Bible Treasury: Volume N1

IT was necessary that he should speak of his relations with the twelve. Had he received his instructions from them, or any sort of appointment from them? Hearken: “But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” Thus does he assert the entire independence of his ministry, and its heavenly origin. His gospel could not have been derived from the Jerusalem laborers, because, while not contradicting theirs in anywise, it went far beyond them.

It will be observed by every careful reader of scripture that the gospel as preached by Peter and Paul, though in both the Spirit's testimony to Christ, had decidedly different characteristics. Peter spoke of One who had walked here well known by all the Jews, who had been crucified by wicked men, yet raised up by God and exalted to glory, in Whose name remission of sins is now preached to all. Paul, on the other hand, starts with His glory. His testimony was not of One who walked here (though he speaks of his wondrous pathway as a pattern for our souls, Phil. 2). On the contrary, he wrote, “Henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more” (2 Cor. 5:16).

His testimony was of One, Who, having accomplished redemption, is now in glory, the Second Man, head of a new race, in Whom believers are justified and accepted, and with Whom we are one body by the Holy Ghost. All this, and more, he had by revelation, not through a human medium. Not that Paul despised the fellowship of any of his brethren—his many appeals in his Epistles for their prayers prove the contrary; nor that he undervalued the counsel of those who had been longer engaged in the service of Christ than himself; but he would preserve intact his own direct responsibility to the Lord, as having been called and commissioned from above, altogether apart from man.

His early training in Judaism was in no sense a preparation for his apostolic ministry. He had been a persecutor, and a very extreme one. “For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God and wasted it: and profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly jealous of the traditions of my fathers.” The divine sovereignty in the choice of the vessel is strikingly seen. Who more suitable to write the Epistle to the Galatians? Who better fitted to enforce justification by faith alone, to the exclusion of works, thus pouring contempt on the first man, and all his efforts after righteousness? Who better fitted to show the believer's entire deliverance from law? Could a converted publican do it as well? I am not overlooking the Spirit's inspiration in writing thus, but merely drawing attention to the display of divine wisdom in the use of one who profited in Judaism above his contemporaries, blameless and zealous, to unfold Christianity in its highest aspect, setting the believer entirely free from law, and all that pertains to the first man.

Accordingly, when called of God, be conferred not with flesh and blood, nor sought human credentials, but went into Arabia, &c. “But when it pleased God who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood; neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia and returned again unto Damascus.” Observe the peculiarity of the expression— “to reveal His Son in me.” He is the only apostle who uses the phrase, and it is characteristic. To Peter the Father revealed His Son ( Matt. 16); but Paul's word goes farther. It involves union with Christ, and of this truth Paul was the honored exponent. He learned the elements of it in his conversion. The immense fact was brought to bear upon him that in persecuting the saints he was persecuting Christ, for the saints were in Him and He in them.

Having received such a call, the apostle acted upon his direct responsibility to the Lord, without any human medium. He went into Arabia (after a brief testimony, it would seem, in the synagogues of Damascus, Acts 9), and thence returned to the scene of his conversion. What a passing by of those who were somewhat in the church! He did not go up to Jerusalem for some time, and then merely on a visit to the apostle of the circumcision; not to be instructed or appointed in any way. This he shows plainly. “Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none save James the Lord's brother. Now the things which I write unto you, behold before God I lie not.” It is clear that he was most anxious to show that there was no sort of subordination to the twelve, nor commission from them. It was so ordered that only two of the apostles were at home at the same time. It might be a reproach in the eyes of the Galatians; but Jerusalem and the twelve were certainly not the source of his ministry.

He was also, at least at first, very little known by the Jewish saints in general. Though he loved them well, and at a later date found pleasure in carrying to them Gentile offerings, his work did not lie among them, but in the regions beyond. Hence we read, “Afterward I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, and was unknown by face unto the churches of Judea which were in Christ: but they had heard only that he which persecuted us in times past, now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed. And they glorified God in me.” How transforming is divine grace, turning a thief into a giver (Eph. 4:28), and a persecutor into a preacher; but what a rebuke for the assemblies of Galatia! They were criticizing the devoted apostle, and slighting him because his ministry had not a Jewish source; while the assemblies of Judea (from whom he might naturally expect more or less prejudice) glorified God for His admirable work of sovereign favor. Those who had been called to the grace of Christ by his means were positively behind brethren of the circumcision in such an important respect!

Compromise.

IN divine truth compromise has no place. It would be the surrender of God's authority and manifest rebellion. We are sanctified by the Spirit to the obedience of Jesus Christ, not more surely than to the sprinkling of His blood. We are not left to our desires after good or our devices to give it effect. He that hath Christ's commandments and keepeth them, he it is that loveth Him. Nor is this all. The new life is exercised; the love that is of God grows. And it is not only His “injunction” that governs the heart: His “word” forms it in obedience and is a deeper test of it. Therefore the Lord adds (John 14), “If anyone love me, he will keep my word; and my Father will love him; and we will come unto him and make our abode with him He that loveth me not keepeth not my words; and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's who sent me.”

In matters of outward arrangement, or of moral indifference such as questions of time and place, there is ample room for grace in mutual consideration and in special care of the poor, the weak, and the suffering. Here the principle applies, though in another sense, that the strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please themselves: rather, that everyone of us please his neighbor for good to edification. The strong may well afford to seek unselfishness and make it sweeter for all. And here Christ is our blessed pattern, Who in glorifying His Father never sought His own will, though it was all untainted and holy, and pleased not Himself, but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached Thee fell on Me.

But where the will of God is expressed, there is no option for ought else. Our duty then is clear and unqualified: we have only to obey Him. Of His own purpose did He beget us by the word of truth that we might be a kind of first-fruits of His creatures (James 1). All else are under sin and ruin, under death and judgment. This new and divine nature, of which His grace has made us partakers (2 Peter 1:4), rejects all filthiness and superfluity of malice, receiving with meekness the implanted word which has the power of saving our souls, assuredly not in mere hearing but in practicing the word. Thus it becomes the perfect law of liberty; for as the new life craves the revealed word, so the word exactly suits the life one has in Christ; not the old I, each believer can say, but Christ living in me. Undoubtedly this life is not independent of its source, but lives in dependence on Him. For what I live now in flesh, I live in faith that is in the Son of God Who loved me and gave Himself for me.

All is the grace of God, whether it be Christ's death or life thus given.

What shall we say then? should we continue in sin that grace may abound? Far be it from us! We who died in sin, how shall we live longer therein? Or know ye not that so many of us as were baptized unto Christ Jesus were baptized unto His death? Therefore were we buried with Him by baptism unto death, that even as Christ was raised out of the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we were identified with Him in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in [that] of resurrection; knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be annulled, that we should no longer serve sin. For he who died has been justified from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, being raised out of the dead, dies no more: death has no more dominion over Him. For in that He died, He died to sin once for all; and in that He lives, He lives to God. So do ye also reckon yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body unto obeying it in your lusts, nor render your members to sin instruments of iniquity; but render yourselves to God as alive out of the dead, and your members instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under law but under grace.

Such is the apostle Paul's handling of this great matter in Rom. 6; and he is as far as possible from compromise as to either the principle or the power. We are baptized to Christ's death as the principle; we are not under law but grace as the power. In both, sin is triumphed over and wholly disallowed. Delivered from sin but enslaved to righteousness, enslaved to God, we have our fruit unto holiness, and the end life eternal. Our condition is mixed no doubt, which indeed is to say but little of the sad reality; but this is not to enfeeble the absolute truth of our deliverance on the one hand, or of our responsibility on the other. Compromise is excluded; and no wonder, for Christ is dead and risen. Further, the Holy Spirit is given to us.

So in 1 Cor. 3 we are no longer to walk as men, but as sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints called.

Once we were all “the unrighteous,” some this horror, some that; but receiving Christ, we were washed, sanctified, justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. For know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit that is in you, which ye had from God, and ye are not your own? For ye were bought with a price. Glorify then God in your body (1 Cor. 6). There is no compromise here.

As it is in these two great Epistles, the one very markedly individual, while the other is also ecclesiastical or corporate, so it is in every other part of the Christian deposit we are bound to keep. There is no sanction of laxity; grace condemns sin more solemnly and profoundly than law. We are Christ's epistle, responsible to be so known and read of all men. Consistency with Christ, with the truth, with holiness, is obligatory on all saints even the weakest. Compromise here is altogether a sin and nothing but shame.

Is there, again, any latitude allowed in the ministry of the Spirit? Is there license of unfaithfulness in those that preach or teach Christ? May we in the Lord's work associate with known inconsistency, with deliberate playing fast and loose, with divine ways openly set at naught? So the Corinthians thought, and for a while rose up rebelliously against the apostle whom God had blessed to their souls. For a while they were haughty and alienated from the true, abjectly listening to the false teachers who brought them into bondage with their own objects. Was it not a grief and scandal that such things should be done by such as claimed to be the Lord's servants? For what can one think of any professing fidelity joining hands with unrepented evil ways? what of the deplorable and unholy scheme of fancying that such union is of God to get wrong-doers right? Can the simplest believer fail to see that it is doing evil that good may come? whose judgment is just.

But may not the object be good? So say all religious guides, and many of them sincerely, however differing or even opposed. It would be uncharitable to doubt of many that they are each in earnest with their methods, and more or less satisfied with the cause they plead. But this only makes evident that an apparently good object is not the least guarantee of either truth or holiness.

Were the aim ever so excellent, it is essential that it be prosecuted according to the Lord's mind; and this can only be in obedience to His word. To oppose it is courting destruction, to do without it is self-will. In His work compromise is evil. The Lord is jealous that the known walk be consistent with His testimony. His servant is bound to have clean hands, and not to partake of other men's sins.

How contrasted is God's way for His servants! “Therefore, seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not, but have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God “; and again, “Giving no offense in anything, that the ministry be not blamed, but in all things approving ourselves as the ministers of God in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments, in tumults, in labors, in watchings, in fastings; by pureness, by knowledge, by long-suffering, by kindness, by the Holy Spirit, by love unfeigned, by the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armor of righteousness on the right hand and on the left.” Indeed all of 2 Cor. 6 is worthy of the consideration of all God's servants and His saints. But this may suffice to point out what His word enjoins to the total uprooting of that compromise which is man's device in His work, as offensive to His Spirit as it is defiant of His word.

Λογια Ιηκου Sayings of Our Lord

from an early Greek Papyrus, discovered &c. by B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Bunt.

As some desire a brief and reliable account of this discovery, let it suffice to say that it consists of a single leaf from a book (not roll) containing a professing series of our Lord's sayings, found with a considerable number of others in the rubbish-heaps of Oxyrhynchus, the chief town of a nome similarly designated in lower Egypt. Strabo (xvii.), C. Ptol. (iv. 5, § 59), and others of less note speak of the place; which derived its Greek name from a fish of the sturgeon species worshipped in a temple there dedicated to it. The present village of Bekneseh is on part of its site.

The document no more approaches the inspired character than other treatises of the second, third, or later centuries. The interest that attaches to this leaf is that it bears sufficient evidence of being written, perhaps as early as A.D. 200, improbably later than A D. 300. Even this single page (Verso and Recto) is not without gaps which hinder its entire and unequivocal sense.

It does not pretend to be such “narrations” as Luke refers to in his chap. 1:1, though they were but human and therefore without divine authority, even if authentic in the main and ever so well meant. It gives no account concerning those matters which have been fully established, or believed, among Christians. It is simply a collection of sayings attributed to the Savior.

Of these the first (as far as here appears, for it lacks the introductory clause) is the least exceptionable. That which remains appears to be a citation from Luke 6:42, as Lachmann edits and Text. Rec. according to à A C D, a dozen more uncials, most cursives, and seemingly most ancient versions. But the Vatican with 13, 69, 124, 346 has ἐκβαλεῖν at the end; and so edit Alford, Tiscbendorf, Westcott and Hort. Here only we have no longer λέγει, these words being now gone. Yet the saying here given is the only one that is fairly correct according to scripture, if the introductory words once extant did not clog or alienate them.

The next is an absurdity, but it would seem in accord with the ascetic tendency then in vogue with some, as others leaned to lax ways; for the enemy avails himself of opposites to annul the truth of God. The “saying” is “Except ye fast to (or, probably, abstain from) the world, ye shall in no wise find the kingdom of God; and except ye keep the sabbath, ye shall not see the Father.” The construction of the first is not harsher grammatically than the doctrine is unsound and anti-evangelical. The second is if possible more outrageous, as it openly judaises. Neither a literal nor a metaphorical sense can redeem it.

The third does not contradict fundamental truth, but is wholly unworthy of our Lord and unlike His unique simplicity and depth, though suited to a rhetorical moralist. “Jesus saith, I stood in the midst of the world, and in the flesh was seen of them, and I found all drunken and none found I athirst among them; and my soul grieveth over the sons of men, because they are blind in their heart...”

Still stranger is the fourth.” Jesus saith, Wherever are... and one alone, I am with him. Raise the stone, and there thou shalt find me, split the wood and there am I.” Assuming this to be the sense, what mystical jargon! Eph. 4:6, which the learned editors cite, refers to the Father: if they had alleged ver. 10, it might be more plausible perhaps. It seems nonsense, and assuredly was never uttered by our Lord.

The fifth refers to Luke 4:24, eked out not by citing verse 23, but so varying it as to be no longer true, still less inspired. “Jesus saith, A prophet is not acceptable in his own country, nor doth a physician work cures on those that know him.”

Nor is the sixth more than true in part. “Jesus saith, A city built on a high hill's top, and established, can neither fall nor be hid.” It certainly can fall.

The seventh is only a beginning, so that we can say nothing definitely.

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision — 2

Dan. 2; 7

WHEN the children of Israel not only fell into wickedness against God, but their wickedness became systematic and complete as apostates from His name—not merely the people and the priests, but also the prophets and the kings such as we see them at the end of Kings and Chronicles, God gave them up to one of the most idolatrous of the Gentile nations; and Nebuchadnezzar by His appointment became “the head of gold.” Undoubtedly Babylon was a great city from the earliest days, and “mad on her idols” as time went on. You may be aware that there was no idolatry in the antediluvian world. All flesh on the earth had corrupted its way, and the earth was filled with violence; but there was as yet no setting up of false gods. When, however, the heavens darkened against them and the waters of the great deep swept them away from before God, after this it was that Satan induced men to worship the hosts of heaven and deprecate the avenging powers of death. They thought nothing so reasonable as to propitiate the heavens that they might ever shine favorably, and the waters that they might no more overwhelm them in their resistless flood. Therefore religion took the form of paying honor to the higher powers of nature as well as of satisfying those lower. All immorality followed, and even contrary to fallen nature itself.

But God called His people Israel to bear witness to Himself as the One living God; and when departed into idolatry, He handed them over as captives to the vilest of men, setting up Babylon as the first of the great world-powers. It did not matter that they pretended to honor Jehovah along with their false gods; indeed such an alliance made things worse in His sight. However solemn might be their zeal for His feasts, their tampering also with idols only heightened their guilt and His indignation. But the fact was undoubtedly, that they often showed themselves more zealous for the false gods than for the true God; as Christians now, when they take up bad doctrine are absorbed with the error, and seem to lose the very truth they once professed.

God then chose Babylon to be the vessel of supreme earthly power for the punishment of His guilty people. Its ruler was not only a king but a king of kings, an emperor in the fullest sense of the word. Such was Nebuchadnezzar. His thoughts, we are told, came upon his bed what should come to pass hereafter; and God was pleased to reveal the secrets of futurity. But this He did, so as to impress on the Gentiles that true intelligence is only with those that fear Himself. In vain had the king applied to the ordinary means of his empire in order to recall or understand the vision. He asked, as his wise men told him, what no king had ever asked before. By their confession none but He whose dwelling is not with flesh could give the answer. In his imperious style he demanded it on pain of death, and when his minister was about to put the cruel decree into execution, where did God raise up a witness? Among the captives of Judah. If power was vested in the Gentile who scourged a people more guiltily offensive to God, the light of God was vouchsafed to Daniel the captive. God prepared for others too a deliverer from the king's wrath out of the king's palace. Daniel was morally prepared, as we see him in ch. 1. refusing the king's dainties, which were invariably offered to idols. He was willing to die rather than dishonor the true God, Who gave him favor with his guardians, so as to abide faithful. For “them that honor Me I will honor; and they that despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.” The great principle here is that, if you are to have the secret of the Lord, you must look to Him and stand clear of the world, and especially of its religion which never is nor can be the truth. Do not expect to enjoy the holy light of God if for your ease or honor or safety you conform to what is of the world.

Accordingly Daniel was blessed remarkably. The king, though he had let slip the dream, was conscious of something altogether extraordinary in it, and in the furious haste of his rage apparently overlooked Daniel. Nor was it till the last moment that he went in and desired of the king that time be allowed him. This given, he betakes himself with his three pious friends to prayer. And God heard. “Then was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night vision.” How cheering and beautiful the dealings of God! As Daniel in faith took the initiative, though all four joined in, prayer, God singled out Daniel. What happens thereon? Does he at once rush off to the king? He turns to God in thanksgiving. “Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven” (ver. 19). As he had looked to Him alone, so the glory he renders to God only. “Art thou able,” said the king, “to make known the dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof?” “There is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days,” answered the lowly prophet. And he adds, “But as for me, this secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living;” yet was he the wisest then on the earth. But God was in all his thoughts, to Whom be glory. It was a wonderful revelation for king Nebuchadnezzar; but think, my friends, what we have given of God in the whole Bible.

If you say that we have not Daniel, do not forget that we have a better than Daniel. A wiser and better than Daniel? Yes, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth, that other Paraclete, the gift of Christ's redemption. The Holy Spirit had indeed wrought always, notably in Daniel and his companions; but there is now more, the personal presence of the Spirit of God to dwell with and in the Christian forever, and in the assembly or church of God. See John 14:16, 17, 26; 15:20; 16:7—14. He abides, among other privileges of the utmost value, enabling the believer to enjoy all the revelation of God in the measure of his faith by grace. Oh! what a wonderful boon for the Christian and for the church of God. See that you sink not below your privileges, but enter into them by faith; for it rests not on your own opinion or the authority of other men. There is much blessing in the communion of saints; but God's teaching must be individual. “They shall be all taught of God.”

Remember that the Lord lays down what has just been stated in His remarkable series of parables (Matt. 13). They represent the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, and we are in it now. With the kingdom as here made known we have to do now on earth, while the Lord is exalted and hidden in heaven. Yet, though embracing so large a sphere, the Lord says in ver. 9, “Who hath ears to hear let him hear.” In the Old Testament the call was to all Israel, to all the people; but now it is to each of us, to a Christian individually. Whatever comes, this responsibility in hearing and receiving the truth of God is inalienable; and woe to such as deny or weaken it. You will do well to lay it to heart.

Daniel then repeats and interprets the dream to Nebuchadnezzar: a gorgeous image with golden head, with breast and arms of silver, with body and thighs of brass, and with legs of iron, ending in feet of iron and clay, smitten by a little stone which reduced the whole to powder; after which the stone that smote the image became a great mountain which filled the whole earth.

There is also evident deterioration, as the power is distant from its source, and becomes characterized with more of man lower and lower. It has nothing to do with the extent of empire, which, on the contrary, became greater successively. But Nebuchadnezzar in his imperfection acts absolutely, as only One can perfectly to God's glory. In the Medo-Persian empire, wise men counsel much; as in the Greek soldiers of fortune. Rome goes down to the dregs, and is governed instead of governing, so that power from God is swamped by the people as its source.

Not a word of Christ's suffering for our sins, nor of the gospel going forth in consequence to every creature; not a word of Christ's sitting as the rejected but glorified Lamb on the Father's throne, and of our meanwhile suffering with Him while He there waits. It is Christ coming judicially in power and glory, dealing with the fourth empire in its last divided state, as well as with all that remains of its predecessors. Only after this destruction does God's kingdom fill and rule all the earth.

(To be continued D.V.)

Proofs of the Resurrection. 3

EVERY distinct “proof” of the resurrection in itself furnishes an equally striking proof of Christ's unchanged and unweakened affection for His own.

The “sword” had indeed smitten Jehovah's Fellow; the sheep had also been scattered; the way was now quite open for as wonderful an exhibition of marvelous grace in the turning of the Lord's hand upon the little ones. Very instructive it is to observe evidences of this latter, as token follows token in due order, each one (had it been at once discerned) being calculated to comfort their sorrowing spirits, and to sustain their wavering faith, as throughout all He was leading them by a way that they knew not.

“The same day at evening, being the first day of the week,” He brought His blood-bought sheep together, so that they were found “assembled,” with the foe shut out and themselves shut in, within those closed doors. The all engrossing and absorbing topic of their conversation at the moment consisted of those proofs of the resurrection already given, when lo,

JESUS HIMSELF STOOD IN THE MIDST OF THEM.

In the sight of all assembled He stands, the great Shepherd of the sheep brought again from the dead through the blood of the everlasting covenant. Listen! He speaks. By His first word spoken He announces the “peace” which He has made and is. He has endured wrath; peace is now theirs, made known to them; perfect, unalterable, unvoidable, unassailable, because its enduring and sure foundation is His own finished work. They behold Him; they have heard His voice. Alas of some we read, “they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit, and He said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts!”

They need a token to re-assure them, and to set them quite at ease in His immediate presence. The one instantly given is remarkably powerful and complete. Luke's version of it, perfectly consistent with His presentation of Jesus in his Gospel as the Son of man, relates to His showing His disciples “His hands and His feet.” What wonders those “hands” had wrought in their sight! How unweariedly those “feet” had trodden the pathway before themselves! Now each displays in the print of the nails man's cruel and murderous hatred of Him, and even more forcibly the Savior's love to sinners. On the other hand John, here as ever presenting Him as Son of God, appears to take correspondingly higher ground than his brother evangelist. He tells us, “He showed unto them His hands and His side.” How abundant the blessings bestowed by those uplifted “hands” now pierced From His “side,” bearing the mark of that sword-thrust, had flowed the blood and the water, witnessing indeed of His own self-sacrificing love, and surely now telling also of their blissful association with Himself the risen Son of God; for by His “side” His fellows shall sit with Himself in glory.

While their eyes earnestly gaze upon His hands, His feet, His side, His own voice re-assures them, and certifies that Jesus Himself now stands in their midst. And when we remember the despiteful and cruel treatment of His own blessed Person which He had so recently endured at the hands of heartless and unfeeling Men, what love, gentleness and meekness shine out in His spoken words— “Handle Me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have”! To these abundant tokens He adds yet one other, for He did even “eat before them,” and all rejoice as each discerns the risen Lord.

“Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you.” Henceforth, while themselves enjoying the peace of God which passeth all understanding, they shall be His chosen messengers of peace in the world where He was crucified. Himself “the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God,” He next breathes on them, saying, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” But before they actually set upon their glorious mission, He took occasion by the absence and resultant unbelief of Thomas to display once more His tender concern for a loved disciple overtaken in a fault.

JESUS APPEARS A SECOND TIME IN THE MIDST

for the especial benefit of unbelieving Thomas. That all who were present eight days before are now rejoicing in the full assurance of the fact of His glorious resurrection lessens not His loving solicitude for the one then absent, who has since lamentably fallen into the grievous sin of unbelief, and thus allowed the adversary to gain over himself a temporary advantage. We grieve at this evidence of sin abounding; yet far more do we rejoice over that grace which did much more abound, as Thomas, gently yet firmly taken up on the very ground on which he had himself elected to stand, is lovingly invited to convince himself in the manner suggested by his own mind.

In this, our Lord's direct appeal to Thomas before all, becoming dignity of manner and of speech is seen allied with perfect condescension: how wise an administration of a well-timed rebuke! While the tender love expressed in the same made the brief yet earnest remonstrance which follows the rebuke all the more powerful.

His former unbelief all dispelled, the heart of Thomas is now so exclusively occupied with the Lord Who so completely restored his soul, that, as if unconscious that present with him at that moment are many other true worshippers, with ecstatic joy he exclaims, “My Lord and my God” “Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet believed.”

(To be continued D.V.)

Proofs of the Resurrection. 4

OUR LORD'S APPEARANCE AT THE SEA OF TIBERIAS.

In the Song of Solomon the Bride appealing to her Beloved says, “Tell me, O Thou Whom my soul loveth, where Thou feedest, where Thou makest Thy flock to rest at noon “; for she is desirous of knowing where He is to be found at that time. He answers her by saying, “If thou know not, O thou fairest among women, go thy way forth by the footsteps of the flock, and feed thy kids beside the shepherds' tents"; thus very clearly indicating that where His own loved “little flock” is seen, there her Beloved may surely be found. Where His own were assembled in Jerusalem, their risen Lord stood in the midst; even so, when certain of them, having left Jerusalem, are actively engaged fishing in the Sea of Galilee, He is then in the same locality with them, bent on promoting their highest interests, and this while they are totally unconscious that the Lord is so near them.

They are engrossed in their unsuccessful efforts to catch fish, but their risen Lord is thinking much more of themselves. As in His dealings with ourselves oftentimes, He first allows their human energies to expend themselves in vain and fruitless toil. Then obedience to His command is rewarded with blessing so bountiful, that John quickly discerns in their Blesser the Person of the Lord.

Having made this discovery John as usual toils on, in strict harmony with the Lord's own expressed command. He honors his Lord by his patient continuance in the path of obedience. Peter, hitherto so much engrossed in his fishing, from the instant that John has informed him that it is the Lord Who stands upon the shore, becomes so exclusively occupied with Jesus, that the fishes, highly valued before, are now of such small account to himself that he suddenly ceases all his own toil to hasten into his Lord's presence.

Was not the ship of greater intrinsic value than ever so large a draft of fishes? Peter springs out of the ship without the slightest hesitancy, save only that he attires himself becomingly for the special occasion. Some might feel disposed to reflect with severity upon his leaving those attached brethren, who had at the first followed his lead, to toil henceforth by themselves. In this action of his we however see striking evidences of his own ardent affection for the Lord; for greatly as he loves them, his brethren have a secondary place in that heart now full of Christ to the exclusion of aught else. He has literally left all for Christ, and is privileged, not only as being the first disciple to reach the Lord, but also as being thereby enabled to help his brethren even more effectually than he could have done had he remained with them. For all the advantage of having a firm footing upon the shore is Peter's as he now draws the net to land, full of great fishes. Do not those who come straight from the Lord's presence to the succor of other loved ones ever prove to be the most effectual helpers of their toiling brethren?

While standing “in the midst” in Jerusalem, our Lord took and ate the fish His disciples gave Him. By the shore of the Sea of Galilee they saw a fire of coals that they had not themselves made, fish laid thereon that they had not caught, and bread not at all of their providing. These partakers of the repast are the guests of Him Who serves them during the never-to-be-forgotten meal; itself an earnest of the joys of the coming feast at which our Lord will make those servants, whom He finds “watching,” to sit down to meat, when He will gird Himself and come forth and serve them.

His own resources infinite, yet does He condescendingly acknowledge the result of His blessing of their own toil by saying, “Bring of the fish which ye have now caught.”

To those already established in the glorious truth of His resurrection was this “proof” given, by which our Lord Jesus also gave ample proof that His great love and tender concern for His own remained unaltered by changed circumstances.

The thrice repeated “Lovest thou Me?” wrought more effectually in the heart of Peter than a long discourse would have done. And the very nature of the threefold charge is yet another clear indication of constant solicitude for the promotion of the welfare of His own “lambs” and “sheep.”

John's last picture in his Gospel is his presentation of Peter following his risen Lord by express command; and of John following Jesus because it is Himself that is leading the way—no question raised and no definite command required. May we so follow Christ at all times.

THE APPEARANCE ON THE MOUNTAIN IN GALILEE.

What inclines us to the thought that this was probably the occasion to which Paul refers when he writes of our Lord being seen “of above five hundred brethren at once,” is the final wording of this “proof” as given by Matthew, viz., “and when they saw Him, they worshipped Him: but some doubted.” For the three last quoted words could scarcely apply to those who had already seen Him more than once before, and who, when they had previously seen Him, knew that it was the Lord. And the verse preceding that quoted is conclusive that this meeting was by previous appointment. From the knowledge, however imperfect, which we possess of our own hearts, we can easier account for “some doubting,” or being at “a loss what to think, if these words apply to “some” of that “five hundred,” many of whom had not before seen Him since He was risen from among the dead. The Lord now authoritatively commanded His disciples to go and teach all nations.

OUR LORD'S APPEARANCE TO THE APOSTLE JAMES

is one of distinct “proofs” enumerated by Paul (1 Cor. 15), of which no mention is made elsewhere.

THE APPEARANCE ON THE FORTIETH DAY

(possibly that “to all the apostles” of which Paul speaks) was evidently in Jerusalem. Earlier, by express command or appointment, had they gone to Galilee, there to see the Lord; now the exhortation given is, “tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued, with power from on high.” They are further instructed to begin preaching “at Jerusalem.”

“And He led them out as far as Bethany, and He lifted up His hands and blessed them. And it came to pass, while He blessed them, He was parted from them and carried up into heaven. And they worshipped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy: and were continually in the temple, praising God.”

ON THE DAY OF PENTECOST

Peter adduces the outpouring of the Holy Spirit as demonstrating the glorious fact that the risen Jesus had “been exalted by the right hand of God,” and had “received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit “; Whose presence on earth was and is an incontestable proof, not only of the resurrection, but also that the risen Jesus has departed out of this world unto the Father.

We pass on to consider that which, viewed from one standpoint, may be said to be

THE FINAL PROOF GIVEN TO THE NATION OF ISRAEL.

One of the charges preferred against Stephen before the council was that he had been heard to say, “that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered unto us.” To the subject-matter of his unanswerable defense we now make no allusion, seeing that his powerful testimony through the Spirit before the enemies of the Lord was instantly confirmed by the heavens being opened in the sight of that fearless witness on earth. That same Jesus Whom they had crucified, and Whose sepulcher had been so carefully sealed, is now seen by Stephen standing on the right hand of God. Given thus unexpectedly, this infallible proof of the resurrection could not be gainsaid; the guilty disputants had only one resource; this they instantly adopted, and silenced the witness by stoning him to death.

THE LAST PROOF OF ALL

cited by the apostle Paul is that the risen Lord was seen of himself also, “as of one born out of due time.” To believers of Gentile birth, this appearance of the Lord has a special interest, because of its being inseparably connected with Paul's call to the apostleship of the uncircumcision.

JOHN AFTERWARD SAW THE RISEN LORD

in His judicial glory; and fell at His feet as dead. The Lord then said, “Fear not; I am the First and the Last, and the Living One; and I became dead, and, behold, I am alive for evermore.”

A. J.

Scripture Queries and Answers.

Q.-Do the recorded Passovers help us to gather the space of the Lord's ministry on earth?

DISCIPLE.

A.-In John 2:13 is the first, which preceded the public ministry of the Lord in Galilee. For even in John 3:24 John is seen not as yet in prison. In John 4 the Lord is going through Samaria on His way to Galilee which He only reaches at the end of this chapter. Next in Matt. 11, John, sends from prison to inquire, and in ch. 11 the Lord vindicates His disciples for eating of the corn on a sabbath, which was after a new Passover and even the wave-sheaf that followed it. From Luke 6:1 (which coalesces) it was second-first sabbath, that is, next after the great one (cf. John 19:31) of that week, the first sabbath when it became lawful after Jehovah had His first-fruits. Again we learn from John 6:4, which corresponds in time with Matt. 14, or the first miracle of the loaves, that Passover was at hand, that is, the third. The last Passover, or fourth, He came up to keep, and be Himself our Passover in His sacrifice. It is thus rendered certain and evident from scripture, that the public ministry of our Lord lasted less than four years, or at least three years and a half, as it is generally understood, though some men of learning have contended for less or more.

Q.-Isa. 53:11. What does this mean? Especially by His knowledge? C. P.

A.-One important question arises, when it is known that the object of the verb is not “many” as in all known versions but “the many.” If to “the many” belongs the technical sense in which Daniel employs it, the meaning would be the mass of Jews that believe not, contrasted with the remnant (chap. 9: 27, 11: 33, 39, 12:3). The article is not affixed in chap. 11:34, 44, 12:4, 10, where it has no such application. So Isa. 52:14, 15, and the latter clause of 53:12, while its first clause has the article. Without doubt this makes the interpretation difficult; which some have tried to meet by comparing the Pauline of οἱ πολλοὶ of Rom. 5:19. But as this is due to τοῦ ἑνὸς in the same clause, how can it be imported with any certainty into Isaiah where there is no such contrast? If then we attach a force in Isaiah similar to the phrase in Daniel, the meaning of the verb would seem necessarily modified. For the unbelieving mass could not really be justified, but “instructed in righteousness” they might be by the Righteous Servant. In this case also “by His knowledge” would have the unforced sense of what He made known by His teaching. And Dan. 12:3 confirms this sense; for teachers can only instruct “the many” or indeed any in righteousness. They surely can justify none. It is certain that God alone justifies. Confessedly, however, the passage in Isaiah calls for fuller investigation; as there seems to be a grave difficulty not here raised. Any real help would be welcome.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:1

This comprehensive, instructive, and interesting chapter, followed by Gen. 11:1-9 which has its own special importance, is devoted to a description of a new element among mankind, its various nations divided in their lands, every one after his tongue. Before the deluge no such distinctions subsisted. Immense as the population might be, they were not thus associated any more than marked off one from another. Jehovah took care that the line of Seth should be guarded for His ways then, and for His purposes in the future. There were moral differences between Cain and his descendants from early days; and an awful form of creature lawlessness arose before God executed judgment on all flesh in an earth corrupt before Him, and filled with violence. But there was no government on the one hand yet established by God, nor was there any division into nations, nor yet diversity of language.

After the flood God had introduced the principle of government, committing the charge into the hands of men. As the next fact of the widest moment for the earth, the origin of the nations which were about to play their part is made known to us; and this with a special view to His choice of a people for Himself, and separated to Himself. Even it is seen first tried and failing through sin, as Adam had been in the world before the flood. Of this the O. T. is the ample witness and the awful proof, before His grace intervenes in the Second man and the Messiah of Israel to deliver both man and Israel, as He will the church and the universe, on the ground of divine righteousness and ever enduring mercy to the praise of Himself and the Lamb.

The fact is before all eyes. Nothing exists more notorious in ordinary and universal knowledge (save perhaps for the most isolated of savages) than the many races and tongues and peoples of mankind, each having its own separate bond of union. Yet how this fact began, so pregnant in history, not one of these nations can tell; nor do the most ancient—one does not ask of formal records, but—of incidental monuments go far enough back to explain. Yet here it is written with simple and calm dignity by the instrument God chose for the purpose. It was easy for Him, Who knew all from before the beginning, to make known distinctly and accurately what it seemed good in His eyes to reveal to His people. This He has done in the short compass of a single chapter, Gen. 10, with His moral ground for so separating mankind in the first paragraph of the following chapter. We shall find there an adequate, not to say absolutely necessary, reason for His intervention at once for His own glory and on behalf of guilty man; unless we assume that He Who but recently instituted responsible government in man's hand was indifferent to a rebellion as slighting to Himself as ruinous to man. This drew out from Him a dealing equally simple and effectual, which issued in the scattering of man over the earth according to God's will, but in separate nationalities to the frustration of man's will against God.

As Israel then was to be His earthly people, God made known in a brief survey the sources of all the nations here below, having provided, laid down, and committed to man government in its root principle. None of these facts applies to the antediluvian earth, where all consisted of a vast indiscriminate population of one tongue and under no restraint of government, as it ended in all but universal lawlessness and a judgment that spared a family of only eight persons, including its head. He Who alone could reveal the primeval state when the first man and woman were made, and ushered then into an unstained earth, now deigned to tell the story of how nationalities began with their miraculously started distinct languages, spreading over different lands according to their families. His pleasure was both to bring to naught man's union for a name of pride and to set Israel in the most central spot, not more for righteous government than for shedding on all the earth the knowledge of Jehovah and His glory. So says Deut. 32:8: “When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the children of Adam, He set the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the children of Israel.” The people were redeemed first, then the land: all in view of Messiah and His redemption and reign in manifest glory, when they shall bow in faith who are still unbelieving, and living water issuing from the house eastward shall heal the Dead sea and gird the globe with blessing. See Ezek. 47, and Joel 3:18; and Zech. 14:8, 9 adds that half goes westward: the sign doubtless of universal blessing from the divine center in that day.

The first chapter of Genesis presents the origin of the world, especially of the earth, sea and land, and its inhabitants, above all of man himself its head and God's representative; then in chap. 2. the special relations of man with God, with the lower creaturehood, and with woman his counterpart, which necessitates for completeness and accuracy the special divine name of “Jehovah” Elohim. The slighting of these revelations exposes to Atheism or a powerless Theism. Science cannot penetrate the secrets of the beginnings by the confession even of one so self-confident and skeptical as J. S. Mill (in his Logic). The domain of science is either purely abstract or applied to what is already created; but how it came to be is outside its ken. Here in chap. 10. we are given to survey a fact of immense importance to the government of the earth. The first rise of families into separate nations and tongues, history has utterly failed to indicate, as science fails, in the material realm.

Revelation, as it kept intact two chronological lines in chap. 5., here too supplies the manifest and invaluable light of God with a special view to His earthly people, followed by the moral cause laid before us in chap. 11. which brings in (as it ought) the name of Jehovah throughout its earlier paragraph; whereas it only appears exceptionally, though for good reason, in chap. 10:9. All the lessons and monumental records of all the earth combined are not to be compared for certainty or comprehensiveness with this sacred ethnography, grounded on genealogy, and linked with geography. God gave it by Moses as He alone could. Facts of great weight as to the antediluvians are related in Gen. 4, and, what to some may seem strange, in the family of Cain with religion but without faith. Therein arose city life, arts, and sciences, literary verse, among men who forgot the fall, ignored sin and the Savior, and strove to embellish the earth into a worldly paradise. As the unity of the race was absolute at the beginning, so it was virtually in Noah after the deluge. The outward progress of mankind must have been all the greater because of their longevity. Whatever it was, the sons of Noah possessed all on their new start. No theory is more fallacious than the pretended ages of stone, bronze, and iron. Men, in their wanderings into rude forest life or other forms of savagery, fell into the circumstances of such facts, which still exist under similar conditions: to generalize them, as successive periods through which all passed, is mere myth, not history.

“And these [are the] generations of Noah's sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth; and sons were born to them after the flood” (Gen. 10:1). This is the true place for such a statement given after Noah's fall and its remarkable consequences; just as the genealogy of Adam's sons followed in Gen. 5 after his sin and that of Cain led to the revealed state of the world before the flood. Noah lived on for centuries after, but is mentioned no more in the history, as Adam disappears after his sin, with Cain's crime leading to Seth given instead of Abel. One Spirit forms the narrative beyond the wisdom of Moses, and in total disproof of incoherent fragments pieced together, least of all at an epoch when all was crumbling to ruin among the chosen people. It was well ordered that none of Noah's sons had children till they emerged from the ark. So Adam became a father only after the fall and expulsion from paradise.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles

Esther.

In the book of Nehemiah we have the last look which scripture furnishes historically at the remnant in Jerusalem, justly subjected to the world-power for their apostasy from Jehovah, yet provisionally kept for Messiah's advent. Alas! as we know they rejected Him to their own rejection, the call of the Gentiles following, till mercy take the Jews up again at the end of the age, and they fall at the feet of Jesus Messiah in glory, after manifold judgments, when “all Israel shall be saved.”

Here we have another final view historically in the book of Esther; but it is in a quite different direction, for we have a picture of the secret providence which never fails to watch over them while they are scattered among the Gentiles. And this it is that accounts for no introduction of Jehovah or even Elohim in the book, which rationalistic ignorance alleges against its divine inspiration. Oh, the folly of heeding what these enemies of God (and therefore in divine things of man also) say about scripture! Were their learning and ability as great as they conceive for themselves and their school, nothing avails but faith for the true and spiritual intelligence of God's word. For their system excluding faith excludes God also, and is a constant crying up of man in any and every form; so that assuredly the issue is that the blind guides lead their blind followers into the ditch. Now to faith the absence of God's name is here in unexpected but exquisite harmony with the book, and its intrusion would not have been in perfect keeping with the secret working for the people (publicly Lo-ammi) preserved extraordinarily, while their enemies are completely foiled and overwhelmed. It stands alone from beginning to end the deeply interesting witness of One unseen and unnamed Who none the less surely works in the anomalous state of the Captivity, carrying out by seemingly nothing beyond human means the vindication of those who, faulty as the people had been, secretly feared Him, and the catastrophe of their adversary, though in possession of assured and boundless means to compass their destruction.

The readers of Baxter's “Saint's Rest” know that the author, on Sandys' authority, says the Jews used to fling the book of Esther to the ground, because God's name was not there. But J. C. Wolfii Biblio. Heb. 2:90 is opposed and imputes the act, where it may have been, to manifesting their abhorrence of Haman; for the book was notoriously venerated in the highest degree, however late in the Canon. Luther was as wrong about it as about the Epistle of James. The interpolations in the Greek V. gave it an unfavorable aspect to Athanasius and others who did not know Hebrew.

Short as the book is, it is full of the most surprising circumstances which crowd its scenes and entrance the least sensitive of readers from the first chapter to the close. Without a touch of romance, it is instinct with the life of the Persian empire at that day. Yet though it seem unique and exceptional on the surface, underneath we may discern the constant story of scripture, the war that never ceases, while man is tried in the ages and dispensations (allowed for the wisest purposes by Him Who could terminate it in a moment) between Him Who is good and righteous, and “the old serpent, the devil.” And in that it is in this world, though the springs be outside it and on high, we see in the book the godly Jew on the one hand who resists at all cost, and, not out of pride or personal feeling but uncompromising religious fidelity, refuses to honor the representative of a people with whom Jehovah swore from early days to have war from generation to generation. In Mordecai and Haman the question is here brought to issue, and the triumph of the chosen people is foreshown; not less is the shame and curse which will without a doubt fall on their enemies in the day that hastens. As Satan instigated the Amalekite to his exterminating hatred of God's fallen people, so He Who loved them notwithstanding all would punish condignly an enmity that began without cause against the object of His manifest favor.

It is remarkable, however, that while the book of Esther does not in its historical events transcend the provisional limits which characterize all the past captivity annals, it supposes that servitude to their Gentile masters to which apostate iniquity had reduced the people of God. But even in its most extreme form, outside the land, the temple, the sacrifices, and the priesthood, it demonstrates the surest action of divine providence on their behalf against their foes however deadly and powerful. We have also typical instruction which yields much more to the opened eye. He Who, though hidden and unmentioned, none the less does all things according to His sovereign will, does not fail to add very far beyond the living proof of watchful oversight, tender care, and overthrow of seemingly triumphant malice. For Vashti, in the typical point of view, by no means obscurely sets before faith the Gentile set aside because of insubjection to the supreme ruler, and this in that which He had so deeply at heart, the display of her beauty before the world; and the accomplishment of promise of old is in the call of Esther the Jewish bride to be the object of His love and the sharer of His earthly glory. This is the scheme that runs through the prophets as a whole, of which the things, here prefigured, are manifest characteristics: the everlasting overthrow of the dominion of the nations by divine judgment; the elevation of the earthly object of Jehovah's love, as set forth distinctly in the Psalms and Prophets, to say nothing of Canticles; and the administration for the Great King entrusted to Mordecai as the figure of the Lord Jesus.

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 1

Dan. 2; 7

IT may be well here to notice that the book of Daniel is divisible from its nature into two nearly equal parts. The first six chapters may be regarded as the first volume, the last six as the second. This is not at all an arbitrary division. It is one founded on the contents of the book. For the early chapters consist of visions which the Gentile king saw, or facts of a moral kind that befell one or other of the monarchs of Babylon vindicating God's mind and sure judgment; whereas the last half of the book communicates visions which the prophet saw. Accordingly there is a marked difference between the two portions, even when they treat of the same subject matter. We see this clearly by comparing the seventh chapter with the second. They go over the same ground precisely, but in a different way. The earlier of the two gives the public history of the world as made known to the first man whom the God of heaven made monarch of all mankind, as well as of the lower creation (chap. 2: 37, 38); in the later (chap. 7.) we have a presentation of it to a saint, and details in relation to the Lord and the saints at the end of the age.

Nebuchadnezzar was not able to enforce his sway universally—man never is. But as far as the sovereign gift of God was concerned, it was wheresoever the sons of men dwelt. Cyrus, the Persian, extended his sway somewhat more; Alexander of Macedon, a great deal farther still (ver. 39). But it was the Romans who did more than any before them. This was the last empire of the tour, to which God gave to conquer and rule the then known world, leaving outside of it races that were then uncivilized, our own included, but afterward to become the most important peoples of modern times. The Britons up to the Christian era were rude and undisciplined. So were the Germans as wild and fierce as the Britons, and the Gauls little better, though successively more or less reduced by the Roman arms. You all perhaps know the famous Julius Caesar visited our country in the south; as others followed and tried to conquer the Caledonians; but the mountains protected those hardy warriors, and the Romans had no particular sway beyond the well-known limits that sever the Highlands from the Lowlands.

However that may have been, here we have God giving in the first part of the book a comprehensive view of the great imperial powers in the history of the world. There was first the vigorous and splendid empire of Babylon. Man had sought and contended for undisputed and supreme power; but it had never been seen before. Thus we see in scripture the haughty ambition of the Assyrian power: and, even after its fall in the destruction of Nineveh, the rising up of the Egyptian, till Nebuchadnezzar overthrew it at Carchemish. Babylon had been but a subject province of Assyria till the Chaldees gave new courage and strength against its suzerain. For they were among the active enemies that destroyed Nineveh, combining with their Median and Persian allies. Whatever the pretension, the Assyrians did not succeed in getting a universal empire. Egypt sought the same thing afterward, but Nebuchadnezzar crushed any such aspiration. God had decided to exalt a hitherto inferior kingdom. Who on earth then would have thought of Babylon? Yet was it chosen of God to hold this new place of imperial power. It had under Merodach Baladan become independent no doubt, but it was soon put down again and made tributary to Assyria. Hitherto they appear to have been chiefly of Hamitic race; but some time before the Chaldees gave them a new impetus, coming down from the northern mountains, being of Japheth, from which source were the races that overspread Europe.

But whatever the providential course that wrought, the empire of the world depended on another and all-important turning point. Israel, Judah even, had proved utterly unworthy to be the leader of the kingdoms of the earth. They ought to have been a central witness as a people to all the surrounding kingdoms, a pattern of righteous government under the law of God that all the nations might take heed and see the blessing of having the Lord Jehovah for their God. All this, however, had completely and shamefully broken down before God allowed Babylon to be anything but a power aspiring to independence, but not yet succeeding even in this. When it rose for a little, it was friendly toward Judah, as we may learn from Isa. 39

You remember how, after recovery from his sickness, Hezekiah the king displayed his treasures to the ambassadors from Babylon, and how the prophet was promptly sent to announce that all should be carried to Babylon without a remnant, and his own sons captives and eunuchs there. No such destiny had God allowed to the Assyrian, who on the contrary fell under an immense disaster, even the destruction of a mighty host of them, through the angel's intervention. A hundred and eighty-five thousand in their camp were left dead corpses in a single night. Do you ask how these facts were not acknowledged by the ancients? How could you expect a vainglorious and idolatrous king like Sennacherib to publish his own shame under the evident interposition of the living God?

These ancient despots were ready enough to blazon their successes on enduring pillars or other monuments of pride. Who ever heard of people disposed or ready to acknowledge their own defeats, especially when the defeat was of divine origin as in this instance? And if such be the might of Jehovah's angel, what of His hand? In fact, God then held things in the balance, until first Israel and then Judah proved altogether failing to present the picture of a righteous people here below. Had He continued to keep Judah after Manasseh and others, it would have been God supporting His own in the wickedness of the kings and the people. He cannot deny Himself. For those who know His nature and ways, it is impossible to conceive His doing otherwise than He did in their case; and so He warned them early. “Hear this word that Jehovah hath spoken against you, O children of Israel, against the whole family which I brought up from the land of Egypt, saying, You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities” (Amos 3:1, 2). Who finds anything like this in the Vedas or the Sutras, in the Zend-avesta or the Yih-king, the Kuran or the like?

The spurious sacred books of men rather flatter and puff up their votaries, while they harden their hearts to destroy better men who refuse their impostures. God's wrath is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men that hold the truth in unrighteousness. He will not sanction but punish those who couple His name with their own evil; and is it not most just? The Epistle to the Romans declares His grace to the ungodly, who, when they confess the name of the Lord, are brought into the richest spiritual blessing. But if they insult the God Who blesses them, what can be before them but righteous judgment? God is not mocked. So the gospel declares. But Israel is still kept as a people to be blessed of God. They are in a truly abnormal state, having been for many centuries without a king and without a prince, and without a sacrifice and without a pillar, and without an ephod and teraphim. What is there that remains to Judaism but dry and empty form? All they can do in Jerusalem is to wail. But this is not the spirit or language of those who have the grace and truth that came by Jesus Christ. These may and ought to confess their sins; but if they be not happy, there is something wrong with their faith or their state. They who believe the gospel have the deepest, highest, surest, and simplest grounds for rejoicing in the Savior. “Rejoice in the Lord always,” said the apostolic prisoner from Rome; “again I will say, Rejoice “; as he said of himself, “Yea, and if I be poured forth upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy and rejoice with you all.”

Those that in faith of Christ read the New Testament, or the whole Bible (for one likes it as a whole and not merely its latest part), cannot but glean from it very considerable good. But if they practice what is contrary to the word, the Holy Spirit of God is grieved and therefore makes them miserable in the sense of their unfaithfulness; for He witnesses against their faults till they judge themselves before God. But their regular state is one of peace and joy in believing.

( To be continued D.V.)

The Last King of the North

Dan. 11

As is known, great uncertainty pervades even believers as to the closing verses of this chapter and their true application. It may be well to show enough proof to any mind open to conviction that he truth is here so plainly revealed that doubt is inexcusable. And this is the more desirable, because, as long as hesitation exists, there cannot be the simple strength of faith, not only in believing this scripture, but in apprehending many others with which it is connected.

Let it then be distinctly noted that, though the kings of the north and south occupy the chapter from ver. 5 (Seleucus Nicator and Ptolemaeus Lagi with their successors), this comes to a halt at verse 32, after which we hear no more of Antiochus Epiphanes; of whom far more had been said than of any other, because of his deliberate and desperate efforts to uproot the law of God in the land and to Hellenize the Jews, even to Greek idolatry in the temple itself. The Maccabean resistance is pursued after that, and the various fortunes of the Jews in verses 33-35, which evidently not only indicate a continuance of sifting and trial, but point “to the time of the end.” This needs no argument; it is indisputably asserted by the prophet. The great break is therefore here; and we are directed to look on from that Maccabean day of “exploits,” followed by a period of instruction and falling on one side, and purging of the others for many days, without a word about kings of the north and south; but beyond this is “a time appointed,” left quite indefinite, when “the time of the end” is to come.

Then suddenly we hear of one entirely distinct from either line of those kings. It is no longer the Lagidae nor the Seleucidae, but a monarch who becomes an object of attack to future kings of the south as well as of the north simultaneously or nearly so. He will be beyond doubt a king in “the land” of Israel between the kingdoms of the north (Syria and Asia Minor) and of the south (Egypt). Verses 36-40 are entirely devoted to this portentous ruler, only the last of which brings in the king of the south pushing at him, and the king of the north tempestuously assailing him (that is, the willful king in Palestine).

It is of the utmost moment to observe that from that ver. 40 it is no longer the king in the land that is described, but his northern adversary. Some of the fathers blundered here, as do many moderns, who take the closing verses 41-45 as said of the Jewish king in that future day; whereas they are demonstrably an account of the king of the north and his awful end.

First, it is on the face of the passage that this northern king is the person last spoken of through the greater part of ver. 40; and therefore grammatically “he” is the one continued throughout the following verses as the great actor who at length comes to an abrupt end. Next, he is said to “enter also into the beautiful land” (Judaea) as well as many others. This does not apply properly to the king who was at home and reigning there, but to an enemy from without. Thirdly, it cannot be “the king of the south,” seeing that ver. 42 informs us in plain terms that the land of Egypt shall not escape,” and again that “he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt,” and, quite as serious an effect of his overthrow, that “the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.” Fourthly, what arrests and recalls him in his southern victories is “tidings out of the east and out of the north.” It is plainly bad rumors out of his own dominions which trouble him. “Therefore he shall go forth with great fury to destroy and utterly to make away many. And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the mountain of holy beauty” (vers. 44, 45). Here we have him back, incensed to the highest degree and bent on the destruction of the Jews. For the beautiful holy mountain is none other than that which distinguished Jerusalem and its temple, as the seas on either hand are the Mediterranean and the Salt or Dead Sea. “Yet he shall come to his end and none shall help him.” Compare Dan. 8:23-25.

From other scriptures, as Isa. 11:4, 2 Thess. 2:8, Rev. 19:20, we know that the false prophet, king in the land, the Antichrist, is to perish with his western ally the Beast (or revived and apostate Roman Emperor), when the Lord shines forth in the day of His appearing; whereas the last king of the north comes up afterward to a no less terrible catastrophe, when He takes His place with His people in Jerusalem and fights against this mighty ravager at the head of those nations whom he compels to follow his banner. Of them Zech. 14 speaks, of the first attack when he was partially successful, before he hurried to the south, and of utter destruction when he comes up again in his fury, not knowing that Jerusalem is then Jehovah-Shammah.

Treasure Hidden in the Field

HERE the importance of the Lord's speaking to the disciples in the house is manifest. He began with explaining the parable of the Darnel of the field. They are not exterior facts of the kingdom like those said without to the crowds, but spiritual views for His followers only. If those spoken openly have been misinterpreted through the natural mind, the later are yet more exposed to it.

“Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid, and for the joy of it goeth and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth the field” (Matt. 13:44).

The gospel or the soul's salvation is by no means what this parable or the next presents, though often so interpreted. In reality, one can hardly conceive anything more opposite. For the gospel is the revelation of God's grace in Christ; salvation is a free gift, like eternal life. It is in no way true that the man, who has it brought before him, sells all that he has to purchase that treasure; still less does he buy the field, which is certainly something else very different, to acquire the salvation of his soul.

Never since the world began has any soul been led by the Spirit to sell all that he had to buy life or pardon, salvation or glory. And if any have sought in this fashion to be delivered from evil or to gain God's favor, we may be sure that their suit was rejected; for it is an ignoring of guilt and ruin, a frustrating of God's grace, and a making void in effect Christ's death. On the other hand it is allowed fully that, in those that are Christ's and have Him as their portion, there may be and there ought to be a like devotedness to any extent in our measure. But this is a very different thing, and not what the parable teaches.

It is overlooked that the soul's need and blessing we have had already in the opening parable of the Sower, as it is indeed a personal question, antecedent to the mysteries of the kingdom, and carefully presented as distinct, before any likeness of the kingdom begins. Those likenesses bring out larger considerations, whether outside or within. And the Lord is the “man” here, as nobody can doubt in His field of wheat spoiled by the darnel (ver. 24).

Thus read, all flows without jar and in accordance with all truth. It is the Son of God incarnate Who is compared to one who found and hid the treasure in the field. And, in this aspect, “the field” retains its significance as “the world,” instead of being twisted into “the scriptures,” or “the letter” or “the Christian profession “; it is “the world” where Christ found His own, who constitute His “treasure.” The meaning is then not only enforced by but agreeable to the rest of God's word. And the Lord's consequent action is no less in harmony. For what can be more certain than that He emptied Himself to become man, and, when found in that fashion, humbled Himself and became obedient unto death—even death of the cross? Nay, we may press the analogy closer still from the known facts of the case. He was as Messiah heir of David's throne, but gave up all in His death, which purchased the world and redeemed His own who were in it. Even His enemies, who blaspheme and deny Him Who bought them (2 Peter 2:1), are His purchase. But His own have also in Him redemption through His blood. So plain is it that purchase and redemption are not the same, nor equally extensive. For clearly the purchase is not of the treasure only but of the field (or world) wherein the treasure was hid. Redemption is not thus universal but belongs only to those that believe, as all scripture teaches and this parable illustrates. Christ has paid (to say the least) the full price, to reconcile “all things, whether the things on earth or the things in the heavens” (Col. 1:20); and the day is near, when God will head up the universe in Him (Eph. 1:10), the Heir of all things, at His coming. Christ bought the world, but His joy is in the “treasure” which is to be with Him and like Him in that day.

How then do you stand as to Him? To be bought, as is the field of the world, is only the more terrible if you deny Him. And all that call not on Him, all that neglect so great salvation, do deny Him, though they may not break into heresies of perdition. You are summoned by God in His word to believe on Him. So believing you shall have mercy: for it is written that whosoever does believe on Him shall not be ashamed. All who reject Him, high or low, poor or rich, must bear their doom to endless shame and woe. Oh, why sin against God and His Christ and your own soul? Why regard lying vanities, whatever they may be, and forsake your own mercy?

Christ, the world-rejected Lamb, is worthy, and He has brought to your door redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins. Is not this your deep need whoever and whatever you are? In none other is remission; in Him it is as perfect as Himself. Oh, delay not, nor turn away. It is yielding to His enemy and yours, to the liar and murderer from the beginning. Consider too how your unbelief insults God in all the ways of His grace. “As though God did beseech through us, we pray (says the apostle) on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (2 Cor. 5:20). Unbelief directly dishonors the Father Who sent, and the Son Who in love deigned to be sent. And the Holy Spirit is sent down since Christ's ascension to testify of His Person and work and glory. Oh! beware of doing despite to the Spirit of grace. For we know Him that said, Vengeance belongeth to Me: I will recompense.

Proofs of the Resurrection

IN a grand symphony of praise a multitude of angels, in the hearing of the shepherds of Bethlehem, celebrated the birth of our Lord. Assuredly not less interested in His glorious resurrection, certain angels rendered true and acceptable service in announcing before the women at the sepulcher its accomplishment. From that moment when from the vision of angels Mary Magdalene “turned herself back,” these heavenly messengers were lost to sight, to appear again no more until after our Lord's ascension (Acts 1:10, 11).

When first our Lord foretold to His disciples His own resurrection from the dead, these questioned one with another what the rising from the dead should mean (Matt. 9:9). And, when we consider it, how much was involved in that glorious bringing again from the dead our. Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep! For upon it depended our justification; also by it the Mighty Victor put all His enemies to open shame. The very glories attendant upon His victory make the riches of His grace all the more apparent as we perceive the manner in which our glorious Deliverer made Himself known to His weeping and sorrowing disciple (John 20).

“Jesus saith unto her, Mary.” That one word, uttered by Himself, instantly turned all her overwhelming grief into overflowing joy. It was Himself indeed, “Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever.” Many waters had not quenched that love which His calling her by name abundantly proved to be, as ever, perfect. She had sorrowed much for His sake; He had endured infinitely more in accomplishing her salvation and ours; and now He was found of her whom He called by name.

“She turned herself, and saith unto Him, Rabboni.” The writer on one occasion, having been hastily called to the bedside of a loved and dying sister, was quietly sitting near and watching the dear sick one, when she presently opened her eyes, gazed upwards very intently, and said, “Lord Jesus!” Those two words were uttered in a tone at once expressive of complete satisfaction of heart, of ecstatic spiritual joy, and of deepest reverence, as became a true worshipper. By that one word “Rabboni,” Mary Magdalene expressed what this dying sister also felt when she too recognized her Lord.

Her natural impulses are instantly checked and restrained by the Lord's authoritative injunction— “Touch Me not; for I am not yet ascended to My Father.” The Son of God stood before her, soon to ascend up to where He was before; so that, if before her in infinite and condescending grace, Christ shall henceforth be known after the flesh no more. Yet is. Mary very highly privileged in being commissioned to bear His message to those whom He is not ashamed to call His brethren, to announce the glorious fact that His ascension is now imminent, in language no less clear in its expression of the full reality of our unalterable relationship now existing between the risen Son of God and those who believed: His Father and God is theirs also.

OUR LORD'S SECOND APPEARANCE.

The omission from the ninth verse of Matt. 28 in the R. V. of what forms the first clause of the verse in the A. V. is a decided improvement. We quote the Revised, “And behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and took hold of His feet, and worshipped Him.”

The manner of our Lord's salutation “All hail!” leaves no room for a doubt that quite a number of women, saw Him at His second appearance. Mary had gone and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and she had faithfully delivered His first message to them. Yet Mary's only companions on her again returning to the sepulcher appear to be believing women, whom our Lord meets on their way, and so salutes them all. These are now privileged to hold Him by the feet, which Mary at His first appearance was strictly forbidden to do. Why that restriction then? And this liberty of action now? Evidently the Lord would have His “brethren” to be instant partakers with Mary in the joy of the full assurance that He was actually risen from the dead. There must be no delay in the delivery of the all-important message He sent at the first by her to them. Had they at once accepted the truth from her lips, they had doubtless all returned with her at once to the sepulcher. We believe that those thus returning with her believed because of her word, and that the favor of holding their risen Lord by the feet was specially conferred on those who readily received Mary's testimony. The message they jointly receive to deliver to His “brethren” treats not of His ascension, but of His presently meeting them in Galilee.

THE LORD APPEARS TO TWO GOING TO EMMAUS.

It has become quite the habit with some, whose sole standpoint in viewing the whole matter appears to be Psa. 133:3, to reflect strongly upon those two disciples, who, on that eventful resurrection day, turned their backs upon and left Jerusalem to go to a comparatively obscure village. These Mentors seem to quite overlook the very significant fact that our Lord Himself does not in the least reflect upon, them for their action, which exactly reversed that of the Queen of Sheba. The city of solemnities had an all-absorbing attraction for her, because there reigned Solomon, and there the Lord God of Israel was glorified in Israel's accepted king. Therefore in her day it was a profitable employment to

“Walk about Zion, and go round about her:

Tell the towers thereof,

Mark well her bulwarks,

Consider her palaces.”

That they might have the privilege of worshipping a greater than Solomon the wise men came from the east to Jerusalem. Not finding Him there, Zion's “towers, bulwarks, palaces,” have no attractions for them compared with Bethlehem, where He then was. The culpable indifference displayed by the inhabitants of Jerusalem with reference to His birth, had since given place to the open manifestation of their murderous hatred of Him, Whom they cast out of that city which He had Himself chosen to put His name there, and crucified on Calvary.

The entire narrative shows that Cleopas and his companion were thinking more about the treatment the Lord had received at the hands of its inhabitants than about the city itself. For all this their turning of their backs upon it was a testimony against Jerusalem, in which they had no heart any longer to abide, since He has been so shamelessly maltreated therein, and led out only to be crucified.

His crucifixion, death, and burial is their all-absorbing theme of conversation as they walk and are sad. Their affections are strong, and as deep as they were real; but faith is lacking, so that they are very depressed and sorrowful: chafed in their minds and wounded in their spirits because of what He had suffered at the hands of sinful men. Jesus draws near and goes with them, His every footstep betokening unweakened affection.

In infinite wisdom their eyes are holden that they do not know Him. He encourages them to tell out all their sorrows. Hiding nothing from Him whose full sympathies are with them, they tell of all that has so deeply wounded them. He answers them by the instant application of that word which is sharper than any two-edged sword. His sharp rebuke went deeper than all that had wounded before, and fully exposed a slowness of heart in believers, of the existence of which they had hitherto not been aware. As they now were deeply wounded and thoroughly humbled, their risen Lord forsakes them not; but instantly brings forward the testimony of the written word concerning Christ's sufferings, and His glory that should certainly follow.

Jerusalem now is no longer in their thoughts; they fret no more over the wicked action of “the chief priests and our rulers;” they forget even their own sorrows. For their hearts are now burning within them, as He talks with them, and opens to them the scriptures.

They draw near unto Emmaus; He makes as though He would go farther. But they constrain Him to abide with them. Most gladly they do their best and utmost in their genuine desire to minister to the refreshment of their unknown Guest, Who has so fully refreshed their spirits by His ministration of the Christ to them through the written word.

He is known of them in breaking of bread, and vanishes. This is now indeed an overflowing cup; they must make others partakers with themselves of joys so full and deep and real. They rise up the same hour, and return to that very city upon which they have so recently turned their backs. Why is it become to them the city of desire, in which their feet now gladly tread? Christ's own are there assembled; they are mourning and weeping, while Cleopas and his companion are filled with comfort. They hasten forward in their eagerness to tell good news, to find that the Lord has been graciously pleased to give another proof of His own resurrection. Certain anticipate them, “saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon.” “And they told what things were done in the way, and how He was known of them in breaking of bread.”

Position and the Grace That Gave It

THERE are two dangers to which believers are exposed: one is stopping short of the position grace gives; the other, of losing the abiding sense of it in the soul. Both involve what is important as to standing and state, or privilege and responsibility. The latter should ever be governed by the former, and both maintained in holy consistency and grateful thankfulness to the God of all grace, from Whom all blessing comes, and to Whom all the fruit of it should return.

Deut. 26 and Eph. 2 are two striking scriptures to illustrate the position given in God's grace with an appeal, to those blessed, ever to abide in the sense of it. In the one we have that of Israel as a redeemed nation, and in the other, that of the church in the marvelous grace bestowed alike upon Gentiles. True, the one is upon earth in the land of Canaan, and the other heavenly in the once dead but now living and exalted Savior. The principle nevertheless is one, though most important to distinguish; for from each given position there is a touching appeal, worthy of consideration in a moment like the present, when there is such need for believers to know and remind each other, that they belong to heaven, and no less to live and walk in the sense of the infinite grace of God, which not only saved but set them there in Christ. Israel, when in the land and enjoying their highest privilege in worship, were enjoined before the Lord their God to say, “A Syrian ready to perish was my father.” Gentile believers, when raised equally with the Jewish ones to the position of being set in Christ on high were enjoined to “Remember” what they were in the past. To forget the past through the present position may be the thought and way of man; but it is not so with God for those who are the recipients of His grace. Neither will a received position lead to

pride or indifference, when maintained in the presence of God, and enjoyed before and with Him Who gave it. Moreover, to stop short of the purpose of grace must be to lower what it is, and weaken or nullify that which gave rise to it. For example, Jehovah made known to Moses, the appointed deliverer of Israel, His purpose of grace toward them: they were not only to be delivered from the power of Pharaoh, and Egypt his sphere, but to be brought into the place of blessing, the land flowing with milk and honey.

This Ex. 3 clearly shows, when the Lord tells Moses His intention, and touchingly speaks of having seen His people's affliction, heard their cry, and known their sorrow. Hence the purpose of grace embraced not only deliverance from slavery, but the bringing into the blessings of Canaan. For Israel therefore to be content with the one, and fall short of the other, would be dishonoring if not presumptuous self-will as to the blessed purpose of divine grace. Yea, the precious truth of Deut. 26 whether as to the presentation of the first fruits, or the confession of what they were in Egypt with what they sprang from, would be lost, both as to their blessing in the land, and the kept up sense of the grace that gave it.

The offered first fruits could only be in and of the land of Canaan, so that Israel must be there, and possess it, before they could tender to Jehovah the precious fruit.

Then only, when in their enjoyed position, were they to say, “A Syrian ready to perish was my father” as well as to remember what they were in Egypt.

If position bore its holy fruit toward the Lord, so their past condition would have its wholesome effect, that all was of sovereign grace, flowing from Jehovah's choice—therefore to His own praise and glory, though equally to His people's happiness.

Having considered the position and grace of an earthly people, we follow only to look at the heavenly, which unfolds divine grace in all its fullness. If Jehovah and Moses were concerned and together respecting the former, God and His Son were blessedly so as to the latter: an important distinction, when we remember also that God has been glorified in and by His Son. By Him sin, death, and Satan's power have been annulled, so that the blessed purposes of grace may appear in all their fullness. Bearing this in mind, to stop short of the position grace gives is to slight not only divine purpose, but Christ Himself in and by Whom it is made good, seeing He is the grand center of all purpose and counsel, and His God-glorifying death its holy and righteous basis. It may be expected therefore, that the Epistle of divine counsels (as Ephesians clearly is) would unfold the fullness of divine grace.

Extremes of condition and position, infinitely beyond that of an earthly Israel are declared, laying bare the root and springs of an evil nature, wholly corrupt, and alienated from God: not only Jew and Gentile alike sinners, but dead in trespasses and sins, equally the children of wrath; a condition of ruin, helplessness, and death. Then and there it is, that God displays Himself by a power already manifested in Christ. He Who in grace went into death for the sin of others is now raised out from the dead by the power of God, and seated at His own right hand: a power in favor of all who believe, consistent with righteousness, and in character with what God is. Love and mercy in their greatness and richness combine with the exercise of divine power, suited to the condition of those dead in trespasses and sins; as it is written, “But God Who is rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ.”

There is life with Christ risen from the dead, but further, “He hath raised us up together and made us sit together, in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.” Moreover that it may be fully understood to be His pure abounding grace that gives this position (as well as displays the exceeding riches of it by-and-by), it is added, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not of works, lest any man should boast.” Such is the given place of all believers now, not only the knowledge of being saved, but of life with and position in Christ in heavenly places. How distinct, and infinitely beyond that of an earthly people in the land of Canaan, who were taken from Egypt's bondage, with the humbling origin of “A Syrian ready to perish” ! Whereas present grace raises from moral death and sin, to life and seated position, and no less fully blesses in Christ in heaven. The supreme dignity and surpassing contrast of divine grace is not wondered at, since it is in and by Christ Jesus; and such wonder is eclipsed in the unfathomable fact that He by “the grace of God tasted death.”

When the latter expression of grace can be fathomed (which it never will), then will the extent of blessing flowing from it know its limit. But only God and His Son are in the knowledge and fullness of it. Alas! how little pure grace is known or understood with the love that gave rise to it, and the work of Christ by which the grace of salvation has freely come. The grace that saves from death and judgment, with present forgiveness of sins, is much clouded with uncertainty; so that the fullness of grace in seating us in Christ in heaven is rarely heard of, much less known and believed in as a present blessed reality. No wonder therefore, that the ground of an earthly people is accepted, and Jewish things imitated; as if what was should still be in experience and practice, rather than what is, since Christ has come and is gone into heaven. Eternal redemption, eternal life, present seated position in Christ, in the abiding rest and peace of a full salvation, are nevertheless for to-day, since the gospel of God has been preached by the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. Happy they who receive in their simplicity these holy and precious realities, as beyond all question!

It is well, for those who in any measure know what grace has freely and fully given in Christ, to be reminded of the responsibility such a position brings with it.

How wholesome therefore is the appeal to remember the past, not only as to those of whom it is written, that they were without hope and without God in the world. Alas! Gentiles when under the profession of Christ, have become proud and boastful, indifferent to the true grace of God, yea, have turned it to fleshly purposes and carnal ends. Those too who really know and have tasted the grace and blessedness of a present heavenly standing may well give heed, lest they fall into the snare of practical indifference to the abiding sense of what grace should produce. If heavenly life calls for heavenly ways and holy fruit, so also such a position claims the corresponding answer in separation from all that is a denial of it, bearing in mind that those set in Christ on high are created in Christ Jesus unto good works.

To avert the danger of falling short, either of the place grace gives, or of its abiding effects, no brighter sample can be given to imitate, than the apostle Paul, to whom its fullness was made known, and as it was received so was it also expressed to others. Grace abounded toward him to own himself the chief of sinners, the least of the apostles and of all saints. Nevertheless he labored more abundantly, adding, “Not I, but the grace of God which was with me.” In motive and object Christ Himself governed him: a man in Christ his grand theme, in contrast to man in the flesh; and Christ in glory the One for Whom he had suffered the loss of all things, to gain Whom as His eternal portion would be his incomparable blessedness. Such was grace to him for salvation and position, as Christ Jesus was his Savior, object, and boast. May that same grace so work in us by the blessed Spirit of God to beget in some little measure a like answer to the praise of Him, Who, though on high, yet went lower than all, in order to provide at all cost to Himself a place not only in Him in the heavenlies now, but to be with Him in His own likeness forever and ever. Amen.

G. G.

The Epistle of James: Introduction

THE Epistle by the title as well as by its contents proclaims its peculiarity. It addresses the twelve tribes that were in the dispersion, not the elect strangers of the dispersion, but the mass of the old people of Jehovah. Nor is this quite unexampled even in the apostle Paul's feeling and phrase; for on the occasion of his speech before king Agrippa and Festus the procurator of Judaea he speaks of “our twelve tribes, earnestly serving day and night,” hoping to attain to the promise made by God unto the fathers (Acts 26). There is thus, as has been remarked, a striking counterpart between the Old and N. T. in this, that one book in the New is devoted as a testimony to Israel, as one in the Old (Jonah) is devoted similarly to the great Gentile city of that day (Nineveh), both exceptional and proving the rule.

Hence only is accounted for in this Epistle appeal (chaps. 4: 1, 4, 9, v. 1-6) to unbelievers in Christ or unconverted Jews, interspersed with addresses to those Jews who did believe (chaps. 2: 1, 5, 14; 3: 1, 13, 17; 5: 7, 8). There is no ambiguity as to his own confession of the Messiah. From the very first verse of the Epistle he announces himself bondman not more of God than of the Lord Jesus Christ; and he begins with the blessedness of enduring trial or holy temptation in a way that applies clearly to Christian Jews, while he proceeds to warn against sins which go beyond the faithful to mere profession in chap. ii. and afterward farther still.

As a whole the Epistle consists of exhortation from beginning to end; even its doctrine bears closely on moral ways, as in chaps. 1: 13-15, 16-21, 3: 5-8, 15-18. James is pre-eminently a teacher of righteousness; and was used of God in Jerusalem to meet the transition state between the old state that was about to close and the Christianity that was known more simply and fully among Gentiles. Accordingly his teaching, though as truly inspired of God as that of Paul, does not develop redemption in itself, its source, its objects, or its effects, but connects itself with the new birth, and the life we have from God by the word of truth, as opposed to outbreaks of temper and tongue which are the workings of fallen nature.

For this reason no one brings out more clearly than James “the law of liberty” (chaps. 1: 25, 2: 12), which is indeed his own phrase, in evident contrast with letter and its bondage. This, we shall see, supposes the new life which God's grace gives the believer, and which finds its pleasure in the things which please Him as shown in His word.

Nor is there the smallest excuse for imagining discrepancy between the teaching of Rom. 3, 4., and James' chap. 2. on faith, however common the idea was of old as it is now. The object before each writer is wholly different. The apostle Paul unfolds to the Roman saints how an ungodly man is justified, and declares that it is by faith. The apostle James lays down to the twelve tribes that a dead faith, destitute of works, is vain, and that the only faith of real account is that which is displayed in ways which glorify God. Living faith produces living works. He is exposing the worthlessness of an intellectual reception of the gospel, which had even then grown up among the Jews. We see the same principle during our Lord's ministry, and His repudiation of such faith. See John 2:23-25, 6: 66, 15. Nor is the self-same truth lacking even in the Epistle to the Romans, as in chap. 1: 18 (latter half), and also. chap. 2: 5-11. He is destitute of living faith who does not walk in the ways, and by the word and Spirit, of God. “For if ye live after the flesh, ye must die; but if by the Spirit ye mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live” (Rom. 8:13). So thoroughly is the great apostle of the Gentiles at one with this pillar of the circumcision, when the occasion of a godly walk calls for notice in the very Epistle which ignorant haste conceives to stand opposed. All the truth of God is in harmony, whether doctrinal, or ethical as this Epistle is eminently.

It may be well to add that, whatever the doubts of Alford, Neander and others, the writer was no, other than James “the little,” son-of-Alphæus or Clopas (really the same Aramaic name rendered into Greek somewhat differently): the same man who took the lead after the martyrdom of the son of Zebedee, as is plain in the Acts (chaps. 12: 17, 15: 13, 21: 18). Compare 1 Cor. 15:7, and Gal. 2:9, 12. His words and ways elsewhere are strikingly in agreement with his letter. Patience and purity, love and lowliness, characterize the apostle and his writing for the sphere he labored in. It is remarkable that his language, and style, consist of excellent Greek with great energy. But the work given him in the Lord was, not to unfold divine counsels or to insist on redemption, but the urgent assertion of the moral consistency day by day, in affection, speech, and ways, of those who are called to endure patiently the various temptations of this world. This becomes such men as look for the crown of life, being already begotten of God by the word of truth according to His sovereign will.

Letters on Singing: Making Melody in the Heart

4.-Making Melody In The Heart.

MY DEAR—

You will remember doubtless that in a former letter the exhortation of 1 Cor. 14 was referred to, wherein we are enjoined to sing with both the spirit and the understanding. Christians are expected to be intelligent in the ways of the Lord, and not to be “children in understanding.” There is however another element in singing which is of equal importance. Without the melody of the heart, it is impossible to render acceptable praise to the Lord.

This might be gathered from the general tenor of both Old and New Testaments. But to mark its extreme importance, we find it repeatedly expressed in definite terms. The Psalmist desires more than once to praise Jehovah with his “whole heart” (Psa. 9: 1; 111:1; 138:1). And the Christian with his higher privileges and greater responsibilities is not to be behind the Jew. In two of Paul's Epistles there are special exhortations to this effect: “Singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Eph. 5:19); “Singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord” (God, R.V.) Col. 3:16.

The heart therefore must be right before the Lord as well as the mind. Otherwise, though the expressions be as “clear as crystal,” they will be as “cold as ice.” To avoid this it is necessary that both should be in exercise, that the mind should contribute spiritual intelligence, and the heart sacred emotion.

Scripture shows that there is an intimate connection between the two, and that the heart exercises a considerable influence over the mind. When the declension of man from the knowledge of God to the darkness and corruption of heathendom is described, it is first stated that they “became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened.” It then follows that “even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind” (Rom. 1:21, 28). The heart foolish and darkened was the precursor of the reprobate mind. Again, the apostle prays for the Ephesians that God would give them “the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him; the eyes of your heart (not, “understanding” as in the A. V.) being enlightened: that ye may know what is the hope of his calling,” &c. So that it is clear that while the knowledge of God was lost through the darkening of the heart, the full knowledge of Him is now communicated through the enlightening of the heart. Since the heart therefore is the highway to every true and proper apprehension of the things of God, it is of the highest importance that the heart should be strictly guarded; even as it is said, “Keep thy heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life” (Prov. 4:23). So the apostle writes to the Philippians, “And the peace of God which passeth all understanding shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:7), thus pointing out what alone can form an efficient garrison for the central citadel of man's nature.

For scripture uniformly teaches that the heart is the core of man's being. It is the seat of the affections and of the impulses that carry man forward in the path of life. The Lord Himself declared to those who were content to make clean the exterior of the platter that there is a fountain of uncleanness within, which they entirely ignored. It is from the heart that proceeds everything that defileth (Matt. 15:19). The evil heart of the natural man therefore gives a color to his every action; for it is thence the mischief springs (Matt. 5:28, 1 John 3:15). On the other hand, the heart of the renewed man is so to characterize every action that it may prove good and acceptable before God. As servants of Christ we are to do “the. will of God from the heart” (Eph. 6:6). To this end the love of God has been “shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us” (Rom. 5:5). Indeed the very Spirit of God Himself is in our hearts to originate and characterize every affection. This the apostle teaches, “Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father” (Gal. 4:6; 2 Cor. 1:22).

This fact is of great moment to such as have learned the deceitfulness of the natural heart (Jer. 17:9). We are not left to ourselves to produce proper feelings Godward. He Who gives us right thoughts of God and the Father gives us right feelings too. For He is the Spirit of love as well as of a sound mind (2 Tim. 1:7). It is He, Who fills the heart with such a sense of the incomparable love of God (Rom. 5:5) that out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Matt. 12:34, 35; Luke 6:45).

This constitutes the melody of the heart. But while it cannot exist apart from the offices of the Holy Spirit, the responsibility to produce it abides upon the singer, as our text implies. The one who utters the praises of the Lord with the lip is expected to offer concurrent melody in the heart. For the Holy Ghost assuredly will not act unless the believer honors His presence here upon the earth and yields himself to His direction. It is therefore incumbent upon the worshipper to assume this attitude of faith and dependence in order to secure the operation of the Holy Ghost without which no sacrifice of praise can be acceptable on high.

Though running the risk of being considered tedious, one ventures to point out the further emphasis given to the point now being dwelt upon in Eph. 5:19. There the saints are exhorted, not to sing alone, nor to make melody in the heart alone, but to sing and make melody in the heart. No degree of melody with the voice can become an equivalent substitute for melody in the heart according to the words before us.

And yet it is painful to think that there are not a few who practically maintain that a correct mechanical rendering of hymns to God will be sufficient for Him Who desires truth in the inward parts. Let such seriously consider the solemn warning words of the Lord to the scribes and Pharisees. “Ye hypocrites! well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me” (Matt. 15:7-9). They were in fact but “things without life, giving sound.”

It is imperative therefore that along with the tuneful voice there should be the melodious accompaniment (ψάλλοντες) of the heart. This is to take the place of the musical instruments of the temple worship. The Christian is not invited to praise the Lord with the sound of a trumpet, with the psaltery and the harp and the high sounding cymbals; nevertheless his song should be instinct with the pathos and holy enthusiasm of the inner mart. And shall we for one moment compare the “sounding brass,” the “tinkling cymbal,” or even the “pealing organ,” with the rapturous glow of a fervent soul born of God, and led by the Spirit into the possession and apprehension of the high and lofty privileges which the New Testament reveals as the inalienable portion of the Christian? It will be to compare death with life.

In Colossians we are bidden to sing “with grace” in our hearts. Grace always expresses the superabundant manner in which God has met our sinful need. Hence grace is surely calculated to move the soul to its inmost depths. Those who contemplate the love of Christ, in that He has washed them from their sins in His own blood and made them kings and priests to God and His Father, cannot fail to ascribe to Him the glory and dominion forever and ever.

Grace, while it establishes the heart (Heb. 13:9) and enables us to serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear (Heb. 12:28), also provokes the heart into outbursts of praise and thanksgiving to God. For it is to God we sing in Colossians (R. V.) as the Author of grace, while in Ephesians the Lord is before the soul evoking the melodies of the heart— “making melody in the heart to the Lord.”

And it may surely be said that herein lies the secret of this heart-melody. If any ask, “How may I produce this inward harmony?” the answer is, Let Christ be before the soul. Why does the tongue so often sing while the heart is silent? Is it not because the blessed person of our Savior and Lord is forgotten? The voice joins listlessly with others, but the heart is apathetic and dull or even engaged with the most worthless thoughts. Oh! for faith so to realize His presence that in this as in other things we might exhibit a demeanor becoming to us and, if we may so speak, worthy of Him.

May we not say that it was the sense of the Lord's presence in the Philippian dungeon that caused Paul and Silas to sing “songs in the night?” For if the Lord was not in this case the object of their praise, He was, as He always must be, the subject of that praise. Therefore they sang aloud, making melody in their hearts. They were not as those who sing “songs to a heavy heart “; for the presence of the Lord makes even “the tongue of the dumb to sing,” and none of His redeemed can be sad before Him. For the light of the Master's face transfigures even circumstances of sorrow into occasions of joy.

Above all things therefore let the heart yield its melody to the Lord. One often sees public notices to the effect, “Voices wanted for the church choir,” when, the truth is, hearts are wanted. These, however, cannot be obtained by advertisement. “No heart but of the Spirit taught Makes melody to Thee.” It is not the cultivated voice but the renewed heart that the Father seeks. It should be a comfort therefore to those whose singing consists only in making “a joyful noise to the Lord,” that they can at any rate make melody in their hearts. At the same time they should moderate the loudness of their efforts lest they tax too severely the keener sensibilities of their more musical brethren; while the latter should endure any harsh grating sounds with cheerfulness and grace, remembering that their own praises are not heard on high for their fine or scientific singing.

The sentiments of quaint Thomas Fuller on this point are good in the main. “Lord,” says he, “my voice by nature is harsh and untunable, and it is vain to lavish any art to better it. Can my singing of psalms be pleasing to Thy ears which is unpleasant to my own? Yet though I cannot chant with the nightingale, or chirp with the blackbird, I had rather chatter with the swallow (Isa. 38:14), yea, rather croak with the raven, than be altogether silent. Hadst Thou given me a better voice, I would have praised Thee with a better voice. Now what my music wants in sweetness let it have in sense, singing praises with understanding. Yea, Lord, create in me a new heart (therein to make melody), and I will be contented with my old voice, until, in Thy due time, being admitted into the choir of heaven, I have another, more harmonious, bestowed upon me.”

I am, Yours faithfully in Christ,

YOD.

Answer to Query Last December: Head Coverings

IT is a question with some as to whether a Christian wife should cover her head when in prayer with her husband at home. If she audibly engages, I think so; for women must not act in the presence of men (whether few or many, husbands or servants) without the sign of authority on her head. God's order must be maintained, that angels may observe and learn. The woman is the glory of man, and must therefore be covered before God; the man, on the contrary, is the image and glory of God, which must not be covered up. The fact of nature having given her long hair, in contrast with the man, tells the woman that she needs a covering; though the hair itself does not suffice, for God would have her place something on her head, implying her action as acceptance and confession of the place He has assigned to her.

If in the home (at family prayers for instance) the wife is silent, the husband only expressing himself audibly to God, I do not see that the passage in 1 Cor. 11 applies; though if in any individual case there is the least feeling as to it, the woman should comply. It is important to preserve a good conscience at all cost; and we should remember that it is written, “Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth” (Rom. 14:22). It is better to be over-scrupulous than indifferent in the things of God; especially in an evil day of departure from the truth as the present, when on all hands God's order is despised and His word ignored.

W. W. F.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:2

IT will be noticed that the order of Noah's sons is now changed. Japheth has the first place, when we come to genealogic survey; and this is even explained when we arrive at the line of Shem (ver. 21), who for spiritual reasons had been uniformly set in that place of honor hitherto, even Ham being otherwise put before Japheth. That many Jews, followed by others, should overlook the spirit of scripture, in their zeal for the progenitor of the chosen people, is easily understood; but some weighed the word with more care and less prejudice. So Nachmanides remarks that the enumeration begins with Yapheth, because he is the firstborn. It proceeds with Ham, although the youngest, and reserves Shem to the last, because the narrator wishes to enlarge on the history of his descendants. Rashi also, though admitting the doubtfulness of the phrase, decides similarly from comparing other scriptures— “From the words of the text I do not clearly know whether the elder applies to Shem or Japheth. But as subsequently we are informed that Shem was one hundred years old and begat Arpachshad two years after the deluge (chap. 11: 10), it follows that Yapheth was the elder. For Noah was five hundred years old when he began to have children, and the deluge took place in the six hundredth year of his age. His eldest son must consequently have been one hundred years old at the time of the deluge; whereas we are expressly informed that Shem did not arrive at that age till two years after the deluge.”

We next come to the family of the firstborn. “Sons of Japheth: Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras” (ver. 2).

Here is presented the distinct statement of what scholars have regarded as the greatest triumph of modern research in comparative philology. The Asiatic Society instituted in 1784 at Calcutta gave the great impulse, Sir W. Jones declaring that “no philologer could examine the Sanskrit, Greek, and Latin, without believing them to have sprung from some common source, which perhaps no longer exists. There is a similar reason, though not quite so forcible, for supposing that both the Gothic and Celtic had the same origin with the Sanskrit. The old Persian may be added to the same family.” Long after this scholars were still incredulous, clinging to the heathen notion of aboriginal races with their respective tongues, modified by the thought of a Hebrew primaeval source. Hence, in his prejudice for the honor of Greek and Latin, so cultivated and able a person as the late Professor Dugald Stewart (Elements of the Philosophy of the Human Mind, 3: 100-137) denied the reality of Sanskrit as a tongue of the past! and imputed its forgery! to unprincipled Brahmans whom he supposed to have founded it on the model of the old classic languages to deceive the world. F. Schlegel however, though more a genius than a scholar, had scanned the secret early in the century when he gave the name Indo-Germanic to the Aryan tongues of ancient Persia (the Zend), Greece, Italy, and Germany. He might have included quite as surely Celtic, Scandinavian, and Sclavonian under the wider generalization of Indo-European. They were the tongues of the Japhetic or, as moderns speak, the Aryan families.

It was the task of Franz Bopp to set the matter on a sound basis of proof, not only in his essay of 1816 and others, but in his Comparative Grammar of 1833-1852. Others, as Eugene Burnouf in France and Max. Muller in this country, have contributed not a little since.

Now if the Mosaic account had been given its just place, the fact would have been known all through, which is far more simple and to the believer more authoritative than inferences ever so plain and sure drawn from the comparison of these many languages. For it became evident that Sanskrit, old as it may be, is no more the parent of these tongues than Greek, but that they were all sisters, derived from a language earlier than any of them. Thus the tongues were seen to have a family relationship no less than the races of mankind; and phonetic changes follow according to observed principle instead of the more obvious derivatory resemblance. That they had (as Sanskrit proved) in the east a common source was for the learned a recent discovery. But in our verse we are told authoritatively that Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras were sons of Japheth. Thus were they all linked together, dialectically distinct, but of common origin. Nor is it difficult to distinguish those races in general.

Thus Gomer embraces the Cimbri, or the more modern Kelts, who appear to have come first of the Aryan family to Europe from their early seat in the north of India. At one time they had a considerable hold on northern Italy, as well as Spain, Switzerland, the Tyrol, and south of the Danube; but Belgium, Britain, Gaul, were long their own; and even now the Welsh and the Breton dialects (and till recently the Cornish) attest the fact, as also the closely related Erse, Gaelic, and Manx. It was a body of marauders from Gaul, chiefly the three tribes of Tectosages, Tolistobogii, and Trocmi, who overran Asia Minor and gave their name to Galatia where they settled: a consideration not without considerable interest to those who weigh the Epistle addressed to them by the apostle Paul. They seem to have migrated to Asia Minor on their route to Europe, before this final return and settlement for some in that quarter.

Next, Magog (cf. Ezek. 38:2) quite as certainly is identified with the land we call Russia (a name derived from the river Volga, called in Greek 'Pa, as 'Pk is their Greek title). To these we must add Meshech and Tubal, races long known as Moschi and Tibareni: these are the Muskai and the Tuplai of the Assyrian inscriptions, who find their representatives in Moscow and Tobolsk. This is the Sclavonian branch.

Madai again is the unchanged name for the Medes and their country, with whom was the Persian race or Parsee, though Elam was Shemitic. Even to this day the Persian tongue, though debased by Arabic importations, is essentially Aryan, as the alder language, the Zend, was exclusively, and of course closely akin to Sanskrit.

Javan also is the proper Hebrew for Greece, as in Dan. 8 where we hear of the Medes and Persians. The less may be said as here no question can be. Details will follow in due course which confirm the general fact.

There remains but Tiras, which from the likeness of the name has been generally believed to mean the representative of the Thracians. Though they lacked cohesion and persevering purpose and so made little mark politically, it is well to remember that Herodotus set them next to the Indians as the most considerable nation in his day. The absence of the vowel “i” may be accounted for by its subscription in the Greek term. Still the question cannot be said to be settled, like all the others which precede.

The learning of the Greek was at fault at least as much as the tradition of the Jew. Scripture had not been weighed or trusted by either. And when the discovery of Sanskrit came, the issue was so startling that the erudite at first recoiled from that which not only brought in larger views, but shook to its foundations much they had been building up. The method of derivation alone had been trusted; whereas the newly ascertained facts pointed to parallel descents from a common parent in at least six great lines with their modern offspring. But this so revolutionized the entire groundwork as to show that erudition had been on a false scent, especially as to the inflexions and the conjugations of tongues ever so distant locally, which indicate affinity far more surely and thoroughly than isolated words. K. O. Müller was one of the first seriously to own the old position embarrassing; and G. Hermann before him had written sarcastically of those who sought light from “a sort of aurora borealis, reflecting the gleams of eastern illumination, and who, betaking themselves to the Brahmans and Ulphilas, endeavored to explain Greek and Latin by the help of languages which they only half understood.” K. A. Lobeck carried on the war in his celebrated works, Aglaophamus (1829), Paralipomena (1837) and Pathologic (1843), as Ellendt did in the Preface to his Lex. Sophocl. (1835). Yet the truth remains that God marks certain families of language in the great dispersion, and that with their specified differences they give sure evidence of a common kindred. The same grammatical framework belongs to them; and it differs totally too from that of the Shemitic tongues; as the varied Turanian group differs in this from them both.

The Jews, as is known, assign to Cush (translated Ethiopia ordinarily) not only his African seat but the opposite coast of Arabia and the southern shore of Asia generally into India. And this is well founded. But Arabia received also a large Shemitic population which gave character to their language; and this as we shall see not only from Joktan, Eber's son, but from Jokshan, Abraham's son by Keturah, and from Ishmael's twelve sons, with some of Esau's decendants. Even Homer (Od. 2: 23, 24) speaks of Ethiopians as divided into two parts, the most distant of men, some at the setting sun, and some at the rising. It was a Turanian race, which included the Turks, but not the Armenians who were rightly given to Japheth. But the Jews seem never to have realized the fact that the ancient Persian tongue (Zend) and that of northern and central India (Sanskrit) yield the fullest indication of Japhetic origin.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 2

FOR a Jew the circumstances under the great king were most anomalous. The opening scene is as if Israel were, like the name of God Himself, not even whispered. The brightness of the silver empire, more apparent than real, alone shines. Outwardly it was still more extensive than when its first and greatest monarch reigned, the conqueror of Babylon, of whom, near two, centuries before the prediction was fulfilled, Jehovah by name said, “He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure; even saying of Jerusalem, She shall be built; and to the temple, Thy foundations shall be laid” (Isa. 44:28). When Darius the Mede received the kingdom there were a hundred and twenty satrapies; now seven more were added, though the day of vast conquest was over, and one sat on the throne disposed to lavish display of the riches of secret places, the treasures of darkness, and of luxurious enjoyment.

What indeed could one naturally have looked for in those who seemed content to linger among the Gentiles when leave, nay encouragement, had been proclaimed by the highest earthly authority to return to the land of promise? A remnant from the dispersion had gone back, with the heir to David's throne, and the high priest, to rebuild the temple and the city and, for such as had faith, to await the long expected Messiah after a term now for the first time defined. The multitudes that stayed behind could not plead the extreme old age of the prophet by the Hiddekel. But if they lacked zeal for the things that remained ready to die, He Who is unnamed did not fail when a greater danger threatened Israel than ever their fathers knew in the murderous tyranny of Egypt. How this was, by secret providence, without a miracle, not only averted but turned to the destruction of their enemies, is the story of this book. The details of it all are told with equal simplicity and graphic power, and the chief characters alike kept up skillfully according to the truth, and culminating with breathless interest in the downfall of evil and pride, and in the vindication of the righteous oppressed without cause. Hence the ground of a feast, added to the original ones of the law, which carried its own special record of merciful interposition in a day so evil that utter reticence was kept of all that was most excellent and cherished by faith. For who can justly say that, however confession might be unheard, faith was unreal that fasted and prayed and looked for deliverance, as we read in chap. 3.? Who but a rationalist could charge with revengeful spirit her who pleaded before the king (chap. 7. 3-5)? That the persecuted were saved, and those who sought the sword fell by the sword, is what was seen before, and will be yet more triumphantly at the end of the age. It is natural that the enemy should dislike and denounce all this; but He who has given this moral in the past will not fail to fulfill it yet more completely when He comes Whose right it is to judge all wrongs.

“And it came to pass in the days of Ahasuerus, (this is Ahasuerus who reigned, from India even unto Ethiopia, over a hundred and seven and twenty provinces)—that in those days, when the king Ahasuerus sat on the throne of his kingdom, which was in Shushan the palace, in the third year of his reign, he made a feast unto all his princes and his servants, the power of Persia and Media, the nobles and princes of the provinces being before him: when he showed the riches of his glorious kingdom and the honor of his excellent majesty many days, even a hundred and fourscore days. And when these days were fulfilled, the king made a feast unto all the people that were present in Shushan the palace, both great and small, seven days, in the court of the garden of the king's palace. There were white, green, and blue [hangings] fastened with cords of fine linen and purple to silver rings and pillars of marble; the couches were of gold and silver, upon a pavement of red, and white, and yellow, and black marble. And they gave them drink in vessels of gold (the vessels being diverse one from another), and royal wine in abundance, according to the bounty of the king. And the drinking was according to the law; none could compel: for so the king had appointed to all the officers of his house, that they should do according to every man's pleasure. Also Vashti the queen made a feast for the women in the royal house which belonged to king Ahasuerus” (vers. 1-9).

It is a vivid picture of earthly splendor, without a thought of God, true or false. Nebuchadnezzar brought in religion of a base sort, and sought to compel it on all. Xerxes, for he it seems to be who now possessed the general title here used, showed himself, as Daniel said long previously, “far richer than all before him,” thought of no one higher, and gave himself up to ostentatious indulgence, all the more after the utter failure of his invasion of Greece. Underneath worldly grandeur in efforts so unparalleled can be discerned shame and fear, with the desire to gratify the peoples of his vast dominions, and to efface the remembrance of foreign disgrace which might be ruinous.

But a check came and a gloom over all was cast when least expected at the close, after the princes and nobles had been feted, and the seven days followed for all the people small and great, present in Shushan.

“On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Me-human, Biztha, Harbona, Bigtha, and Abagtha, Zethar, and Carcas, the seven chamberlains that ministered in the presence of Ahasuerus the king, to bring Vashti the queen before the king with the crown royal, to show the peoples and the princes her beauty: for she was fair to look on. But the queen Vashti refused to come at the king's commandment by the chamberlains: therefore was the king very wroth, and his anger burned in him. Then the king said to the wise men, who knew the times (for so was the king's manner before all that knew law and judgment; and the next unto him was Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, [and] Memucan, the seven princes of Persia and Media, who saw the king's face, and sat first in the kingdom), What shall we do unto the queen Vashti according to law, because she hath not done the bidding of the king Ahasuerus by the chamberlains? And Memucan answered before the king and the princes, Vashti the queen hath not done wrong to the king only, but also to all the princes, and to all the peoples that are in all the provinces of the king Ahasuerus. For this deed of the queen shall come abroad unto all women, to make their husbands contemptible in their eyes, when it shall be reported. The king Ahasuerus commanded Vashti the queen to be brought in before him, but she came not. And this day shall the princesses of Persia and Media who have heard of the deed of the queen say the like unto all the king's princes. So shall there arise contempt and wrath enough. If it please the king, let there go forth a royal commandment from him, and let it be written among the laws of the Persians and the Medes, that it be not altered, that Vashti come no more before king Ahasuerus; and let the king give her royal estate unto another that is better than she. And when the king's decree which he shall make shall be published throughout all his kingdoms (for it is great), all the wives shall give to their husbands honor, both to great and small. And the saying pleased the king and the princes; and the king did according to the word of Memucan. And he sent letters into all the king's provinces, into every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language, that every man should bear rule in his own house, and should publish it according to the language of his people” (vers. 10-22).

If the demand of the king was unusual, the refusal of the queen was an affront not to be passed over. The seven chamberlains were duly charged to attend her; but she was rebellious, where compliance would have done her no real harm, but cast whatever of blame might be due on her lord. In the antitype, how true it is that the Gentile has been faithless and refractory, seeking self will and wholly failing to show the world the beauty of one so favored! The consequence will be, as here it was, the call of Zion to be a crown of beauty in the hand of Jehovah and a royal diadem in the hand of her God; when she shall no more be termed Forsaken, nor her land any more Desolate, but she shall be called Hephzibah and her land Beulah.

It seems most natural not to put “the president” last among the seven princely counselors of state, but to infer that judgment was sought, beginning with the youngest, whose opinion so commended itself on the question proposed that all accepted it at once; and letters were sent accordingly that a better than Vashti should take her place, and that family order should stand in the honor of the head in his own house throughout all the kingdom.

One Pearl of Great Price

As the leaven followed suitably the mustard seed in the parables spoken without, so does the pearl duly come after the treasure in those within, the house. None of these conveys what was shown in the parable of the sower before the likeness of the kingdom. In that first parable did the Lord set out the word as the germ of life and spiritual understanding to the believer. The comparisons of the kingdom of the heavens, external and internal, present subsequent truths and larger considerations; whether of the outward course of the dispensation while the rejected Lord is on high; or of its spiritual aspects for the guidance and enjoyment of the faithful who have the mind of Christ.

After the Lord explained within the house the parable of the darnel to his disciples, the latter class opened, as we have seen, with the treasure. Now is given the far more precise instruction of the “one pearl.”

This, which is evidently true as a sketch, helps to save the reader from serious misconception of the particulars. From early times men, having lost the fresh fullness of grace in the gospel, began to bend scripture generally to meet the first need of the soul. Hence the mustard seed was diverted by many to teach the work of grace in the heart from its small beginning, as the leaven was supposed to mean the gradual work of sanctification to bring about a universal change. Even the parables within the house are turned to the same account, only employing great things, instead of small, to show in the treasure the value of what we should make our own, and in the pearl the dream doubled to make it certain.

No believer doubts that the Lord Jesus is the richest of treasures, and the jewel above all price. But as the general structure and the bearing of the discourse point to a different aim, so the special forms of these similitudes are inconsistent with the assumption that the work of divine grace in the heart is intended. How plainly untenable it would be to suppose a sinful or even an exercised soul selling all he has to buy the world in order to possess the treasure said to be hidden there. Nor can any deny the truth that Christ in His joy over the treasure did, as He alone could, buy the world, in order to have the treasure of a people out of the earth for heaven.

A late dignitary, who treated the parables in a very interesting way, thought this interpretation “strangely reverses the whole matter.” What matters overturning an error however old, if we can only receive and enter into the truth with simplicity? The fact is that spiritual men have long felt the inadequacy of popular views. The word of the Lord abides. Be this our criterion. “Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a man of merchandise seeking goodly pearls; and having found one pearl of great value, he went and sold all whatever he had and bought it” (Matt. 13:45, 46). Now is it not harsh in the extreme to infer that lost sinners are compared to a man in quest of goodly pearls? It is untrue even of the uncommon case of the rich young ruler, irreproachable as his conduct was, who clung to his wealth, and forfeited treasure in heaven, and left Christ full of sorrow. He never knew his ruin and did not even seek to be saved. And never was a greater mistake than that Saul of Tarsus answers to the merchant, “determinate, discriminate, unremitting.” He was, as he said, “chief of sinners” and, like every other, saved in sovereign grace.

It is Christ then Who really seeks and buys. It is Christ Who alone has also the perfect discernment of the moral beauty He saw and prized above all. Indisputably He alone of men understood and sought goodly pearls; and this one pearl of great price He saw, in divine counsels, to be saints like Himself holy and blameless in love—yea, one with Him, the church glorious, which He will present to Himself, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing. He alone was in Himself perfectly what the saints are in divine purpose to be; and shall be in fact at His coming again, as in principle they are even now.

He that is in Christ is exhorted, as he has life in Him, to have in himself the moral mind which was in Christ Jesus, to obey and serve in love as He did absolutely, to count all things loss and dung that he may win Christ, and be found in Him, not having his own righteousness but that which is through faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God on the condition of faith. But the parable sets forth what is the ground and pattern and spring of all such effects in the Christian, in the Lord's own love to saints seen as the reflection of His own beauty, the one inestimable pearl, for which He sold all else, glory on high, kingdom below, all whatever He had, to buy that pearl. It might be, it was, in the depths, submerged in what was lowest and vilest; but He saw the end from the beginning, He discerned what grace would effect, loved us and gave Himself for us, as He will have therein the object of His love and rest in His love on high.

O my friend that reads these words, flatter not human nature, nor your own character. In an ungodly family you may have been shocked with the horror of open evil, and have walked morally; in a godly one you may have been guarded from corruption and trained in religious habits. Yet it strangely reverses, not the point of this parable only, but the whole force of revealed truth, and of the gospel particularly, if you compare yourself in your natural state to a merchant in quest of goodly pearls, still more if you credit yourself with such devotion, in your unconverted days, as would give up all you have to win Christ. Since man was created on the earth, never was such an instance; and if it had been, how could it avail for a sinner without new birth or redemption?

The same apostle, who tells us this was his experience as a saint, condemns all he had been previously (though more moral and religious than you) as filth. He also proclaims from God of the entire race, that there is not a righteous person, not even one, that none understands, that not one seeks after God, that peace's way is unknown, and no fear of God is before their eyes. He further declares that it was not merely so among the Gentiles, but that the law expressly pronounces this sentence on those under the law, spite of all their privileges. Now the gospel is sent to all as equally lost. For, says he, there is no difference; for all sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Hence God justifies freely though the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Whom God set forth a mercy-seat through faith in His blood. The very object is to cut off boasting of self in every form, that no flesh should boast before God. He that boasts, let him boast in the Lord.

Priesthood of Christ: 1

VAGUENESS is often found in the thoughts of many a child of God as to the priesthood of our Lord Jesus, its place and proper action, as well as what it is founded on—what its relation to other truths, more particularly to redemption—what the design is that God secures by it—what the portion that the saint enjoys in virtue of it, or consequently loses if he have it not. All these various ways in which priesthood may be examined will be found somewhat indefinite in the minds even of most real believers; and it is wise in general never to assume that a truth is known till we have proved it.

We often take for granted, finding the children of God happy together in fellowship, that they must know this or that truth; but it by no means follows. They may be using language beyond what they have actually learned from God. The mass are apt to be carried along (and this even where their words would give little suspicion) by the faith of others. This is easily understood. They do not doubt in their own minds that it is all quite true, having the general sense and savor, and surely not without some enjoyment, of it; but still they have not thoroughly sought out and realized the mind of God for their souls, receiving the truth distinctly and decidedly from God. If exposed to misleading influences they might soon and seriously be turned aside, at the least be perplexed and tried by questions easily raised, and often for the very purpose of confounding those whose general confession puts to shame such as are walking in the ways of the world. And these are days, when we need to have everything from God for our own souls.

Assuredly one need say no more to urge the importance for every child of God of simply and thoroughly searching into His word; if they do know, of having it so much the more happily confirmed to their souls, and if they have not yet ascertained it for their own souls, of searching and seeing what God has to show and give them. We have the truth in having Christ; but it is well to have it explicitly for our souls. His priesthood goes on for us whether we enter intelligently or not into what our portion is in it and by it. But is it not of great importance that we should know how suited, and rich, and constant is the grace of our Lord Jesus? Indeed it is this which makes it so blessed, because the truth we are about to look at now is bound up with Christ. He is all in it. There may be the reflection of His grace, there may be the working of it (no doubt poorly and imperfectly), in souls on earth who enter a little into their priestly character and blessing. But this is altogether of a different bearing after all from His relation to us; for it is not now simply priestly grace in activity of love for others, but that which our own souls indispensably want in order to be carried through the wilderness.

Let me call your attention to this point at the start of any observations I have to make (and you will see how true it is when you reflect upon it): the whole Epistle to the Hebrews supposes a redeemed people pilgrims and strangers on the earth. They are not in Egypt, nor are they in Canaan; they are passing through the wilderness. The very same people may be viewed if not in Egypt, certainly as being in heavenly places even now; but such is not the aspect in which the children of God are viewed in this Epistle. In no case here do we find them invested with that character of blessings which we have, for instance, in Ephesians and in a measure even in Colossians. We do not find anything at all of resurrection with Christ either; although this too, of course, it need hardly be said, has its immense importance, and several Epistles take it up.

But here we have distinctively the Spirit of God starting first of all with Christ at God's right hand in heaven; and this is an essential feature of His priesthood. “For if He were upon earth, He should not be a priest.” His is an exclusively heavenly priesthood; and those for whom He is acting are a heavenly people. The time was come for God to form and fashion them accordingly. There were saints of old waiting, with more or less light of heavenly hopes, looking for the city above—the saints of the high or heavenly places, as the Spirit of God in the New Testament explains the expression to us. But still they looked up only in hope, and this too necessarily with vagueness. Here it is still in hope; but the veil is rent, and heaven opened, and the Spirit sent down because of Christ's redemption and glorification. Here all is definite, without the least vagueness whatever. The ground and scene are clear and distinct from the very fact that Christ Who purged our sins is in heaven, yet in living relationship with those He is not ashamed to call His brethren on earth. Thus, even if we look at the Christian in this point of view, having such a Priest and passing through the wilderness, still there is a positive and present imprint of heaven upon all.

Hence therefore in chapter 3. those who are particularly contemplated in the Epistle are called “partakers of a heavenly calling.” It was not only that they were called to heaven by and by, but the One that called them was already in heaven, and in heaven on the ground of redemption already accomplished. This is another truth of the greatest possible, yea indeed primary, importance; for the heavenly place of our Lord Jesus is here, viewed as consequent on the accepted sacrifice of Himself for out sins, as in fact it was. It is no question at all of our Lord, Jesus coming by-and-by from heaven. This, we know, is most true; and it too has its revelation elsewhere in a suited manner. But the point here with which the Epistle opens is the great truth that the fiord by Himself purged the sins (or our sins, it may be): I merely say this because there is a question of reading, but the question raised has nothing to do with the indisputable truth (and that is all that affirm now, as it is perfectly certain), that the Lord Jesus went up to heaven, and took His place at the right hand of God, to enter on a new kind of action there; and this founded on the purgation of sins by the sacrifice of Himself.

But this at once clears the way for the application of Christ's priesthood to the believer. It supposes a people already redeemed, It supposes that the great and absolutely necessary work of grace on their behalf has been accomplished. It supposes that they are resting on it without a question, the main danger being that some may be tempted to give it and Him up, because of the difficulties, the trials, the snares, the persecutions, the dangers of the way. And this we see to be before the mind of the Spirit of God every now and then in the Epistle to the Hebrews. You will find it very early brought up in chapter 3., and you may trace it continuously to perhaps the last. It was what Satan was seeking to separate them from; but it was no question of whether the work was done. The whole doctrine of the Epistle supposes that the Lord single-handed had finished the work which He undertook on earth. All that God contemplated to be done as to sin—that God Himself could do in the way of blotting out sins—was already done before the Lord entered on His priesthood on high.

It is the want of seizing and holding fast that great truth which has thrown such confusion and darkness into the minds of most on the subject of Christ's priesthood. That it is which has made it vague to better instructed souls, and just in proportion to the weakness with which they hold the completeness of redemption. For naturally, if the believer be not resting” with his conscience purged and perfect now, the priesthood of Christ is thrown in to complete what is deficient. The true grace of the priesthood therefore is impaired, yea lost; it becomes a mere maker up of weight; for the preliminary question must naturally be to know Christ, and one's sins forgiven through His blood. With most nowadays there is but a hope (for it rarely amounts to more throughout Christendom) of favor with the Lord by-and-by. Thus the true place of the priesthood disappears, because redemption has never been received from God in its simplicity and its fullness; and Christ's walk and priesthood are thrown into the scale to make up what His death on the cross has done perfectly.

Certainly the Epistle to the Hebrews leaves no ground for any such hesitation. Before the Spirit of God enters on priesthood, we have, with the greatest precision and fullness, the person of the Lord Jesus brought out, and this in a twofold way. We hear of Him as the Son of God; we see Him as the Son of man. And both natures were necessary to His priesthood. If He had not been God's Son pre-eminent, unique, and eternal, there had been no such priesthood as that which this Epistle sets before us. On the other hand, if He had not been the Son of man, in a sense too that was as real as that of others, but in a character that was peculiar to Himself, there had been no such priesthood available for us. The Lord Jesus was both; and as the first chapter presents Him particularly as Son of God, so the second as Son of man. At the end of chap 2. we have the first allusion to His priesthood.

In both these chapters we have the fullness of redemption set forth. We have already seen this in the first chapter; the second supposes the same truth. There we read, “It became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified [i.e. set apart to God] are all of one.”

Here again, then, we have a very important relation to His priesthood. It is a question of the sanctified, and of the sanctified only. None but the sanctified, we must see, have to do with the priesthood of Christ. They are the persons contemplated. On the other hand, “by the grace of God he [Jesus] tasted death for every man (or thing).” But after this the apostle begins to narrow the sphere; for he is about to treat of the priesthood of Christ. He shows us certain that are sanctified, or set apart. They are therefore spoken of not merely as the seed of Adam, for this would take in the whole human family, but as the seed of Abraham. Thus it is a loss general class taken as the seed of Abraham, not merely in the letter after the flesh, but, as it really means, after the Spirit; for none but such are viewed here as sanctified.

Sanctification in the New Testament is not fleshly, as in the Old Testament. If of profession simply, it might be given up by those that take it, up of themselves, and are not born of God; but still it is separation to God in the name of Christ. We find persons afterward spoken of as treating the blood wherewith they were sanctified as an unholy thing. They became apostate, as we know; but as yet He does not contemplate such an issue. He speaks of certain as real. “Both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren.” They are His brethren and He owns them.

In short, then, the priesthood of Christ is in no way a work which looks out to the whole of mankind, as the propitiation of Christ does. That which was represented by the blood on the mercy-seat contemplated all. It was sprinkled on the mercy-seat, and before it. It was not merely a question of those that were in the immediate circle of God's dealings. That blood was too precious, being infinite in its value, to be thus limited. “By the grace of God he tasted death for every man.” Indeed, the word may go a little farther, and take in “everything;” but still it includes every man a fortiori. As we approach Christ in His action and sufferings and qualifications for priesthood, we find a special regard to those that had an actual relationship of grace. “Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death (that is, the devil), and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.”

( To be continued D.V.)

Are God's Objects Ours?

LET me offer a few remarks with reference to the work of the Lord. It is undeniable that we are living in a day of extraordinary activity. On every hand enormous efforts are being put forth by professing Christian men, perhaps to a larger extent than at any time since the days of the apostles. But the efforts vary much in kind and character. The enemy of souls is busy (never more so), so that error of every sort is assiduously propagated; indeed, the more serious the error, the more earnest the advocates seem. Souls are poisoned by Ritualism and by Rationalism; the person and work of Christ are despised; the scriptures are called in question, and attacked unblushingly at every point; and many are lulled into a false security with vain hopes of ultimate universal salvation (though through fire), to speak of no other vagaries. On the other hand, many true hearts are found earnestly carrying the gospel of Christ (or what they know of it) to those near and far who are in the darkness of nature, and away from God: may the number of such be increased a hundred-fold is our earnest prayer!

It is to the latter class of laborers I desire to say a few words; for one cannot but feel that a very large proportion of laborers, even of pious men in the present day, falls far short of the objects which God has in view, and which He has revealed in the scriptures for our guidance, One would think, to hear evangelicals in general speak, that God's sole aim and object is the deliverance of men from hell. This is to make man the object, not God; man's conversion the end in view, not the divine glory. It is not meant that the salvation of souls has a small place in the plans of God. Blessed be His name, it has a very large place. It is the delight of His heart to save and to bless; but is salvation from the wrath to come God's grand object? It is recorded of Jonathan that he “wrought with God” (1 Sam. 14:45). To do this calls for discernment of His mind, and an understanding of what He is doing at any particular time. This Jonathan had (his armor-bearer too, in measure); while Saul and his people were utterly in the dark as to it all.

It is important to see that God is carrying out at the present time a purpose and work of a peculiar character. He is not now dealing with an earthly people, laying down His righteous requirements from man in the flesh, and making a nation the center of His governmental ways with regard to the earth. He is doing something incomparably. higher. He has revealed Himself in the person of His Son come in flesh. That blessed One having been rejected and cast out (accomplishing while man was doing his worst, the wondrous work of redemption), God has exalted Him to His own right hand in the heavenly places. No longer is a Messiah on earth proclaimed (though this will yet be put forward in its day); but a Christ dead, risen, and exalted to glory. The Holy Ghost has come down consequent upon Christ's glorification, and is here on earth to give effect to the purposes of love and grace formed in the divine heart before the world was. He is here not merely for the salvation of souls, though this be true in its place, but to gather out a people for His name, and, as Caiaphas expressed it, to “gather together in one the children of God scattered abroad." This is a totally new thing, and could not be until the coming of the Comforter. In every age God has had His own saints here, men in whose hearts and consciences His Spirit has wrought; but never, till redemption was accomplished and the Holy Ghost descended, was there any gathering together of such. Indeed there was no Head in heaven—to whom they could be united. When manifested here, He abode alone, so that there was no union with Him; in fact, union with Him could never have been the portion of any, had He not gone into death and wrought redemption. But being risen and exalted, the true corn of wheat bringeth forth much fruit. He in glory is the Head of the body, the church, Who is the beginning, the First-born from among the dead. By the Spirit Who has come down, all who believe in His name are joined to Him in one body (1 Cor. 12:13).

This is the present work of God, while His Son is hidden in heaven, and His Spirit is here below. To the body, thus formed on earth, gifts are given for its edification and advancement. The Head has given some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers (Eph. 4). The two first connected gifts, of a foundation character, have necessarily ceased (though we have their inspired writings for our permanent profit); the others remain, and will continue to be given by the church's faithful Head, “till we all come” &c. The object, of giving such gifts is declared to be primarily “the perfecting of the saints.” “The work of the ministry” &c. comes in as subsidiary. Thus we find Paul aiming not only to preach Christ, and to warn men, but to, present every man perfect in Christ Jesus (Col. 1:28). We see him also in great conflict for the saints at Colossae and Laodicea, “that their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgment of the mystery of God, even Christ” (Col. 2:1, 2). He endured all things for the elect's sakes, that they might obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory (2 Tim. 2:10). It might have been said of the apostle in a modified way what is written of Christ, that he loved the church and gave himself for it; not of course in the way of atonement (this glory must be Christ's alone), but of self-sacrificing love. He bore the church and all its members ever on his heart before God, and filled up that which was behind of the afflictions of Christ in his flesh for His body's sake, the church (Col. 1:24; 2 Cor. 11:28). Epaphras also, who was according to his measure a kindred spirit, labored fervently for the saints in prayers that they might stand perfect and complete in all the will of God (Col. 4:12).

Thus did these devoted laborers serve in accordance with God's objects. They sought not only the salvation of the soul (though this must be enjoyed before we can speak of “perfection”), but the gathering of the saints to a divine center, and their perfection and growth as members of one body on earth. The evangelist's work was no more independent of this than that of the pastor and teacher. Such went out from the bosom of the assembly, and into that circle they gathered souls, that they might find their divinely ordered place in the body on earth, and be led on in the ways of Christ.

It is not denied that, in a day like the present, the evangelists find a smoother and more popular path by becoming, what has been termed, a “free lance.” Such have apparently no responsibilities; they seek the salvation of men, then allow them to drift where they will, or be caught by the first watchful wolf, or perverse man. Thus are souls permanently injured; and who cares, so long as a fair show is maintained? What matters it, that Christ's members are stunted in growth and starved in soul, so long as men applaud? And on the other hand, how much of the effort put forth is merely for the extension and strengthening of party? Souls are viewed as useful, in so far as they fill the register and swell the funds. Is this saying too much, or are not these things sorrowfully true on every hand? Oh, for a Jonathan who “wrought with God!” Oh, for a Timothy, who will “naturally care” for the state of the saints! These are the laborers for the moment; and who can supply them but the church's Head? W. W. F.

James 1:1-4

THE title taken by the writer deserves our consideration: “James, bondman of God and of [the] Lord Jesus Christ.” It expressed his absolute devotedness to God as well as to the Lord Jesus Christ. He was bondman of both equally. He honored the Son even as he honored the Father. He avowed from the beginning his unqualified subjection to both. This was just what was most needed by the Israelites to whom he wrote. He sought the everlasting good of them all, as the style of his address attested: “to the twelve tribes that [are] in the dispersion, greeting.” The last word reminds us that it is in the letter which the apostles and elders with the whole assembly sent to the brethren from among the nations in defense of Christian liberty (Acts 15). But here the letter is directed only to the ancient people of God in their entirety, now a long while in a state of dispersion. For the return from Babylon had not hindered this, as only a small minority had returned from their exile. To all the twelve tribes he wrote, as being of the circumcision, even more widely than did Peter when he addressed his two epistles to the sojourners in Asia Minor. For he qualified it by terms expressive of vital Christianity, “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” No such restriction appears here, though James without reserve confesses his own self-abnegating service of the Lord Jesus Christ no less than of God, and specifies living faith in Him among those to whom he writes.

But the Epistle is characteristically moral and hortative, not basing its appeals as the apostles in general did on an unfolding of grace and truth, so much as revealing by the way now and then the sovereign goodness that comes down from above, from the Father of lights, Who alone is reliable in a world of incessant change, and has quickened us by the word of truth, and has promised the crown of life to them that love Him.

Hence it opens with a cheering call to such as were in danger of being faint-hearted and cast down by their trials. The Jews naturally looked for outward marks of divine favor; yet psalms and prophets revealed deeper things. James goes farther still.

“Count [it] all joy, my brethren, when ye fall into various temptations, knowing that the proving of your faith worketh out endurance; but let endurance have a perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, lacking in nothing” (vers. 2-4).

It is the counterpart of our Lord's beatitudes in Matt. 5. For the blessed in His eyes and mouth are, not only of no account in the world, but sufferers from it for righteousness' sake, and for Christ's, poor in spirit, meek, mourners, hungerers after righteousness, merciful, and more. They are called to rejoice and exult, for great is their reward in heaven. So here, “count it all joy, my brethren, when ye fall into various temptations.” In this world of sin and ruin, God not only works in grace but carries on a discipline of souls, and turns trials of all sorts into an occasion of blessing for all that own Him and seek His guidance. Self-will hardens itself against each trial, or yields to discouragement and even despair. Faith recognizes the love that never changes, and judges the self that resists His will or despises His word; and, as faith bows submissively, it reaps profit, and grows by the knowledge of Him.

Hence is the believer entitled and emboldened to think it every sort of joy whensoever he falls into varied trials, as indeed they may be, of all kinds. It is not that Christians are exempt from sorrow—far from it, or that we should not feel the sorrow, any more than forget God's grace. Thus the trial throws us back on Him without Whom not a sparrow falls on the ground, and by Whom the very hairs of our head are all numbered. Affliction comes not forth of the dust, nor does trouble spring out of the ground. All is under His hand Who has made us His for glory, and meanwhile puts our faith to. the test in this present evil age, habituating us not only to patience but to endurance.

So it was that Christ walked here below, leaving us an example that we should follow His steps. His meat was to do the will of Him that sent Him and to accomplish His work; His joy was in His love and the glorious counsels which He knew, and which will soon be the manifest issue. He indeed endured the cross, as was only possible to Him; but He suffered all through in a way proper to Himself, and learned obedience through it (for before He had only commanded); yet what was not His joy, man of sorrows though He was and acquainted with grief beyond all others He could and did upbraid the cities wherein most of His mighty works were done, because they repented not; for their guilt was worse than the worst judged of old. But at that, season it was that He answered and said, “I praise Thee [I confess to Thee], Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou didst hide these things from wise and prudent, and didst reveal them to babes: yea, Father; for thus it was well-pleasing in Thy sight... Take My yoke upon you, and learn from Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest for your souls.”

Here too the ground of joy in sorrow is explained, knowing that the proving of our faith worketh out endurance, as the apostle in Rom. 5:4 speaks of the saints “knowing that tribulation worketh out endurance.” Both are equally true; but it is plain that tribulation could produce no such effect unless there was the faith that stood the test. And such was his prayer for the Colossians that they might be “strengthened with all power according to the might of His glory unto all endurance and long-suffering with joy.” The character of the inspired writings may differ ever so much in suitability to God's design in each; but there is unity of spirit also beyond all doubt in His revealed mind. He cannot deny Himself.

There is an important caution added. “But let endurance have a perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, lacking in nothing.” The contrast of this we see in Saul king of Israel, who did not wait out the full time and lost the kingdom (1 Sam. 14). Even in David we see failure of endurance when fleeing from Saul he sought Achish in Gath (1 Sam. 27-29). Christ alone was perfect in this as in all else. Endurance has a perfect work, when we judge our own will and await God's. Then and thus only are we perfect and entire, deficient in nothing. It cannot contradict chap. 3: 2 for all that.

Letters on Singing: Concluding Remarks

MY DEAR—,

There is a phase of our subject brought forward in Eph. 5: 19, Col. 3:16, which has hitherto been Unnoticed in these letters and which it is of some importance to consider.

It has been repeatedly pressed that the Christian is bound to sing “to the Lord,” and that according to the plainest teaching of scripture not only one but every psalm, hymn, or song should be consciously sung as before God. It is at the same time equally true, on the same authority, that sacred song has a reflex action upon the singer. Just as, when our requests are made known to God, the result is, whether we get what we ask for or not, that the incomprehensible peace of God keeps our hearts and minds through Christ Jesus (Phil. 4:6, 7). The very attitude of prayer produces a state of calm restfulness in the soul even though the direct answer be withheld. In like manner singing, while it is primarily addressed to God, has secondarily a beneficial effect upon the believer. The very verse that enjoins the Ephesian saints to make melody in the heart to the Lord, says, “Speaking to yourselves in psalms, &c.” And to those in Colossae the apostle writes, “Teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, &c.” (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).

The action of singing enlarges the heart and the mind, and leads to a more practical acquaintance with truth. Just as man's mental and physical powers are developed and strengthened by exercise, so it is with the faculties and emotions of the believer's spiritual nature. The hymn affords a suitable channel for the outflow of the affections and aspirations of the soul, which react in blessing and profit to the singer. So that, if in the words of the Psalmist, “It is a good thing to give thanks unto Jehovah and to sing praises unto thy name, O Most High” (Psa. 92:1), it is not less so to sing praise unto the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Again, it is a notable fact that singing is a means of deeply embedding truth (or, alas! that it should be so, error) in a person's heart. There is an extravagant paradox that is often quoted, to the effect that if a man had the making of a nation's ballads, he need not care who had the making of its laws. Whatever the degree of truth this may contain, it is certain that sacred hymnology has an incalculable effect upon Christian thought and belief. Scriptural hymns exercise a sanctifying and instructive influence whenever sung; while on the contrary an unsound hymn, whatever its “beauty” as a composition, injures and does not help. How many hearts have thrilled with fervent adoration as they have joined in Watts' “When I survey the wondrous cross,” &c., or in Hart's “How good is the God we adore,” &c. And on the other hand how many hearts have been blinded as to the fact of the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit by the many hymns, which pray for His present coming or His outpouring, such as, “Come, Holy Ghost, Creator blest, Vouchsafe within our souls to rest, &c.” Such sentiments entirely overlook the Lord's promise that the Comforter should come to abide forever (John 14:16), and expressly deny that Acts 2 was the fulfillment of that promise; and the mass, who are alas! not accustomed to “prove all things,” through singing such hymns receive this false and mischievous unbelief to the damage of their own souls.

It behooves us therefore to take heed what we sing. And the only infallible test of a hymn must be the word of truth. Of what use, for we are now taking that side of the question—of what possible use can an unscriptural hymn be to me or any one else? It certainly cannot contribute to spiritual advancement but rather to the propagation of its own erroneous notions.

Under this head of spiritual helpfulness comes the majority of that class of hymns known as gospel hymns. They consist of hymns sung by saints in presence of sinners in accompaniment of evangelistic ministry. They afford expression for the delight of God's children in the simple and elementary truths of the gospel. It is sad degeneracy however, when gospel services are made the occasions for the display of so-called musical talent, and sickly sentimentalism wedded to jigging tunes and jingling refrains, to suit the popular taste, is exchanged for the sober and solemn truths of the grace of God. This does not honor God nor help either saint or sinner.

Turning again to the subject of singing in the assembly, a scripture in 1 Cor. 14 gives guidance on a very practical point. At Corinth there was a great deal of unseemly haste and confusion when gathered together. Each of the brethren appears to have come up prepared with his contribution of gift for the assembly. The apostle says, “How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying” (1 Cor. 14:26). It is clear there was a keen competition, if not rivalry, among them for the display of their gifts. The result of this was that the meeting became disorderly and the saints were not edified. The counsel of Paul under these circumstances was “Let all things be done unto edifying.” He did not say, establish a president, or make one man responsible for the order of your meeting, and then it will be manifest who is to blame. Nay, this would be utterly to, deny the sovereignty of the Spirit of God in their midst, “dividing to every man severally as He will” (1 Cor. 12:11). Let them be governed by Him, and the edification of the saints must be the sure result.'

Now singing is especially mentioned in this verse. If every one had a psalm, there would be an end to all fellowship at once. It is entirely a false principle for a brother to suppose that, because he has found great joy in a certain hymn, he must forthwith take it to the assembly and ask the whole of his brethren to sing it with him. It is no doubt very natural to assume that, what I find to be good, I should ask others to share. But it contravenes the truth of 1 Cor. 14. That chapter shows (as has already been stated) that what is, not what may be, suited for all, is the rule for guidance. In other words, the hymn should be the expression of the minds and hearts of the saints at that particular time, and this shuts us up to the Spirit of God. We are absolutely and continuously dependent on the Holy Ghost for direction as to what is to be presented as worship at any given time.

Nevertheless it ought to be remembered that the Spirit of God does not miraculously bring to any person's memory a hymn never seen or sung before. The more familiar saints are with the hymn-book through constant usage at home, the greater will be the variety of hymns sung in the assembly. For the Spirit selects from what we know. Hence the importance of becoming acquainted with hymns in private devotion, so that proper and suitable praise as opposed to anything formal or habitual may be rendered in the assembly.

On the other hand, license with the hymn-book is to be deplored. The constant habit of announcing hymns is self-delusive. It should never be forgotten that the Lord Himself is the Leader of our praises, as He said, “In the midst of the assembly, will I sing praise unto thee” (Heb. 2:12). It is therefore a solemn matter to give out a certain hymn which is to embody the praises of the saints at that moment, since the Lord Himself is the great Precentor. Indeed, none but the Spirit of God can rightfully guide in accordance with the mind of the Lord. It is however at the same time our own responsibility to place ourselves in alignment with His action, so that all things may be both of and to the Lord.

Careful consideration of what is being uttered in song will involuntarily lead to the choice of a suitable mode of expression. It ought not to be necessary, after all that has been written, to refer to this subject; but a few plain words may perhaps divest the guilty of their last excuse. Efforts after effect in singing cannot be too much deplored; on the other haul it would almost seem that saints, probably from lack of thought rather than lack of principle, are sometimes utterly oblivious of the meaning of the words they sing. Where can the believer's thoughts be who shouts out the following solemn words at the top of his voice and at the top of his speed?— “When we see Thee in the garden, In Thine agony of blood...When we see Thee as the victim, Nailed to the accursed tree, For our guilt and folly stricken, All our judgment borne by Thee.” On the other hand, who has not heard “What cheering words are these, &c.” delivered in a dirge-like wail, pathetic in the extreme; or that enlivening strain, “We joy in our God, and we sing of that love, &c.,” drawled through in funereal time, with most mouths half-closed? This arises from want of heart, from a lapse into a dull slothful formality, which is a discredit to the saint and a dishonor to the Lord, but which may be avoided by a little thought over the real import of the words of the hymn.

A difficulty arises in some minds as to how one is to decide when to refrain from singing a hymn proposed to be sung. It is certain that this is an exceptional case and calls for the exercise of much wisdom. But two principles founded on what has been brought forward in previous letters may be found helpful—

1.-Because I sing to the Lord, I must not sing what I know to be contrary to scripture;

2.-Because I sing in communion with the saints, I have no ground for refusal, unless I am asked to sing what is manifestly contrary to scripture and the mind of the Spirit.

I say, “manifestly,” because in dubious instances modesty and humility would join with prudence in abstaining from a too positive expression of opinion. We ought not to be surprised if others do not fall in very readily with our own little fads. And when we ourselves do not see very clearly points which others lay down with emphasis, it is possibly caused by our own defective vision. In short, we ought to be very slow to judge where we have not the full light of scripture; but where there is no room for doubt, the claims of the Lord and His word bind us to firmness and faithfulness.

Let me add as a final remark that in singing as in other matters there is no such thing as “rule of thumb” for the Christian. Not the bit nor the bridle, but the eye of the Lord must be the guide. The best rules will lead astray if they supplant Christ. The simplest and feeblest believer sings well who has the Lord before him; but the praises of the most intelligent and the most accomplished singer are altogether vanity, if the Lord is forgotten as being both the object and subject of those praises.

Yours faithfully in our Lord,

YOD.

Scripture Query and Answer: Three Words Translated "Net"

Q.-As there are three different Greek words in the N. T. translated “net,” would it not be well to have the distinction explained? Q.

A.-Ἀμφίβληστρον occurs only in Matt. 4:18 (implied also in Mark 1:16, where the most ancient MSS. omit the noun), and means a casting net. It was thrown round the object, whence the term was derived. The more usual word is δίκτυον, but in the plural form in Matt. 4:20, 21, Mark 1:18, in the sing. in John 21:6, 8, 11. It is derived from δικεῖν, to cast. Trawl net has been suggested as appropriate. But the σαγήνη (in Matt. 13:47 only), from σάττειν to pack or load, was a dragnet or seine, on a larger scale.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:3

OF Japheth's sons two only have their descendants specified, Gomer the head of the Kelts, and Javan, from whom came the Hellenic-Italian races.

“And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah” (ver. 3).

Jeremiah (chap. 51: 27) introduces Ashkenaz as one of three kingdoms set apart and called together with Ararat and Minni against Babylon, when the kings of the Medes also played their decisive part. There seems no sound reason to doubt that as Ararat and Minni were parts of Armenia, here as elsewhere falling under Togarmah, so Ashkenaz and Riphath occupied the peninsula of Asia Minor at that time and took their place with Cyrus the leader of these races during that notable struggle. But this in no way weakens the general fact that Gomer pushed westward and into Europe, allowing that at least Togarmah settled in Armenia. For this is as sure as any fact of history; and scripture is decisive as to it, not only in the past, but for the future.

For instance, Ezek. 38 beyond doubt unveils the judgment of Russia at the end of this age, and lets us see its supporters compelled to follow and share the general ruin. Among those of the north are Gomer and all his hordes, and the house of Togarmah from the uttermost north and all his, as well as the southern races of Persia, Cush, and Phut under the same influence.

It is quite unfounded to pretend that this vast confederacy of the nations (or its overwhelming destruction) applies to any action under the Seleucidae, any more than the then state of the Jews in the land agrees. For it is clear that Israel previously has been brought back from the sword, gathered out of many peoples, and that they are dwelling in safety, though in a land of unwalled villages, having neither bars nor gates. Again, the position is made all the plainer by taking into account the two preceding chapters, 36. and 37. The prophet in the first declares that Jehovah will call them from among the nations, and gather them out of all the countries, and bring them into their own land. This restoration is to have a national completeness and a holy character beyond all precedent. “And I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean; from all your uncleannesses and from all your idols will I cleanse you. And I will give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit within you, and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and keep mine ordinances, and ye shall do them. So ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers, and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.”

This new and mighty work of divine grace for Israel is clearly seen to be confirmed symbolically in the next chap. 32., where we see the valley of dry bones caused to live and stand up, an exceeding great army; then, under the two sticks made one in Jehovah's hand, the old rent of the divided tribes completely healed, and one nation made on the mountains of Israel with one king to them, as has never been since the days of Rehoboam. “And they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all. And they shall not any more defile themselves with their idols, or with their detestable things, or with any of their transgressions; and I will save them out of all their dwelling-places wherein they have sinned; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God. And David my servant shall be king over them; and they all shall have one shepherd; and they shall walk in my ordinances, and keep my statutes and do them.” It is a bright and blessed prediction awaiting its fulfillment. In these circumstances will Gog lead his vassal hordes to perish signally on the mountains of Israel, and a fire shall also be sent on Magog and those that dwell at ease in the isles; and they shall know Who it is that thus judges them in the day that all Israel shall be gathered out of the nations into their own land, none to be left any more there.

The Rabbins have it that Ashkenaz subsequently migrated into that part of Europe which was afterward called Germany. And a learned German who has devoted much research to the details of this chapter comes to the same conclusion. But the evidence is far from being clear, though all agree that the Teutons are Japhetic and of Gomer. Herodotus indeed (i: 125) tells us of the Germanioi as with other tribes an agricultural class, not pastoral like several, and distinct from the princely and noble, into which the ancient Persians were divided. It is probable that they were at any rate connected with Carmania, the modern Kirman, as Mr. W. S. Vaux suggests; so Agatharcides (Mar. Erythr. 27, Hudson) and Strabo (xiv. 723) use the name of Germania, for what Diodorus (xviii. 6) calls Carmania. But it seems only a curious coincidence. Besides, of old, “Germans” was not the name the Teutonic family gave themselves, but from without. Far less is the ground for applying Riphath to Great Britain as some have done, or to the Rhipaean mountains (in all probability a geographical dream of the ancient Greeks), though here again the rationalist coalesces with the Jewish doctors and labors to find in the Carpathian range a temporary seat for the Kelts or Gaels. But there is no good reason for doubting that those we call Germans were of Gomer, no less than the Kelts.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 3

Chapter 2

THE design of providence to shield from impending destruction the Jews, unworthy as they were, and to punish their unrelenting enemies, here manifestly advances. Nothing could have seemed less connected with it than the Persian story of the preceding chapter which ended in the repudiation of Vashti. A further step was now taken. A lofty one was put down, a lowly one is exalted. But God alone wrought in this secretly. The king's servants had neither issue before them, any more than the king himself. Afraid that Ahasuerus might violate the policy of the empire, and that the restoration of the queen might be to their own imminent danger, they propose that the king should choose as consort the fairest maiden in his dominions that might please him best.

“After these things, when the wrath of king Ahasuerus was pacified, he remembered Vashti, and what she had done, and what was decreed against her. Then said the king's servants that ministered unto him, Let there be fair young virgins sought for the king: and let the king appoint officers in all the provinces of his kingdom, that they may gather together all the fair young virgins unto Shushan the palace, to the house of the women, unto the custody of Hegai the king's chamberlain, keeper of the women; and let their things for purification be given [them]: and let the maiden which pleaseth the king be queen instead of Vashti. And the thing pleased the king; and he did so” (vers. 1-4).

How did this affect the poor people of God? It soon appears in the germ. For was it chance that gave an orphan of Israel a beauty beyond all in those wide provinces?

“There was in Shushan the palace [or, fortress] a certain Jew, whose name [was] Mordecai, the son of Jair, the son of Shimei, the son of Kish, a Benjamite; who had been carried away from Jerusalem with the captives which had been carried away with Jeconiah king of Judah, whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away. And he brought up Hadassah, that [is], Esther, his uncle's daughter: for she had neither father nor mother, and the maiden [was] fair and beautiful; and when her father and mother were dead, Mordecai took her for his own daughter. So it came to pass, when the king's commandment and his decree was heard, and when many maidens were gathered together unto Shushan the palace, to the custody of Hegai, that Esther was taken into the king's house, to the custody of Hegai, keeper of the women. And the maiden pleased him, and she obtained kindness of him; and he speedily gave her her things for purification, with her portions, and the seven maidens, which [were] meet to be given her, out of the king's house: and he removed her and her maidens to the best [place] of the house of the women. Esther had not showed her people nor her kindred: for Mordecai had charged her that she should not show [it]. And Mordecai walked every day before the court of the women's house, to know how Esther did, and what should become of her. Now when the turn of every maiden was come to go in to king Ahasuerus, after that it had been done to her according to the law for the women, twelve months, (for so were the days of their purifications accomplished, to wit, six months with oil of myrrh, and six months with sweet odors, and with the things for the purifying of the women,) then in this wise came a maiden unto the king, whatsoever she desired was given her to go with her out of the house of the women unto the king's house. In the evening she went, and on the morrow she returned into the second house of the women, to the custody of Shaashgaz, the king's chamberlain, who kept the concubines: she came in unto the king no more, except the king delighted in her, and that she were called by name. Now when the turn of Esther, the daughter of Abihail the uncle of Mordecai, who had taken her for his daughter, was come to go in unto the king, she required nothing but what Hegai the king's chamberlain, the keeper of the women, appointed. And Esther obtained favor in the sight of all them that looked upon her. So Esther was taken unto king Ahasuerus into his house royal in the tenth month, which is the month Tebeth, in the seventh year of his reign. And the king loved Esther above all the women, and she obtained grace and favor in his sight more than all the virgins; so that he set the royal crown upon her head, and made her queen instead of Vashti. Then the king made a great feast unto all his princes and his servants, even Esther's feast; and lie made a release to the provinces, and gave gifts, according to the bounty of the king” (vers. 5-18).

Whatever may be thought of Mordecai or of Esther in the matter (and Scripture is here silent, neither accusing nor excusing), we have not long to wait before the vital question was raised, and the Jews must perish or be delivered beyond all outward hope, yet without sign, wonder, or miracle.

Accordingly a new fact is ordered of the utmost moment in providence. Mordecai is the instrument of making known a plot aimed at the king's life by two of his chamberlains.

“And when the virgins were gathered together the second time, then Mordecai sat in the king's gate. Esther had not [yet] showed her kindred nor people, as Mordecai had charged her; for Esther did the commandment of Mordecai, like as when she was brought up with him. In those days, while Mordecai sat in the king's gate, two of the king's chamberlains, Bigthan and Teresh, of those who kept the door, were wroth, and sought to lay hands on the king Ahasuerus. And the thing was known to Mordecai, who showed [it] unto Esther the queen; and Esther told the king [thereof] in Mordecai's name. And when inquisition was made of the matter, and it was found to be so, they were both hanged on a tree: and it was written in the book of the chronicles before the king” (vers. 19-23).

The traitors were thus found guilty; but the benefactor was strangely forgotten till the time of direct need arose, all the more surely to be rewarded to the confusion of the enemy at last. Secret providence ordered all aright, however trying appearances might be. This again, as to the conspirators and Mordecai, the means of warning the king was no more fortuitous than the downfall of Vashti or the elevation of Esther. All was in His hand Who ruled unseen.

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 3

Dan. 2, 7

WHEN Daniel had the vision of these four powers as it is given in chapter 7, they are presented to his eye as four ravenous beasts. The vision as dreamed by Nebuchadnezzar was comparatively external, as man's eye might see; but the same objects seen by the prophet were according to what a spiritual understanding could enter into. The reader may find an analogy in the parables referred to, first some before all in public, then others to the disciples within the house (Matt. 13).

There is also evident deterioration, as the power is distant from its source, and becomes characterized with more of man lower and lower. It has nothing to do with the extent of empire, which on the contrary became greater successively. But Nebuchadnezzar did his imperfect acts absolutely, as only One can perfectly to God's glory. In the Medo-Persian empire, wise men counsel much; as in the Greek, soldiers of fortune. Rome goes down to the dregs, and is governed instead of governing, so that power from God is swamped in the people as its source.

In chap. 7. the prophet sees the four powers emerge from the sea or ungoverned mass of peoples: first, a lion with eagle's wings, which ere long is humbled; secondly, a bear which raised up itself on one side and had a measured voracity; thirdly, a leopard with four wings, and eventually four heads, which none of the preceding had; lastly, a beast to which none in the realm of nature answered, beyond all dreadful and terrible and strong exceedingly, with great iron teeth, devouring and destroying with contempt, diverse from all before, and at length with the peculiarity of ten horns, &c. And here, answering to the little stone of chap. 2., we have the Son of man before the Ancient of days, receiving dominion, glory, and a kingdom that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him: an everlasting dominion which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed. Here we have the internal view according to God's mind, with yet more added in the interpretation.

But it may be remarked in passing, that the intervening chapters are as valuable for the world-powers, as chap. 1. we have seen to be for the moral state of Daniel. Chap. 3. shows that the first recorded act of Nebuchadnezzar was to enforce the most senseless idolatry, on the king's authority, as a means of binding together the peoples, nations, and languages; which only brought out fidelity at all cost on the part of the three Hebrew youths, the remnant, and the Gentile king's recognition of God their deliverer. Chap. 4. points to the Gentile power, after the seven times of a beast's heart, restored to praise the King of heaven. Chap. 5. is plainly the profaning Gentile judged in the destruction of Babylon; as chap. 6. attests the Gentile that took the place of God (according to the law that passeth not) confessing the living God Who alone rescues from the power of the enemy, and His kingdom what shall not be destroyed and His dominion unto the end. It is in the then facts the prefiguration of Gentile power abased and of Jew saved at the end to God's glory and the triumph of His kingdom. For no prophecy of scripture is of private (of its own, its isolated) interpretation. Every one bears, all converge, on the grand object of God in the exaltation of the Anointed, at the close of man's busy restless day. The Holy Spirit in what is written never stops short of that conclusion, so worthy of God and His Son, so blessed for the universe and every creature in it, save those that have rebelled persistently against His will. No accomplishment in the past, even if true and important, exhausts the meaning or satisfies the divine end.

If ever man tried to govern the world of his day by his own will absolutely, it was “the head of gold;” and as he sinned in giving the glory not to the Most High but to himself, he was abased personally as no monarch or man was before or since. But mercy intervened in due time, and presented a hope “at the end of the days,” which shall not make ashamed; when the nations shall be gladdened with His people and hope in Him Whom they together slew on the tree.

When the monarch took counsel with others, nobles or military chiefs, it was not really better. And when it was avowedly the people with or without an emperor, no tyranny so selfish, none so oppressive, nor so presumptuous against the true God. Never will the divine ideal be realized till He come again to reign, Whose right it is in the fullest way, divine and human, the Father of the age to come, the Prince of peace. All governments meanwhile are imperfect and provisional in His providence, though every soul in Christianity is bound to be subject, as unto higher authorities of this world. The existing authorities, whatever the form, are ordained of God; and he that ranges himself against the authority is a resister of the appointment of God. Yet consisting of sinful men, not one of any sort but has failed and sinned. How blessed to know that He, Who is coming to be King over all the earth, here lived and died and rose and ascended, not only the Lord but the Servant of all, and the Servant of God in serving all others not in love only but as the propitiation fox our sins.

For indeed there is one Man, and one Man only, Who never thought of any other object but doing or suffering the will of God. It was therefore and necessarily one course of ever deepening humiliation, though moral glory, till He reached a depth unfathomable save to Him. He it is Who, when He returns in power and glory, will take the whole world, as scripture fully shows. Meanwhile the Lord Jesus is very far from now governing the world. If He were, would He suffer Satan to be god and prince, as God's word declares he is, even since Christ took His seat on the Father's throne?

God's providential care does not fail of course, but what occupies Christ now is His loving ways with the church, and saving sinners to serve God and wait for Him from heaven. They are not of the world as He is not, and He is coming to receive them to Himself in the Father's house. This is far better. No matter how effectual and glorious the government of the world by-and-by when Christ reigns, it is not at all comparable to union with Him even now, and suffering with Him here below, and enjoying His love as Bridegroom forever in heaven. This is what Christ is now carrying on in God's children, that, when He shall be manifested, we may be like Him; for we shall see Him as He is.

But returning to the first vision, we note that it was a great image, whose brightness was excellent, and the form thereof terrible. So it was seen by Nebuchadnezzar; whereas Daniel was given to behold the self-same first empire as a lion with eagle's wings. This power was not to endure long, because its continuance was measured, as Jeremiah (chap. 15: 11, 12) had already predicted, by the captivity of Judah—in round numbers about seventy years. It was a power of peculiar majesty and splendor, Nebuchadnezzar being called “the head of gold,” as it appears to be in part, if not mainly, from receiving his power as king of kings direct from God in a way that none else of these empires did afterward, and allowing no human element to enfeeble his acting as so constituted. It was not won by conquest merely; it was God's immediate gift in his case, instead of being derived successively from others put down. Thus Cyrus was in many respects a greater man, and employed to do God's will on behalf of the Jewish remnant typically. Even Nebuchadnezzar was not a ruler to be despised, being (I suppose) the greatest city-builder the world ever saw. There are to be seen countless bricks with his name on them still, although thousands of years have passed since they were made. There they remain, strong and recognizable as ever almost, circumstances being no doubt peculiarly favorable for their preservation. Nebuchadnezzar also had much energy and practical wisdom in many other respects, as in seeing to the water-ways of the great rivers, and the irrigation of his fruitful plains, in order that the country might flourish and the people be prosperous as it never was before.

Under his reign Babylon became by far the most powerful and celebrated city of that age on the globe. The country was watered by two great rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris, rivers having their rise in Eden, where was the original Paradise of man; a remarkable proof that the deluge which left neither man nor beast on the earth did not blot out so much as some think. And as this great king actively provided work for the people, so also did he promote immense foreign trade. We read of “the cry of the Chaldees in their ships,” and their ports then became a source of enormous wealth and led to enterprise without end. Yet when the allotted hour struck, the golden city was razed, and, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldees' excellency, became in due time as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. Nor was there in all history so tragic a scene, if so righteous a fate, as that which is portrayed in Daniel's account of her last night as an imperial power.

( To be continued D.V.)

The Dragnet

Matt. 13:47-50.

THE last similitude of the chapter is the counterpart of the first; for as this is the sowing of the good seed in the world, where the harvest is spoiled by the enemy's darnel, so that is the judicial dealing with the bad fish after the good had been gathered into vessels before the consummation of the age.

“Again, the kingdom of the heavens is like a dragnet cast into the sea and having brought together of every sort; which, when it was filled, they drew up on the beach, and, sitting down, gathered the good into the vessels and cast the worthless out. Thus shall it be in the consummation of the age: the angels shall come forth and sever the wicked from amidst the righteous, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be the weeping, and the gnashing of teeth (ver. 47-50).

Here again we have what was meant, not for the multitude, but for those who had ears to hear. The Lord speaks to the disciples only in the house. It is for the spiritual mind.

We may notice here as elsewhere how carefully the truth was communicated, so as not to impair the Christian hope. The Jew has had times and seasons set out and discriminated to guard him from being deceived by the cry, The time is at hand. Now that the Christ was rejected of Jew and Gentile, the unequaled tribulation must be before the times of refreshing from the presence of Jehovah and His Christ. But for the Christian it is of all moment not to confound the proper hope with prophecy, but to wait for the Lord to receive us to Himself precisely as the early saints did. Whatever events are revealed, and they are many, varied, and momentous before the day of the Lord, His coming remains immediately before the heart without any predicted events to intervene.

In fact, we now know that many centuries have transpired; but from the parables here and elsewhere we should never have gathered such an interval as might hinder constant looking for Christ. We could not from the letter have gleaned, but that the fishermen, who first cast into the sea the dragnet, at length filled out of every sort, were the same that drew it up on the beach, and sitting down gathered the good into vessels and cast the worthless outside. He Who knew the end from the beginning had all before Him but disclosed with a wisdom self-evidently divine. Mistake there was none: only the rashness or of unbelief can say so. If taught of God, we wait for the Lord Jesus now, as the apostles did. Our hope, as our faith, is the same. All hangs on His word, which can fail no more than His love. And those who have fallen asleep have in no way missed their hope; for it remains true as ever, that the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we, the living that remain to the coming of the Lord shall in no wise precede those that are fallen asleep, but shall together with them be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so shall we ever be with the Lord (1 Thess. 4).

The parable does mark in the first place the fishermen completing their work of filling the dragnet from every kind, and drawing it ashore; next, sitting down and sorting the good fish into vessels, while they cast away those unfit for food. This was the fishermen's work of delicate discrimination; and the more striking as the servants were forbidden in the first similitude to gather the darnel. To deal with the wicked is in both parables assigned to the angels. They are, as the interpretation goes on to say (not only explaining, but adding), to come forth and sever the wicked from amidst the righteous. This is another truth, which must not be confounded with the fishermen's work of gathering the good into vessels. Both are true, but they differ in their nature and objects. We, the servants or fishermen, have to do with the good; the angels will execute judgment on the wicked. The Christian is called to the work of grace. So it was even among the Jews of old. “If thou take forth the precious from the vile, thou shalt be as my mouth,” said Jehovah to Jeremiah: not the vile from the precious, but the precious from the vile.

How is it with you, dear reader? To be within the dragnet is no security. Are you Christ's? He Himself welcomes the anxious and the restless and the wretched and the despairing. “Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” Yea, He declares, “Him that cometh to Me, I will in no wise cast out.” And He deigns to give the most lowly and gracious reason: “For I came down from heaven not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me.” And His will that sent Jesus is, “that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on Him shall have life eternal; and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:37-40).

What more do you want to win your hearts than these words, if you believe the Lord? To honor Him is to honor the Father, Who refuses to be honored otherwise. And no wonder; for to Him it is that His God and Father is indebted for His glorification morally in a world which had departed from Him, and done Him foul wrong, not only among Gentiles, vain and dark and proud, but in His own people guiltier and prouder still. Then and there it was that the Lord Jesus vindicated Him, not only in emptying Himself and becoming man, but in humbling Himself when man and being obedient unto death—yea, death of the cross. There it was also God made Him Who knew no sin to be sin for us that we might become God's righteousness in Him. Then it was He Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree that we being dead to sins should live to righteousness.

Fear not therefore to receive the Lord Jesus at God's word, as your quittance from all that you have done and are, and as your new start; for He Who died is risen, the giver of a life in Him, which speaks to you of victory, and is the pledge of holiness. Fear not: only believe.

Seeking and Receiving: Part 1

THERE are two things given us in this chapter: first, the origin and source of our salvation, God seeking us; and, secondly, the reception of the person when he comes back to God, and, at the same time, what passed in the heart of the prodigal when coming back to his Father. When come back, we hear no more of him, but of what passed in the heart of the Father.

It is a wonderful thing (if we did not know what we are naturally) to think that God should have to excuse Himself for loving us (vers. 31, 32 compared with 1, 2). It shows the selfishness and hardness of the human heart, that, if it cannot accredit itself before God, it will not have God's righteousness. That is what the elder brother was in his selfish self-righteousness (the Pharisee saying, “I never transgressed thy commandments;” and “Thou never gavest me a kid, to make merry with my friends”). Thus there was not one movement of the heart that fell in with the Father or even the servants. The whole household was moved by the Father's joy; but in him there was no response at all. The self-righteousness of man sets up to be something and accredits itself; but it is only of himself he is thinking. His Father's grace and goodness leads selfishness but to complain against God. This characterized the Jews in principle. These Pharisees were complaining against Christ for having eaten with publicans and sinners; then comes the blessed truth that God will not give up His character of love, but goes on in spite of all the false pretentious righteousness of man.

There are two things in these parables: the seeking; and the receiving. The first two refer to the seeking, the last to the reception of the sinner through redemption. The first two are God seeking (I do not doubt you get Father, Son, and Holy Ghost): the Shepherd seeks the sheep; the woman lights the candle to search for the piece of silver, as the Spirit by the gospel. Then you find the reception by the Father. In the first is the simple blessed principle that man kicks against—that it all comes from God to you in love. How self-righteousness gets mixed up in many hearts with the full free grace of God! The great thing seen of Christ is, God the originator of all the mercy. God has gone through the question of man's responsibility, and “there is none righteous, no not one” (Rom. 3:10). This is the summing up of the state of man before God, as being thoroughly tried. God in His mercy has given it, because the tendency of the human heart is to go on the ground of its righteousness, conscience telling him he should have it for God (as the law is its perfect measure: He has taken that ground with man). But our hearts do not submit to God's righteousness till we have gone through the testing: we have to learn it in a real way.

Further, God never left man without testimony: I do not say without promise, because this was to the Second Man. First (though not without testimony, as Enoch, Noah, and so on) man was left to himself. And what was the end of it? All was so bad that God had to bring in the flood. This was judgment on man in a certain sense left to himself. Then we have the second great principle: the promise came first—promise to Abraham, who was called out of a world which had gone into idolatry (Josh. 24:2). Then things went on till the law was given, when man took up the promises, but upon the footing of his own obedience; for they said, “All that Jehovah hath spoken we will do.” But they went on with wickedness afterward; they made the golden calf. There had been then sinners and law-breakers. But this was not all: God sent the prophets, dealing with their consciences, “rising up early, and sending them.” After all, God says, “I have still one Son, they will reverence Him;” but they cast Him out.

That is, you have man (in a certain sense) left to himself, but not without testimony; then man under law, and breaking it; then the Son of God came, God manifesting Himself. God was revealing Himself to win back the heart of man to confidence in Himself, in perfect and patient goodness, passing through this world as man, perfect and spotless; that good in power might meet every sorrow—power which removed all the present effects of sin. But they would not have God on any terms. Grace has wrought from Adam, but the heart of man is still the same. They break the law now, as far as they have their share in it. They cannot put Christ to death now; but talk of Christ to the world, and see how they will like it I We have had the law, and the prophets; after that Christ came. “He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not.” And when the Holy Ghost came into this world, it was but a world that had rejected the Son of God. God says to the world, What have you done with My Son? Men forget that the Son has been here: He is not here now. Everything that God could do He did, if anything could win the heart of man; but it was all of no use. Is it not a very solemn thing?

But to come to the point where God and man really meet, it is only at the cross of the Lord Jesus Christ. There was man's enmity rejecting the Son of God come in grace, and there was God giving His Son in love. We find a most blessed picture of it when the soldiers were sent to break the legs of those who were crucified with Him. “A bone of Him shall not be broken;” but they must make sure they have got rid of Him: “They pierced His side,” and there came out blood and water. What a sign of salvation as Gods answer to man's insultingly making sure that he had got rid of God come in mercy! There is where a soul can meet God, and there only. It is God's truth as to its state, that “the carnal mind is enmity against God” (Rom. 8:7). But His love has met it where it is. In truth we must come as mere sinners to the cross. The only part that we had in that which saved us was our sins; and there we must come. All must come before the Lord Jesus and bow to Him, either as Savior, or as Judge if we neglect salvation. Such is man's history.

Thus comes in the fullness of grace. God had proved man's state. He had now to act from Himself. They had had the law “by the disposition of angels;” they had had the prophets; they had had the Son, the Just One, and the testimony of the Holy Ghost. “Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost” (Acts 7:51-53). He had come with the testimony of Christ glorified. Stephen's speech was a kind of summing up as to man. They had broken the law, slain those which showed before the coming of the Just One,” were His betrayers and murderers, and resisted the Holy Ghost. Now, consequently, what we find on the other side is, that the spring and source of the whole blessing is God's own heart. What made the Shepherd look after the sheep? It was what was in the heart of the Shepherd toward it. Who put it into God's heart to send His Son? We did not; we would not have Him when He came. “If one died for all, then were all dead” (2 Cor. 4:15). Thus we see what was the first spring and movement of all: it was infinite grace! All were lost. But “God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). There is the wonderful truth, that the spring of it all is in God's own heart. Jesus “came to seek and to save that which was lost.” In this way we know “God is love:” “He laid down His life for us.”

We find in the first two parables the expression of His pure sovereign goodness interested in us. It was what Christ did. The Shepherd goes after the sheep, and “laid it on His shoulders rejoicing.” Here it set no foot to ground: not a word of what the sheep did, nor even of its happiness. It is just the same with the piece of silver. The woman cared for it, and could not give it up till she found it, and then was happy about it. The thing that runs through these parables is, that it is God's happiness to bring us back.

The truth that we have in the third parable is, that God's own happiness is to have us. There is nothing said about the prodigal's happiness, but about the father's: “God is love.” In the third are details in connection with his failure and his reception. The reception when he comes back is from the same love, the same grace, that sought the lost in the two first. He took his own way, and left his father's house, and tried to please himself. That is what men are trying to do—what he did, giving up God and His authority. Men do not believe that God is looking to their happiness, and they look to it themselves. So it was with Eve in Eden, when confidence in God was lost; she must try to make herself happy. The beginning of our ruin was losing confidence in God. Christ displays God in a way to win confidence in Him, manifesting such love and goodness that the heart should say, I can trust Him. This is not peace, it does not purge the conscience but awakens it. It is such a revelation of God to the heart as produces confidence. “I will arise and go to my Father:” such is the effect of God's light and God's love. You cannot be blessed with God (and you cannot be at all blessed without Him) but according to what He is.

If you come to God, you must come in the light that manifests everything. When God reveals Himself, He is light. It makes us see all we are. But He is love; and this is what brought the light, and where that is revealed to the heart, one is willing to receive the light. God cannot reveal Himself without being both. I trust the love that has brought the light into my conscience.

(To be continued D.V.).

The Ways of God in the Acts: 1. The Calling of the Jews

The Calling of the Jews.

Chap. 2.

IT is important, to a due understanding of the ways of God in Christianity, to have a clear perception of the teaching contained in the Acts of the Apostles. In that book we have the three great facts particularly brought before us: (1) the descent of the Holy Spirit, according to the promise of the Lord Jesus; (2) the formation of the church of God—the body of Christ, and the house of God; and (3) the propagation of the gospel of Christ far and wide.

But there are differences in the divine action which we do well to note. It is a true remark that in studying the scriptures we learn more by looking for differences than for similarities. Many generally occupy themselves with looking for parallel passages in the word, supposing it to be the best way of acquiring a knowledge of the truth; but, while not slighting this method, our souls learn greatly by carefully noting the many differences that are there, and looking to the Spirit of God about them. In the Acts we have the Spirit dealing respectively with Jews, Samaritans, and Gentiles, varying somewhat His method in each connection. It is these important variations we now propose to consider.

Acts 2 shows us the coming of the Holy Spirit. The Lord Jesus, before leaving His own, promised the precious gift to His disciples (John 14-16). In Acts 1 we get the Lord, after His resurrection, tarrying awhile with His own before going to the Father; putting before them in some sort their new position (not yet of course telling them of union with Him as one body), and speaking to them generally of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God. They were to wait in Jerusalem for the promise of the Father; He declares to them, “ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” In chap. 2 the promise is seen fulfilled: the baptism of the Spirit takes place.

Now this was a wholly new thing: the saints of God had never experienced the like before. From the very beginning there have been those who through grace have been born of the Spirit; but the gift of the Spirit, sealing individual believers and baptizing all into one body, is an entirely new order of blessing, founded on redemption. That mighty work being now accomplished by which God has been vindicated and glorified, and the divine sin-purger having taken His seat on high, God is able in a righteous way to lavish every gift upon all who believe in His beloved Son. And, as one may say, Jesus received the Holy Spirit twice; first at Jordan for Himself, then on His return to glory for His saints. At Jordan the Father expressed the delight of His heart in Him as the perfect man on earth, “and the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon Him” (Luke 3:22); so that He could afterward say of Himself, “Him hath God the Father sealed” (John 6:27). But when risen and ascended, Peter could declare, “therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, He hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear” (Acts 2:33).

But the manner of the Spirit's coming was quite different in the two cases. Upon the Lord He came like a dove; the form in connection with the disciples was “cloven tongues like as of fire.” Why the difference? He came upon the Lord Jesus in a form suited to the character of the blessed One Whom He was sealing. Christ was the meek and lowly One, not quenching the smoking flax, nor breaking the bruised reed. What more apt emblem of meekness than a dove? As for the disciples, they were to be witnesses as the Lord told them; hence tongues. They were cloven, for the testimony was not to be confined to the Jews, as in the day of Matt. 10—though it was to them first, as we shall soon see—but it was to branch out to Gentiles also, “to all that are afar off, as many as the Lord our God shall call.” The tongues were of fire, the usual symbol of divine holiness in judgment; for the testimony of God, while bringing blessing, nevertheless judges all before it, giving no quarter to all that is of fallen man.

But let none suppose from the fiery form that this is the baptism of fire spoken of by John the Baptist in Matt. 3 John said of Christ, “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire.” To these words doubtless our Lord alludes in Acts 1:5, “John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence “; but with marked omission of “and fire.” If Matt. 3 be examined, it will be seen that the baptism of fire is judgment— “He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” This is not yet; through God's longsuffering grace the baptism of the Spirit is an accomplished fact: the baptism of fire awaits another day.

The first great result of the coming of the Spirit was a striking testimony to the Jews: “To the Jew first;” “Beginning at Jerusalem.” It was the feast of Pentecost, and many were in Jerusalem from far and near. To their utter surprise unlearned and ignorant men began to speak in other tongues, and to declare the wonderful works of God. This was plainly the hand of God. The men had not learned the languages; yet Parthians, Medes, Elamites, &c., heard them speaking in the tongues wherein they were born. Tongues are for a sign to unbelievers (1 Cor. 14:22). Thus did God surmount the confusion brought in at Babel. The day had not come for its removal; but God would have men of every tongue hear the glad tidings of His grace. The opinions as to the marvel were various. Some seemed thoughtful and said, “What meaneth this?” Others mocking said, “These men are full of new wine.”

Then Peter stood up with the eleven. What grace, that Peter of all the apostles should be so used I am aware that the Lord had said to him, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven “; and that here he is opening the door to the Jews, as in chap. 10. to the Gentiles. Still what abounding grace that he should be first to preach in the name of the risen Jesus! It was the preaching of a restored backslider. Grace had so wrought that he could calmly charge the Jewish nation with denying and crucifying Messiah. They might have retorted that he also had denied Him. But Peter had confessed his sin and been forgiven; and his conscience was clear and happy before God.

Let us notice his preaching. He explains the remarkable event of the day. He repudiates the insinuation of drunkenness, reminding them of the early hour, and brings forward Joel's prophecy. Had not the prophet spoken of an effusion of the Spirit in the last days? Why then need they be surprised at what had occurred? Not that Joel's prediction received then its complete fulfillment; for the Spirit was not yet poured out upon all flesh, nor had there been signs in heaven above and in the earth beneath; but it then had an incipient accomplishment—an outpouring of the Spirit had taken place.

Peter's style in preaching Christ is noticeably different from Paul's. The apostle of the church starts with Christ as glorified, showing the wondrous results of His death and resurrection in the light of the glory with the counsels of God now accomplishing on the ground of it. Peter, on the contrary, speaks of Jesus as One Whom the Jews had known among them, marked out by God by miracles and wonders and signs; but Whom they had crucified and slain, showing also that God had raised Him and put. Him at His own right hand. He had been delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. The Jews and their rulers, not knowing Him nor the voices of the prophets read every day, had fulfilled them in condemning Him (Acts 13:27). But God raised Him up, and David had spoken of it in the Psalms, as Peter proceeds to show. The time was when Peter and his companions needed to be shown Christ in the Psalms (Luke 24:27). Now he quotes several and presses them upon the consciences of his hearers. Psa. 16 is the first witness (with perhaps a clause from Psa. 21 in ver. 28). Of Whom had David spoken? “Thou wilt not leave My soul in Hades, neither wilt Thou suffer Thy Holy One to see corruption.”

Did the Psalmist speak of himself? Nay, he was both dead and buried, and his sepulcher was known to all the Jews; he has not yet known resurrection, and certainly not exaltation by the right hand of God. But, “being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; he, seeing this before, spake of the resurrection of Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, neither His flesh did see corruption.” This includes an allusion to Psa. 132 to which is added the crowning word from Psa. 110:1. The solemn conclusion of all was that God had made the crucified Jesus Lord and Christ.

What a position for the Jewish nation! convicted of the deepest enmity against God, of utter blindness as to the scriptures, of the betrayal and murder of their Messiah. The awful truth pressed itself home upon many— “they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Now notice carefully the answer, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Why this order? Why is repentance pressed rather than faith? And why must baptism precede remission of sins and the gift of the Spirit? especially as a very different order is to be observed in the case of the Gentiles in Acts 10. The answer is to be found in the peculiarity of the circumstances. These proud Jews stood convicted of the rejection and murder of Messiah. God would have this deeply felt (therefore repentance is pressed), and would have them submit to baptism in the name of the One they had despised ere blessing could be theirs. Will any say this is the usual order? It is exceptional and extraordinary; and in it we see the perfect wisdom of God's ways.

Peter assured them that the promise was to them and their children, and to all that are afar off, as many as the Lord shall call (including Gentiles); and exhorted them to save themselves from the untoward generation which was about to be visited with judgment (see also ver. 47).

Those who received His word (“gladly” is a doubtful word. See Matt. 13:20) were baptized: and the same day were added 3,000 souls. Thus did God commence His new thing in the earth, the church of God. The waiting company received the, baptism of the Spirit, and thus became the body of Christ, though as yet they knew nothing of the doctrine of it. The 3,000 were introduced by the gift of the Spirit into the same blessed place. No such portion had been enjoyed by saints, however favored before that day. The church had no existence in O. T. times, save in the counsels of God. Christ must take His seat on high as the glorified head, and the Spirit must descend, ere such a thing could exist on earth.

But it does now exist, and the souls before us were brought into it on that memorable day. “And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers.” Steadfast continuance is good. To some Paul had to say, “Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?” (Gal. 5:7). Not so in Jerusalem on the Pentecostal day. There are four things to be noticed here. (1) “The apostles' doctrine.” What else did they, or do we, want? Apostolic doctrine is the standard and test of truth as John declares, “We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error” (1 John 4:6). Are we prepared to bring all our ways and the teaching we accept to this test? Tradition is of but little worth, however ancient and widely received; what was “from the beginning” alone has a claim upon our souls. (2) “Fellowship:” What a mercy that we are not called to walk alone! In a hostile world, what a relief to the heart that God has given us the fellowship of saints! Do we value it sufficiently?

No saint is self-sufficient; we all need what God has for us by means of our brethren. But our fellowship must be holy. Better far to walk alone than compromise the Lord's name. In such a case His grace will be made sufficient for the soul, as many can testify; but such is not the ordinary Christian path, but fellowship. (3) “The breaking of bread.” This had clearly a larger place in the Christianity of those days than now. While continuing daily in the temple, they broke bread “at home” on (at least) the first day of the week (Acts 20). Love was too fresh to be satisfied with a monthly or quarterly remembrance of Christ. In our day the very name is well-nigh lost, to say nothing of the reality. What are the sounds around us? One tells us of the mass, another of the sacrament; but how often do we hear God's titles, “the breaking of bread,” and “the Lord's supper?” (4) “The prayers.” They felt the solemnity of their position in the midst of enemies, and valued united prayer. When the apostles were “let go” in chap. iv., they at once sought out “their own company,” and together they gave themselves to prayer. Do we feel our need? It is sorrowful to see saints, who are regular in their attendance at the Lord's table, indifferent to the prayer-meeting. What can be said of their condition of soul?

It is truly a lovely picture the Spirit brings before us here; first love, ardent faith, and earnest zeal for the glory of the absent Lord. But as yet all in the church were Jews; others were to be called, as succeeding chapters will show.

Priesthood of Christ: 2

PLAINLY therefore it is for a delivered people that Christ is viewed as a merciful and faithful high priest—for the sanctified, for the children. “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels.” The real force is, “he doth not take up the cause of angels.” It has nothing to do with “nature” here, which was put in very inconsiderately. You may observe some words printed in italics, but others too are ill-rendered. The margin here gives the sense much better— “He taketh not hold of angels;” that is, He does not espouse their cause, which is the true meaning. “But of the seed of Abraham he taketh hold. Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest.”

It will be seen, then, how this clears the ground distinctly; for we learn that priesthood follows accomplished redemption, that it supposes the Lord Jesus Himself as He is now, not merely as He was before He came into the world (for He was not priest then), nor yet, when actually in the world, was He priest then either. When He suffered on the cross, and left the world and went to heaven, He is saluted of God as priest then and there, and this for those who see Him while He is there. We see Jesus, as it is said, crowned with glory and honor. It is for such as see Him by faith. It is, then, an office and function He discharges in heaven for those that are separate from the world, severed unto God, that is, for the sanctified.

And here by the way let me express the hope that there is nobody here who mistakes the meaning of the word “sanctified.” The point in Heb. 2 is not at all the thought of a process going on, though I do not the least deny this to be true practically, as it is taught elsewhere. In the practical sense holiness is of course a gradual product of grace—a growth into Christ which always should be going on in the saint. But this passage, and others in Hebrews, look at the class so viewed in the abstract; and what made it also the more striking was, that it was no longer true, as such, of Israel. The Jews alas! had profanely refused as far as they could the Holy One of God. They had treated Him as a reprobate and an impostor. They had lost, therefore, their sanctification, and God treats them as profane. And the sanctified here are those who were separated out of Israel; here, I repeat emphatically, out of the Jews; for, as far as the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks, we could scarce prove by it that any Gentiles were being called now. From elsewhere we all know that there are, and the principles in the Epistle to the Hebrews apply to the Gentile believer just as truly as to the Jewish; but the Holy Ghost was tenderly dealing with these men of prejudice, whom He is now instructing in the way more perfectly, and thus leading out from old attachments to the best of blessings. There was solemn warning, but also the desire of love, in gracious consideration of such thoughts and feelings as might appear weak, and, no doubt, to a Gentile supremely so. A Gentile would have torn their prejudices to atoms, with rudeness perhaps, certainly without much scruple. But the Spirit of God dealt with the utmost care and gentleness, yet throughout with increasing plainness of speech, until at last the truth has been taught so fully that they are summoned to quit the camp for Christ outside, bearing His reproach. There is much to learn in this; and I am sure, my brethren, every one of us needs the lesson.

But still what I would recall your attention to is this, that the Lord now stands related as priest above to those who are separated to God in the confession of Christ, and separated from the people just as much as out of any other race, yea, pre-eminently here out of that people. For the apostle thus implies that those for whom He is acting were not according to the old sanctification of Israel, but sanctified out of that sanctification which no longer had any validity before God. All now turns on Jesus, the rejected Messiah. He was the sanctifier, as indeed He is God no less than man. “He that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one.” “He that sanctifieth” here means Jesus. “He is not ashamed to call them brethren.” It is not God as such, of course; Who does not, could not, call any one “brother.” It is our Lord Who is the sanctifier; and the sanctified are those set apart in His name and by His blood.

Then comes the first allusion to Jesus as priest; we find it at the end of chap. 2. He is “a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God,” but not exactly “to make reconciliation.” I regret, on such an occasion, to be thus commenting on our common version; but the truth must be spoken where touched, and specially on such momentous and fundamental topics as these. It really means propitiation, not “reconciliation.” The great day of atonement is alluded to here, and the expiation of sins on it. Reconciliation is a much larger thought than atonement; and means the making good the whole state of the object of it with God. Therefore, although it is founded on propitiation, it goes farther; and so it takes in creation universally, as we see in Ephesians and Colossians— “all things,” not all men, though the blood was shed in view of all, to be testified in due time. Everybody can see for himself that there is no very just sense in saying “making reconciliation for sins.” People are reconciled; but can we say reconcile sins? or make reconciliation for them? Expiation or propitiation for sins is the exact force. This the word means.

And it is the more important and striking, as showing the confusion into which people have fallen, that in Rom. 5:11, where “atonement” occurs in the English Bible, it ought to be “reconciliation “; while in Heb. 2, where “reconciliation” occurs, it ought to be “atonement.” That is, our translators were unfortunately astray in the very points that the Spirit of God was teaching in both. I do not mention the fact as taking pleasure in detecting flaws of the kind, but simply to vindicate the truth of God, holding that it is of much more consequence for His word to be seen as it is, and for souls to be set right, than merely to keep up an unreal appearance in the version we have in our hands, though heartily admitting that providentially we have abundant reason to bless God for so good a translation. It has its faults, however; and these are two, which it is not well to explain away.

It is plain that up to chapter iii. we have the introduction; and, the atonement being brought in, we have hence not merely a priest but the high priest introduced. So in the day of atonement the high priest of Israel appears, and none other. There was a very peculiar action on the day of atonement; and it was the only one of the kind. Atonement was done once for the whole year. It thus set forth completeness (as we can now say, forever), not a continuous process. The action of the priest or high priest otherwise might be going on all the year round; but not the atonement, which was distinct, unique, and absolutely settled for that circle of time. The high priest on this occasion represented the people, and offered that on which Jehovah's lot fell for the sins of the people, bringing its blood within the veil, and doing with that blood as he did with the bullock's, and thus making atonement, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions in all their sins. After he came out from the most holy place, he laid his hands upon the live goat, and confessed over it all their iniquities, and all their transgressions in all their sins. The whole was wound up by sending the goat (Azazel) into the wilderness, as the figure of sins thus borne away.

( To be continued D.V.)

A Heavenly Christ, Therefore a Heavenly Church: Part 1

IT is the uniform tendency of man's mind to practically dissociate Christ and the church, particularly with regard to those relations of intimate unity which scripture reveals and emphasizes as the peculiar marks of the Christian calling. Which of the great sections of Christendom really holds that the church is so united to Christ in heaven that its constitution derives an essential character from this very fact? The Roman, Anglican, and Dissenting, not to speak of the Greek, communities, all fall short of discerning that the living connection between the church and its risen Head on high is not a mere abstract notion, purely theoretical and altogether inoperative, but a vital principle meant to be embodied in its every action.

Now it is impossible to understand the heavenly nature of the calling of the church apart from Christ; for the raison d'etre of the church is Christ. And it is not meant by this to refer now to the atoning and redemptive work of the Savior. Undoubtedly that incomparable work supplied the immutable foundation on which God's dealings with man are based. Anticipatively or retrospectively, the death of Christ formed the sole ground for blessing to the children of faith for all time. It does not follow however that the blessing offered and given has been of an identical character from the beginning. On the contrary that blessing has varied in character and measure according to the then purpose of God, as it has been successively revealed in connection with the varied glories of the Son.

The Old Testament, speaking broadly, is occupied with the promise and prophecy of the advent of the Messiah Who would come to the chosen people of Israel as their Prophet, Priest, and King, and exalt the seed of Abraham above all the nations of the earth. The blessings which the saints of old were taught to expect were of an earthly nature. The daughter of Zion was to look for the coming of her King Who would reign in righteousness. The oppressor should be broken in pieces, and their enemies made to lick the dust. Peace should flow like a river, and the earth be full of the knowledge of Jehovah as the waters cover the sea. Long life and prosperous days should be the happy portion of every subject of the glorious kingdom of David's Lord. In short, Christ in the Old Testament is brought forward as the earthly ruler and the executor of divine justice in the earth, especially in connection with the nation of Israel. Accordingly the blessings of the people assume an earthly and national character in perfect accord with these promises.

Now just as the hopes of Israel derived their points of distinction from Messiah the prince coming to reign here below, so the hopes and calling of the church receive their distinctive marks from the position now assumed by Christ on high. This establishes the widest possible difference between Israel and the church. The difference is that betwixt earthly and heavenly, carnal and spiritual blessing. Wherever we look in the Old Testament, we find the same kind of anticipations. In Egypt and the wilderness, they look for the land of promise with a bountiful basket and store. In Canaan when groaning under the idolatrous rule of apostate kings, or when weeping by the rivers of Babylon, the faithful long for the Redeemer to come to Zion, Who shall bless every man under his own vine and his own pomegranate tree.

But the New Testament sanctions no such expectations for the Christian. The Jew was entitled to hope for blessing here of a worldly nature; but the believer's blessings are heavenly and spiritual, enjoyed alone by faith. They take their character, as has been said already, from Christ; and from Christ, not as the king of Israel and the order of the nations, but as the glorified Head of the church.

Now the epistle to the Ephesians unfolds the mystery of the heavenly blessing of the church in a very full manner, but always in connection with Christ. The close of the first chapter establishes the truth of the present exaltation of Christ on high and binds up with that momentous fact the position of the church in the heavenlies along with Him. Let us look at the way in which this doctrine is brought forward.

The first fourteen verses of chapter i. contain a summary of truths relating to the saints, bringing out their place in the mind and purpose of God. This calls for a remark worthy of note. It is a principle of the word of God that personal blessings and responsibilities are invariably set forth before corporate blessings and relationship. And it is nowhere more strikingly illustrated than in this epistle which exceeds all others in the fullness of its divine unfoldings concerning the church in its most comprehensive aspect. For we have it presented in its totality, from eternity “hid in God,” “now made known,” and by-and-by to be presented to Christ perfect and entire. Nevertheless there is even in this epistle no exception to the general rule observed throughout the whole scheme of revelation to state first of all what relates to the individual. We are told not only of election and inheritance in Christ, but of what might seem very elementary, of forgiveness of sins and of hearing the gospel. This is significant enough. The individuality of the believer ought not to be swamped by the generalities of the church. It is also well, nay imperative, for the soul to be assured of its personal relationship before God in order that it may be able to enter more truly into its place in the church. Neither should an acquaintance with the privileges of Christ's body cause any to forget or under-value their individual standing through grace.

Having therefore unfolded to the saints at Ephesus their blessed place individually before God in Christ, he tells them of his prayers on their account that they may be made to know yet more. He seeks that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give them the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, the eyes of the heart being enlightened. His petition on their behalf is threefold, viz., that they may know—

1.-What is the hope of His calling, and

2.-What the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and

3.-What is the exceeding greatness of His power to usward who believe, according to the working of His mighty power which He wrought in Christ, when He

a. raised Him from the dead, and

b. set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places far above all principality and power and might and dominion and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come, and

c. hath put all things under His feet, and

d. gave Him to be head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him that filleth all in all (Eph. 1:16-23).

Here then we have the inspired desires of the apostle for these Ephesian saints. He sought that they might grow in divine knowledge (“full knowledge” is the word employed).

In the first place (1) as to their calling; it had already been brought before them in the early verses, but did they grasp the hope of that calling? The hope is the consummation, the crown, the climax of what we now enjoy by faith. We are in point of fact even now blessed in the heavenlies, even now accepted in the Beloved. But the hope is yet to be realized when the Lord takes us to the Father's house on high and the purpose of God with regard to us is fully accomplished. The calling is individual, the hope takes in all; for it contemplates that unity in which Christ will present the church to Himself in glory. Into this view the apostle prays that the saints may now enter fully.

He further prays (2) that they may know the riches of the glory of God's inheritance in the saints. It is not so much, as has been pointed out by others, that the saints themselves form this inheritance, but that in the saints God in Christ will take the inheritance. Christ is “heir of all things” (Heb. 1:2), and when He enters into His right, the church will share the glory of that inheritance as joint-heirs (Rom. 8:17; 2 Tim. 2:12). Christ will not enter into His glory apart from His bride. He says Himself, “The glory which thou hast given me, I have given them” (John 17:22). And it is the desire of the apostle that the saints may now by faith apprehend their high destiny in the coming day of glory.

The next clause (3) of the petition is that they may know the exceeding greatness of God's power already exercised upon believers in raising them up to share the exaltation of Christ. This is so important as to call for special attention in a subsequent paper (D.V.).

James 1:5-8

WHEN a soul has fairly entered on the path of trials, which faith never fails to experience in a world departed from God, he soon finds his lack of wisdom. But his comfort is that He with Whom he has to do is alone wise, and ready to guide those that wait on Him. How much better it is that wisdom should be in Him that we may be dependent on His guidance, than if it were a possession vested in us, exposed to the danger of our setting up to do without Him! Therefore comes the exhortation to pray (cf. Luke 18:1); for our need is all the greater because we are God's children in a world where all is opposed to God. “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God that giveth to all freely and reproacheth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing doubting. For he that doubteth is like a wave of the sea wind-driven and tossed (for let not that man think that he shall receive anything of the Lord): a double, minded man, unstable in all his ways” (vers. 5-8).

It is of the essence of the new nature that the believer has to live in dependence on God, and to find its present exercise in the midst of trials by cultivating that confidence in Him which finds its proper expression in prayer. Hence it is that, if any one becomes sensible of deficient wisdom in presence of the many difficulties of this life, he is directed to ask of God that gives to all freely and upbraids not. How full of cheer and re-assurance! Even Christ, Himself God's wisdom, habitually waited on God, prayed at all times where men least look for it, and spent the night in prayer when the occasion called for it. If He then Who never lacked wisdom so lived, how much should we be ashamed of our failure in so drawing near to God and drawing from Him what He so readily gives!

The expression employed to encourage us is striking. He “giveth to all freely and reproacheth not.” Wisdom no doubt is primarily what is sought, as it is in our trials peculiarly requisite; but the Holy Spirit is pleased to enlarge our expectation, that we may know better “the giving God,” “the unreproaching God.” And a word is used here to characterize Him, to which the apostle Paul exhorts the Christian in his giving (Rom. 12:8): “He that giveth, in simplicity.” For how often do mixed motives seek entrance into the heart in giving! Liking rather than love here, dislike hindering there, self-importance, regard for character, sympathy with others on the one hand, and on the other prudential or unbelieving fear under questionable pleas. Hence the call on the giver among us to give with simplicity. Singleness of eye here as elsewhere promotes love, as it ensures light; and the issue is liberality. And so the various English versions agree from Wiclif to the Authorized. For both Wiclif and Purvey give the primary meaning “by simpleness,” Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva, “with singleness “; Rheims “in simplicity,” and the Auth. “with simplicity.” Again, Wiclif, and the Wiclifite nave in our text “largeli,” Tyndale and Crammer “indifferently,” Geneva “freely,” Rheims “abundantly,” and the Auth. “liberally “: all of them a secondary meaning. Of these “freely” seems to suit God best, as flowing readily from the primary force which hardly befits Him, while it well becomes us. And it may be added that these respective meanings are in excellent keeping with the writers; of whom Paul looks at the inner source, James rather at the result.

That God in giving freely, does not reproach the receiver is no small favor. How often in man's case the fact is, that the grace is accompanied with such a drawback express or implied! God acts worthily of Himself Who is good.

But if a petition is thus freely and graciously given of God to him that asks, there is the requisite condition, “let him ask in faith, nothing doubting.” God will be inquired of suitably; and least of all does it become man, so favored, to fail or to doubt in anything. “He that spared not His own Son but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not also with Him freely give us all things?” Even in the very trials which are most painful— “in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us.”

“For he that doubteth is like a wave of the sea wind-driven and tossed (for let not that man think that he shall receive anything of the Lord): a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.” Here is the contrast, alas! not uncommon even of old. Collectively “surge” is a known sense of the word rendered “wave,” which is not the ordinary term (κῦμα) though this occurs repeatedly in the N.T. It is rather a billow singly, but here the sport of winds to and fro. How could it be otherwise in him who in his weakness does not lean on the Lord? Whatever may be given, there is no real receiving from the Lord on his part who does not trust Him. If in one way he speaks, in another he feels and acts, being of double soul. Instability marks all his course. Is not God ashamed to own such a one? (Heb. 11:16.)

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:4

WE have now to offer such explanation as we can on another branch of the Japhetic race. It may be premised that they come next after Madai. Of this last we have no details; only indeed of Gomer's sons, as now of Javan's, the Keltic and the Italo-Hellenic, families respectively.

It has been already shown briefly on ver. 2 that Javan represents Greece. Ionia however, or Ionia, answers most nearly to the Hebrew name, a narrow district in Asia Minor, of which Greek colonies are said to have possessed themselves more than a thousand years B.C., some time after the Dorian conquest of Peloponnesus, and even after their advance toward Attica (Muller's Dorians, ii. 511, Tufnell and Lewis' Tr. 1830). Not only was Ionia remarkable for its commercial prosperity, but for excellence in art and poetry, in history and philosophy, before the mother-country attained any eminence in these pursuits (Smith's Diet. of Gr. and R. Geography, 61, col. 1). Ezek. 27:13 speaks of Javan among the traffickers with Tire: only we must distinguish from it Javan of Uzal in ver. 19, which seems to mean the capital town of Yemen or Arabia Felix. But those who migrated here and elsewhere were the race who long before were in Attica and in part of the Peloponnesus. Of course none can wonder at varied forms of mythical genealogy; but the fact is certain of the early predominance of the Ionian name, as Moses here gives it, for a general description of Greece (Thirlwall's Hist. i. 134). In fact Greece is so designated from Gen. 10 to Zech. 9 Homer in xiii. 685, Aeschylus, in Pers. 176, 568, 948 and Suppl. 72, employ a word that approximates to the Hebrew term.

“And the sons of Javan, Elishah, and Tarshish, Kittim, and Dodanim” (ver. 4)

As Javan unquestionably answers to the Greeks in general and is represented in the Ionian race particularly, it is acknowledged that Elishah also belongs to that people. Ezek. 27:7 helps us to the conclusion that the isles or maritime parts pertained to his lot. Josephus applied the name to the Aeolians, as others to Hellas (which was adopted by J. D. Michaelis, Spicil. i. 79). But Bochart preferred the Peloponnesus as an extension of Elis. The commerce with Tire points to the islands as well as to the Morea.

Tarshish follows; and here it appears that we need not doubt an original settlement on the south shore of Spain, where also the Phoenicians later had factories, and whence by their ships they brought to Tire silver, iron, tin, and lead, as Ezek. 27:12 informs us. The ships of Tarshish were the most famous for merchandise in ancient times. Psa. 72:10 is of itself sufficient to indicate a considerable stretch of country, not merely the well-known city of Tartessus at the mouth of the Baetis (or Guadalquiver). There is no valid ground to doubt that this was the region to which Javan's second son gave the name. There may have been another place so called in the south east or Indian ocean, to which Solomon's ships sailed from Ezion-Geber (cf. 1 Kings 9:26, 2 Chron. 9:21). For we have no ground to suppose the route round Africa by the Cape of Good Hope was then known; nor, if it were, could the south of Spain supply ivory, and asses, and peacocks, which point rather to India or Ceylon. Tarsus in Cilicia, which Josephus conjectured, in no way meets what is said in the references of scripture.

There is no difficulty as to Kittim, which is a term beyond controversy applied to two of the peninsulas of Europe, first Greece [or Macedon], then Rome or Italy. So the writer of Maccabees speaks of Greece (chaps. 1: 1, 8: 5); as Dan. 11:30 is decisive as to Rome. So in the prophecy of Balaam (Num. 24:24) we learn of a fleet from the west afflicting Asshur, when all man's power comes to destruction. In Jer. 3:10 and Ezek. 28:6 we hear of the “isles” or sea-coasts of Kittim; which can hardly mean Cyprus, as understood Josephus and many since his day, though Gesenius approved. He allows however that a wider signification is called for as in not a few Scriptures here cited.

Dodanim remains, which some, from the similarity of sound it seems, would connect with the famous Dodona in Epirus; but the celebrity of an ancient oracle would scarcely give warrant for a place in this chapter. There is another reading which appears in 1 Chron. 1:7, and Rhodians have been thought to correspond with it. The Sept. has the same people for Dedan in Ezek. 27:15, which is assuredly an error. The learned Bochart suggests the Rhone, at whose mouth was an ancient Greek colony and emporium. More than one Targum understood the common reading of the Dardans; and Gesenius inclines to this view in his Monumenta Phoen. 432 and Thes. LL. Hebrews and Ch. 1266. It was a branch of the widely spread Pelasgic stock. Curiously enough Strabo (vii.) preserves a fragment of Hesiod, of Dodona as a seat of the Pelasgians. See also Hes, Goettl, ed, alt. 295.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 4

Chapter 3

It was after divine providence had wrought in ways so remarkable as to elevate one of the chosen people to be imperial consort, to use another in discovering and defeating a deadly plot against the monarch, that we hear of the sudden rise of a new personage, the Jews' enemy. This was no casual fact; it was a move in the great conflict ever enacting in this fallen world. So it had been in Egypt; when Pharaoh arose to oppress and destroy God's nascent people. So we see in the beginning of the wilderness journey, when Amalek appeared to oppose Israel; as at its end Balak and Balaam sought curse for them and their ruin in every way. So again from within Absalom and Adonijah rebelled shamelessly against Jehovah's purpose when the kingdom was set up. And here, in the days of captivity and dispersion, the same traits re-appear; the elevation of the Jew in any measure during the eclipse of the people is met by the counterpart of the old and deadly hostility in an equally unexpected way.

“After these things king Ahasuerus promoted Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him, and set his seat above all the princes that [were] with him. And all the king's servants that were in the king's gate bowed down and did reverence to Haman: for the king had so commanded concerning him. But Mordecai bowed not down, nor did [him] reverence. Then the king's servants that [were] in the king's gate said unto Mordecai, Why transgressest thou the king's commandment? Now it came to pass, when they spake daily unto him, and he hearkened not unto them, that they told Haman, to see whether Mordecai's matters would stand: for he had told them that he [was] a Jew. And when Haman saw that Mordecai bowed not down, nor did him reverence, then was Haman full of wrath. But he thought scorn to lay hands on Mordecai alone; for they had shown him the people of Mordecai: wherefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews that [were] throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus, the people of Mordecai” (vers. 1-6).

What makes the rise of Haman into the highest place next the throne so surprising is that we have not had the least trace of him before. Privy counselors and chamberlains—many have been personally named. But now at this juncture comes forward no Mede or Persian, but a stranger to the ruling races, into a seat above all the princes that were with the monarch. He, like his father, is described as “the Agagite,” which seems to have been the royal seed among the Amalekites. No doubt Saul had crushed them, and David yet more. But here in the highest and most influential position is, not an Amalekite only, but “the Agagite,” to whom Mordecai refused reverence. The king had commanded it on his behalf; but Mordecai bowed not. Had not Jehovah caused it to be written down that He would utterly blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heavens? He persists and takes the consequence, whatever the fury of Haman, and his resolve to destroy all the Jews throughout the empire.

“In the first month, which [is] the month of Nisan, in the twelfth year of king Ahasuerus, they cast Pur, that [is], the lot, before Haman from day to day, and from month to month, [to] the twelfth [month], which [is] the month of Adar. And Haman said unto king Ahasuerus, There is a certain people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of thy kingdom; and their laws [are] diverse from those of every people; neither keep they the king's laws: therefore it [is] not for the king's profit to suffer them. If it please the king, let it be written that they be destroyed: and I will pay ten thousand talents of silver into the hands of those that have the charge of the king's business, to bring [it] into the king's treasuries. And the king took his ring from his hand, and gave it unto Haman the son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, the Jews' enemy. And the king said unto Haman, The silver [is] given to thee, the people also, to do with them as it seemeth good to thee. Then were the king's scribes called in the first month, on the thirteenth day thereof, and there was written according to all that Haman commanded unto the king's satraps and to the governors that [were] over every province, and to the princes of every people; to every province according to the writing thereof, and to every people after their language; in the name of king Ahasuerus was it written, and it was sealed with the king's ring. And letters were sent by posts into all the king's provinces, to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish, all Jews, both young and old, little children and women, in one day, even upon the thirteenth [day] of the twelfth month, which [is] the month Adar, and [to take] the spoil of them for a prey. A copy of the writing, that the decree should be given out in every province, was published unto all the peoples, that they should be ready against that day. The posts went forth in haste by the king's commandment, and the decree was given out in Shushan the palace. And the king and Haman sat down to drink; but the city of Shushan was in consternation” (vers. 7-15).

Thus the enemy had recourse to the casting of lots for a day favorable to his murderous project. This, divine providence took care in result to defer so long as to admit of a fresh decree (change or revocation being inadmissible) for the Jews to stand in self-defense and destruction of their enemies. But at first no issue was more contrary to all appearances; in the end Satan as ever defeated himself. Haman's plea to the king was plausible. God's people, just because they are His, are always an offense to the rest of mankind, especially the proud and vain-glorious; and this remains, even when through their unfaithfulness they forfeit His open favor, as was the actual fact. “There is a people scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces of thy kingdom, and their laws diverse from [those of] every people, and they keep not the king's laws; and it is not for the king's profit to suffer them.” So Haman proposes their destruction, offering a round sum for the exchequer in return. That such a one, wild and capricious to the last degree, as then ruled Persia should decree accordingly, and remit the favorite's payment, is in no way strange, even if we had not inspired testimony to the transaction. Worse has been repeatedly, and in modern times. Armed with the fullest authority Haman dictates, and the royal secretaries write to the governors over every province and to the princes of every people. And posts or couriers were sent throughout the empire hastened by the king's command, besides the publication in Shushan the fortress. How graphic and life-like the close of the chapter thereon! “The king and Haman sat down to drink; but the city of Shushan was in consternation.” It was not the Jews only who Were so deeply moved. Nor did heartless banqueting at such a crisis relieve men's hearts about the great actors or the victims.

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 4

Dan. 2: 7

THEN followed the second empire of the Medes and Persians, the captors of Babylon, set out by the image's breast and arms of silver, and by the bear that raised itself on one side: a kingdom of larger extent, but inferior in vigor and splendor, which lasted some 200 years before it fell before Alexander the Great, the founder of “another third kingdom of brass, which should bear rule over all the earth.” Who could have conceived of an empire so much wider than its predecessors, from the vain and contentious Greeks, led by the despised race of Macedonia, and their boy king? Up to that time what did they present but a cluster of jealous, factious states, if one except Sparta, struggling for leadership, whatever their skill in arts or letters? The attacks of Darius and Xerxes at length united them for a while in patriotism with a humanly brilliant result. Only God could have led the king to dream, and the prophet to interpret, the Greek or Macedonian kingdom. Yet there is the living picture, the details of which cover the beginning of chap. 8.

There is more particularity as we descend the stream of time; so false is the maxim of the rationalists who leave out God, or count Him such a one as themselves. How plainly does He put contempt on their assumption that a prophet anticipated no more than the imminent future! They are given as God pleased, Babylonians, Medo-Persians, Greeks, and Romans. The first or Babylonian no doubt was there before men; but which of the rest could have been foreseen even plausibly by a single soul on earth? Least of all would Nebuchadnezzar have conceived changes so beyond calculation.

We have seen the extreme improbability of a world-wide empire from Greece or its rude neighbor Macedon. What is the fact as to the Rome of Nebuchadnezzar's day? The philosophers count its annals as for the most part uncertain if not fabulous. Yet we need not doubt the city was then ruled by such petty kings as Italian towns could boast of old, kinglings indeed. Long before, we see a sort of analogy in the numerous kings whom the sons of Israel smote under Joshua (chap. 12.), more than thirty. The kings were succeeded by consuls; dictators too ruled occasionally; decemvirs; and consular tribunes; till the chaotic condition morally and politically gave opportunity for an emperor, though still employing republican forms. Rome yet for hundreds of years had been engaged in constant struggling with its rival neighbors. Sabines, Volscians, Veientes, and the like. Finally they had their city taken and burnt by the Gauls; they further had to fight for their very existence with another competitor. And what think you, was the power that rose up to dispute in a life and death conflict with Rome? It was Carthage, an active mercantile city, exceedingly ambitious and aspiring, planted and colonized by the accursed race of Canaan.

From early days God had pronounced against that son of guilty Ham, who had indeed many sons; so that we may admire the mercy that all were not involved in similar ruin. It was righteous that God should mark His displeasure. Is there not a moral necessity to deal with men guilty of signal wickedness? Even an infidel husband would not condone his wife's dishonor, or his son's stealing the family's money. If God must not punish iniquity, to let man off, what is it but desiring God to be less holy and righteous than the most worthless of mankind? If justice is not only free but bound to render according to the due desert of human deeds, is God alone to be debarred from that prerogative'? In the three Carthaginian or (as they are called) Punic wars, the two cities fought for supremacy, and so for life. Rome fought in Sicily, in Spain, and at length, after desperate defeats on her own soil, in Africa. In the last of the three Rome's stern determination was to destroy Carthage. The senate felt that thence emanated an enemy that would entirely frustrate all their hope of progress and conquest; and so the cry that Carthage must be blotted out arose accordingly. These wars stretched from long before Christ; but they were still longer from the time of Daniel who died an aged man more than five centuries before our Lord's birth. Yet even then all that so deeply concerned the last of the empires was made known and written down by God's inspiration. Here we have, from two separate aspects, a complete sketch-map of the world-powers that were to govern from first to last until the Lord appears in power and glory. Even so it is given clearly in the brief space of a few paragraphs.

Does any one object that there are few particulars? If time permitted and such were my present object, it would be easy to prove that they are many more than hasty men imagine. And it is observable that, just when we are brought down to the fourth empire, then these details are supplied in most abundance. What a rebuke to rationalism! And why was it so? Because the Roman was the empire in which Christ was to be born and be cut off; as that empire is to rise up again by Satan's power when He will shine forth in judgment from heaven. The Roman empire was to be expressly different from all its predecessors. The Babylonian lost its imperial power; so did the Medo-Persian; as well as the Macedonian or Grecian, never to rise again. Yet they were all to exist, and so they do still; but their dominion was to be taken away, as it is laid down in Dan 7: 12. There was to be no revival of their imperial character, though a prolonging in life was given them, when their dominion was lost. Rome and Rome alone is the empire which must rise again, as we learn in Rev. 13 and more awfully than of old, quite falling in with what Daniel predicts of its end in chaps. 2. and 7.

A great many Protestants think all this refers to the papacy. But the Pope essentially differs from a Roman emperor. The Popes have played a shameless imposture in Rome under the abased name of the Lord. Babylon is much more like their evil in pride and corruption and persecution than a Roman emperor. It was the Roman power that was responsible for the crucifixion of Christ under the apostasy of the Jew long before the first budding of the papacy. Pontius Pilate who condemned the Lord was the local expression of Rome in Judea. God as well as man always holds the governing power to be responsible for its public, deliberate, unrepudiated acts; as we see sometimes in international affairs. In the face of his conscience, of his conviction of Jewish unrighteousness, and of solemn warning, the governor condemned the Just; the Roman empire far from repudiating it accumulated its acts of enmity. This is the power whose head was wounded to death but healed to universal astonishment on earth; and it emerges not only from the sea but from the abyss, the historical fact being given of the little horn in Dan. 7 as the character is in Rev. 13; 17 It “was, is not, and shall be present.”

Nothing so wonderful in all past history as that which is predicted in the Book of Revelation, as for instance this three-fold condition and its moral source at the end, as well as God's judgment of it: “the beast... was, and is not (which we can now say still applies), and shall come forth out of the bottomless pit” (as Christ Who died and rose will be present from heaven). The first points to a condition of past existence, then to its non-existence (we know it was destroyed by the Goths and other wild races, chiefly the Teutonic tribes of that day), and lastly to its future re-existence. The moment of its revival surely hastens. Already a great step is taken toward the re-appearance of that empire. Italy has become a kingdom; and not only so but a great power is Italy now considered. I cannot doubt that it is destined to become still greater before the sure execution of God's judgment on the peculiar iniquity of the empire. Scripture cannot be broken; and we find that which has been said fully proved in Daniel and the Apocalypse. The outline was manifested clearly enough in Nebuchadnezzar's dream, and yet more in the vision of Daniel. Then above all in the Revelation our attention is drawn to a principle of the greatest moment. Most is said throughout on the fourth or Roman empire. Thereon the Spirit of God dwells most, because of its collision with the Lord Jesus. That would have seemed most difficult, humanly speaking: to deal most fully with the most distant is not the manner of man, who would have naturally said as much as possible about Babylon; then, if at all, more hazily about Persia, and not a word could have been said of the two western empires.

Again, how could man prognosticate that only four world-powers were to rise? There was ample ambition of founding more. Even in the middle ages Charlemagne tried to set up such an empire and failed, with the strongest desire to succeed. Then a military genius arose in this century no less ambitious, and never scrupling at violence or corruption to effectuate his schemes; Napoleon Bonaparte essayed it. He sought, if ever man did, a universal empire, but notwithstanding all means, skill, and opportunity, he broke down utterly in the attempt. God employed great Britain to smash all Napoleon's hopes. Nelson with his fleet completely crushed his navy, and on the field of Waterloo Napoleon saw his star set forever. There was to be no new world-power, though all know of course there are those who style themselves emperors in a quite subordinate sense.

(To be continued D.V.).

The Merciless Bondman

THE grace which forgives to the uttermost is characteristic of Christianity. Christ Himself bore witness of it habitually, and expressly to the sinful woman in the house of Simon the Pharisee. It is the prime message of the gospel; and the church assumes it to be settled for the least member of Christ's body.

But grace believed and received creates practical responsibility; for where that is real, there is also life in Christ to follow Him, and the gift of the Spirit ensues, a spirit, not of fear any more than of severity, but of power and of love and of a sound mind. But where there is only the profession of the natural man, without a vital work of God, the soul (not being purified by faith) betrays its unrenewal by heartless cruelty to one's fellow. And here it is set out in the strongest light, not only in its total antagonism to God, but by the aggravation of an immense debt forgiven him a servant, followed at once by the most extreme punishment of his fellow for a small debt due to himself.

In a previous section of the chapter the Lord had laid down the grace that saves the lost, illustrated by the owner's earnestness to seek one stray sheep out of a hundred. No trouble is begrudged. He leaves the safe ninety and nine, he traverses the mountains in quest of the wanderer, and, if he find it, he rejoices more over it than over the ninety and nine that had not gone astray. This grace, as it filled His own heart and gave meaning to His death, the Lord proceeds to press on the church or assembly, which was soon to supersede Israel for the present, as He announced in Matt. 16. Founded in God's righteousness on His own death and resurrection, so that the gates of Hades should not prevail against it, the Christian, no less than the church, is called to walk in grace. The injured one is to seek, not vengeance, nor yet retribution, but to gain his brother that sinned against him. If the latter should not hear, one or two are to be taken with the injured, in painstaking love; but if he heed not the assembly also, “let him be to thee as the heathen and the tax-gatherer.” How worthless the state that rejects all overtures of love! Grace refused condemns more than violated law. Indifference would deny righteousness as well as grace. The Lord is in the midst of even two or three gathered to His name.

Peter suggested what he regarded as a perfect limit of forgiveness, and inquired whether seven times satisfied; the Lord answered, Until seventy times seven. Grace declines a stipulated term and demands the widest margin; but the parable indicates solemnly the doom of him who has no heart fox it. Whatever the man pretended to, the only true God, the Father, was unknown, and Jesus Christ Whom He did send: life eternal was not his.

“For this the kingdom of the heavens is likened to a king who would make a reckoning with his bondmen. And when he began to reckon, one debtor for ten thousand talents was brought to him. But as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife and the children and all that he had, and payment to be made. The bondman then falling down did him homage, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay all. And the lord of the bondman, moved with compassion, released him and forgave him the debt. But that bondman, on going out, found one of his fellow-bondmen who owed him a hundred denarii, and having laid hold he was grasping his throat, saying, Pay what thou owest. His fellow-bondman then, falling at his feet, besought him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee. And he would not, but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay what was owing. But his fellow-bondmen, having seen what was being done, were greatly grieved, and went and fully explained to their lord all that was done. Then his lord, having summoned him, saith to him, Wicked bondman, all that debt I forgave thee, since thou didst beseech me: oughtedst not thou also to have pitied thy fellow-bondman, as I also pitied thee? And his, lord, in wrath, delivered him to the tormentors till he should pay all that was owing to him. Thus also shall my heavenly Father do to you, if ye forgive not from your hearts each his brother” (Matt. 18:23-35).

But one debtor is specified, and his debt enormous. Even if of silver, Haman offered no more in lieu of destroying the entire Jewish people. Not less guilty is the sinner before God. No wonder he “was brought to Him “: of himself he would never come. All depends on the reality of one's submission to God's righteousness. If he be not born of God, it is superficial. Profession may have no root of faith, but spring from the mere feeling of terror on the one hand or of sympathy on the other. It may be but creedism or deference to public opinion. It is often mental apprehension. In all such cases there is no thorough self-judgment, no divinely formed repentance, and hence no true sense of the grace of God, nor real appreciation of Christ and His work, whereby faith knows. But the sentence of judgment (for God's wrath is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of them that hold the truth in unrighteousness) may alarm souls into the profession of the Lord's name apart from living faith. So it was when our Lord preached; as He warned such as quickly received the word with joy, and soon gave it up in trial. So it was yet more, when the gospel went out in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth. A single case is more impressive than a crowd. Further, as individually one believes, so too judgment will be individual.

Here the debtor who did not keep the word, nor bring forth fruit with patience, “on going out,” soon betrayed his emptiness. He, being a dead stone, who had never tasted that the Lord is good, ruthlessly assailed his fellow that owed him a comparatively small debt. And his lord, incensed at cruelty so selfish after such grace, consigns him not to prison only but to the tormentors in irretrievable ruin.

O my reader, deceive not your soul: God is not mocked. Read not only Gal. 6:7-10 but Rom. 2:7-11, which press not the grace that saves, but the indispensable character of those that are saved. “He shall have judgment without mercy that showed no mercy.”

How is it then with your soul, my reader? Have you received Christ and believed the gospel to the remission of your sins? For this is the A B C of God's message based on Christ's redemption. There is far more given in His grace; but with this most needed and touching answer to our deep want God begins. He remembers no more our sins and iniquities, as He often assures us; but He would have us to know them blotted out by the Savior's blood, as we remember Him and show forth His death habitually. What can be conceived more contradictory of His grace than a hard vindictive spirit? Are not we who are forgiven distinctly charged to forgive? Nay more, are we not solemnly warned that Christ's heavenly Father will award unsparing judgment, not to open adversaries only, Jew or Gentile, but to the Christian professor especially, if from his heart he forgives not a brother's trespasses? Can any course be more fraught with danger than glossing over Christ's plain meaning under the fond claim that, whatever come, we are safe? He that believes to the saving of the soul is neither presumptuous nor cowardly where Christ is at stake, but keeps His word and denies not His name, sharing His life and displaying His character.

But this does not exhaust the full bearing of the parable, which (like others such as Matt. 22:2-14; 25:1-13) not only admits a personal application but is dispensational. For it needs little insight to discern that, in accordance with the kingdom of the heavens in its present mysterious form to which the Christ's rejection gave rise, God will have consistency with His own grace, and, as He is forgiving to the uttermost, insists on the same spirit in His children who call on the name of the Lord. Legal retribution is not in keeping with the kingdom of the heavens, least of all with His sufferings and death Who is gone on high, and Whom the Christian is to represent here below. The bondman with the debt to God of 10,000 talents is historically the Jew, availing himself greedily of a gracious oblivion of all in the gospel, but so little imbued with the Spirit of Christ, as to hate and persecute, forbidding any mercy to the Gentile because of his injustice to Israel, little indeed compared with the Jew's wickedness against God. Therefore, as the apostle shows, is wrath come upon them to the uttermost (1 Thess. 2:16). So also we see in the Acts of the Apostles, that though the blotting out of their sins was preached to them on their repentance and turning to God, they did not truly profit by His mercy. They dogged enviously and as enemies the steps of His messengers, whom He sent next to the Gentiles. Thus they pleased not God and were contrary to all men, and afford the sad witness that, if the despiser of Moses' law died without compassion on proof of two or three witnesses, much sorer must be the punishment of those that trample down and count unholy the blood of the covenant and do despite to the Spirit of grace.

Seeking and Receiving: Part 2

(Concluded).

IN the case of the poor woman that was a sinner, she had seen Christ in goodness and in love; she was one who might be ashamed to show herself to any decent person (Luke 7:37, 38). But she comes to Him, and He would not reject her. The light got in, and she saw how thoroughly vile she was. This is always the case. The light breaks in, and we get into the light as God is in the light; but the One Who has opened the door to God in our hearts is He Who has come in grace. You may frighten a man about his sins, but there will be no confidence. When the light in Him Who is love breaks into the soul, it gives confidence (I do not say a perfect conscience); but the soul trusts God.

The poor prodigal comes to himself again. All seems well in the far country, while he is spending his substance. But there is soon a “famine in the land;” and there is many a poor soul finding nothing to satisfy it, who knows what a famine is. Man's heart was made for God, and there is nothing to satisfy without Him. This was a case of real wickedness. It is not that everybody runs to that excess; but the Lord puts the case, that sinners, however vile, may know what to trust in that they can return. When he comes to himself, he says, The servants have “enough and to spare; and I perish with hunger.” There is goodness in God, and badness in me. However wise and clever a man may be, there is no conscience-work, and hence no real work, till he comes to that point, There is goodness in God, and badness in me.

Then, as regards the sin, the prodigal was as great a sinner, though not as degraded (for sin degrades), when he crossed his father's threshold, as when in the far country with the swine. When he came to himself, he said, “I will arise;” he was converted. His going was quite right, owning his sin and unworthiness. He meant to say, “Make me as one of thy hired servants;” but this was something he did not say to his father. He was reasoning from his own thoughts still, from his own condition, as to how his father would receive him. This is the principle of self-righteousness, though in a subtle form. How can God receive such an one as I? Mark, there is not a word of it when he had met his father. Your hearts turn to God, but have not peace. The young man had not met his father at all, and he did not know his father's mind. He was reasoning as to what his father would be when he met him. How many are doing this?

But God meets such in grace: this is what they do not yet appreciate, and this is why they are reasoning. They see the goodness in God, but measure His thoughts by their own condition. They see goodness in God, but still linger at this, “I am not fit.” Of course you are not. You say, “I am lost.” Very glad you have found it out; it is the means of getting peace. Conversion must be; but conversion is not the knowledge of the Father's heart in salvation. As yet the prodigal was not fit for the house; he was in his rags. What his intention to say (“Make me as one of thy hired servants”) proved was, that he had not met his father. Suppose you say of one you have done a wrong to, “I wonder how he would receive me;” it is clear, you have not met him yet.

Many sincere souls are reasoning from what they are to know what God will be; yet they are not competent to know what is in God's heart but from Himself. They reason upwards from what they are to God; the Holy Ghost reasons downwards from God's heart and Christ's work to us. This upward reasoning, from what we are to what God will be, is self-righteousness. The prodigal did not know his father's minds Then he goes up with his mind to his father. While yet a great way off, his “father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck and kissed him.”

Now we have what the father does. The son was in what. is the effect of not knowing God's mind (that is, where conscience is at work)—self-righteousness. The principle of self-righteousness is, What will God be, seeing I am such and such? People say, “Must I not work?” Yes; but you are not in the place for it yet. People say, “Must I not have holiness?” Indeed you must; “Without holiness no man shall see the Lord.” But when you are in the state of the prodigal, it is not holiness you should be looking for, but righteousness. Holiness and righteousness are two distinct things. When I have holiness, I take delight in what God delights in; and it becomes my purified heart's affection, with the abhorrence of what is hateful and sin.

“Holy” means hating a thing, if evil, for its own sake; or loving it, if good. It is not a question of the ground of acceptance. Must I not be holy? Yes, it is just as true as righteousness; but such are looking whether they can be accepted or not. You have a holy nature, the moment you are born of God; but you have never holy thoughts and feelings till you get settled peace. Till you get this, it is righteousness you should look for; for it connects itself with acceptance by, God and must do so—yea, ought. When I have settled peace and am sealed, I look at the evil and hate the thing for its own sake. This is holiness; and there is growth in it too. I get to know more of God—what God's nature and character is;. and my soul becomes more like Him. As long as I mix it up with acceptance, it is a delusion to call it holiness. Righteousness is in question.

Well, the prodigal comes back to his father and there is not a word about “Make me as one of thy hired servants.” What made the difference then was that the idea of his position flowed from his father's thoughts, not his own. Why? The father was on his neck, kissing him. It was not a question what would be, but the blessed consciousness of what then was. Not a word have you of what passed in the prodigal's heart at all, save that he fully confessed his sins. A converted man, simply as such, is not fit to get into the house—he is in his rags. But the father went out to meet him where he was, in his rags without. Suppose he in that state were let in, what would the servants say? all unfitted, as his rags were, for his father and for his house! a disgraced son brought in!

But though on his neck in love, the father does not bring him into the house thus. He takes the best robe—it was no part of what the son had before; it was in the father's treasures. Thus God brings out what satisfies His love, and what suits us for His house, that is, Christ. The prodigal comes in with all the honor of a son: so now grace allows nothing to make us uneasy in going into the house. “Accepted in the Beloved,” we are made the “righteousness of God in Him.” The son comes to a point where the father clothes him with the very best robe. There is no condemnation for him; his sins are blotted out. Jesus “was delivered for our offenses.” Then He puts the ring on his hand, and does everything that puts the stamp of His delight on the poor prodigal, and brings him into the house to make all as happy as Himself.

This is what we have: the love that sought (as in the first two parables) is the love that received (as in the third); but received according to what a man must he for the glory of God's house—that is, Christ, and nothing else. We are in Him. “There is no condemnation for them that are in Christ Jesus.” What I find then, as distinct from being converted, is this: his standing in Christ. Then his thoughts about his father and about himself are according to what is in his father's mind. He is made a son. God brings us, in all the efficacy and honor of what Christ has done, into His own presence, and righteously there. He delights in the fruit of His own love to the poor sinner.

The gospel proclaims to us that in Christ's work God has anticipated the day of judgment. And this work is divine, perfect, and finished; and, in virtue of it, Christ is sitting on the right hand of God in the heavens. I may go on laboring to be accepted; but the moment I go on the ground of what the Father is, I am a mere sinner. But also I see God loves me, and has given His Son for me, and I am in Christ (this is the best robe); and He has given the Spirit that I may know it; so that, though in weakness, my relationship with God is settled by God Himself. And Christ did not sit down at the right hand of God till He had finished the work that God gave Him to do; and He is sitting there, because “by one offering He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.” God gives us the knowledge of it by giving us the Holy Ghost. When Christ is the ground on which I rest with God, I am as fit to go into God's house as God can make me. You never get this till you give up your own righteousness.

The prodigal was not fit to go in till he got the “best robe.” This was a testimony to all that were there, that God put the highest honor on the prodigal. The love and light come in, and give confession of sins as seen in God's sight, with confidence; but righteousness comes in too—that is, Christ. Then the whole thing flows in upon my soul from the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ; and the gift of the Holy Ghost that makes me know that, being a lost sinner, my standing is not in myself. I am never to be thinking of anything good in myself. I am now before God upon the footing of what God has done, not upon what I have done.

So we get in Balaam's prophecy (Num. 23:23), “It shall be said concerning Israel, What hath God wrought?” A soul may now say, and that as it is standing before Him, What hath God wrought in Christ (2 Cor. 5:21)? Are your souls saying this now? Seeing utter sinfulness in yourselves, owning that in yourselves when converted you are not fit for God's house; but your souls resting upon what He wrought, and the infiniteness of the love that gave Christ. So Christ, as man, did not sit down at the right hand of God, till He had finished the work God gave Him to do, and He is “now appearing in the presence of God for us” (Heb. 9:24).

I desire earnestly that you would just weigh this: first, in ourselves, “I have sinned and am no more worthy;” second, where we have found it out for ourselves, we give up thinking whether we are fit to go in or not fit. But the sinner (seeing the love of the Father in the grace which, while it falls on his neck in his rags, puts the “best robe” on him) knows that He has “made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light,” and has given the Holy Ghost that we may know it. And I say to you what God is doing now, till the Lord Jesus comes to take us to be with Himself, is beseeching men to be reconciled to Him, that we may be made the “righteousness of God in Him” that righteousness of God shown in Christ's sitting at the right hand of God.

The Lord open the hearts not open, and give them and all not at peace with Him to see what the way of grace in the Lord Jesus is—giving Himself for our sins, to deliver us from this present evil world, and confer a place with Himself and in Himself forever. J, N. D.

———————————————————————————

POPISH unity attaches Christ's name to unity, and hence legalizes with His name every corruption. Christian unity attaches unity to Christ, and therefore gives it all His excellence.

The Ways of God in the Acts: 2. The Calling of the Samaritans

Acts 8

WE have had before us the descent of the Holy Ghost, and His baptism of the waiting saints, constituting them the church—the body of Christ, and the house of God. We also saw that by means of the preaching of the gospel some 3,000 Jews were brought into the new circle of blessing. The following chaps. (3-7) show continued overtures to the nation. Peter promised them on God's part that, if they would repent, their sins should be blotted out, the times of refreshing should come from the presence of Jehovah, and He would send Jesus back to them. Their treatment of Stephen was the climax of their rejection of the testimony. They cast him out, and stoned, him, sending a messenger after the Lord (as it were) saying, “We will not have this man to reign over us” (Luke 19:14).

In this chapter we see the work of God extending, and reaching the Samaritans. This was quite in keeping with the Lord's word in Acts 1:8, though the twelve were not the honored means. The rage of the enemy was the immediate cause of this spread of the gospel. At the time of Stephen's death, “there arose a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem, and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles.” It is strange that the twelve, who were in the forefront of the testimony, and consequently special objects of the enemy's spite, should have been allowed to remain. It is a fair question also, whether they should not have gone elsewhere with the gospel. To them the Lord had said, “Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” And He had also laid down as a general principle long before, “when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another” (Matt. 10:23); a principle carried out clearly by Paul and his companions later, even to the shaking off the dust of their feet (Acts 14:6; 17:10-14). However, God in His wisdom made important use of their presence in Jerusalem, as we shall presently see in stirring up persecution for the church. The enemy, as often before and since, over-reached himself. It only led to the spread of the truth, for “they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word.” Satan never intended this. His aim was the suppression, not the spread, of the testimony.

We see a similar state of things in Phil. 1. Satan had succeeded in getting Paul imprisoned, which at first sight was a real calamity; but see how God wrought through it! The apostle was enabled to speak of Christ in quarters where he could not have gone in the ordinary way; and besides, many brethren in the Lord, who were perhaps silent in his presence, were bold in his absence to preach the word without fear.

Verse 4 in our chapter has occasioned a good deal of discussion in days ancient and modern. It is a difficulty with some that the saints as a general class should be represented as “preaching the word.” That it is a serious verse for officialism is readily granted; but it is God's truth, and if traditional ideas did not becloud the mind, all who bear the Lord's name would understand it. The simple fact is that all set forth what they knew of the Lord Jesus. Every Christian is responsible to do this, as far as God gives grace and opportunity, though it is not denied that there are special gifts from Christ, as evangelists, &c. But in these there is no room for man; it is the ascended Lord Who gives, the servants are responsible to Him alone, and the church is but the receiver of the blessing.

Among the scattered ones who preached, Philip is particularly noticed by the Spirit. “Philip went down to a city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them.” This laborer was one of the seven who were set apart to distribute the church's bounty in Jerusalem.

There is no connection between the office of a deacon, and the gift of an evangelist, save that in a general way “they that have used the office of a deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus” (1 Tim. 3:13). The modern notion of a deacon appointed to “read holy scriptures and homilies in the church” &c., “and to preach if he be admitted thereto by the bishop,” in contrast with a priest ordained to forgive sins, and to be a dispenser of the holy sacraments, had no existence in simple apostolic days. As a deacon, Philip was chosen by the assembly, and appointed by the apostles; as an evangelist (which the Spirit elsewhere expressly declares him to have been), he had received his gift from Christ, neither the church nor the apostles having aught to say or do in the matter (Acts 21:8, Eph. 4:11). His services as deacon being no longer required (the Jerusalem saints being scattered), he is seen exercising his gift in dependence on the Lord.

Note, he preached Christ unto them. Compare verse 34 where the same Philip is seen dealing with the eunuch, “he preached unto him Jesus.” Why the difference? Simply this. The Samaritans, though a foreign race, had for centuries taken Jewish ground. They had their temple on Mount Gerizim, they had the Jewish scriptures, spoke of “our father Jacob,” and appropriated the Jewish hope—the coming of Messiah (John 4:12, 25). Philip therefore took them on their own ground, and announced the Christ unto them. The preaching was accompanied by many signs, as the casting out of unclean spirits, &c., “and there was great joy in that city.” One man in particular was arrested. Simon the sorcerer (of whom tradition has very much to say, largely no doubt fabulous), had for years held great sway over the minds of the Samaritans, “giving out that himself was some great one,” and had gained the title of “the great power of God.” Numbers believed Philip's testimony and were baptized, Simon among them, astonished at the miracles and signs which were done. Alas! it was these which struck him, not the word of God. Contrast Sergius Paulus in Acts 13:12. Faith founded on miracles is but little worth. The Lord, when here, would not trust Himself to such (John 2:23-25). Miracles may arrest and convince the intellect (and confirm faith where it exists): the word of God alone can lay bare the heart and conscience. This the unhappy Simon never knew.

But tidings of the good work reach Jerusalem; and when the apostles heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John. Did Philip resent and regard as intrusion the coming of men whose place in the church was greater than his own? Nay, the work was one, whether in Jerusalem or Samaria, and all were equally interested. Besides, the power of the Spirit was too deeply felt all round to leave room for such petty feelings. And God had a special reason for sending Peter and John at that time. The new converts had not received the Holy Ghost, the great characteristic gift of Christianity, but had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. The apostles prayed for them, and laid their hands on them; and they received the Holy Ghost. Why this order? Why did they not receive the Spirit when they believed, as the Gentiles later in Acts 10? Herein we may see the wisdom of God. Samaria and Jerusalem had been for centuries antagonistic religious centers; and had God dealt with the Samaritans exactly as with the Jews, who can say that the rivalry might not in time to come have revived under a Christian name? Have we never known such a thing in Christianity? Who does not know of the jealousy in early days between the great sees of Christendom, particularly between Rome and Constantinople, resulting at last in a total breach between east and west? God would leave no open door for this in Philip's day. Hence they must wait for the coming of the apostles from Jerusalem, ere the gift of the Spirit could be theirs. Thus did God bind the work together, and preserve unity. The saints on earth, whether Jews, Samaritans, or Gentiles, are one body, linked to the one Head in glory by the one Spirit sent down from on high. Independency of any sort misses the mind of God completely.

All this brought out what was in the heart of Simon. “When Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God. Repent therefore of this thy wickedness, and pray God if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee. For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.” He betrayed his utter ignorance of God. God has revealed Himself as a giver: for it is more blessed to give than to receive. He has given His Son, and in Him eternal life to us. The Spirit too is His gift, founded upon the work of Jesus. But of all this Simon knew nothing. It was power that had attracted him, and for power he craved. It was self-aggrandizement he sought, not the divine glory. Further, when Peter bade him repent and pray to God, he said, “Pray ye to the Lord for me.” Where was confidence in God for himself? The Lord was to him unknown; perhaps a human intermediary could act on his behalf! So thousands of deluded souls have thought since. At this solemn point, scripture leaves him, and tells us no more.

The apostles returned home, evangelizing on their journey many villages of the Samaritans.

W. W. F.

Priesthood of Christ: 3

THUS two goats, in fact, were needed to complete atonement, the formal and particular confession being upon the scapegoat or people's lot. Still for the type of atonement they were both involved in its two great parts: the vindicating of God, which was the first thought; and next the allied comfort of knowing that all evil on the part of the people was minutely brought out, laid on the live goat, and discharged to be seen no more. And these two truths are distinctly before us in Rom. 3 and 4.; chapter 3. answering more to Jehovah's lot, chapter 4. to the people's lot, in the latter part of both chapters. In the one case it is God just and justifying him that believes in Jesus; and there we have the blood on the mercy-seat. In the other, Christ is said to be delivered for our offenses, and raised again for our justification, which delivering of Him up for our offenses is exactly what the scapegoat figured when sent away with their sins over his head.

Azazel does not answer to the truth of resurrection. There is no type of this in the offerings here, though we find it in that of Isaac (Gen. 22). There was also a figure of it in the bird that was let loose, dipped in the blood of the killed one, for the leper; but it is not so with the live goat. For it was to be sent into a land not inhabited; and heaven is anything but this. It is a place already well inhabited, and will be so yet more forever. Impossible for it to be symbolized by the desert scene into which the goat was sent. What this was intended to set forth was the dismissal of Israel's sins, the visible testimony to all of their offenses—their positive acts of transgression—borne away. This seems to be all that was meant by it, the evident complement therefore of Jehovah's lot, as it was the people's. Substitution appears no less than expiation.

Atonement, however, though by the high priest alone, does not (strictly speaking) give us the proper ordinary action of priesthood, but the foundation, and hence is intimately connected with it. The purging of, or making expiation for, sins was a prime necessity, but also a foundation for the priest to appear before God day by day on behalf of the people.

We come now to another matter of the deepest interest in the person that could fittingly act as priest. “In that he himself suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted.” Let us weigh it the more because it so clearly concerns, not merely ourselves, but Himself, so often wounded in the house of His friends, as well as by heartless enemies. It is not only the person in both parts, or the foundation work for us, but the gracious, provision in His heart, as man tried in every possible way, that He might thus the better succor those that are tempted.

What is meant by the word “tempted”? As you may have observed, not a word is said about temptation till we hear of the sanctified people. “Tempted” in these cases, then, has no allusion whatever to the inward solicitations of evil. Such is not the thought: it should be needless to say the Lord never had any. But even where priesthood is spoken of on our behalf, it is remarkable that by it God does not make provision for sins or failures. So we see in chap. 4., where we learn not a little more. “Seeing then that we have a great high priest that is passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, [yet] without sin.”

Here the introduction of the word “yet” into the clause (printed in italics) is a very great blemish, calculated to ruin the sense. If you read it without that addition, you may apprehend what the Holy Ghost means a great deal more distinctly and correctly. As it stands now in the Authorized Version (and also in the work of the Revisers too, certainly of many individuals in our own day), the deduction is that the Lord was tempted, but never yielded, never sinned. This is not at all the point. The Holy Spirit was teaching quite another truth, more worthy of Christ's glory, and needed by the believer. Of course, it is true that Christ never did sin; but it is far below the truth here intended. What is revealed goes a great deal farther.

Christ “was tempted in all points like as we are, apart from sin.” He had no sin whatever. It was not only that He never sinned, but He had no sin; and this makes all the difference possible. He was the Holy One; and this was manifested, especially in the unparalleled temptations He endured. Assuredly He was all through the Holy One; but it was all apart from sin. In Him was no sin—not sins merely, but sin. It was not only that He did not yield to sin, but there was no sin in Him to yield. His nature as man had no evil to be acted on by the devil. There was evil without. He was assailed by every possible, the most subtle, effort of Satan in a ruined and wretched world. There was all that could give pain, not only in men and the Jews, but even in disciples. There was the presenting of what was agreeable to allure at the beginning of His path; there was the endeavor to alarm at the end by what was most tremendous and overwhelming in death, and, above all, in such a death as was before Him.

But whether it was by the pleasant or the painful, at every time, under all circumstances, Christ was tempted like as we are. It is not said that He was not tempted more. “There hath no temptation befallen us but that which is common to man,” i.e. a human one. Could one say this about Jesus? Who does not see that the Lord was tempted above all that man was ever tempted? that there was no temptation to compare with His? While, therefore, it is perfectly true that He was “tempted in all points like as we are,” it is far from being true, as many ill-instructed souls assume, that we have been tempted in all points like as He was.

The wilderness was the marked scene of Christ's characteristic temptation. Have we been ever tried so? Certainly not. There may be a measure of analogy, and I have no doubt that the three well-known temptations which closed the sojourn in the wilderness are full of instruction in their principle at least. Each one of the three efforts of Satan against the Lord—the natural temptation to make the stones loaves, the worldly temptation in the offer of the kingdoms of the world on the condition of homage, and the religious temptation in the exhortation to cast Himself down from the pinnacle of the temple according to the promise in Psa. 91—is full of the weightiest instruction and warning for our souls. But then be it remembered, that before these He had been tempted for forty days without food. Is this a trial that we have ever been subjected to? We may boldly say, I think, that it is one into which the Spirit will never lead us as Him. It was a trial altogether peculiar and suited to the Son of God, the man Christ Jesus.

(To be continued D.V.J)

James 1:9-12

THERE is indeed no excuse for him that confesses the Lord Jesus Christ to be a double-souled man. Without the knowledge of Him a man may easily be unstable in all his ways; and it is no real credit to him if he be firm in the pursuit of self, braving trial instead of bowing to God with profit and joy to his soul. Christ alone is the true measure of all; and such was His manifestation here below in absolute superiority not only to every circumstance but to all evil. He and He only was the Faithful Witness. In Christ is God's secret of steadfastness for man in a world of sin. And there is more, yea all, in Him to fill the heart with joy and give needed wisdom.

“But let the lowly brother glory in his elevation, and the rich in his humiliation, because as flower of grass he will pass away. For the sun arose with its scorching and withered the grass, and its flower fell away, and the comeliness of its look perished: thus also will the rich one fade in his goings. Blest [is] a man who endureth trial; because, having been put to the proof, he shall receive the crown of life which He promised to those that love Him” (vers. 9-12).

Here again it is Christ Who alone sheds the full light of God on the inequalities of position on the earth, and turns them into a ground not of acquiescence only, but of pleasing God in exercising suitably the new nature. In the world covetousness is the universal idolatry, and mammon its idol. And the Jew fell under a similar condition readily, as he looked for blessings on his obedience, in the city and in the field, in the family and in the flock, in the basket and in the kneading trough. But the day is coming when God will put down all evil, stilling the roaring of the seas and the tumult of the peoples, and lifting Israel out of their low estate, when at the feet of Messiah they truly own the God of their salvation. Then will the outgoings of the morning and evening rejoice, when God visits the earth and waters it, when He crowns the years with His goodness, and His paths drop fatness, and the hills are girded with joy, and the valleys, covered over with corn, shout for joy and sing.

For God will have blessed Israel then, and thenceforward will forever bless them, and all the ends of the earth shall fear Him, It will be the day, not of man, but of Jehovah, when a king shall reign in righteousness and princes shall rule in judgment, Jehovah (yet Man) the judge, Jehovah the lawgiver, Jehovah the king, when the inhabitants of His land shall not say, I am sick, for the people dwelling therein shall be forgiven their iniquity. Yea, the wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad, and the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose. It shall blossom abundantly and rejoice even with joy and singing: the glory of Lebanon shall be given to it, the excellency of Carmel and Sharon. And no wonder: for they shall see the glory of Jehovah, the excellency of our God. And Jehovah will answer the heavens, and they the earth; and the earth the corn and the wine and the oil; and they Jezreel. And Jehovah will sow her to Him in the land, and will have mercy on her that had not obtained mercy, and will say to Lo-Ammi [not My-people], My-people thou, and they shall say, My-God.

But now the Holy Spirit, sent from heaven, is bearing witness to the church in one way, to the world in another. Christ is not ruling, as He will in power and glory during the age to come. It is the present evil age, out of which Christ, having given Himself for our sins, is delivering us who believe and constituting us members of His body for heavenly glory. We shall be displayed with Him on high when that day dawns on the earth. Thus, being called into God's marvelous light, it is our privilege to have the mind of Christ, and judge all things according to God in this scene of confusion.

Hence the lowly brother can glory in his elevation, for the glorified Christ is not ashamed to call him brother; and the rich one can glory in his humiliation, in fellowship with Him Who emptied and humbled Himself to the death of the cross. Whatever our natural place, we are now by grace not of the world as Christ is not. Thus we are enabled to read glory in the humblest believer; the wealthy and honorable can write nothingness on what the flesh values highly. For indeed as the Lord said, That which is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God (Luke 16:15). Truly and beautifully is the evanescence of all men think great and stable, here compared to the fleeting bloom of grass, put in the past tense of transiency; as the Lord put his case who abides not in Him (John 15:6). So certain is the passing away of that which flows not from life in Him. As flower of grass perishes before the scorching heat of the sun, “thus also will the rich one fade in his goings.” What is surer, or sooner forgotten?

From this parenthetical comparison in vers. 9-11 we return to a kind of summary of the previous exhortation; and happy is pronounced a man who endures trial. So it was with men of marked faith of old, Job, Abraham, David, and the prophets; so it is now for every believer, and made plain by Him Who endured more than all, and as He alone could. And what an encouragement in the path of trial for him whom grace has called “Because, having been put to proof [or approved], he shall receive the crown of life, which He promised to those that love Him” Faith receives the word of God that reveals God's holy love in giving us a divine Savior Who died for our sins; and we love Him Who first loved us; but also how sweet while pilgrims and strangers to have so cheering a promise in the trial we endure! The new nature is exercised in trial and drawn out in its affections by God's love, and becomes more conversant with the things above and the coming glory.

To Correspondents

IN reply to M. H. (Buffalo, N. Y., U. S. A.) the Ed. B.T. would say, that, besides the interpretation of Matt. 13, he has long seen how the chapter applies historically, like Rev. 2, 3. Only it begins earlier and ends later, being larger also throughout. In this point of view, it is hardly possible to differ in applying the earlier four parables. But all could not be expected to distinguish the application of the treasure to the recovery of individual blessing so widely spread at the Reformation, from that of the one precious pearl when grace in our own day brought out the church's association with Christ, before the final scene at the consummation of the age. It is cordially owned that, in order to enjoy the relation of the Christian and of the church, Christ Himself must be appreciated, incomparably more according to God and the word of His grace than could be where justification was in question. Thus the supposed difference almost vanishes in Him, though the application here sketched seems to adhere more closely to the exact interpretation.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:5

THE general summary of the Japhetic distribution is given in the closing verse 5: “From these were separated the isles (or, maritime districts) of the nations in their lands, each (man) after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.”

Of the seven sons of Japheth, we have the descendants of but two, Gomer and Javan; from Gomer, three, and from Javan, four; seven only specified of the second generation, as of the first. That Magog and Madai had sons cannot be doubted, for we hear of their posterity to the latest times as well as of Tubal and Meshech; and as little can we doubt of Tiras. But it did not here fall within the design to give details of more. The prophets speak of others who sprung from these early forefathers to figure in the latter day. It is clear also that the order of time is not in question here; for in the following chapter difference of tongues is shown to have been imposed suddenly by a divine act of judgment, only after the project of building a city and tower, and thus making themselves a name. Our chapter therefore anticipates what is historically set out in what follows, and so speaks of the sons of Japhet distributing their seats of settlement, as it does of the Hamite race and the Shemitic in their respective places. On the other hand the “dividing” of the earth in the days of Peleg (chap. 10: 25) should be distinguished.

Dispersion preceded: a different term is employed in the Hebrew, as there ought to be in the translation. The isles are said here to be “separated,” as the earth there is “divided.” The orderly partition followed the confused dispersion.

Hence in Deut. 32:8 we read,

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,

When He separated the sons of Adam,

He set the bounds of the peoples

According to the number of the sons of Israel.

Israel is thus declared to be His earthly center, though as yet we see not His glorious plan, which the prophets fully disclose. Hitherto no more appears than a passing but instructive shadow under David and Solomon, even these bringing in seeds of ruin, with occasional glimpses of better things in such as Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, and Josiah, but as a whole gradual yet sure downfall till “there was no remedy,” and the chosen people were by reason of their apostasy branded as Lo-ammi, Not-My-people. And so they are from the Babylonish captivity to this day. A remnant of Judah was according to prophecy restored to the land by Cyrus; and a further test of the first man followed, no longer under the failing sons of David, but in the presentation to them of Messiah Himself, the Righteous Servant. But those who had wholly broken down in violating God's law and even in persistent departure after false gods to their shame by the renunciation of one Jehovah, their only true God, proved themselves yet more inexcusably His enemies and the slaves of Satan by rejecting His anointed, though according to flesh of Israel—of Judah—He was, Who is over all, God blessed forever, Amen. But Him they crucified in blind hostile unbelief by the hand of lawless men, and therefore are they dispersed to the ends of the earth. Beauty and Bands are severally both cut asunder.

But the cross of Christ in the wondrous wisdom of God is made His basis for the counsels of His grace, and the display of His righteousness, and the bringing out of His heavenly purpose, the hidden mystery or secret concerning Christ and concerning the church. For He is now in glory made Head, not merely over Israel or even all nations too, but over the universe, expressly over all things that are in the heavens and that are on the earth; and the church is united to Him as the Head of that one body which is soon to share His heavenly and universal glory. Yet shall the Jews, purged by disciplinary judgments, be brought to His feet, and see Him as their Deliverer Whom once they pierced, and all Israel be saved in God's mercy, to make good His plans, laid down from the first, accomplished at the last, to bless all the families of the earth, and fill it with the glory of Jehovah, and with the knowledge of it and of Him, as the waters cover the sea. So little is this chapter to be counted dry or unedifying; for barren as it may seem now, what fruit of righteousness shall be in that day through Jesus Christ unto God's glory and praise

At present God is working in the gospel, and in the church, but it is for His heavenly purpose in Christ, Whose members suffer with Him and wait for Him. The sole dispensation now as to the kingdom is of the heavens in its mysterious form, while the earth-rejected King sits at God's right hand on high. He must come and appear in glory to bring in the manifested kingdom, which alone the prophets predicted, when the daughter of Jerusalem shall have the first dominion here below, as Micah declared. Then, when the heavenly counsels have been completed, shall Jehovah make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the former Levitical one which they broke; but He will put His law in their inwards and write it in their heart, and He be their God, and they His people. Then, and not till then, shall Jerusalem be the throne of Jehovah; and all the nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of Jehovah, to Jerusalem; and they shall no more walk after the stubbornness of their evil heart. Instead of taking out of the nations a people for His name, as God is doing now by the gospel and in the church, the day will have come to destroy in the mountain of His holiness the face of the veil which veileth all the peoples, and the covering that is spread over all the nations. For Jehovah of hosts shall reign on mount Zion and in Jerusalem and before His ancients in glory: a state in strong and manifest contrast with all that goes on now, whether we think of God or man, of heaven or earth.

The word usually rendered “isles” not only admits of an application to coast-lands also (as to the Greek, Italian, Spanish, and Scandinavian peninsulas), but to settlements or habitations wider still, as Gesenius contends with ample consent of the more learned modern Jews; and such is the version of de Sola, Lindenthal, and Raphall in this verse. Again, the division is marked by four particulars: their lands, the tongue spoken, their family descents, and the resulting nation.

We shall see from chap. 11. how little man's will had to do with the distribution. Here we have simply but clearly the fact. It was quite a new thing on earth, not only unprecedented before the deluge, but the very opposite was man's purpose after it; so that the replenishing of the earth could not but seem distant indeed, however fruitful Noah's sons might be. But the God of creation is the God of providence, and He knows how to give effect to His word.; and here we have Europe, though not Europe only, the destined scene for the Japhetic line, of all the earth the most varied in contour, the fullest of coast-line as being the most deeply indented, and so the most accessible through its inland seas, and as well the most open to foreign connection. It was exactly suitable for him who was to be enlarged in his activity beyond his brethren. What a contrast with Africa or even Asia, and their more elevated highlands and extensive plateaus!

Yet contrary to this common purpose each country was allotted to its respective race, and in all this startlingly new fact of lands partitioned by families constituting nations, and distinguished by its tongue appears, as we have seen, the line of Japhet, which mainly and in due time settled in Europe. The remembrance of the deluge would not dispose men to separate. But God meant it to be, and so it was: one race of Adam, but with all the variety into which the several stocks were to divide and replenish the earth. And the immediate occasion was the opposing determination of man, and the practical end for which they united, as the history relates afterward, along with the simple and effectual way in which God confounded their vain and selfish purpose and accomplished His own.

Nor was the earth itself externally out of harmony with God's mind about man, but adjusted in general to his use who was to eat bread in the sweat of his face, and especially to the new condition, fitted to their separate life as nations with mountain barriers and river boundaries, till man's enterprise made even the seas the ready means of intercourse, commerce, and conquest.

Thus also the principle of government, which God laid on Noah and his sons, was to prove its great practical value, as its control could now be brought to bear far more readily when men were distinguished in their nations. If it was a fresh start for the race, it was not under one man, Adam. The post-diluvian earth began with three sons of Noah, and their three wives, besides Noah and his wife, all of them inheriting whatever was known and learned in the long era before the deluge. Agriculture and live stocking were long familiar, city as well as tent life had begun, forging of copper and iron for instruments of every sort, with musical instruments for wind and hand, and metrical composition, from very early days. Since the flood God had entrusted to man's hand the responsibility of the civil sword (Gen. 9: 6), the root of government in restraint of human violence which includes the lesser rights in the greatest; and this well suited to the national bond of each independent nation which was now commencing. Families of course had been before in the midst of an undivided race. Henceforth in the new state of things they take their place in their lands by the lesser relation of their nations, each welded together by that tongue which severed him from others of different descent and locality, with their own associations and their independent interests and aims.

The importance, as well as the permanence, of this new condition of humanity will be felt all the more by comparing the prophecies of the O.T and the Revelation of the New. In the former may be identified the descendants of the Japhetic line as well as those to follow of Ham and Shem. In the others, when the heavenly saints are transferred to their proper home on high, the question of the earth is raised, and we hear of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, out of which the Lamb purchased saints to God by His blood, and the ensuing conflict for the inheritance here below. For Christ, the Son, is alone Heir of all things, and the day hastens when His rights shall be asserted with indisputable power.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 5

Chap. 4

IT may be well to add that the believer is in no way bound to defend the procedure of Mordecai, save just so far as we recognize his real faith. We do not learn that he was under compulsion to present Esther to the monarch, nor was he called to conceal that she was a Jewess; nor can it be made out that he could not bow in civil respect to Haman, Agagite though he was certainly we read of Abraham bowing down to the sons of Heth, though of the cursed line of Canaan. And we find Jacob blessing Pharaoh though head of those to afflict his seed four hundred years, and to be judged of the Lord Jehovah. It was the unbending spirit of the Jew in exile, who hated the deadly enemy of the chosen people, and believed in the day of vengeance of their God. They are the simple facts of the case, which we are taught and can judge according to the far deeper principles of Christ in the gospel.

Our chapter opens with the profound grief of Mordecai and among the Jews where the king's decree penetrated. The report of it soon reached the queen, as it was meant to do; for Mordecai fully counted on relief and deliverance through her means, and, till it came, utterly refused even her to divest himself of sackcloth and ashes.

“And when Mordecai knew all that was done, Mordecai rent his clothes, and put on sackcloth with ashes, and went out into the midst of the city, and cried with a loud and a bitter cry: and he came even before the king's gate; for none might enter within the king's gate clothed with sackcloth. And in every province, whithersoever the king's commandments and his decree came, [there was] great mourning among the Jews, and fasting, and weeping, and wailing; and many lay in sackcloth and ashes. And Esther's maidens and her chamberlains came and told [it] her; and the queen was exceedingly grieved: and she sent raiment to clothe Mordecai, and to take his sackcloth from off him: but he received [it] not. Then called Esther for Hathach, [one] of the king's chamberlains, whom he had appointed to attend upon her, and charged him to go to Mordecai, to know what this [was], and why it [was]. So Hathach went forth to Mordecai unto the broad place of the city, which [was] before the king's gate. And Mordecai told him of all that had happened unto him, and the exact sum of the money that Haman had promised to pay to the king's treasuries for the Jews, to destroy them. Also he gave him the copy of the writing of the decree that was given out in Shushan to destroy them, to show [it] unto Esther, and to declare [it] unto her; and to charge her that she should go in unto the king, and to make supplication unto him, and request before him, for her people” (vers. 1-8).

But it is striking to observe how the furnace may be heated seven times before the rescue comes. For Esther fully realizes that her life was at stake in the charge her cousin laid on her. It was universally known at court and through the provinces how rigorously the law hedged the king's majesty, whom none dared approach, on penalty of death, unless called. And it was so ordered that even she had not been called to come to the king for the last mouth. Mordecai however is only the bolder in his demand, and the strength of his faith is as plain as that of Abraham.

“And Hathach came and told Esther the words of Mordecai. Then Esther spake unto Hathach, and gave him a message unto Mordecai, saying: All the king's servants, and the people of the king's provinces, do know, that whosoever, whether man or woman, shall come unto the king into the inner court, who is not called, [there is] one law for him, that he be put to death, except such to whom the king shall hold out the golden scepter, that he may live: but I have not been called to come in unto the king these thirty days. And they told to Mordecai Esther's words. Then Mordecai bade them return answer unto Esther, Think not with thyself that thou shalt escape in the king's house, more than all the Jews. For if thou altogether boldest thy peace at this time, there shall relief and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father's house shall perish: and who knoweth whether thou art not come to the kingdom for [such] a time as this” (vers. 9-14)?

Not less fine is the reply of the queen. She is ready, now that all the truth is before her soul, to jeopard her life at least as worthily as Mordecai, and in a spirit far more gracious. Even here it is striking to observe that, though her faith shines, the Name is kept as secret as ever. Yet fasting without a doubt implied the most earnest prayer to Him Who dwelt in the thick darkness and would hear as surely in Shushan the palace, as in the temple at Jerusalem.

“And Esther bade to answer Mordecai, Go, gather together all the Jews that are found in Shushan, and fast ye for me, and neither eat nor drink three days, night or day: I also and my maidens will fast in like manner; and so will I go in unto the king, which [is] not according to the law: and if I perish, I perish. So Mordecai went his way, and did according to all that Esther had commanded him” (vers. 15-17).

It is the undaunted Jew who now complies with all that Esther enjoined. He had warned her faithfully and with solemnity of inevitable ruin to herself and her father's house if she were silent. But at the same time he expressed the fullest certainty that relief and deliverance should come from another place. This is the victory that overcometh, even faith, as we may surely apply here; and its effect was no less apparent with Esther than Andrew's was on his own brother Simon. The queen is ready if need be to perish in such a cause, strengthened by the unseen hand that sustains the universe, as the king's heart was to be turned at His will.

But may we notice in passing the strange misapplication so common among preachers! “If I perish, I perish” was not unbelief, but a martyr readiness in the queen's mouth, about to fall at such a despot's feet. Does it warrant a similar sentiment at the feet of Him Who came into the world to save sinners? Who has already declared that “him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out?”

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 5

Dan. 2; 7

BUT now what is the “little stone cut without hands,” which at length becomes a mountain? Perhaps all my readers are accustomed to hear this referred to the Lord gradually making good the kingdom of God. Undoubtedly He will come in that kingdom of God when the hour strikes. But take care that you understand its true force. Excellent men will tell you that it will be through the gospel—the kingdom of God introduced by the Spirit. Allow me to ask this, Does the gospel smite kingdoms of the world? Does the Holy Spirit by the word destroy powers that be? The first action of the “little stone” is to fall upon the feet of the great image, and the effect of that decisive blow will be to scatter its fragments like chaff of the summer threshing-floor's.

You know God's gospel is the revelation of Christ applied by the Spirit of God to save sinners, Jews and Gentiles that believe. But the “little stone” on the contrary symbolizes a power, small in appearance, which at once deals destructively with all that is high, great, and strong on the earth, at the first blow reducing the entire imperial system to powder. Consequently the attempt to make the gospel out of it wholly fails. The word of God is by the Lord compared to the seed that, sown in the good ground, bears fruit more or less abundantly, as a germ of life by the Holy Spirit. It is plain that the “little stone” is, not the gospel or the church, but the kingdom of God which Christ enforces when He returns. Conclusive and clear is the proof of this from the comparison of the closing scenes in Dan. 2 and the corresponding part of chap vii. It is not only an intervention from on high, but of a judicial and even executory character. The gospel is no doubt of God, but it is His sovereign grace based on the cross of Christ. Whereas the “little stone” smites the powers of the world, the mightiest then reigning no less than the remnant of all that preceded, and at once crushes them to atoms.

What can be more in contrast with the gospel? After this the “little stone” grows and becomes a great mountain and fills the whole earth. The gospel never smote any earthly power, never will destroy a single king or kingdom. God's work in the gospel is to reconcile the sinner to Himself and render him meet for heaven. Can one conceive things more different? All Christians profess to believe the Lord Jesus is coming again. What to do? Is it not to judge the quick and the dead? Even the common creeds of Christendom admit that; Copts and Jacobites, Nestorians and Greeks, as well as Latins and Protestants of every variety, confess this truth. They read, say, and sing that Christ is coming to judge, not the dead only but the living also; and these before the dead, we may add.

It is easy to theorize, but scripture shows Christ to reign a thousand years, and to judge the quick. The judgment of the dead follows, as Rev. 20 teaches, and this after the heavens and the earth flee away; whereas the quick He will judge on this earth. Will not Christ's feet stand on the Mount of Olives? and when He stands there, will not the mountain be split in two? So Zech. 14 declares. Yet there it is still, as solid as ever; but it will be cloven yet, giving testimony to its Maker and to the word of God. Who can wonder when the Creator stands there in power and glory? When He came the first time, it was in grace and humility, bearing all and enduring all, when He deigned to die a sacrifice to God, yet at the hands of His own creatures, that their sins might be blotted out. Then it was all pure and sovereign grace, in which He bore God's judgment of our evil that we who believe might be delivered from wrath. But when He comes again, it will be in judicial power and glory. And will He come alone? His own glorified hosts will follow Him—they that are Christ's. Rev. 17:14; 19:14.

Carefully avoid the new-fangled notion that seems to please some in the present day, that none are with Him but “superior Christians.” I have generally found those men when weighed sadly wanting. They and their set are no doubt excellent in their own eyes; but God forbid that a true-hearted saint should regard Himself as better than others. We are debtors to God's grace in Christ alone for salvation; and we have abundant reason to humble ourselves before God while here below. There is doubtless power in the Spirit of God to keep us; but as a matter of fact, in many things we all stumble. Let us look to Him Who alone can keep us from falling. It is a strange delusion, by way of what is called “deepening the spiritual life,” that any can jump into holiness practically; and why connect this idea of themselves and the like with the translation of the saints to heaven at Christ's coming?

For such self-flattering expectations scripture gives no warrant. “We shall not all sleep,” says the apostle, “but we shall all be changed in a moment,” and the same moment. The living saints found when our Lord comes are not to die. The dead in Christ shall rise first; then we, not some of us but all, shall be caught up together with the risen to meet the Lord. This is the mystery as it is called, or New Testament truth, added to that of resurrection revealed in the Old Testament.

When Christ comes and those that are His along with Him from heaven, He will smite the powers in open blasphemous rebellion (Rev. 19), and call all the nations to account, as He will in Matt. 25:31-46. The two leaders civil and religious will be thrown living into hell. Their followers and kings and armies will be slain on the spot. Did you ever realize who these will be? The flower of the civilized world, the rulers and hosts of the then kingdoms of the west. They will have hastened at the Emperor's demand to protect the Jews and their king in Jerusalem. The Jews who rejected the true Christ will then have received the antichrist. Then will all the powers of western Europe be involved in the same sin. Balance of power is long gone. The satellite kings “have one mind, and shall give their power and authority to the beast. These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them; for He is Lord of lords and King of kings; and they that are with Him (the glorified saints) are called, chosen, and faithful.” “For God hath put in their hearts to fulfill His will, and to agree and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled” (Rev. 17: 13, 14, 17).

There will remain for divine judgment the last king of the north (Dan. 11:40-15); and after him Gog from the land of Magog, Prince of Rosh (Russia), Mesheoh (Muscovy), and Tubal (Tobolsk), the power that makes the king of the north mightier than his own strength could command. These shall all perish in due time after the Lord has appeared: all must receive the due reward of their deeds. Is this not as far as can be from the kingdom of God in spiritual power such as we know under the gospel? But it is in full accord with that which is the true meaning of Nebuchadnezzar's dream and of the prophet's interpretation, as well as of his own visions in chap. 7. and elsewhere. The destruction of “the beast” and other powers which will then be in a state of rebellion must be fulfilled at the end of this age.

And what is preparing for an end so awful? The superstition and the infidelity of the day: each provokes the other beyond measure. Where are these men so different in appearance and pretension, yet alike unbelievers, the one sanctimonious, the other profane? They are everywhere; their name is Legion. You have them both here in your quiet little town, lively and strong. But it does not matter where they may be: God is not mocked, and they are His enemies. How they swarm in the great city, the metropolis of the kingdom! It is not so strange that they often join arms, sometimes are combined in the same persons. Such are those who dare to say that God did not inspire the Bible, and deny him who wrote this book to be “Daniel the Prophet,” although the Lord declares so it was. They would make it a romance written hundreds of years after his death. Whoever so speaks, and whatever he pretends to be, no orthodox believers should shrink from denouncing such a man as infidel. They are corrupting this country and America, as others have Holland and Germany.

But let it be understood that no mistake is greater than to suppose Roman Catholic countries free from skepticism. No country more abounds in infidelity than France and other Popish lands. The women may go to mass and confession, and some of the men may follow occasionally; but this is no disproof of their infidelity. And the issue will be (spite of all forms, and processions, and what not) the falling away or apostasy, as the apostle told the Thessalonians. The open abandonment of the gospel is at hand. Then man under Satan's power will become the object of universal admiration and worship to the exclusion of God; and this will bring down the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven. So He in Dan. 7 answers to the “little stone” of chap. 2. He is seen coming to the Ancient of days, and receiving dominion and glory and a kingdom that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve Him. It opens with the execution of consuming judgment on earth, and most unsparingly where most light had been given and given up.

Is it possible to find a scene in stronger contrast with grace? The gospel of God's grace is founded on Christ's first coming, and on His death, resurrection, and ascension; for His object was atoningly to suffer to God's glory for sins. When He comes again, it will be as the “little stone cut without hands,” wholly apart from human means to destroy the kingdoms (then apostate), and to establish God's kingdom in power, righteousness and glory over the earth. He will appear from heaven, and (falling, as we see in Dan. 2 and 7., on the Roman empire) will efface all the authority set forth by the image or by the four beasts. The beast (or he who then shall wield the power of the fourth empire revived) and the false prophet are to be consigned to the burning flame. That is, the imperial as well as the religious chiefs are to meet this unspeakably frightful doom, while their adherents are slain (Rev. 19:19-21). Besides, judgment falls on all the other elements. “Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together.” So too is it in Daniel's vision of the beasts whose dominion had been taken away and their lives prolonged (ver. 12). There is no sparing of evil longer. Jehovah reigns, and the earth rejoices. It is the Son of man Who makes good the kingdom over all the earth, as His first advent gave grace its scope for heavenly glory, which the Christian and the church should enjoy now in faith. W. K.

The Labourers Hired

Matt. 20:1-16.

PEOPLE have little difficulty in understanding the general drift of the answer to Peter, who said, Behold, we have forsaken all and followed Thee: what shall we have therefore? Our Lord shows that God will be debtor to no man, and that for every loss on account of His name every one shall receive again a hundredfold and inherit life eternal. But He adds the cautionary words, Many first shall be last, and last first. For as Christ is the motive where faith is, reward is but. the encouragement to him that follows the Savior; it cheers him when already on the way. Make the reward the object, and all becomes mercenary. Even where Christ is the constraining power, there is danger of clouding Him under an overweening estimate of sacrifices for His sake; and hence the need to think of the shortcoming implied through self-reliance. In every case however God never forgets but assuredly repays.

Why is it that there has been such perplexity and difference from of old to the present about the parable which opens chap. 20.? It is because man bulks so largely in his own eyes that room is not left for the sovereign grace of God. Now this is the very thing the Lord here asserts. Pious men might and must more or less distinctly allow it in His saving souls; but the Lord claims it for His dealing with service. And it ought not to be a question that in the parable not salvation but service is the matter in hand. Alas! in all ages the tendency has been and is to confound the two things to the deep injury of both; for if mixed up, no soul who has a due sense of his unprofitable service can or ought to be assured of his salvation; yet without that assurance God's grace is not fully received, nor has Christ's blood practically cleansed the conscience, so that the service is vitiated correspondingly from first to last. And no wonder; for never can exist the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope, which we are exhorted to hold fast firm unto the end.

Now what can be plainer in scripture than the truth that “the free gift of God is life eternal through Jesus Christ our Lord” (Rom. 6:23)? In John, Gospel and Epistles, it is no less plain that the believer has that life now. No doubt, it is in the Son, and alone in Him rightly and securely; but “he that believeth on Me hath life eternal” (John 6:47). And the First Epistle was written that God's children might know, that they believing on the name of the Son of God have life eternal. They do not wait for His coming again to have it; they have it now for their souls, they will have it for their bodies also, and in its proper glorious sphere, when He comes for them. And it is of life eternal by-and-by that the Synoptic Gospels speak.

But the parable contemplates, not conversion, nor life eternal, but laboring in the vineyard. How can those that know the gospel fall into a mistake so evident and profound as to overlook this? It was for Christ that Simon Peter left all and followed Him. Christ drew him, not reward, though reward there is; for God is not unrighteous to forget any work or labor of love shown to His name in the service of the saints or of the gospel. But it is divine love in Christ, seen by faith, which draws the soul after Him, and makes His call effectual. Such alone do work that pleases God; and life eternal is therefore shown in Rom. 2 to come at the end of a fruit-bearing course; but the utmost care is taken in the same epistle to declare that we are justified freely by His grace (chap. 3: 24). Yea, it excludes any work on our part from that great act of His grace. “Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt; but to him that worketh not but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (Rom. 4: 4, 5).

In the parable on the contrary it is a question of work done for the householder, who calls and sends into his vineyard.

“For the kingdom of the heavens is like a householder which went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard; and when he had agreed with the laborers for a denary the day, he sent them into his vineyard. And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing in the marketplace idle; and to them he said, Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way. Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise. And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing; and he saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle? They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard. And when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto the steward, Call the laborers, and pay them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first. And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a denary. And when the first came, they supposed that they would receive more; and they likewise received every man a denary. And when they received it, they murmured against the householder, saying, These last have spent one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat. But he answered and said to one of them, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a denary? Take up that [which is] thine, and go thy way; it is my will to give unto this last, even as unto thee. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? or is thine eye evil, because I am good? So the last shall be first, and the first last” (vers. 1-16).

Plainly the Lord lays down the true spring and principle of service. It is confidence in him who calls. All is set out with divine wisdom. The workmen first called agreed to the terms. Those at the third hour went to work on his word; “whatsoever is right I will give you,” as did those at the sixth and ninth hours. The last batch at the eleventh went there simply at his call: “Go ye also into the vineyard.” With these last the steward is directed to begin, giving each a denary. This aroused the murmurs of the earliest workmen, who resented the householder's liberality. But he stopped the mouth of their spokesman at once. The injustice complained of was solely in the complainant. “Didst thou not agree with me for a denary?” Grace reserves its title to bless. “Is thine eye evil, because I am good? So the last shall be first, and the first last.” The despised enjoy the grace that abounds beyond all question of man, and those who indulge in selfish thoughts justly sink. God Who never fails in righteousness maintains His right to act according to His own goodness. He is sovereign even in this where man sets up his claim to his own chagrin. Indisputably just, He is good and will act upon it, as He loves to do: what loss and misery those make for themselves who dispute it!

W. K.

The Ways of God in the Acts: 3. The Calling of the Gentiles

The Calling of the Gentiles.

Chap. 10.

THE time had now come, in the ways of God, for the presentation of the gospel in a formal way to the Gentiles; and Peter, spite of his strong Jewish sympathies and prejudices, was to be the honored means. This was quite in keeping with the word of the Lord to him in Matt. 16— “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” These words indicate no sort of princely supremacy (not even of a personal character, far less of a sucessional for all time); but it was a privilege and honor conferred upon the apostle. He had opened the door to the Jews on the day of Pentecost and 3,000 had entered; he was now to open it to the Gentiles. He had himself alluded to this day in Acts 2 (however little he then entered into it), saying to the Jews, “The promise is unto you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” And speaking of the same thing in a later day, he reminded his brethren, “Ye know how that, a good while ago, God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel and believe” (Acts 15:7).

God would not have the moment farther deferred. The apostle had just been called who was to be the Lord's chosen vessel to bear His name before the Gentiles pre-eminently (Acts 9:15); it was fitting therefore that the door of faith should now be opened to such.

The individual first called was a remarkable character. “He was a centurion of the band called the Italian; a devout man, and one that feared. God with all his house, who gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway." It was a rare thing probably for a Roman officer in a garrison town to be spoken of in this way. We read of one in the Gospels, who loved the Jewish nation and built for them the synagogue (Luke 7:5); but the usual character of such was in every way different. Instead of giving alms to the conquered, it was rather the custom to oppress and exact as far as possible. But we must look a little deeper here. All was not mere benevolence in Cornelius, but the fruit of a man quickened by the Spirit. Cornelius was not yet saved, for he had not yet had Christ presented to him as a Savior; but he was undoubtedly born of God. In Zaccheus's case, I think there is a difference. He merely spoke of giving half of his goods to the poor, and of restoring fourfold to any man he had wronged (Luke 19:8). This was kindness and conscientiousness; but Cornelius went much farther. Does an unconverted man fear God and pray to Him always? Assuredly not. Such fruit is never borne on the corrupt tree of the old man. “Do men gather grapes of thorns or figs of thistles?” (Matt. 7:16-18.) This godly Gentile was in reality pretty much where Old Testament saints were, born of God, confiding in Him, but not knowing accomplished redemption through a dead. and risen Christ, nor having received the gift of the Holy Ghost.

We must ever distinguish between the quickening work of the Spirit and sealing. The first was true from the first. Ever since grace introduced a hope for the sinner, there have been those in whom the Spirit of God has wrought producing new life and faith in God; but the gift of the Spirit to believers is a wholly new thing, not true until Christ rose from the dead and went on high.

The truth as to Cornelius comes out even more clearly as we proceed with our chapter. “He saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him and saying unto him, Cornelius. And when be looked on him, he was afraid and said, What is it, Lord? And he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memorial before God.” How plain is all this! When did the prayers and alms of an ungodly man ever “come up for a memorial before God?” Such are “dead works,” as valueless, if not as offensive, as wicked works.

To this interesting Gentile, then, the gospel of Christ was to be declared. The angel bade him send for Peter, who was then at Joppa, lodging with Simon a tanner. His obedience was prompt, his heart being simple before God; and two household servants with a devout soldier were dispatched.

At Joppa, meanwhile, the same God Who wrought with Cornelius at Caesarea, wrought with the apostle, graciously preparing him for what was before him. Peter is shown praying on the housetop (reminding us of Acts 6:4).

Falling into a trance he saw heaven opened and a vessel like a great sheet, knit at the four corners let down to the earth, filled with all manner of four-footed beasts, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. A voice bade him kill and eat. He objected, “Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten anything that is common or unclean.”

The answer was given, “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.” To make it all the more emphatic; this was done thrice, and “the vessel was received up again into heaven.” Thus did the Lord graciously wait on His servant's scruples, and instruct him as to the new work of grace now in hand. Fleshly distinctions were to obtain no longer, uncircumcised Gentiles were to be brought in, and blessed on common ground with the believing Israelite.

The middle wall of partition was now broken down, however slow those of the circumcision might be to comprehend it. While Peter pondered the vision, the servants of the centurion arrived, and the Spirit instructed him to go with them, doubting nothing. He had the precaution to take with him certain brethren from Joppa as witnesses, and to silence objectors afterward. Cornelius would have worshipped him, but Peter took him up, saying, “Stand up, I myself also am a man.” Compare with this the indignation of Paul and Barnabas when the men of Lystra would have offered them sacrifice (Acts 14:14), and the words of the angel in Revelation whom John was disposed to worship (Rev. 22:9). These servants knew their place, and what was due to the Lord.

Considerable and charming simplicity is to be observed in Cornelius throughout. There was simple following of the Lord in all things step by step, and when he had Peter beneath his roof he said, “Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God.” There was no reserve, and no desire for the suppression of any part of the counsel of God. What a contrast with this day of itching ears! Peter has at last perceived that God is no respecter of persons, but that in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness is accepted with Him. This does not go beyond the admission of the fact, that blessing is for Gentiles as truly as for Jews; as yet the truth of the one body was not declared. Of this Paul was the honored administrator. To him it was given to unfold the heavenly union of all saints with the risen and exalted Head by the Holy Ghost. Peter went no farther than to admit the Gentiles to an equal place with the Jews: “God gave them the like gift as unto us.”

His preaching is characteristic. He speaks as ever of the Lord Jesus as One Who had walked up and down among the Jews, having been anointed by God with the Holy Ghost and with power. He went about doing good, Peter and his companions being witnesses, yet was slain, hanged on a tree, but raised by God on the third day and shown to chosen witnesses. All these were public and notorious facts (he could say to his audience— “Ye know”); but Cornelius and his kinsmen and near friends had never before heard of an interest for themselves in that blessed One. They knew His path among, and His presentation to, the Jews; but they were Gentiles! Now they learn that He is a Savior for all—for “whosoever.” He is the appointed Judge of living and dead; but is that all? “To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins.”

What a message from God to needy men! At once solemn and blessed, it wrought immediately with this first Gentile company that heard it. Generally audiences are divided after a discourse; as in Acts 28:24, “And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.” But there was no such division here. “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.” Though not stated, it is implied that all believed the testimony. The Spirit is given only to believers, as we read. “After that ye believed, ye were sealed with the holy Spirit of promise” (Eph. 1:13). Peter's companions were astonished, “because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Why should they have been? Why so slow to rise to the thoughts of God? Peter afterward said, “God gave them the like gift as unto us” (Acts 11:17). Mere fleshly standing is no more, distinctions have no place in Christianity, salvation is available to flesh, whether Jew or Gentile. “There is no difference.” Signs accompanied the gift, for these new believers began to speak with tongues, and magnify God.

What hindered now their formal reception among Christians? Who could withstand God? Consequently Peter asks, “Can any man forbid water, that these should be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” Baptism is nowhere spoken of as a command (save to the evangelist), but as a privilege granted to all who are Christ's (compare Acts 8:35).

It is a sign of death—death with Christ—a figure of salvation and the washing away of sins. In apostolic days, when things were done according to God, it was the first act of the believer. As remarked before, the order here varies noticeably from that in chaps. 2. and 8.

In chap. 2. the conscience-stricken Jews must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ ere they could have remission of sins, and the gift of the Spirit.

In chap. 8. the Samaritans were baptized by Philip, but had to wait for the Spirit's seal till the apostles came down. In the first case God would humble the proud rejectors of His Son unto the very dust; in the second God would preserve unity.

Here at Caesarea neither consideration had a place, consequently the Holy Ghost fell upon them at once. They heard of remission of sins through faith in the name of Jesus, they received the testimony, and then the Spirit of God. This is what we are warranted to expect. Let the gospel be but simple and full, and God will not fail in His blessed part. To His name be all praise.

W. W. F.

A Heavenly Christ, Therefore a Heavenly Church: Part 2

THE strongly and distinctly marked clauses of the apostle's first prayer for the Ephesian saints (Eph. 1:16-23) have already been noticed. He sought on their behalf that they might be made to know (1) the hope of His calling, (2) the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, and (3) the exceeding greatness of His power toward believers.

The last petition introduces a subject on which the apostle in a characteristic manner enlarges in a very full way. It was a theme especially near and dear to the heart of Paul. Christ in heaven and the consequent effects for us of His present exaltation are prominent in almost every epistle. Paul knew not Christ in the days of His flesh. He did not meet Him on the banks of the Jordan, like John or Peter. It was a heavenly Christ that confronted the mad persecutor; and it was the memory of that vision of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ which ever hung like a brilliant beacon star on the horizon of the apostle's life, shaping his course and animating his zeal. He loved to think of Christ in the glory, and when led to speak of the power now working in us, he immediately unfolds its connection with the power that put Christ there. The self-same power that wrought in Him works in us.

Thus the doctrinal truth is made as ever to rest on the solid substructure of fact. It is a fact however only to be appreciated by the spiritual mind; and this the apostle has in view. Such he calls to, consider the most recent display of God's omnipotent power in the resurrection of Christ, unveiling its profound import to the church of God.

In the beginning God displayed His power in the creation of the heavens and the earth. In the history of Israel, He showed His power by their redemption from Egypt. But the greatest exemplification of God's power for the Christian is in the resurrection and exaltation of Christ. This transcends in character the power exercised in furnishing the material universe, as it also does that which crushed the military power of. Pharaoh and over-ruled natural phenomena for the deliverance of His enslaved people. For here we have the annulment of man's last enemy—death, God raising Him Who lay under its power, not merely to life but up to the very chiefest place of authority and glory.

In that supremest position dominion is given Him, and that over all things; “He hath put all things under his feet.” He is Lord of all. Though this universal sway is unseen as yet, the time of its public administration not having come, the glorification of the One Who lay in the rich man's tomb is no secret to faith because revealed. It is to the believer the most signal exercise of divine power. Wondrous are the potent and invisible forces of nature operating alike on the mightier orbs, forming the remoter stellar systems, as in the countless swarms of minute life which people the stagnant ditch. But the glory of God in creation is infinitely surpassed by the glory of the Father in raising the Son.

It is surpassed to the same degree as spiritual things surpass natural, and as eternal things surpass temporal. Mechanism of the universe! Cleavage of the Red Sea! Of what small account are these in comparison with what He has done for the Son of Man, for Him Who was “crucified in weakness,” but “raised in power.” He Who passed by the heavenly dignitaries, in His descent to the assumption of manhood and the subsequent shame and death of Calvary, has now passed them by in His ascent to occupy His seat on the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, “far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.”

What a super-eminent example of the working of God's mighty power is this Life from the dead is much, but exaltation to the very utmost how much more! Singularly few are the instances of resurrection in Old Testament times. And those who thus issued from the gates of the grave through direct divine interposition full soon returned. But here is One thither again truly raised but raised to die no more, being elevated out of the domain of death beyond its reach into the heavenlies whereto death can never come. There even now abides the Son of Man, the permanent demonstration to faith of Omnipotent interference.

Now having strained our thoughts to their utmost in setting forth the heights of exaltation to which Christ is raised, the apostle brings forward a fact of the profoundest interest to the church. In that place of conferred glory, the church is associated with Him., He is not only “head over all things” but “head over all things to the church.” The self-same power, that wrought in Christ to set Him on high, works in us to set us along with Him there. As Son of Man He has those who are destined to share the headship bestowed upon Him in resurrection; and they are described as being already, in purpose and effect, associated along with Him there.

The intimate connection of the church with Christ is illustrated by the figure of the body— “the church which is His body.” This is not the relationship of subjects to a rigor, though of course it is at the same time true that the church is subject to Christ. But this expressive metaphor implies the marvelous truth that the eternal purpose of God would not be realized unless the church is united to the Risen Man in the place of glory to which He is exalted. Indeed, this is the particular import of the succeeding phrase, “the fullness of him that filleth all in all.” The church is called out to become the complement, that which is necessary to complete the Mystic Man on high.

Here then we have the revealed purpose of God with regard to Christ and the church. We are brought into indissoluble association of the most intimate character with Christ, not as a man here below, for this could not be, but as a man in resurrection and exaltation to God's right hand. The fact (for it certainly is not a theory) of itself stamps a unique distinction upon the church. The grand objects and purpose of God in reference to her will never be accomplished on earth. The scene of her consummation in glory is on high, a secret as completely hidden from the world now as the fact of the present glory of Christ. On this account the aspirations of the church, where the true nature of God's calling is apprehended, will be exclusively heavenly, while the world will be regarded as a place of temporary sojourn in which all arrangements are purely provisional and in no way objects of chief concern.

How far this is borne out by the practice of the professing church of to-day needs no word of comment. W. J. H.

Priesthood of Christ: 4

Heb. 4:14-16.

WHILE, therefore, our Lord Jesus here below was tempted like as we are in all points, He was tempted in a most important way that was altogether proper to Himself. And it was meet that it should be so; for He was not what one may call a merely natural member or natural head of the human family. Most truly a man He became, by grace made of a woman; but in His own right God, and the Son of God. And soon He was about to take the place of head of the new creation. He was to be the counterpart of the first man—as he in sin, so the Second in righteousness and grace; and just as Adam fell in a place that was peculiar to him in his measure, so the Lord Jesus stood under incomparably more severe temptations, and is now. the glorified man in resurrection, as the other brought in death for himself and his race. Thus Adam's case, here briefly sketched, helps, or ought to help, any soul that wants to know what temptation is; for the common notion that temptation supposes inward evil is a fatal mistake, and Shows that there is a leaven of unsuspected heterodoxy in all who think so, and thereby fail to conceive of temptation apart from proclivity or tendency to sin. One need not do more than just ask the simple questions, Was not Adam tempted? and what was his condition when tempted? Certainly there was no sin, no inward proclivity to evil, in Adam before he fell. Sin therefore is in no way necessary to temptation in the sense of the word here meant; for the first great instance of temptation, and alas! of sin, was the case of a man who was made without sin. So here; so with the Son of God Who conquered Satan, the destined extirpator of sin, and this too not by power but by suffering, that it might be by righteousness, and thus grace have all its blessed way for and with our souls. How admirably, here on earth morally, now in fact on high, was not our Lord Jesus the counterpart of that first man, Himself the second man, and last Adam!

I affirm then, that He, absolutely without sin, was therefore the very and only One that could be a prime object for temptation on the part of Satan. The enemy's aim was to get sin in; but no, even at the very close, the prince of this world came and found nothing in Him. There was neither sin inwardly to excite, nor was there lack of dependence on God which admitted sin. It was not there, nor could it ever find entrance by independence of God. If Satan had only contrived to lead Him to use His own will, there had been sin at once, and all was ruined, every hope gone. It could not be indeed; for He was both a divine person and the dependent, obedient man. The foe was utterly foiled. And there is the great mistake—that many reason from themselves to Him, and conceive it was a kind of virtue or merit in the Lord. Jesus that He never sinned. Whereas there never was a question about His sinning, either to God or even to any man who believed in Him.

How could any one born of God entertain for one moment the thought of the Lord Jesus failing? Could such a profane dreamer be really supposed to believe that He is the Son of God? All these speculations of men which lower the glory of Jesus simply show that they do not really believe that Jesus is God while a man. They do not know what they mean by such a confession as that He is the Son of God to be honored as the Father. They do not truly believe that He is God Himself as truly as the Father or the Holy Ghost; for His becoming a man detracted nothing from it. He took manhood into union with His deity; but the incarnation in no way lowered the deity, while it raised humanity in His person into union with God. Each nature, however, preserved its own properties. There was no confusion. Each was exactly what it should be—human nature, and divine nature, each in all its own characteristic excellence, combined, not confounded, in His person. And such was Jesus, Who came to glorify His God and Father, and deliver us from our sins to His glory by redemption through His blood.

( To be continued, D.V.)

James 1:13-15

THERE is another class of trials, with which souls are everywhere conversant in Christendom, even though they know but little of the blessed ones, which our Epistle heretofore has brought before us.

It is ridiculous to deny the evident distinction. How could it be said, Count it all joy, when ye fall into various temptations in the form of inward lusts? or blessed is the man that endures solicitations to evil from his corrupt nature? We have already seen that thus far the trials are from without. Our Lord knew then not only as do others, His saints, but beyond any, as we hear not only in the three earlier Gospels, but in Heb. 2:18; 4:15, where it is expressly treated for our consolation, yet with the all-important reserve, “apart from sin,” He was tempted in all things in like manner, without sin, not without sins or sinning, but sin excepted. Of sinful temptation He knew nothing, for in Him was no sin. His nature as born of Mary was holy. It was so constituted from the womb; and therefore it was said by the angel Gabriel, The holy thing which shall be born shall be called the Son of God.

But the believer, though born of God, has another principle—what the apostle calls “the flesh,” which is not subject to the law of God, for neither can it be. Its mind is enmity against God. Not that the Christian is excusable if he allow it to act, now that he has a new life, and the Holy Spirit also given to dwell in him expressly that he may in no way fulfill flesh's lust but oppose it, and not do the things which he naturally desires. For the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control: against such things there is no law. But they that are of Christ Jesus crucified the flesh with its passions and its lusts.

From this, our naturally deplorable state, the person of our Lord Jesus was wholly exempt. He was the Holy One of God. Even the demons owned Him thus, though men are not wanting who have dared to blaspheme His moral glory by imputing to Him the same fallen nature with its proclivities as we have. And such as thus lower His person are only to consistent with that fundamental error by obscuring or even annulling the true sense and power of His atonement, thus in their ignorance and unbelief humanizing alike His person and His work. It is the working of the antichrist, of which we have heard that it comes, and now it is already in the world; nor is any error more dishonoring to God or more deadly to man. It is the more dangerous because with it is often mingled a good deal of truth apparently in advance of what is commonly known, which some perceiving are enticed to accept the error. But no lie is of the truth; and no lie more sure or evil than that which denies the Christ, the Son of God.

It is blessedly true that Christ died to sin once for all; but this was not for Himself but for us who had sin in the flesh. To teach. that Christ could say till the resurrection, Not I but sin that dwelleth in me, is apostasy from the truth, and is Satan's enmity to it, in order to degrade His person and to exalt ours; also to insinuate that sin in the flesh was conquered in Him as it may be in us, instead of being condemned in Him made sin. Never therefore is it nor could it be said, that the Lord mortified His members that were on the earth, never that Ha reckoned Himself dead to sin and alive to God. Precious as all this or more is for the Christian, it would be to the last degree false and derogatory to Him Who knew no sin but was made sin for us.

The Epistle then turns from our holy trials to our unholy ones, and shows their source to be, not in God, but in sinful man. “Let none when tempted say, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted by evils, and himself tempteth none. But each is tempted when by his own lust drawn away and enticed; then lust having conceived bringeth forth sin; and sin when completed giveth birth to death” (vers 13-15).

The distinctness is evident when we read on the one hand that God tempted or tried Abraham (Gen. 22:1, and Heb. 11:17), and on the other that Israel tempted God (Psa. 78: 18, 41, 56, compared with Ex. 17:7). Never does God tempt any one to evil, but He may and does so bring out their faith and fidelity; but it is alas! too sadly common for His people to tempt Him by doubts of His mercy and active care. Hence the word in Deut. 6:16, “Ye shall not tempt Jehovah your God,” the Lord's answer to the devil suggesting that He should cast Himself down from the pinnacle of the temple on the, strength of Psa. 91:11. But the Lord utterly refuses to test God, as if His protection were doubtful in the path of obedience. God is not to be tempted by evils, any more than He so tempts.

The evil temptation comes from within man, though Satan may act on him, for he ever evilly tempts to evil. So it was man at the beginning was tempted when his nature was not evil; but instead of repelling it as the Lord did, he allowed and received it; so that henceforth the race was contaminated like its fallen head. The precise contrast is seen in Christ, to Whom the prince of the world came at the end, and had nothing in Him then any more than when first tempted. But it is wholly different with us, conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity as we are naturally, though now by grace born anew. Therefore have we an altogether distinct class and character of temptation, which the Lord had not, as incompatible with His person as with His work. In Him was no lusting against the Spirit, no contrariety in Him, because He was, as no one else could be, the Holy One of God. The Word became flesh (John 1:14). Incarnation was true of Him, but of Him alone. But the believer, though having life in the Son, has the fallen nature, and hence is liable to evil temptation.

“But each is tempted when by his own lust drawn away and enticed.” The Lord though tempted in all points similarly could not be in this way, because it would have denied and destroyed His moral glory, and it would have frustrated the purpose of God in saving us to His glory. That the Lord was in like manner tempted in all things has this immense limitation, “sin excepted,” not sinning only in fact, which is true of course, but “sin” in the nature from which He was absolutely exempt. He had not and could not have such evil temptations from a corrupt nature, because His was expressly holy. There was no lust of His own to draw away or allure. Evil suggestion from without He therefore uniformly rejected with indignation, even if an honored apostle, shocked at the suffering before Him as inconsistent to his mind and feeling with His glory, repudiated His death and such a death as an impossibility, and received rebuke stern beyond example. With the believer too often is it likewise, when like Peter his mind is not on the things of God but on those of men. Christ sought His Father's glory, and unrighteousness was not in Him, but He did always the things pleasing to Him. Self-will there was none. He was come to do God's will, and did it perfectly and at all cost.

Far different is the saint when thus off his guard and ceasing ever so little from dependence on God. “Then lust, having conceived, bringeth forth sin; and sin, when completed, giveth birth to death.” How graphic and true! But it is the strict line of James who looks at the moral effects, and does not occupy himself or the reader with that deep sounding of causes which we find in the Epistles of Paul. It is scarce needed to say that both views are invaluable, and alike given by inspiration.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:6

THE Holy Spirit now brings before us in a general way the descendants of Ham or Cham. As there seems prophetic significance in the name of Japheth (“may he spread”), and it was expressly claimed for Noah in Gen. 5:29, there appears to be also in that of his younger son, which means “warm” or hot, and so “dark” or black.

“And the sons of Ham, Cush and Mizraim and Phut and Canaan” (ver. 6).

The prominent fact that strikes one here is that this is the branch of mankind which after the deluge distinguished itself by the earliest and most vigorous civilization; and this not in an isolated instance, but alike in Asia and in Africa. Scripture attests the truth; and even rationalism, though ever hostile, cannot dispute it. But along with material progress another characteristic is no less marked: the degradation of the race, their fall into ways and habits of savagery. Phut illustrates this as distinctly as Cush and Mizraim and Canaan showed themselves in different respects pioneers of earthly progress.

However opposite, both are effects of departure from God. In an unfallen earth and the innocence of man, there was room for neither the savage nor the civilized state. No dream of unbelieving poets is more remote from the truth than the pictures they have drawn of early human beings, unable as yet to converse, and subsisting on acorns, wild fruits, edible roots scooped with difficulty out of the reluctant earth; at length imitating the birds, or rising from ejaculations, to express wants and feelings. Then in the course of time, instead of wandering after precarious food, some conceive the idea of collecting seeds, and cultivating their growth in patches cleared from the forest or brushwood; others, again, betake themselves to the chase, and so provide food and clothing for themselves, and begin also to barter with those that tilled the earth, who bethought them too of rearing the animals capable of domestication in order to their supply or exchange. Later in time rude huts and ruder rafts or canoes were made for land and water; and with the long awaited social life villages and towns would arise and give birth to the useful arts in their variety, and to the unlimited refinements of life.

We have already seen how the inspired history contradicts this fanciful scheme. In God's account of man sinless in the paradise of Eden we see our first parents surrounded by every good thing, endowed with mind and moral feelings as well as speech, with a given sphere for activity, and placed under a defined responsibility to the only true God Whose presence and intercourse they enjoyed, and Who thus blessed them whom He tried as bound to obedience under penalty of death. It was a state of natural blessings enjoyed with thanksgiving to Him Who gave them. Alas! they disobeyed Jehovah Elohim, and were expelled from their earthly paradise, but not without a fresh revelation suited in God's mercy to their fallen condition, and directing their hearts to a Deliverer. He from the nature of the case could not but be divine, yet One Who in seine wondrous way must be human also, to suffer indeed but to triumph over the mighty and subtle foe—the bruised Seed of woman to bruise the Serpent's head. Along with this hope did Jehovah Elohim clothe them with coats of skin—with that which had its origin in death: a thing suggestive, especially in connection with the revelation then given, of grave but comforting assurance to guilty man, in lieu of a merely natural device in vain adopted to cover their nakedness.

But it is equally sure, according to scripture, that the arts of civilization began and were developed in that family which rejected God's revelation for nature; which resented His disapproval and vented hatred on the believing brother, as righteous as Cain was not; and which in despair and defiance betook themselves out of a bad conscience and its fears to civic life in its cradle, and sought to make, if not a paradise, a substitute for it in the elegant arts and letters that embellish society. This is surely civilization in the germ; and we see it in Cain's line from the earliest age ever expanding, and recounted for our serious thought in the same chapter 4. of Genesis. To impute its rise or progress to revelation is what none could do who reads believingly.

It is no less plain that Ham and his sons are as marked after the deluge by their progress in civilization, as by the degeneracy into barbarism. To this, war would naturally expose the sufferers from superior power, fleeing into distant lands and forgetting at length what had once been familiar in the new sphere where they sought liberty.

Of Ham's sons Cush has the first place. According to scripture that stock settled in lands the most remote. There is without doubt an Asiatic as well as an African Cush. Gen. 2:13 presents its difficulty, but it would seem to be anticipative like Havilah and Assyria; for it is certain that till the flood there was no actual settlement of lands in their nations. But we know from our chapter that a notable departure was first taken by one of the Cushite descent to possess himself of power by usurpation, and this not in Africa but in the plain of Shinar, of which there are details to follow. It was certainly not after their arrival in Africa that this ambitious movement took place, but early in that day of change; and in fact not a few traces exist, philological and historical, of early connection between Ethiopia, Southern Arabia, and the cities on the lower Euphrates, as may be seen in Rawlinson's Herod. i. 442, 443. No one doubts that in general Cush as a country lies beyond higher Egypt; but as a race they settled far more widely, as already pointed out. And this explains more than one passage, which is commonly and altogether misunderstood from not taking the facts into account no less than from holding fast the strict wording of scripture. Thus, Isaiah (18:1) says, “Ho! land shadowing with wings, which art beyond the rivers of Cush.” It is absurd to infer that this means either Egypt or Ethiopia, any more than Babylonia. The object of the phrase is on the contrary to distinguish the land in question from either those lands or from any within those limits, which had in the past interfered with Israel. It is the prediction, not yet accomplished, of a land beyond the Nile in the south and the Euphrates in the north, which are the rivers of Cush. That unnamed land, described in striking terms as distinctly outside the Gentile powers which had hitherto acted on the chosen people, is to espouse their cause at a future day; but to no good effect, for the nations will oppose, jealous and hostile as of old, just before Jehovah takes up the matter and restores Israel to the place of His name, to Mount Zion. So in Zeph. 3:10 we read, “From beyond the river of Cush my suppliants, the daughter of my dispersed, shall bring my oblation.” Egypt or Ethiopia might be described as on one side of Cush, and Babylonia on the other; but Jehovah shall bring His dispersed from lands expressly beyond both.

There is no question as to the identification of Mizraim, and the great magnificence of its civilization as of the Asiatic Cush in the remotest antiquity. The form of the word in Hebrew is the dual, which some would refer to higher and lower Egypt. However this may be, the context decides that both Cush and Mizraim mean men, and sons of Ham. Ephraim, born in Egypt, has also the dual form, but is none the less surely the name of a man.

Phut or Put exemplifies the more degraded stock of Ham's descendants in Africa, contiguous to Egypt and Ethiopia, and named with one or other at times. But Phut can hardly be the Libyan as A.V. makes out of Jer. 46:9, or Libya as from Ezek. 30:5, and 33:5 where it should be Phut as in chap. xxvii. 10. The Lubim as in Nah. 3:9 point rather to the Lybians. The very obscurity which covers this African branch of Ham's sons serves to show how low they had fallen.

But Canaan, last named, has the most unenviable place of all, as the early object of curse, and the direst adversary of Israel in the land assigned according to promise: a highly civilized race, but steeped in shameless idolatry and every moral abomination, and therefore given up according to earthly righteousness to extermination, both because they deserved it, and as a safeguard lest Israel should be drawn into like iniquities; as indeed, failing to execute His sentence, they proved to their own sin, shame, and cost. More details we hope to have in due course.

The Atonement Money (duplicate Rev)

Ex. 30:11-16.

THE simpler our apprehension of “atonement” as in the scriptures, the happier. It implies a change of condition toward God. Instead of being at a distance from Him, we are brought nigh; instead of being in a state of enmity, we are at peace with Him. Such is our standing. Whatever experience we may have of it, our standing is that of peace with God, when we have received the reconciliation which has been accomplished by the blood of the Cross.

But this reconciliation, this rectifying our relation to God, rests on the fact that God finds His satisfaction in what Christ has done on the cross for us. My peace with God depends on faith in His satisfaction in Christ. If God did not rest in Him and His work for me, how could I rest in God? If God's demand in righteousness against me had not been answered, I could have had no warrant for talking of reconciliation, or taking my place in peace before God. I was God's debtor—debtor to die under the penalty He had righteously put upon sin. Christ acted as my Surety with Him, for He undertook my cause as a sinner. If God had not been quite satisfied as to my responsibilities, I should still be at a distance from Him, and He would still have a question with me, a demand upon me and against me.

Therefore I ask, has God been satisfied with what Christ has done for me? He answers that He has; and He has let me know this by the most wondrous, glorious, magnificent testimonies that can be conceived, He has published His satisfaction in the cross of Christ, in Christ as the purger of sins, by the mouth of the most unimpeachable witnesses that were ever heard in a court where justice or righteousness presided to try a matter. He tells me that all His demands against me as a sinner are fully and righteously discharged. The rent veil declares it, the empty sepulcher declares it, the ascension of Christ declares it, the presence of the Holy Ghost (gift as He is, and fruit of the glorification of our Surety) declares it. Were ever such august testimonies delivered on the debating of a cause? Were witnesses of higher dignity or of such unchallengeable credit ever brought forward to give in their depositions? Were depositions ever rendered in such convincing style?

The sequel is well weighed. Peace with God is ours, settled by God Himself. For we plead the cross of Christ as a very title to peace, God having declared that He and all His demands against us are satisfied in and by that cross. God rests in Christ, and so do we. My experience may be cold and feeble, and is so surely; it may be blotted by doubts and fears and other affections of which I ought to be ashamed. But my standing is sure and strong—just as the throne of God itself. The Purger of sins has been raised from the death by which He answered for sins, and has been taken up to that throne as such a Purger; and if He can be moved, so must the throne where He sits. If He be disallowed there, the word and call and voice of God that summoned Him there must be gainsaid and disallowed also. “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God,” is to be read as setting out our standing on that stable basis. By faith in the death and resurrection of the Lamb of God we are justified and have acceptance with Him, standing in divine righteousness, on what God owed to His work. This is our standing before Him, our relationship to Him. Our experience may not measure it, but such it is; though surely our experience should be true to our standing.

But let me look a little particularly at Ex. 30. The ordinance of the atonement-money tells us that God appropriates His elect to Himself, only as a ransomed people. And surely we know this to be so. If we be not ransomed, we are not His. If we be not in the value of the blood of Christ, we are not numbered to Him as belonging to Him. The act of numbering is the symbol of appropriation.

To number things expresses ownership of them (Psa. 147:4).

Before the institution of the ordinance, this had been a recognized truth. It was the first-born whether of man or beast that was His in the land of Egypt, though it was the first-born who had been ransomed (Ex. 12; 13). And afterward in the day of the New Testament we learn the same. And surely again I may say that we know it is so. Only we have it here, among a thousand others, in the mouth of these three witnesses: by the testimony of the Passover, by that of the atonement money, and by the word of the Lord Jesus.

But this testimony not only tells us that we are there to find ourselves in relationship with God by being ransomed—people who make mention before Him of Christ's blood, and of that only, bringing with them into His presence the atonement-money and that only; but it tells us that He has fixed and settled what the ransom or atonement-money shall be. This is full of consolation when we think of it. We learn all about the way of coming to God from Himself. We have not to reason about it, but to accept His account of the matter in all its characters. Every Israelite had to present himself to God with his half-shekel, which was called “the atonement-money.” Whether he was rich or poor made no difference. He had not to measure his offering himself: Jehovah had prescribed and settled what it was to be. And each and all appeared in virtue of one and the same ransom. We gather these conclusions in all clearness and decision and simplicity. It is the divine good-pleasure, and the sure revelation of God, that He have His people with Him and before Him only as a favored people. The price and quality and measure of the ransom were settled by Himself, so that they have not to object or to question, be they who they may. And it is in this way all His people are not only then reconciled and brought home to Him, but linked in one and the same salvation, and animated by one and the same spring of triumph and exultation.

The conscience of a sinner, instructed by scripture, may therefore indulge itself in these thoughts and assurances. The true half-shekel, the real atonement-money (that is, the blood of the Lamb), is the consideration, the full adequate settled consideration, on which the covenant of peace rests. It is a righteous ransom: God is just while He justifies the sinners who trust in it. The Lord Himself says of it, “This is the blood of the new covenant in my blood.” It is called “the blood of the everlasting covenant;” and it is preached to us that by the virtue of it God, as “the God of peace,” has “brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great Shepherd of the sheep,” a Savior-Shepherd for those that believe (Heb. 13:20).

And I might add to this, and to what I have already said, that the adequacy of this mystic half-shekel, this precious blood of atonement, is finely set forth in contrast with the insufficiency of all other sacrifices in Heb. 10:1-18. The insufficiency of all the Levitical offerings is there concluded from the testimony which they bear themselves. Out of their own mouth they are judged; and no judgment can be of a higher quality than that. Take the fact that he who made these offerings, the priest in the Levitical sanctuary, only stood before God, having to go out again from the divine presence in order to repeat the same sacrifice in the appointed time. The fact that such repetition was made year by year thus kept sins, not the remission of them, in remembrance. How solemn the recognition of insufficiency in these sacrifice-offerings by Christ Himself, when according to the volume of the book He comes to present Himself as ready in the cause of sinners to do God's will by His own death! For indeed it was impossible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

In contrast with this, we have the adequacy of the blood of Christ strikingly testified and concluded, in the fact that He is seated in the heavenly sanctuary, as having satisfied God by the sacrifice He has offered, and accordingly was greeted and welcomed and made to take His place forever before God al the Purger of sins. The fact is also that He is now occupied with thoughts and expectations of His coming kingdom, needing no more to think about sin and the atonement for it, as He did in the volume of the book or in the day of settling the terms of the everlasting covenant. And the further fact is that the Holy Ghost, in the new covenant which is sealed by the blood of Christ, tells of remission of sins, not as did the Levitical priests over the sacrifices they offered of their remembrance.

This is all encouraging and assuring. But I note another thing. The adequacy of the true half-shekel, the true atonement-money, is not to be rested simply on the fact of its being appointed by God, but on its own nature. It is appointed by God because of its efficacy, because of its intrinsic adequacy. It is a half-shekel “of the sanctuary,” having been weighed in the balances of the holy of holies, and found of full value before the throne of God. We are not to say, the blood of the Lamb is the appointed way, as though God might have chosen or taken some other. We are rather to say, it is the only way; for in that sacrifice, but in that only, God is just and the justifier of the believer. It is the price, the only price, which satisfies the balances of the sanctuary, and which gives the sinner an answer to the throne of righteousness. Blessed truth l it does all this; so that the apostle loses himself in admiration, as he gazes at this great sight and meditates on the sacrifice which had the virtue of “spotlessness” and of the “eternal Spirit” in it. We see him treating with some scorn and indignity the thought of the blood of bulls and goats, saying, “It is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins.” But with fervency of spirit, as one that was losing himself in wonder, love, and praise, looking at the cross of Christ, he says, “How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, purge your consciences from dead works to serve the living God?” (Heb. 9:14; 10:4).

J. G. B. (corrected).

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 6

Chap. 5.

IT is not necessary according to Jewish reckoning, as applied to the most important of all events (the death and resurrection of our Lord), to extend “three days, night or day” beyond the closing hours of the day when Esther appointed the fast, the next day, and the morning after; for any part of a day counted as a night and day. When the third day arrived, the queen acts on their solemn laying of the matter before Him Who governs all.

“And it came to pass on the third day that Esther put on royal [apparel] and stood in the inner court of the king's house, over against the king's house: and the king sat upon his royal throne in the royal house, over against the entrance of the house. And it was so, when the king saw Esther the queen standing in the court, that she obtained favor in his sight: and the king held out to Esther the golden scepter that [was] in his hand. So Esther drew near, and touched the top of the scepter. Then said the king unto her, What wilt thou, queen Esther? and what [is] thy request? it shall be given thee even to the half of the kingdom. And Esther said, If [it seem] good unto the king, let the king and Haman come this day unto the banquet that I have prepared for him. Then the king said, Cause Haman to make haste, that it may be done as Esther hath said. So the king and Haman came to the banquet that Esther had prepared. And the king said unto Esther at the banquet of wine, What [is] thy petition? and it shall be granted thee: and what [is] thy request? even to the half of the kingdom it shall be performed. Then answered Esther, and said, My petition and my request [is]—if I have found favor in the sight of the king, and if it please the king to grant my petition, and to perform my request—let the king and Haman come to the banquet that I shall prepare for them, and I will do to-morrow as the king hath said” (vers. 1-8).

Whatever the circumstances, God remains God; and faith knows it and counts on Him. To all appearance it was a dangerous adventure. Even so Esther was ready to risk her life for the Jews in their lowest estate. But she knew no less than Mordecai that deliverance must arise, because God is pledged to it, Whose purposes of blessing for man on earth and glory to His own name are bound up with His promise to the seed of Abraham. This made her path clear to seek at all cost that the blow aimed at their destruction should be averted. The spurious additions of Jewish traditions strike one by contrast with the noble simplicity of scripture here as everywhere. But we do well to consider how Esther was led to defer making the request which filled her heart, when nature would have at once spread it before the king moved deeply as he was by her personal charms. And what a trial the delay even of a day so promising must have been to the Jews if not even to her cousin! But the Unseen was secretly guiding and would use that seemingly dangerous delay to work for her and all as well as for His own deep and good designs.

The second banquet gave rise to fresh pride and undisguised malice in the enemy, who sought immediate revenge destined to fall on his own head.

“And Haman went forth that day joyful and glad of heart; but when Haman saw Mordecai in the king's gate, that he stood not up nor moved for him, he was filled with wrath against Mordecai. Nevertheless Hainan refrained himself, and went home; and he sent and fetched his friends and Zeresh his wife. And Haman recounted unto them the glory of his riches, and the multitude of his children, and [all the things] wherein the king had promoted him, and how he had advanced him above the princes and servants of the king. Haman said moreover, Yea, Esther the queen did let no man come in with the king unto the banquet that she had prepared but myself; and to-morrow also am I invited by her together with the king, Yet all this availeth me nothing, so long as I see Mordecai the Jew sitting at the king's gate. Then said Zeresh his wife and all his friends unto him, Let a gallows be made of fifty cubits high, and in the morning speak thou unto the king that Mordecai may be hanged thereon: then go thou in merrily with the king unto the banquet. And the thing pleased Haman: and he caused the gallows to be made” (vers. 9-14).

In the result we shall see how Satan outwits himself though all the power of the world seems on his side, and those who unworthily bear the Name are exposed to the last degree of peril. How encouraging then to look up! Yea, how sad if we do not who know His love incomparably more displayed than in Old Testament times, and have His word more fully communicated! who have His Son, and His Son now man glorified on high, and His Spirit sent forth to abide in us! If then we have little strength, as is undoubtedly true, let us keep His word and not deny His name. How great is the snare of not holding fast what we have!

The Eastern Little Horn: 1

Dan. 8

WE have had before us most prominently the West, which among the earthly powers was the chief object for the prophet's contemplation as unveiled by the Spirit of God in the second and the seventh chapters of Daniel. This is the fourth and last Empire of man, and its revival under Satan's power, the occasion which will bring the Lord Jesus from heaven (2 Thess. 2:8, Rev. 17, 19.) to the judgment of the world, and to the setting up of what is called in the Revelation “The world-kingdom of the Lord and of His Christ” (Rev. 11:15). Thence we see the Christ has not yet received His world-kingdom. It is clear that the state of things proclaimed under the seventh trumpet has not arrived, but assuredly it will in due time. It is plainly to be at the end of the present age or dispensation, which is followed by a new “age to come” before the everlasting state.

Now you will find in all these visions of the Book of Daniel, whether made to Nebuchadnezzar or vouchsafed to the prophet, that they look forward to that epoch or what is called in a later chapter, “the time of the end.” As the additional visions are given, further light is afforded or there would be no reason for giving them at all. They all, more or less, evidently end with divine judgment on the power to which they refer. Further it is clear that the vision of which we have been reading in chap. 8. is of a comparatively limited nature. There is a preliminary review of the second and third empires; and you may wonder why a branch of the third should stretch away to the still future time when the Lord comes in judicial power and glory. But the reason of this will appear presently. You will do well to remember the truth already stated, that these successive world-powers or empires were superseded by one another; but there is no intimation that they lose their existence when they lose their supreme power. They retained a subordinate place after they were subdued; but they are shown to have a continued existence still. This indeed is distinctly stated in Dan. 7:12: “As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away; yet their lives were prolonged for a season and a time.”

Here then we now hear of the Persian empire; where we would draw attention to the fact that Persia is no longer as in chap. 7. shown as a bear. There the moral judgment of the Holy Spirit expressed itself symbolically about it and the other powers to Daniel. Nor is it either the arms and breast of silver, such as Nebuchadnezzar saw. The glory of Persia is somewhat diminished in comparison with the kingdom of Babylon, under Nebuchadnezzar; but still it was a kingdom of great energy and conquest, especially at first. But why is it here changed from the bear of Daniel in the seventh chapter to be the ram as portrayed in chap. 8.? It would appear to be for a very interesting reason. The second and third kingdoms were friendly to Israel in a way that neither Babylon nor Rome could pretend to be. Rome has hitherto and always been the enemy of the Jews. It was Rome that also razed the city and the sanctuary of Jerusalem to its foundations. None save the Edomites have been such unrelenting persecutors of the Jews as the Romans. And so the Rabbis identify Edom of old with Rome in modern times as the unsparing enemy of God's earthly people repudiated for a while for their sins.

No doubt the guilt of Israel was inexcusable and shameless, but God has not forever cast off His people whom He foreknew; He may be indignant, but always has pity for them; and He is looking onward to the day when He will gather Israel out of the lands from the east and from the west, from the north and from the south. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. Whatever God gives, He stands to it; and sooner or later, when the day comes for His grace to work according to His promise, His call will indeed be effectual. The Jews are enemies now as regards the gospel, and grace brings Gentiles meanwhile to God. But as regards election, they are beloved on account of the fathers. For as the Gentiles once were disobedient to God but now become objects of mercy through Jewish unbelief, even so these were disobedient to your mercy, that they also may become objects of mercy. For God shut up all unto disobedience that He might have mercy on them all. And so, when the fullness of the Gentiles is come in, all Israel shall be saved. There ought to be no doubt that their call was from God and in the end sure. Every Christian knows it for himself and for the church; but he ought in no way to question it for the Jew. Rom. 11:29 is said by the apostle himself expressly about Israel, though the principle is no less true of ourselves, who should never forget His people, and God's mercy yet in store for them.

Now there was exceptional kindness on the part of Medo-Persia; and this is seen from the first in the conduct of Darius, who was the first actor of that empire recorded in this book (chap. 6.). If Babylon was the power which became the enslaver and jailor of the Jew, Cyrus was the characteristic restorer of the Jews to their own land; and this in the very first year of his reign. It is clear that the prophecies of God had a powerful influence on him. It is true he did not know God; but God knew him, and this struck him immensely. He was not disobedient to the vision, as some men nominally Christian are to-day. Isaiah wrote not his chapters 44., 45. in vain even for him. Daniel too was famed among Jews and Gentiles before that day; as the prophets were acquainted one with another, and cherished the highest reverence for such as had gone before. It is only a conceited age that raises up its petty head, and shakes it at the word of God. But what opens the door of true intelligence in the scriptures is on the contrary faith, and as a consequence love for everything of God.

Christ personally is the living bread that came down out of heaven that the eater might live forever; and such is His written word, the sustenance of that life: not bread, but God's word; and in such a way as cannot be destroyed, though in detail it may by man be injured as other things. How perverted has Christian baptism been and the Lord's supper, in what divergent ways, how deeply! And what shall we say of priesthood, ministry, the church itself, from early centuries? So the word of God may be perverted through either ignorance or craft; not only if truly rendered, it stands, but nothing can be conceived so admirable. Even the scholars of the world cannot rest without being occupied with it. Who in Christendom but litterateurs care about the Vedas, or the Avesta the Yik-king, the Shooking, or the She-king? or about the Koran if we come later? Yes, the remarkable fact confronts us of mere rationalists, who believe in nothing of the Christian truth, spending their lives on the Bible, Old Testament and New. A few scholars may look into the heathen books to see what were the beliefs of ancient races; but think of the many baptized skeptics who give themselves up to the life-long study of the Bible! No doubt they do not lack boldness in treating of the holiest themes; nor are they indisposed to show by their peremptory decisions what wonderful critics they are, as well as the strange shortcomings of others who differ or are opposed to them. What a contrast with the inspired, both in communicating their messages and in estimating the prophets of old!

However, be this as it may, the seventh chapter of our prophet sets before us a bear and a leopard as the symbols of the Persian and the Macedonian empires, which chap. 8. represents under a ram and a he-goat. The reason for this change we take to be the close bearing of the latter chapter on Israel, and the kindness shown by those empires in their early days. Cyrus and Darius Hystaspes stand out prominently as their benefactors; and Alexander the Great paid them marked honor, as is known, whether or not we receive the account Josephus gives of the High Priest meeting Alexander and the reverence paid him by the conqueror.

Although viewed before God the Medo-Persian and the Macedonian were but “beasts,” and no better than the Babylonian before and the Roman after, still God did not fail to appreciate kindness done to His chastened people. Hence the change of the symbols in chap. 8. compared with 7. In this special aspect they are presented as clean animals. First, Medo-Persia is now viewed as a ram; and, secondly, Greece as a he-goat. Whatever might be their consideration of the afflicted Jew, there was no mercy, nor lack of ambitious will one toward another. We have the ram as remarkably described now as the bear had been in the preceding vision. It was necessary to intimate a composite power. In chap. vii. the bear raised itself on one side. In chap. 8. the ram had two horns, both high, but one was higher than the other, and the higher came up last. Nothing like this was the case with the eagle-winged lion of Babylon. Notably distinct was the Greek he-goat, first with one conspicuous horn between his eyes, and later, when it was broken, four of mark (answering to the four heads of the leopard) toward the four winds of the heavens. Still more different was the Roman beast, with its ten horns, and a little one that subsequently overthrew three of the first horns.

Plainly then we herein see the peculiarity of Medo-Persia thus described as a twofold imperial power, and so contrasted with the one before, and the rest that succeeded. This quality belonged to it only. Nor this only; for, as we have read, it is stated carefully that one of the high horns came up after the other, and that the later one became the higher. This was the Persian element, which, though later, surpassed the previous Medish state.

There was nothing similar in any other of these world-powers. (To be continued, D.V.)

The Two Children

Matt. 21:28-32.

The proud men who were blind to the glory of Christ, and averse alike to God's grace and truth, raised the question of His authority. It is always so with such as value themselves, and love not God's intervention, and are jealous of those that do His work. He could have pointed to witnesses greater than John; though among women-born none had risen greater than John the Baptist. But the works which the Father gave Him to complete testified yet more. So did the Father's voice. And the scriptures which bore witness of Him He treats as the highest possible, for they have a permanence which no mere words can possess. But here the Lord met their unbelief by appealing to the baptism of John: whence was it? Of heaven, or of men? They saw their dilemma, and fearing man, not God, they answered, We cannot tell. Confessing their incapacity, chief priests and elders though they were, as the cover of their dishonesty, they are left without an answer. The Lord however presents them with a portrait, not of themselves only, but of those they despised.

“But what think ye? A man had two children; and he came to the first and said, Child, go work to-day in the vineyard. And he answered and said, I will not; but afterward he regretted and went. And he came to the second, and said likewise; and he answered and said, I [go], sir, and went not. Which of the two did the will of the father? They say, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say to you, that the tax-gatherers and the harlots go before you into the kingdom of God. For John came in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not; but the tax-gatherers and the harlots believed him. And ye, when ye saw, regretted not afterward to believe him” (vers. 28-32).

It is a plain and direct dealing with conscience. For two classes were then before the Lord's eye: the rude and profligate, the careless and profane, who made no pretension to religion and pursued worldly profit and open sin; and the respectable and decorous, who piqued themselves on heeding the rites of religion and on their own decent character. Now mankind in Christendom is the same still, tested by a standard more searching than John's, though his was a mighty work, as the Lord bore witness to him. Viewed in themselves or in the light of testimony, how living is the picture! The one class puts shameless insult on God, and glories in lawlessness. But an appeal comes which convinces the daring sinner of his outrageous evil: he breaks down in self-judgment; he turns to God and serves Him whom he had set at naught. The other class, on the contrary, claims credit for its proper ways; and as conscience is untouched, they are self-satisfied, and God remains unknown. How exactly such souls answer to him who says “I go, sir, and went not!” Are there not many like him now?

Hence when John, who did no miracles nor claimed official position, came preaching a baptism of repentance for remission of sins, people flocked freely to be baptized, confessing their sins. But as the rule, the Lord here shows that it was not those who justified themselves before men that were baptized by John. They disdained to enter the kingdom by the same strait gate and narrow way as was open to the tax-gatherer and the harlot. But there can be no other way to God for the sinner. The grace of the gospel condemns sins and insists on repentance still more than John coming in the way of righteousness; for the gospel proclaims that nothing but the blood of Jesus, God's Son, could cleanse from sins, and that His blood does cleanse us from every sin. How deadly and defiling were our sins that such a propitiation alone could avail! Therein is a test far deeper than John's preaching, excellent and efficacious as it was; for it was repulsive for a moral man and zealous Jew to confess his sins, like a tax-gatherer or a harlot. How intolerable to be put with such on the same common level of guilt and ruin! This is precisely what the gospel does even more thoroughly; and it is therefore of all things most odious to the self-righteous formalist.

When John came, calling men to confess their sins in view of the coming Messiah and the kingdom of the heavens, conscience answered to his call in those who had walked in gross lusts and indifference to the religious world. “The tax-gatherers and the harlots believed him.” They knew in their souls that they had led a life of shame and iniquity; and they bowed to a call which they recognized to be of God. But not so those who stood well in their own eyes and in the public opinion of the day. They therefore annulled for themselves the counsel of God, instead of justifying God by being baptized by John as the despised ones did (Luke 7:29, 30). The self-righteous when they “saw, had no regret afterward to believe him.”

Hence too, since that day, when the gospel is preached, men who are boastful of their religion, their church, or their character, are ever its bitterest enemies. The Jews as the general fact not only refused it but tried to stir up the Gentiles against it everywhere. Nothing in their eyes more hateful than that grace which denied the value of their righteousness, and announces God's righteousness that He may be just and justifier of him that has faith in Jesus. For this openly declares that there is no difference, all having sinned and coming short of God's glory; as it also declares to all who believe, that they are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. Therefore, being apart from works of law, the gospel is as open to the Gentile as to the Jew, since God is one, Who shall justify circumcision by faith, not otherwise, and uncircumcision through their faith since they believe. Jesus the Lord is the way to the Father: the Way, the Truth, and the Life. And salvation is in none other name under heaven that is given among men whereby we must be saved. Did any wonder at the Lord eating with sinners and the disreputable? His answer was, They that are strong have no need of a physician, but those that are sick. But go and learn what that is, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice; for I came to call not righteous but sinners. Do you, dear reader, know Him thus?

Salvation by Grace: 1

Luke 23:39-43.

THE occasion was unique. It was just the moment for God to make manifest His grace. Man's iniquity was complete. And when all classes, the high and the low, were alike implicated in pouring scorn upon God and His Son, it was of no use to be drawing distinctions. It was due to the Son of God that His Father should show the efficacy of His blood for any—the immediate and abiding value of His blood.

The moment gave a striking opportunity; for there was a man openly a sinner, a criminal, a malefactor of the darkest dye. Indeed there were two; and we have no ground whatever for supposing that he who repented and believed was less a criminal than the man who died in impenitent rebellion against God. Still less is there any ground to suppose that the man who there confessed the Savior had been under previous process, or that any deep work had been going on in his soul before he hung upon the cross. Scripture, as far as it speaks, is distinctly against such a thought. Matthew and Mark speak of the robbers railing upon Him; not of one only, but of both. We know that men try to get rid of this, and would make out the one to be something not so bad as his fellow. A good deal has actually been made of the fact that they were not thieves, but robbers! Is it not extraordinary that men should think there was any difference to signify? A thief may be a sneaking robber, and a robber a bold thief; but one would think that when sin is weighed in the presence of God, it is not very much worth talking of the difference between them. For one thing is very clear—that they were both suffering as robbers. That is, they were not merely dishonest men, purloining what was not their own, but they accompanied it as usual with boldness rather than treachery, with violence or even murder. Barabbas certainly did so; and these at any rate were both of them robbers.

The difference between them does not lie there at all; and they would have been no better or worse if they had been thieves and not robbers. We must not lose ourselves by letting slip the grand truth of the grace of God through Christ toward the lost. But there was an expression produced not merely in the feelings, but in the conscience, of one of these robbers; and we can well understand that the wonderful spectacle of the Holy Sufferer, which had impressed Pilate when He was not in the depth of His sufferings but only in the outer circle of them, should have deeply impressed the dying man. Even such a hardened soul as Pilate, accustomed to condemn so many to death, and historically known to have been a man of desperate character, and most unscrupulous—even he had his feelings, and shrank (I do not say with really righteous indignation) from the suggestion of the priests. He morally condemned them, and evidently felt how false they were, and hypocritical and bloodthirsty. He wanted to let Jesus off, not wishing to add one more crime to the long list of his life's villainies.

But there was more than this, and quite different from it, dawning on one of the robbers; and what brought it out was the continued railing of his fellow. “If thou be the Christ, save thyself and us.” The conviction evidently pierced the soul of this penitent robber that here was a Man who differed not so much externally as morally and essentially.

No circumstances made such a difference. Education, religion—as people call it, or whatever they like—none of these things made the difference. The robber had heard Him, for faith cometh by hearing, not by seeing. It was not the sight of Jesus, for thousands saw the same thing that he saw; but he heard the Holy Victim for sin on the cross say, “Father, forgive them.” One may not say that these were the words to sink so deep into his soul; but how calculated they were to go right through the conscience of the man, and to act on his heart!

So it is written “There is forgiveness, that Thou mayest be feared.” Yes, “forgiveness with Thee that Thou mayest be feared!” not fear of being lost merely, that he knew. No Jew could be without more or less knowing the danger of ruin if a man die in his sins. But “there is forgiveness with Thee, that Thou mayest be feared.” And here was that most solemn moment, when never were so many, not merely of the rabble but of the greatest in the land, and those that occupied officially the highest religious places, animated with one implacable desire for the destruction of this most holy Man! and this most holy Man uttered not one word of judgment, but at that awful crisis pleaded that His Father would forgive them! A new light dawned upon the dying robber. Samuel did not so pray, nor David, nor Solomon. Who ever before? You must wait for Christ that you may have such a prayer: then only is everything in perfection.

It was the proof of this perfection of the Lord Jesus, along with His wonderful words, His looking for and counting upon mercy for others, which touched the heart of the robber. Who could He be? There was but One Person conceivable. The woman of Samaria, although she was utterly dark and ignorant, knew quite well that “when the Messiah cometh, He will tell us all things.” Every Jew of course knew that. Now this poor crucified robber sits in judgment on himself, and wholly refuses the railing in which he had up to that moment himself participated.

“Dost not thou fear God?” said he. He feared God then. He is astonished at the other robber. He cannot tell why the words that had won his own soul to God had not won his fellow. “Dost not thou fear God, seeing that thou art under the same condemnation?” They were all alike crucified; but, oh, how different each! The Messiah crucified; hardened, unbelieving, robbers crucified. But in one, as he hung upon the cross, there was such a new-born sense of grace that it produced “fear of God,” horror of sin, faithful dealing with it, reproving his fellow with whom he had joined, not dreading a retort, nor afraid of being asked— “Who are you? what do you pretend to? Why, you have been railing, too!” What then produced such an entire change of feeling in the man? Faith. Yes, it always produces repentance when it is itself genuine. Faith makes a man willing to see sin as he never saw it before, and makes him see it because God is revealed to him. We never can see sin, except through the cross of Christ, in the light of God. It was Christ crucified Who brought the light of God into the man's conscience. How exceeding sinful must his sins be to bring down the Son of God to die for them.

The very effort to please God makes a conscientious renewed man feel his inability, and sin becomes increasingly sinful. There is nothing that brings out the hideousness of sin so deeply, and so prominently, without destroying confidence before God, as the grace of Christ. Law does it in measure. Christ does it far better than law, as was the case with this poor robber. It was not law, but Christ that made him thus judge himself, and form a sound estimate of the sin of his fellow— “Dost not thou fear God, seeing that thou art in the same condemnation? and we, indeed, justly.” His conscience was purged. When a man has a purged conscience, he can afford to confess his sins. He now tells all out exactly now, even to men. He had been with God in the secret of his heart. It might be only just before, but he had been with God. No man is ever true before men that is not true before God; and truth before God must come previously to truth before men. It was the Lord Jesus that stripped him of all the disguises of his soul. It was His grace to the guilty that gave him confidence to make a clean breast to God, no longer hiding his sins, but assured that God would receive him by the blood of Jesus.

“Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven; whose sin is covered.” But he is not a blessed man who covers his own transgressions; and such is the way of the unbelieving man. The believer has God to cover him, and God covers his sin with the blood of His own Son. The blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanseth us from every sin. Such was the real secret of this converted robber; and now he takes all the shame to himself. He owns his guilt, and says to his fellow— “We indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this man hath done nothing amiss.” Who told him so? He had never heard it from the lips of man. On the contrary, men had been condemning Christ; not least those who paid mock honor. Pilate would have let Him off. Herod found nothing to call for death. It was the chief priests—the High Priest above all—the religious heads of God's ancient people, who would crucify the Lord Jesus; and the voices of the crowd gave their loud approval. Had public opinion been his guide, had he listened to the great men of the nation, he would have come to a different conclusion. Just apply it to yourself. Are you not influenced by to-day's opinion? Are you not influenced by what great men think? Evidently, you must see, man does not change. The world is just the same world substantially as it was then. There may be superficial changes, but the world, as such, is the same.

Not Self but Christ

IT is very difficult to get rid of self-esteem in respect of others. But it must be rooted out. “More than these” the Lord recalls, but Peter now no longer pretends to. We must be brought down to a level with others, if we exalt self at their expense. But the effect is to make Christ everything, being ashamed of self. Peter says simply, “Thou knowest that I love Thee.” At present I think anyone could (though I would not be behind) love Christ better than I do; but that I love Him, and as to object none but Him—that He knows Still how poor what is there!

Priesthood of Christ: 5

And such is the Priest we have before God. Hence we see the great force of the words, “In that he himself suffered, being tempted.” Truly He did suffer. Where you yield to evil, you do not suffer when you are tempted. When there is only evil, it is yielded to; and evil is gratified by its own indulgence. The sinner does his own will, pleasing himself without the fear of God. This is sin—the exercise of one's own will or lawlessness, than which nothing is more pleasant to any ungodly one. This the Lord never did, never wished, never wavered about for an instant; and this we surely find throughout the whole of His course. “Lo, I am come to do thy will, O God.” So it was before; so it was at the end; and all before God. He was the doer of God's will—of all things, to my mind, the most astonishing in the Lord Jesus regarded as God's servant here below. He never sought, never once, His own will; He always did or suffered the will of God. It was the perfection of man morally. No miracles, no deeds of power, can be compared with it. God could work wonders by a worm, as He has often wrought by the merest sinners. But there never was that only did the will of God except One; and He was the One therefore that was called to suffer as no one else could; for it is just in proportion to love and holiness that one suffers, not to speak of His intrinsic glory.

Just so with a child of God now. You refuse to do your own will. Assuredly it costs no trifle to cleave to God's will in a world where nothing else is done but man's; for the world lives, moves, and has its being in seeking out its own will. The Lord Jesus was just the contrary, and so those that are of Him, the sanctified. For this indeed they are, as the apostle Peter teaches, “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by (4) sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.” This, I believe, goes very far too, as it means the same kind of obedience as the Lord's; for He here below never obeyed in a single instance as under compulsion or resisting an influence within that was opposed to the will of God.

Our Lord Jesus suffered; but the suffering was because of Satan's devices against Him Who always pleased God, refusing absolutely and always to swerve from obedience, besides the holy horror of His soul, not at evil within, because none was there, but at evil everywhere else outside Himself. The suggestions too of the enemy, instead of awakening will, only inflicted pain and suffering on Him. He was a sufferer just because He was the Holy One, not in the least degree (as with us) from the sense of the mind—of flesh; and therefore it is said, “In that he himself suffered, being tempted.” When man as he is yields in anything, it is of course to gratify his nature; it is self-pleasing, whatever be the bitter result. There neither was nor could be aught like this in Jesus. He “suffered, being tempted,” and He is “able to succor them that are tempted.” But the remarkable thing to note here is, that an obedience similar to His is looked for from us: to obey God as sons in the new nature, and by the Spirit of God. In this path there is and must be trial.

In exact accordance are Christians viewed here below in the Epistle to the Hebrews. They are redeemed; they are sanctified; they are children; they are Christ's brethren; and meanwhile they are in the place of temptation, which the wilderness is and must be. So we find the Psalmist reminding the children of Israel of “the day of temptation in the wilderness.” For us too now, as for them, there is the substantially same trial. The scene around is the wilderness, the time is the day of temptation. We are tried and thoroughly put to the proof. And this our God turns to our good; for we are in a place too where every spring of power, all the food that sustains, the light, and the direction that guides, are from above, not from within ourselves, nor from the world without of course. There is nothing here around us, any more than in our own old nature, to help us on; but just the contrary, to impede and defile, to injure and destroy. Above the rest in malice is the great enemy that tempts to evil. Christ knows it, having His wakeful eye on him as well as on us.

As the general, who in a beleaguered city had to stand and beat off the enemy, though he suffered, is just the one most of all to feel for his friends, who, being besieged by the same foe, have besides to contend with a traitor within: how much more cannot Jesus feel for you and sympathize with you? Never was a greater mistake than the supposition that He must have the traitorous old man within in order to sympathize. Had there been evil within Him, it would simply have destroyed the person of Christ in His moral glory and perfection, as well as His sacrifice and its consequences. There would have been no Savior at all. This is what unbelief ever comes to—a virtual denial of Jesus, of the Son and His work. And hence, therefore, it matters but little whether men deny His Godhead or undermine His spotless and perfect humanity: either way, no Christ remains for God, no Savior can be for man. It is the merest naturalism to imagine that the perfectness of the Savior and of His salvation takes away from the completeness of His sympathy. Divine love and holiness in our nature tried here below, with suffering to the utmost, are the basis of His sympathy; and He, if one may repeat, Who knew fully what it was to suffer in having to do with the tempter, knows best how to feel for you who, besides the same tempter, have to watch against traitorous flesh within you. If He had this not, does He therefore care for you the less? Nay, but the more and perfectly; for the old man occupies one with self in one way or another: He was absolutely free to love, serve, and suffer.

But then the succor that the Lord renders is to holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling. They are “the sanctified.” The priesthood of Christ applies itself only to saints. This is so true that we never find the slightest raising of the question of sins when Christ's priesthood is discussed by the apostle. It is a common enough thought among believers that Christ acts as a priest for us when we fall into sins from time to time. This you will not find in scripture. The teaching of the Epistle applies His priesthood to succor and sympathy when we are tempted as Christ was; and I have no doubt there was the holiest wisdom in this.

Another opportunity I hope to have for showing what is the admirable and gracious provision for us, whatever may be the depth of our need in failure. We shall then see that, if a believer sin, his sad case is not overlooked, but that God does in His own most merciful and wise goodness provide for it, whatever the want may be.

But your attention is now drawn to the first great truth, which, believe me, ought to be gravely weighed; for not the least unhappy feature of modern Christendom is this, that people have imbibed the notion that we must sin, and that there is no adequate help or power against it. They are apt therefore to regard sin as a small, or at least inevitable, matter, making up their minds for it because we are only “poor sinners:” such is the language constantly adopted, and by evangelicals pre-eminently, whether Anglicans or dissenters.

Now, I do not deny that the Christian may be viewed as a sinner, yea, as the chief, looking back at what one had been, or at what one is in oneself apart from Christ, as the apostle Paul speaks of himself in 1 Tim. 1. But surely he did not mean that he was then going on in his sins? or in constant failures as a believer? This is the way many people use it; and I grieve to think that the object desired is to reduce the holy apostle to their own level as much as possible. Sad to say, they would like to get a license for a little sin out of the Bible. Hence, one party try to make sin only a violation of known law; others take advantage of the later portion of Rom. 7, and the ineffectual struggle against sin there described in a quickened but undelivered soul, as if it were the ordinary and normal state of a Christian here below. What can one call this but Antinomianism? And yet you will find that these evil thoughts reign most with a great many persons who think themselves the most opposed to Antinomians. But there is no one thing more remarkable in the present confusion than the fact that the very people who most fail take credit for what they least possess, and bandy charges against those too who, through the mercy of God, seek to be as far as possible from affording ground for them.

James 1:16-18

THERE is no small danger of error on the subject of man's nature as it is, and the new nature which the believer receives by grace. Mistakes abound to this day, as they ever have since very early days. How many speak of the original Adamic state as holy? It was merely one of innocence, which was lost at the fall irrecoverably. Through the word applied, by the Spirit in the faith of Christ we become partakers of a divine nature. It is not restoration to the primeval creature estate, but an incomparably better life in Christ the Son of God, the ground of fellowship with the Father and the Son, and of a holy walk with God. Christ Himself and alone was the manifestation of this eternal life on earth; and chosen witnesses were given to see and hear and come into the closest contact with Him, and enabled to bear witness by inspiration that we too might have fellowship with them. Never was there such intimacy, never such testing, never such scrutiny, that we might behold and know life eternal in every variety of circumstances, in the simplest as well as the most profound here below; and this is the life we have in Him.

But while we have in Christ an incomparably higher and sure standing, there is the effect of the fall in our old nature which abides for the present life with its lusts which. Adam innocent had not. It is not a change merely, but a new life never possessed before. The disciples were born of water and the Spirit; and what is so born is “spirit,” not flesh improved, changed, or annihilated. They were purged already because of the word which Christ had spoken to them before the gift of the Holy Ghost in power at Pentecost. The heart is purified by faith, yet there is a new life, life eternal, given in Christ; and there is progress and growth through the truth. But besides, we are in Christ, and freed from all condemnation, as we are purged by His blood from our sins once for all. Our being perfected in perpetuity (Heb. 10) is true of all Christians, as it is by His one offering in Whom and in which we believe. The notion of an attained state; where no lusts work for a few superior souls is a mere delusion; it is the real unholiness of denying sin in them and excusing evil because the will does not consent. The apostles Paul and John are no less opposed to the dream than James, though he is occupied with the process and result, rather than with its origin and spring as they.

“Do not err, my beloved brethren. Every good giving and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom can be no variation nor shadow of turning. Having purposed he begot us by the word of truth, that we should be a certain first-fruits of his creatures” (ver. 16-16).

Men's thoughts being so far from the truth, as it is a subject altogether beyond his mind, we are the more bound to see that we be not misled, but subject to scripture. Here there is no obscurity, but all is light; for God is light, and His love has communicated all that we need to know. As man's nature is defiled and sinful, the God (Whom we know by faith and with Whom grace has given us the nearest relationship) is good. He cannot be tempted by evil and tempts none in this way. He is so absolutely good that our Lord laid down that none is good save one, God: not of course as Himself disclaiming it if owned as God, but refusing it from him who saw no more than humanity in Him.

But God is much more; He is the source of all good. He gives freely and fully to those who were evil and enemies. So we are here told that “every good giving and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights.” In Him is no darkness at all; in the world it is so dense that, though Christ His Son was here, the true Light, and shining in the darkness, the darkness comprehended it not: so much did moral darkness exceed the natural which is dispelled by natural light. It is humbling that man, with all his boasting, should be proved thus evil. But Christ solved the difficulty, the giver of a life in Himself risen from the dead, after being made sin to annul it righteously. Thus of His will or purpose (for nothing was more remote from man or more opposed to his will) did God beget us.

There is another consideration added, full of comfort. The greater the blessing, the more is the sorrow if it be exposed to loss or change. Now in our relationship with God we are assured that the goodness displayed suffers no diminution, nor eclipse. Even the greater light that rules the day, which men adored early and long, the bright orb of the sun to which they applied the epithet here predicated of our God, is liable to the variations of nature all day long, and is the salient example, in its apparent motions, of shadow that is cast by turning. But it is not so, as here declared, with the Father of lights, Whose unchangeableness is as perfect as His goodness, and His goodness to us who deserved nothing less, still in our weakness, and still in a world of evil.

But His purpose is to have the world governed righteously. This cannot be according to God till His Son, the Lord Jesus come forth to make good the kingdom, the world-kingdom in power and glory; as He has already vindicated His God and Father in obedience and suffering that He might save to the uttermost. Of this the Old Testament prophets have spoken amply, and the New Testament reiterates the truth in all plainness of speech, as it shows also the more distant and glorious vista, when all evil shall be done away and the new heavens and a new earth shall be, not in measure and pledge only, but in fullness. For government shall yield to everlasting righteousness dwelling in unbreakable peace, after all judgment is executed by Him to Whom it is given. Of this we are a certain first-fruits already, for we are begotten by the word of truth, and this nature is holy. But there is another which we ought never to ignore, and which, if not judged, breaks out into sins; so that, till we are changed at Christ's coming, we can only be called “a certain first-fruits.” We follow Christ's steps and ought to walk as He walked; but we shall be like Him when we see Him as He is.

Time and Space

I DO not think we have any knowledge of time as time in itself. We measure from one event to another, but cannot without facts with intervals. Space is not exactly the same, because we discern it by a sense which sees an interval at one time. All I know of time is, “I am now.” When I compare this with events, I am conscious that it is not “now:” there is time. As events only proceed from God, “I am” to Him never changes. He is in Himself always. Events come from His will, and are relative, not absolute. When I speak of an event before what happened to-day, I look at it as having happened in a “now” which is not present. This I extend by invented measures. “Infinite,” I admit, we cannot know, though we know it is not “finite infinite.” But without existence I do not understand time or eternity—but God is.

When I begin to count time, I count necessarily from “now,” for I am now. I then speak of time not finishing in thought. Before and after make no difference whatever, save by events, and if I look after, I must imagine events or I cannot take a step beyond now. The starting-point in both is “now;” and I go on both ways from that and cannot finish.

Hence when Christ's eternal nature is spoken of, it is said ἐγ ἀρχῆ ἦν ὁ λόγος;. “In the beginning was the Word,” all events and γενόμενα by which time had an existence being supposed. His is existence per se eternal and divine. When historical creation is spoken of, it is supposed God created. All things made came into being, there must have been a Creator. What we wanted to know was Creation. The highest, holiest, way of speaking of God was thus saying nothing about Him, but that He acted. As to Christ, it was of the utmost importance to know that He was before, and eternal.

But all the talk about “bounded” or “unbounded” space is a mistake. I know very well indeed what “bounded space” is: a field is a bounded space, because I know what a bound is, being bounded. That I can negative; but I never conceive any negative proposition. I can deny a bound when a bound is supposed, but it is no idea of the opposite at all. I cannot conceive all space as a known whole. My only conception of it is that it is not within the limits of my finite conception. But this is what “infinite” means. It is no positive idea, for then it is finite—has bounds.

If it be said that “we cannot conceive God,” I answer, Certainly not by an idea. If I did, it must be adequate, and He would not be God. But I do know He is not within the range and capacity of my idea. And this is something very material in our knowledge. When it is said, “He that loveth not knoweth not God, for God is love,” it is another thing. It is not an idea but a moral nature morally apprehended; and space, and time, and measures have no place in it at all. It is another order of things. Affections, even human, are not ideas.

Past time without a commencement is not possible thought; because when I say “past,” I have already commenced with the “now.” I do not see why infinite division cannot be thought of, because the parts are bounded. I remember a teacher of Mathematics sought to show by a tangent an indivisible angle; but he had only to make a circle with a longer radius, and division was made.

The only idea I have of time is bounded by events which are not “now.” But as far as without, then I seek to know it. I have no idea of time but the principle of eternity, only contradicted by experience. “I am” —that is not time as having duration, but in a point, and with a notion excluding bounded time, and so leading up to God Who is necessarily “I AM,” the nearest approach to conceiving eternity; which in itself I cannot conceive. But I conceive God existing, and never doing anything but existing.

My only idea of space, save bounded or enclosed space, is practically infinitude, not conceived as so much (for then it is finite), but as simply endless, i.e. negatively. I do not say “existing time.” Nothing properly exists in time which exists consciously; that is, consciousness is not cognizant of time. But I exist in space. Hence I do not begin it here, as I do time by “now.” And I cannot conceive where a body cannot be unless where one is; that is, I only conceive space as space without measurement, but room where.

“Nothing” cannot become, because there is nothing to become; but this does not say that God could not speak, and cause to be made, that is, create. J. N. D.

Scripture Query and Answer: 1 Corinthians 11:20

Q.— 1 Cor. 11:20. As it is argued that, in refusing the title of some professing Christians to partake of the Lord's supper, we make it “our own,” not His, I wish to know what is His revealed mind.

A.- All depends on whether the professing Christians are “leavened” or even worse. The New Testament is clear that “leaven” includes I both moral corruption (1 Cor. 5) and doctrinal (Gal. 5), neither of which is compatible with the communion of saints. They are “unleavened” in Christ and are commanded to purge out the old leaven that they may be a new lump in consistency with their standing. So runs His word in the scripture which specially treats of discipline in the assembly. The Galatian evil was yet more dangerous though different. But more hateful to God than either is the case of those who allow such as bring not the doctrine of Christ; and all the worse if they have the reputation of piety. The elect lady and her children (2 John) are charged with no heterodoxy, but are bound not even to receive into the house one who falsified Christ. To salute him knowingly was to partake of his evil deeds. How much more to join with him in the Lord's supper! Such a supper would have become not “their own” merely, but anti-Christian. It is precisely because it is the Lord's supper that no one should be welcome there who is known to be deliberately dishonoring the Lord. Doubtless he that does not bring the doctrine of Christ (the truth of His person as come in flesh) is an enemy of the darkest dye; and no principle can be falser or less holy than that piety or orthodoxy gives immunity where that evil is allowed, or fellowship with such an one, no matter what the plea. It would be “our own supper,” if the Lord's authority were supplanted by our own will; but if it went so far as to allow any who undermine His personal glory, it becomes the enemy's. It is Christ's dishonor to screen and condone the sins of those that bear His name, and far worse than belonging to a sect, evil as this is.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:7

THE posterity of Cush we have next, as being Ham's eldest son. “And the sons of Cush, Seba and Havilah and Sabtah and Raamah and Sabtecha. And the sons of Raamah, Sheba and Dedan” (ver. 7; see also 1 Chron. 1:9).

The man Seba gave his name to the country and people afterward known as Meroe between Ethiopia and Egypt. The ruins of the metropolis also so called are not far from the Nubian tower of Dschendi or Shendy, as Gesenius tells us (Thes. Ll. H. and Ch. ii. 993). Bruce in his travels (Sec. Ed. v. 317) says, “If we are not to reject entirely the authority of ancient history, the island of Meroe, so famous in the first ages, must be found somewhere between the source of the Nile and this point where the two rivers unite; for of the Nile we are certain, and it seems very clear that the Atbara is the Asaboras of the ancients.” In his vol. vi. 445, 446, he confirms the former statement, and gives its latitude as 16 deg. 26 min. for the city, adding that there are four remarkable rivers that contribute to form the island Meroe, the Astusaspes (or Mareb), the Astaboras (or Tacazze), the Astapus (or White river), and the Nile (or Blue River). It is rather of course a Mesopotamian tract than an island proper; but no one need wonder that it was so called. Strabo (xviii. 823) corrects Diodorus, Sic. (i. 23) in that 375 miles would be not the length but the circumference, and 125 miles the diameter. It was rich in mines of gold, copper, iron, and salt; possessed woods of ebony, date-palm, almond-trees, &c.; and abounded in pasture-lands and millet fields of double harvest, to say nothing of forests where game and wild beasts were caught.

But its fame was long after the first ages of the Pharaohs; and the derivation (Diodorus Sic., Josephus, &c.), of Meroe from a sister of Cambyses who died during his expedition, is very doubtful. It is rather an adoption from the native designation Meru, which in ancient Egyptian means island, as shown in Smith's Diet. B. iii. 1189. Our Auth. and Rev. Vv. have “Sabeans,” in Isa. 45:14, where it should surely be Sebeans (Sebaim), as the country is named with Cush or Ethiopia in 43:3. In Job 1:15 the error occurs of calling the men of Sheba “Sabeans.” Both Sheba and Seba are brought together in Psa. 72:10; and we shall find a Cushite Sheba presently, as well as a Joktanite and a Jokshanite of the Shemitic line later on, both—of whom found their settlements in Arabia, not in Africa.

There is far from the same clear evidence as to Havilah, the second son of Cush, and also another of similar name, the twelfth son of Joktan (ver 22). As we know there is a country so called in the account of the rivers of Eden (2:11), some have sought it in Colchis or in modern Georgia; or again to the north of Suez (cf. Gen. 25:18; 1 Sam. 15:7). From the scanty references to the Cushite Havilah in scripture, it is not possible to speak with decision; but there is no doubt that they found their way into southern Arabia; and it would seem that the difficulty is increased by their intermingling with the Shemites of the same name, where the district of Khawlan is supposed to have been theirs. It is well known that Niebuhr the elder says there are two districts of that name (Descr. 270, 280); whence some have inferred one for each of the two races. But the second seems a town rather than another large district. There is more ground to look for the Cushite Havilah in the Avalitae on the African coast S.W. of the straits of Bab-el-Man-deb.

The next son of Cush, