Observations on a sermon
Ronald D. Dennis, trans. and ed., Defending the Faith: Early Welsh Missionary Publications (Provo, Utah: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2003).
D2 DAVIS, John. Sylwadau ar bregeth ynghylch “Saint y Dyddiau Diweddaf a doniau gwyrthiol.” (Observations on a sermon about “The Latter-day Saints and miraculous gifts.”) Carmarthen: Printed by John Davis, [1848?].
8 pp. 16.6 cm. Welsh Mormon Writings 22.
Observations contains Davis’s response to a sermon which had been delivered 27 August 1848 in Carmarthen by the Reverend David Evans, a widely respected Anglican priest. A short time after delivering his sermon, Evans published it in the form of a 20-page pamphlet that sold for sixpence. The pamphlet, entitled Saint y Dyddiau Diweddaf a doniau gwyrthiol (The Latter-day Saints and miraculous gifts), lacks the vicious language that other antagonists were then using whenever they mentioned The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Evans does, however, severely criticize the defense that the Church offered for a continuation of miracles from the time of Jesus Christ. He presents his ideas in a gentlemanly fashion and concludes that the members of the Church are false prophets and heretics.
In Observations, Davis also refrains from ad hominem arguments and simply addresses himself to Evans’s points of logic, one by one, defending modern-day miracles by those who have the proper authority to act in the name of the Savior.
Since Observations was published in Carmarthen, it would have come off Davis’s press sometime before it was moved to Merthyr Tydfil (early March 1849) and after its appearance in Prophet of the Jubilee (December 1848, pp. 176–183).
Observations on a Sermon About
“The Latter-Day Saints and Miraculous Gifts.”
THE AUTHOR and publisher of the above sermon is the Rev. David Evans, Curate of St. David’s Church, Carmarthen; who was brought up in the Carmarthen Presbyterian Academy, and was a minister with the Independents; but after that he was a student in Lampeter College, and now he is an approved priest. The name attached to the sermon is the only reason I consider making comments on it. The great task Capt. Jones has in looking after about three thousand Saints, prevents him from commenting on everything that may be published against our religion; but somehow or other, it happens most often that the books that are published against the Saints, especially Mr. Evans’s sermon, have already been answered by him in various books. Now, if our opponents were to be sensible and honest enough to read our books before publishing, they would save a lot of trouble to themselves and us; for they could find their reasons, together with our answers to them, published already. I thought when I gave my sixpence for this ten-page sermon that I was buying an original product, and one worthy of the order of priesthood; but when I saw that the most particular materials of the product had been in the skull of W. R. Davies, Dowlais (Baptist) and a host of other heretics in the eyes of the Pure Church, I was tremendously disappointed.
Having given that much preamble, I come more particularly to note the content of the sermon. The text our preacher chose is seen in Mark xvi, 17, 18, which is, “And these signs shall follow them that believe; in my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Those are the words of Jesus Christ; and heaven and earth must pass before one word of them fails. I wish I could say that about Mr. Evans’s sermon: perhaps, maybe, before an uneducated reviewer like myself has passed, and the Bible before me, every syllable of it will have fled from shame. Our friend begins by saying that “many false prophets are rising up, saying of Christ, Behold, he is in the wilderness—namely over with the Mormons in the American desert; or behold, he is here in the secret rooms with us, and not in the country’s churches and chapels;” and later on in his sermon, “he warns the people in the language of Christ, ‘Do not go’ (to the wilderness, nor to the highways, nor to the secret rooms) ‘after them, and do not believe them.’” Where did Mr. Evans learn this? Did he hear that the Saints say that Jesus Christ is now in the American desert, or in some secret rooms in this country? What, Mr. Evans? Did you not hear that the “Princites,” (the men who were priests like yourself, and also in the same college as you), say that Christ has come, and that they have him in a chapel in New Charlinch, near Bridgewater; and this chapel is called by them “Aga Pamona”? (See ‘Millennial Star,’ May 15, 1848.) The Saints do not believe that Christ has come to a wilderness, or a room, or a church, or a chapel, or Aga Pamona either so far, or that he will ever come to such places; but they believe he will come on the clouds of heaven, and that every eye will see him, and then there will then be no argument whether he will come to a wilderness or a church, since the matter will be proven with flaming fire to those “who do not know God, and do not obey the gospel of Jesus Christ.” It is not strange that Mr. Evans should have spoken so foolishly, because he is so ignorant of the Saints and their religion that he does not know that they are the same people as the Mormons, and that the followers of Joseph Smith in America are not the same people as the Saints in Wales. For proof of this ignorance, read the first two pages of his sermon. What can be more foolish than seeing a man going to show the deceit of people and their religion, without knowing much of anything about the one or the other? That is like a blind man trying to lead the sightless.
