I HAVE referred to meeting some Christadelphians about this time. As I came in touch with them repeatedly in after years, it may be as well to say something of how we got to know them at first. Two cousins named William Christie and Peter Ramsay had joined our little Church at Braidwood. Being out for a walk one day, they got into conversation with a man who lived in the village of Cartland, near Lanark. They found the man to be interested in religion. He invited them to come to his house on a certain evening for conversation, and they consented to go. They asked me to go with them, and we all three went together at the time appointed. I was expected to take a leading part in the conversation. I did not deem it wise to raise points of difference at the very first, and thought that the best plan would be to begin at the beginning as nearly as possible, and if there were points on which we did not agree they would rise naturally as we proceeded. Before we began to talk we set a time at which we would stop, as we had two miles to go home and we had to go to work early. In beginning to talk to this stranger, I said, "Preaching the Gospel is our first duty to the world. Now, suppose you were speaking to a man who did not profess to serve God, what would you put before him as the Gospel?" I expected that we would all think pretty much alike on this subject. But our friend got his Bible and turned to Gen. 13:14,15, and read, "Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward and westward; for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever." "That," said our friend, "is the Gospel which I would preach to a sinner." I have got a few surprises in my lifetime, but I do not know that I ever got a much greater one than that.

Just at this point someone knocked at the door. Two men came in. We were informed that they had come by arrangement. The one was a Mr. Murray, a farmer, who lived near by. The other was a Mr. Wilson, who was giving a considerable portion of his time to the spread of Christadelphian doctine. Both these men were well posted up in that line; much better, indeed, that the man we had gone to see.

I did not expect that these two men would support what the friend we had gone to see said about the Gospel. But in this I was mistaken - all three men held that the Gospel was the good news that Abraham and his seed would inherit the Land of Canaan. This was something new for us, and we found as they proceeded that they had a number of other new things for us. The whole thing being new to us, we did not attempt to argue the points with them. We spent the time putting questions and letting them explain. When our time was up, we were beginning to have some knowledge of what they were trying to enforce. They expressed a wish for more conversation, and we were willing for that. I said, "If you prefer it you can come to Braidwood. You can have my kitchen for the conversation, and I think that I can fill it with people to hear. But I make the following conditions. First, no one must speak more than five minutes at a time. And second, one on your side and one on ours must follow each other alternately." They were quite pleased to accept these terms, and we met in our kitchen one night in the week for the next six weeks; always beginning and stopping at a specified time, and the kitchen was always comfortably filled with people to hear.

As we returned from Cartland, the evening we went there for that conversation, we were all three impressed in the same way. We were all shocked at the idea of preaching the Land of Canaan for the salvation of sinners, instead of preaching Jesus Christ and Him crucified. We were sure when we got time to consider the matter that we would be able to hold our own against that.

Mr. Wilson was the most polished and ready speaker on the other side. He had all the advantages - and he required them all. We pressed him to name a place in the New Testament where the Gospel of the Land of Canaan was preached for the salvation of sinners. We harassed him in that corner and would not let him go. To try and escape from that fix he said the New Testament did not contain first principles - that the Gospel was stated in the Old Testament and the New Testament took it for granted that every person knew it. In order to prove the position he had taken up, he moved that our meeting the following week should take the form of a debate, and he was prepared to prove that the New Testament did not contain first principles. I accepted this challenge, and the next week I made my first attempt at taking part in a regular debate. I did not try how many arguments I could bring forward, but made as sure as I could that there was some force in the few arguments I did use. I did not cover much ground, but I was pretty sure of the ground that I did cover. The affirmative was naturally mine, I had to prove that the New Testament did contain first principles. It was mine to lead, his to follow - mine, to build up, his to pull down if he could. I took my principal stand upon Paul's speech to the men of Athens (Acts 17:23-31). I pointed out that these men did not even know the one Living and True God. How, then, could these men be said to know first principles? And Paul was not such a fool that he would teach them their second lesson first. But though Paul was of necessity teaching these people first principles, there was nothing in his speech about their Land of Canaan Gospel. But there was something in his speech about Jesus Christ, His resurrection from the dead, and exaltation to be Judge of all men. That is, our Gospel is here as a first principle in Paul's speech, but your Land of Canaan Gospel is not here. I supported this passage with a few others of like nature, and had the pleasure of seeing that I had built up what Mr. Wilson could not pull down. Of course, you always see after a debate where, at some points, you might have done better, but I had a feeling of certainty that night that I had taken ground that could be held. I was a youth then, I am an old man now, but I could now stand with confidence on the ground I took up then.

Before I pass from these meetings I wish to mention another one of them in particular. Bro. Ramsay asked me to leave the Christadelphians in his hands for an evening. I was willing to do that if he wished it. Peter was better at putting questions that making speeches. When the meeting was opened, he said, "What Gospel have you for me, gentlemen? Preach your Gospel to me." "The Gospel," they replied, "is the good news that Abraham and his seed will inherit the Land of Canaan." "But it makes no matter to me," he said, "what Abraham and his seed are going to inherit. I am not one of Abraham's seed by the flesh, and you say that I am not one of his seed by faith, it therefore makes no matter to me what Abraham and his seed are going to inherit; what good news have you for me?" Peter Ramsay so managed that question that they had considerable difficulty with it. He then made another move and said, "Abraham and his seed seem to be coming in for all the blessings; can you tell how I can get to be one of Abraham's seed?" Mr. Ramsay so managed this question that he compelled them to admit, that you become one of Abraham's seed by believing in and obeying the Lord Jesus Christ. "Well," said Peter, "that is what we have been preaching all the time and yet you are here opposing us." "But," they replied, "your hope is all wrong." Peter then turned to 1 Peter 1:3, 4, and said, "I hope for an inheritance, incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for me." He then asked, "What is the matter with that hope?" They had not a very pleasant time of it, as Mr. Ramsay pressed his hope upon them and asked them to point out what was the matter with it.

We received no harm from these meetings, and came out of them feeling stronger than when we entered upon them. We had some help from old Mr. Tennant when he came over on the Sundays, but we had no books on the subject at that time. We might have been the better of "The History and Mystery of Christadelphianism," by David King, to have given us some idea of the people that we were dealing with. Or we might have been the better of the pamphlet by Mr. Jackson, of Derby, on the Christadelphian Land of Canaan Gospel but we did not have them; still, we got through without harm.