The true Democrat., 1857-02-24
' MORNING, FEBRUARY 24. 1857.

better land for the spiritual seed, into which you cannot enter without faith in Christ
 And it is in this heavenly country Abraham will enter and have fulfilled to him all that God had promised As the father of the faithful he must have an inheritance, in which all the seed can be heirs. This cannot be Ca naan, for the uncircumcised could not be heirs to that land. And this inheritance is distinct ly alluded to, and clearly pointed out in the word of God. And we are glayii to know that all believe that there Is an inheritance for Christians in the future. But in our judgment the true connection between Abraham. as the father of the faithful and those who are Christs, being his seed, and heirs according to the promise, of that inheritance, is not at all understood If the Jews still be the covenanted people of God, and the land of Canaan still their inheritance, then how can Christians be the seed of Abraham? Were they his seed as long as the first covenant stood? Was there at that time any such thing as a spiritual seed? 1 Would christianity ever have been organized if Judeaism had stood? Read the 7th, 9th and 10th chapters of Hebrews, and you will see that it would have been impossible. The first covenant vanished away that the second might take its place. Hebrews 8. 13. For what grand ultimate end? To carry the Jews back to Canaan? No, but to give them better pro- misses that they might have better hope The second covenant was to convert the Jews to Christ and constitute them he spiritual seed of Abraham. If this be not true, what does Paul mean, Heb. g. 15? He teaches that Christ d ed for the redemption of the trans gresson that were under the first testament that they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance" This clearly teaches that those called received the promise of eternal inheritance. Now there are two important points to be noticed the caUinQ and the tnherltonce.
 In the opening discourse under the new CO., venant, pronounced by Peter, we have these words: "For the promise is unto you (Jews) and to your children and to all that are atar of (that is the Gentiles) even as many as the Lord our God shall call.'--Acts ? 39 Observe that tho promise is to those who are "caLed." Now, how are they called, or by what means does Go call men? The apostle answers, "where- unto he (God) called you by our gospel''- II Thess. 2 13, II. This shows that God calls men to salvation, and to obtain this future glory or inheritance. And being thus called, whe- ther of Jews or Gentiles, they were Christs and Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise" s. Paul reaches.-Gal. 3. 29. But if they are not thus called, they had not obtained the promise of the eternal inheritance alluded to.-iIeb. 9. 13.
 The second point is the inheritance itself-- What, Is 1t Canaan or not? Our position is that God never designed to give the spiritual seed ot Abraham any inheritance in Canaan. 50 far we think the evidence fully sustains our position. But we have still more proof, going to show directly that the literal and earthly Canaan was never designed to be the inheri- tance of Abraham and his seed, who walk in the faith which Abraham had before he was circumcsed. In Hebrews H. s, we have the following: By faith Abraham when he was called to go out into place which he should after receive for an inheritance obeyed" Now, this evidently aludes to Canaan; God had pro- missed it to him, yet as Stephen shows, (Acts ' 4,) he received no inheritance in it. And it is still farther said in the 9th verse, that he so- iourned in the laAd of promise, as in T strange country dwelling in tabernacle9 with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs of the same promise" Tn re we have him d mere sojouruer n the land- This makes the matter more evident that Cd- naau not to be his eternal iuheritance - But the 10th verse Is still more obvious: "FOr he looked for a city which hath foundations. whose maker and builder Is God" Now what city Is this, built by God himself? If we look at verses b. It, we have still more evidence :" And truly If they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out they might have had opportunity to have returned. But now they desire better country, that is a heavenly, wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God, for he hath prepared for them d city''
 l, Now this heavenly country was certainly not Canaan, and the cjy was evidently the hea- venly Jerusalem. In reference to the country Peter says of Christians, that they were < be gotten again to lively hope of an inheritance , incorupJible and undefled and that faieth not away, reserved in heaven."-I Peter l. 3, This clearly identifies the country which 4 bra ham expected to inherit. as not pertaining to this earth, but a future state. And if we turn , to Rev. Fl. l. 2, we have both the inheritance and the city pointed out. It is the new earth. wherein dwel5 righteousness See II Peter 5. 13. And the city is the holy city. new Jerusalem coming down from God ou, Of heaven, prepared as bride adorned for her husband" Abraham :" looked for city. whose maker and builder is God"-Hebrews II. To. And in the 26th verse it is said of A braham. Isaac, and others, that they desired heaven ly country and for this reason God was not ashamed to be called their God, for he hath prepared for them city. And if you read the 2lst chapter of Revelations, you have the most perfect description of this city.
 Abraham never saw the literal Jerusalem. for 1t WIS not built for centuries after his day. This country and city, therefore, cannot refer to the literal Canaan and Jerusalem, but to the new earth and the new Jerusalem. It follows therefore, that the inheritance for the seed ot Abraham, according 70 the promise, is not Ca man but the heavenly land. We conceive that this is sufficient to prove onr first propostion. PROP. II. Go7 only designed Atat Me Je,gs shouM inherit Canaan as speciaUy theirs, ant as his chosen people, until the establishment of tie netU cOvendnt.
 As we consider this a most important point, we hope you will hear us patiently. It is bold ly contend d that Canaan, vet by divine right, belongs to the Jews And one important ar gument to sustain the position, is based upon 1. the fact that 1t was given to them for an ever- lastng possession. This position we freely ad- nit IS held by many superior to us, but that diOHe pfOFtS uotlifS, II Liic teStlmOGy Is want ing. We honestly believe that with all their superior talent and learning they are wholly in error upon this most important subject We offer as argument to sustain our position, the following:
 l. God gave Canaan to the Jews, for an euey- lasting possession, in the same sense that he gave the Aaronic Priesthood, as an everlasting priesthood.
 Is this true? If so, then it follows that if by divine authority, the land of Canaan be- longs to the Jews, the Aaronic Priesthood be- longs to them. And if they are yet to be re- stored to Canaan, in order to fulfill the promise that the land should be their everlasting DOS. session, then it follows, that the Aaronc Priest hood must be restored, to fulfill similar pro. mise. And if the Aaronic Priesthood be re. stored, then the priesthood of Christ, Gas we shall show,) will be abrogated and Christianity uullifed. The question then is, whether our position is correct or not, for if it be true, it in