Further, Mr. Evans says of the Saints as follows:—”These men are dissenting from the church of God, as well as from all other religious people of the age, and thus they are some sort of double Nonconformists” (page 4). What church, pray, is “the church of God?” If it is the Church of England, then those of “all other religious people of the age” are the churches of the devil; and the dissent of the Saints from them, as far as that goes, is good; for they are retreating from evil. The truth is this;—if the Saints dissent from the religions of this age, they do not dissent from the religion of Christ and his apostles; but as for the Church of England it has dissented from the Church of Rome, and all other religious believers of the age have dissented from the Church of England. Now, if the Church of Rome was not the Church of God, then God had no church before the existence of the Church of England: consequently, whoever dissents from the Church of England is like the heathen and the publican. Then, if the Saints have withdrawn from the world, they cannot also have withdrawn from the Church of God. I believe in world and church, but not purgatory. Let Mr. Evans decide then, whether it is from the world or the Church that the Saints have withdrawn. Again says our preacher,—”They believe they are particular objects of God’s grace and spirit, having received light and wisdom from heaven, that the world in general knows nothing of them, and that everyone who does not share their secret is ‘innate and without the Spirit.’” This teacher is as earthly as Nicodemus. The “world” of course knows about all his light and wisdom, before it wonders at the Saints’ saying; and if he does not receive from heaven, or know much more than the world, he is “innate and without the Spirit.” Despite all the colleges that there are in the country, we need one more—one to teach common sense.
On page 6, Mr. Evans comments on the promise in his text, as follows:—”The Lord promises here that he would bear witness to the gospel through miracles; and this promise he fulfilled in the first age of the church.” Now, before we can believe that the promise was fulfilled at that time, we need to know to what sort of men it was given; and Jesus Christ gives us this answer—”And these signs shall follow them that believe.” If we believe the gospel as did the men of old, the promise is for us too; and if we do not believe, and accept baptism as they did, then we cannot be saved either. Also, if we believe as they did in time past, and without the signs following us, Christ must be lying; or else, if Christ is truthful, then Mr. Evans is lying, because he says they have ended. Perhaps, if we were to look what was the purpose of the “signs to follow” the believers, we would find out if they are needed now or not. We find that casting out devils is one thing; and if devils were some hindrance to Christ’s gospel at that time, they are so again; if they possess mankind now, they need to be cast out, of course. Mr. Evans says on this subject on page 18, “The miraculous power is not seen now casting fierce devils out of men’s bodies; but such cruel and odious devils are cast out of the souls of sinners constantly.” A manʼs soul is in his body; and if devils are cast out of the soul, they must be cast out of the body: and since “such cruel and odious devils” disturb men now, there is as much need as ever for the promise at present. Another thing promised to the believers is “speaking with new tongues:” but what could be the purpose of that, I wonder? Mr. Evans can answer first:—”The ability to speak with new tongues is for convincing the unbeliever” (see p. l3). Were the tongues the best thing in former times for convincing the unbeliever? If so, why would tongues not be the best thing again? These tongues could not but convince the unbeliever at that time: how is the unbeliever to be convinced in our age? If there is a new way, that is an addition to the scriptures. Now, the scriptures can answer what “speaking with tongues” is; who knows but that the two parties may agree. It is said in I Cor. xiv, 2, as follows—”He that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.” If it was in unknown languages the apostles were preaching, they were not speaking to “every creature,” rather to God, for the people did not “understand” them; and if they did understand them, like those devout men on the day of the Pentecost, they would not believe, any more than they did, because God said, “With other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me” (I Cor. xiv, 21). Perhaps they would not all say that they were “full of new wine,” or “becoming mad.” A fair trial of the tongues as a means of convincing was had on the Pentecost; but no one there believed until Peter preached after that in the common language (Acts ii, 14—40). The same sort of tongues were spoken on the Pentecost as in Ephesus (Acts xiv, 6); only that men happened to be present in the former place who could understand the languages, and not in the latter. The purpose of the unknown tongues to follow them that believe, is to edify the persons who use them (I Cor. xiv, 4), and by interpreting them, to edify the church also (ver. 5). Read the whole Testament, and prove to me that that is not their purpose, and that they are not needed again to edify the believers. If Mr. Evans proves that the apostles preached the gospel in unknown tongues, then I shall prove that no one “understood” them, if they did not “interpret;” or, if some did understand them, that they would not believe them. Our friend is at loggerheads with the scriptures on this subject, anyway, however he may be about the next promise. That promise is, “They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them.” Now, what could be the purpose of taking up serpents? And would it be when the serpents attacked the believers, or the believers attacked them, that the power to defeat them would be given? If we read (in Acts xxviii, 3—5) about that venomous creature that jumped out of the fire, and stuck to Paul’s hand, we find an answer, I should think, to the two previous questions. Again, with regard to drinking poison without sustaining harm; was the purpose of the promise to save the believers from the plots of their enemies, or to show signs to the world? Was it “if they drink” in ignorance, mixed with their drinks, or when they drank in obedience to anyone who wished it from them, that our Lord meant? Let the reader judge for himself. If the believers were to grasp serpents, or drink poison, at anyone’s bidding, the disciples of Jesus would be more like enchanters than anything else; and if the children of God obeyed the children of the devil, by grasping a serpent or drinking poison for their sake, it would be exactly the same thing as if Jesus Christ had turned the stones to bread for Satan’s sake. Now, since the continuance of the promise is most under debate, and not its purpose, we shall hear what reason says. If the purpose of such things was to convince the unbelievers about the gospel, why are they not needed in this age, as there is nothing else for that purpose in the church now, than there was at first? Again, if it is argued that the purpose of the former signs was to plant Christianity, and thus that they are not needed now; why, then, since Christianity is so new in China and other countries, is there not the same need of signs to follow there, in order to plant it, in these days as there was in earlier days? On the other hand, if the purpose of the signs was to benefit and defend the early believers, in the face of the enmity and cunning of the kingdom of darkness, why are they not needed also in this age for the same purpose? The reader can again judge on whose side reason is, and I can go on to something else. The last promise our Lord gave to believers of his gospel is as follows:—”They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” The rule the believers had to operate by is to be seen in James v, 14—16,—”Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up [unless it be his time to die, of course]. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” I do not think there is one doctor in the land who will not admit that this was a promise for the benefit of the believers; for it is the benefit of the sick person that he himself has in mind when he gives medication: so too with God, except that his medicine and his rules for the sick person are different from the doctor’s. Who thinks that God wanted to give a sign to the world when he was giving health to his children? or that God wished to make believing easier through signs than preaching? Everyone will admit, perhaps, that if one does not believe by hearing preaching, one will not believe either by seeing the dead resurrected. If it is so, then, signs are not for convincing the unbelievers, but for the benefit of the believers; for the gospel is the most effective and safe instrument for convincing, because by depending on signs, we can be charmed by magicians, &c. If this healing was again something to establish Christianity, why would it not exist in the countries where it is said that Christianity is being established in our age? “How,” as Mr. Evans says on page 7, is it “possible to overthrow polytheism and paganism in the world, by preaching the cross, without miracles?” Well, why could he not see that the foreign countries, as well as many unbelievers in this country, need miracles and signs now as much as in former times? But, on the other hand, if the purpose of the signs was to benefit the believers, by healing them, &c., why not again, as the same need exists? Why can “the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man” not succeed with God in this age, to obtain health, as well as anything else? Can one not receive “whatsoever” one asks in the name of Jesus Christ now? If one can, the signs are following. And if we fail to get health, or something else, let us ask ourselves if there are “transgressions” or a lack of faith which are an obstacle to that; and if there are such things, let us all confess to each other, and pray for each other; for a failure or two is no proof that God does not listen to his children. Let us remember that there were in the early church “many weak and sickly, and many sleeping” (I Cor. xi, 30), because of transgressions; and we should make allowance for such things in this age, before we condemn prayer for a failure or two. Also, we should remember Timothy and his frequent weakness, and poor Trophimus, sick at Miletum, without either of them, as far as we know, having transgressed. God’s ways are sometimes beyond the understanding of his children; and because of that, let us take him at his word always, believing that he will fulfill everything which is for our good.
Now, Mr. Evans, I have talked a great deal about the signs, and proved that they are promised to the believers of the gospel of Jesus Christ, and also shown my reasons for their continuance. Now we need to know how the Lord worked with his servants, and whether he works with them now. The latter is answered on page 17 of the sermon like this:—”The Lord is again working through and with his gospel;” and he says too, but without any proof, “Now conversion, and not miracles, is the abiding proof of the divine influences in the church of Christ.” What is the worth of an assertion like that? I prefer to believe the assertion in the scriptures, in the last verse of Mark; which is, “And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following.” Where is the proof that God has changed his method of working? The absence of the signs in the Church of England, and the country’s chapels, is no proof at all; because one first has to prove that they are believers. We shall comment on this later. Mr. Evans, on page 13, brings scriptural proof, in his opinion, that the signs have ended. By doing that, he, like many before him, in his ignorance, is referring to words in the scriptures that prove their continuance. The words are to be seen in I Cor. xiii, 8, and they are as follows:—”Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.” Without reading more than that, it is very reasonable proof; and yet it does not inform us when they were to end. For all that is said to the contrary, they cannot have ended yet. But the thing is, Mr. Evans is safe in Paul’s snare: it is strange how many blackbirds this catches. Now, the apostle says more than is in the above verse: the ninth and tenth explain the matter. He says there, “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then [not before then] that which is in part shall be done away.” If that which is perfect is not come, then speaking with tongues, prophecy, knowledge, &c., is to be in the church. The church is to enjoy the childish things—to “speak,” understand, and think in a childish way, until it becomes “a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ,” when it puts away childish things, and instead of looking through a glass darkly, comes to see face to face, and instead of knowing in part, comes to know even as it is known. (I Cor. xiii, 11, 12; Eph. iv, 13.) Now it will be valuable for Mr. Evans to try to prove that that which is perfect is come: then he can say that the signs have ended. I shall endeavor to do that for him, like this:—It can mean that that which is perfect is come, because the holy scriptures are finished, and we have a sufficient rule to worship by, and nothing more is needed. Mr. Evans probably thinks that a good reason; at least, if he does not think it so, there are plenty who do; for it is not a saying of mine, but of a giant enemy of the Saints. To assist me in this task, I quote Mr. Evans’s words on page 14—”If the holy scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are a sufficient rule for our faith and our observance, we fear to fall under God’s judgment by claiming a right to some new revelation of his will, as men do these days, ‘For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book,’ &c.—Rev. xxii, 18.” Now, that is the whole thing locked up, which no one can open except the one who has the key. But let us try, anyway, without any key. What are the “prophetic words of this book?” John’s Revelation is the only prophetic book of the New Testament; consequently, adding to, or taking away from the Revelation, is what is forbidden. There is a similar prohibition in Prov. xxx, 5, 6, and other places; but the New Testament was added after that. A prohibition to man to add does not prevent God from adding. The Revelation is God’s word, and not man’s word; and because of that, God alone is to add or take away. It was after John was on the island of Patmos, that the scriptures were gathered together, as many as were gathered, because many are missing. (See I Cor. v, 9; Jude 3, 14; Luke i, 1, 2, &c.) What the angel says to John (Rev. xxii, 10), which is, “Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book,” proves clearly that only the Revelation was meant; because the other books of the two Testaments had been made known to the churches before the angel ever issued the prohibition in question, if it is believed that the Revelation is the last book that was written. On the other hand, if John was not the last, then some have added contrary to the prohibition. But that is probably enough about that. We shall say a word, then, about that which is perfect. If a collection of what Paul and others knew and wrote “in part” is what is “perfect,” then, according to the same reasoning, many imperfections could constitute perfection! Everything that Paul and others knew, they knew “in part”; and if a collection in a book of what they wrote makes that which is “perfect,” then we should know and prophesy better than they, because we have that which is perfect. Indeed, if the religious people of this age knew in part, they would learn something from God, in order to end the ceaseless arguments; but since they claim to have that which is perfect, God pays them no heed, and so it will be until they learn the lesson that they know nothing. Now, having traced that much, we dare to assert with Jesus Christ that the signs are to follow them that believe, while his gospel is preached; and we say with Paul, that the prophesying and speaking with tongues in part, is to continue until that perfection comes when we shall see face to face.
Our friend Mr. Evans, on page 11, tries to convince us that the signs have ended, by making the following remarks:—”Do we have to believe that there has been no saving faith in the world for more than fifteen hundred years, since no miracles have been performed by the professors of Christ’s religion in that interval of time? Has the whole world been condemned for such a long time? Did the active and useful men who labored so much in the name of Jesus in those centuries fall into eternal perdition? Let God not allow us to draw such a frightful conclusion! And yet, if one must consider the words in the broad meaning in which the Saints take them, this is the only conclusion to be drawn from the lack of miraculous faith in the church.” Here it is most excellently, at last; for Mr. Evans has proved either that the signs have ended, or else that all the religious people from the days of the apostles have gone to “eternal perdition.” But, wait a moment; because “this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light.” Is God going to condemn men for refusing the light when they were not offered it? I wonder whether the pagans who have never heard the gospel will go to the wretchedness? Would a merciful God behave in that manner? No, “he that believeth not,” he says, “is condemned,” and not those who had no opportunity for that. All, I should think, are to be judged on their actions, and according to their advantages. I believe that the “active and useful men who labored so much in the name of Jesus in those centuries,” have been rewarded by God for every goodness. But the question is, had they obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ, been “baptized for the remission of sins” by God’s appointed servants, and received that Holy Ghost which “calls to mind the things which have passed, and tells things to come,” and which is also promised to “all that are afar off” (Acts ii, 39)? And did God through them “confirm his word through the signs which were to follow?” If one cannot answer affirmatively, then it is not likely that they received the gospel, which would not come to them “in word only, but in great assurance and in the Holy Ghost.” The signs, together with the fruits of the Spirit, were the marks on Christ’s disciples in the beginning; and how can they be known after that time, except by the same marks? Is it by being “without the Spirit,” and possessing much human knowledge, that they are to be recognized? Is it because they “forbid speaking with tongues,” or “despise prophecy,” or else “evangelize differently from the evangelism” of Paul, that one may recognize them? Let it be indicated to me, from the scriptures, that the same marks ought not to be on the believers in this age as in that age. God did not intend to confirm the word of the Catholics, neither those who separated from them, with the “signs,” but only his own word; and consequently it is not surprising at all that the signs were not in this country when it was covered by Catholicism, and it is still not surprising, when one sees only branches stemming from Catholicism filling our land. The “mystery of iniquity” which Paul saw beginning to work in his time (2 Thes. ii), is certain to be in full operation in our days, and to have caused a “falling away” centuries ago; but such “Wicked” will not be disposed of, until the Lord shall consume him “with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.” Everyone who at that time does not know God, and has not obeyed the gospel of Jesus Christ, which was restored by an angel from heaven, will be destroyed “with flaming fire.” Religions known by the names of men will not do at that time, but a gospel bringing a knowledge of God, like the gospel professed by the Latter-day Saints, or the one professed by the apostles. God will provide justice for those who have died without hearing the “eternal gospel,” and he will prepare judgment for those who do hear it, and do not believe it. The gifted preachers in recent years were as much servants of God as some men would be servants to the Queen, who thought themselves to be policemen, and doing a great deal of good, when they had never been sent by her. As much authority from God is needed to administer his laws, as is needed from Victoria in order to administer her laws. God does not “call unto him,” except through his servants, and they cannot call for him, without receiving a revelation of his will. “The active and useful men who labored so much in the name of Jesus in the centuries” past, were servants without revelation, and servants also, of course, without authority to administer. Such a one exactly is Mr. Evans, by his own admission; for he can claim no authority except one deriving from Catholicism. If he can, let him prove it. Now, it will be seen that those who died are not lost for not believing what they never heard; and that there is no reason to prove that the “signs” will not follow those who believe the same gospel as before.
Further, in order to finish, I shall mix the remains I see of Mr. Evans’s reasons in one heap, and I shall shatter them all together. He says on page 17, that “it is not through working miracles that one is reborn:” no, of course, but by being “born of water and of the Spirit.” Again, on page 9, he says, “The apostles appealed to the scriptures of the Old Testament for confirmation of the doctrines they preached.” So do the Saints appeal to the New Testament, and not to the interpretations and traditions of this dark enlightened age; but who will come out to the field to prove them, face to face? Mr. Evans also says something like this:—”Since miracles are wonders, their daily occurrence would cancel the effect they were intended to have.” Well, since none has happened for many thousands of days, perhaps some could be fulfilled at present without cancelling the effect. And since our reverend friend shouts on page 15, “Let the deaf be shown whose ears have been opened through the power of the Saints. Who of them has loosened the tongue-strings of the mute, causing him to speak the praises of God?”—we answer that Mr. Evans can see a person who came to hear and speak—yes, speak the praises of God, after being baptized by the Saints; it happened recently, and it was in Wales. If anyone wants proof, let him go to Newport, and ask for a man, namely Robert Brinkworth, in the house of Mr. Nash, basketmaker, on Market Street; and let him read what the editor of the newspaper there, the Merlin, published in one of the issues for September, 1848. Everyone there admits that he was deaf and dumb, and that he speaks and hears now; but who will say that that was the “finger of God,” except those who believe his word. (See further in the PROPHET for November, 1848.) Again, says Mr. Evans, “And if some of them, like Irving, think that they have the gift of the Spirit to speak with tongues that they never learned, let them show what language it is, and which men on earth speak it.” Let him come to the church to see, because it is in the church that the commandment is to practice the spiritual gifts; but let him not come there “unbelieving,” or “uneducated;” otherwise he will say that they are becoming mad, when they utter some language spoken by men. If our friend had a good sign, I believe he would leave the Church immediately, even though he says that no signs exist. Nearly all the religious people of our country are seeking a sign, but no sign will be given them by God; but perhaps the false prophet will have pity on them when he comes, and will draw fire from heaven in their presence, to satisfy them and convince them all of the effectiveness of his religion. (Rev. xiii, 13.) “Wait a little while in faith,” for the beast will come upon us before the coming of Jesus Christ.
Now, having been rather lengthy, I shall close by saying, If anyone wishes to know if the church of Jesus Christ is on the earth now, and that God has set in it, “first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues,” &c. (I Cor. xii, 28)—if anyone wishes to know that, I say, let him do the will of God, “and he shall KNOW of the doctrine.”
WHY do you not believe our testimony?
Why do you not prove everything there is?
Why do you not wish to have light,
While it is now as light as day?
Why would you not like to have certainty,
Instead of weak hope and belief?
Why do you not grasp the substance,
Instead of the worthless, fleeing shadow?
Why would you not like to have the gifts—
A gift for all as God sees fit?
Why would you not now believe in miracles,
While He who worked them is alive?
Why would you not like a gift to heal,
And tell of things to come,
And speak in a dialect,
While that which is “in part” persists?
Why do you believe the “form of godliness,”
While wholly denying its “power?”
Why do you always teach,
While you cannot know anything?
Why do you not give full obedience
To the words of the King of heaven,
That you may have real knowledge,
Through revelation, from Him?
Carmarthen. J. Davis.