Dan. 2:44.-The meaning is not the four kingdoms in reference to the fourfold succession in the metallic image, but rather, as it seems to me, an incidental allusion to the peculiar and complex constitution of the fourth, last empire of man. " The kingdom shall be divided," speaking of the feet and toes (ver. 41), and to this we must refer, as I consider, " the days of these kings " (ver. 44). The consequence is important; for thereby is excluded Mede's scheme of the regnum lapidis, first; and the regnum montis, by and by. I can understand this in a certain sense; but it is not the teaching, in my opinion, of this chapter. God's kingdom, here described and symbolized by the stone, is raised up not in the days of Augustus or Tiberius, much less in those of Constantine, but in the days of the decem-regal division of the Roman Empire. (Compare Dan. 7:7-14,23-26; Rev. 17:7-14.) The first exercise of its power is to break in pieces and consume all existing empire; all, at least included in the prefigurations of the statue. There is no such idea as the gradual action of the stone upon the statue; but a sudden and decisive judgment, which crumbles the statue into dust; after which, the stone which smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. Evidently this is not the gospel which wins souls to Christ, and saves them; it is not a revolution, moral or material, which man brings about. It is nothing less than the power of God administered by the Lord Jesus; the stone cut without hands, dealing with the powers of the world, and judging their final antichristianism, in order to make way for His own manifest and immediate dominion. " And the Lord shall be King over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and His name one." I would add my opinion, that " these kings," symbolically set forth, by the toes here, and by the ten horns in Dan. 7, pertain exclusively to the West or European part of the Roman Empire. For we must leave room for the destruction of what is represented by the gold, silver,' and brass, no less than for the portion of iron and clay.
THERE IS ONE BODY." EPHESIANS. 4: 4.
PH 4: 4-4:32{)If our readers will dispassionately inquire into the testimony of God's word, I am persuaded that they will distinguish, as Scripture does, between the saints of the old Testament and those who are now being baptized by the Holy Ghost into one body. The question of the one body really turns on that baptism. For those only who are baptized of the Spirit constitute that body (1 Cor. 12:13); and it is certain that this baptism did not exist before the day of Pentecost. (Compare Acts 1 and 2.) No one denies that the Old Testament saints were born of the Spirit, that they were justified by faith, or that we are to sit with them in the kingdom of heaven.
But the New Testament shows that a corporate unity, over and beyond their common privileges, was formed by the descent of the Holy Ghost consequent on the accomplishment of redemption by the Lord Jesus Christ; and this solely is called the " one body." Eph. 2, 3, 4. are most explicit as to this.
None are contemplated as members of this one new man, save those in whom the Holy Ghost dwells, and so unites to a glorified Head in heaven. For the union here spoken of is an actual subsisting fact, and therefore incapable of being predicated, as it never is in Scripture, of saints previously. They had righteousness imputed to them, as it is to us; but the Holy Ghost was not then sent down, as he is now, to baptize Jews and Gentiles that believe into one body.
Further, I am of opinion that Heb. 12, distinguishes in the most positive way between " the spirits of just men made perfect" (i.e. the Old Testament saints) and the " church of the first born, which are written in heaven." So that this text, with 1 Cor. 12 and Eph. 2-4, contradicts the ordinary confusion on the subject.