best right to complain. I do not wish toabuse your forbear- 

 ance. Well-considered brevity does give to a discourse new 

 force and beauty. But, give me the full length living man, 

 even of large proportions, rather than the mummy regularly 

 embalmed, shrunk, and shortened ! Some others of my friends 

 think that I have treated W. B. T. with too much indulgence. 

 I wonder whether such, if aiming at the front of the defying 

 Philistine, would, like David, have chosen the smootli stones 

 from the brook. All tastes cannot be satisfied. I prefer the 

 smooth stones, the free hand, and the full sweep of the sling. 

 But wisdoni is profitable to direct, especially *^the wisdom 

 whichisfrom above; which isfirstp^ire, thenpeace<x?*/e, gentle, 

 and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, loithout 

 partiality and loitliout liy^ocruy. And the f mit of righteous- 

 ness is sown in peace, 0/ them that mahe peaceJ' {James iii. 

 17, 18.) May that wisdom from above be given to me in 

 this Discussion, and also to my friend ! 



y. The FiFTH Proposition defended by my friend W. B. 

 T. is, that " the Sabbath was formally abrogated by the first 

 council at Jerusalem.'' 



I had said of this at first, ^^ it is a pure assumption, without 

 a shadow of proof. I meet it with an uuequivocal denial." My 

 friend W. B. T., it appears, thinks my brevity here even too 

 laconic. So easy it is in argument to err on either side, of full- 

 ness or conciseness. 



