THE important question of Christian position naturally flows from the one we have been considering-the forgiveness of sins. Unless the conscience be cleansed from all sins there could be no enjoyment of the divine presence. This is the turning-point between the Brethren and their opponents; and this being the very threshold of Christianity, we must not wonder at the former being considered in error, seeing the latter do not understand their position as Christians, or rather, Christian position. They are on different ground and look at divine things from different points of view. The thoughts of the one are formed and their statements governed by the particular school of theology in which they have been trained; while the thoughts and statements of the other are governed by scripture only.
Of course theologians would say that their different bodies of divinity were fair and honest deductions from scripture and supported by it. Well, suppose we admit this; but how much of the truth of God is left out in such standards? Where should we find the doctrine of the church of God as the body and bride of Christ? the presence of the Holy Ghost on earth and His varied operations? the coming again of the Lord to receive us to Himself? the rapture of the saints? the heavenly relations of the Christian? the first resurrection, and the millennial reign of the saints with Christ for a thousand years? (1 Corinthians 12; Ephesians 4; Revelation 21; John 14; 15; 16; John 14:1-3 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 1 Corinthians 15:51, 52; Ephesians 2:4-6; Colossians 3:1-4; Revelation 20:5, 6.) These blessed and precious truths are plainly and abundantly taught in scripture, and characterize the teaching and writings of the Brethren. But in what system of theology are they to be found? We know of none; we believe in none.
Individual Christians, we know, there are in the various denominations who hold and teach some of these truths, especially of late years; but we are speaking of those systems of doctrine which are intended to guide young men in their studies, and on which they are examined before being licensed, and by which they will be judged if they should ever after become the subjects of discipline. They must only preach those doctrines which are within the limits of their system if they would not be called in question. How then, we may ask, can those who have been so trained, and still adhere to their system, be competent to weigh in the balances of the sanctuary, the truths which constitute the teaching of Brethren, seeing they do not understand them, but merely judge them by their own theology? It is only in this way that we can account for the evident incompetency of their reviewers to examine what they hold in the clear light of scripture. Believing their own system to be sound, they must conclude that the Brethren are most unsound.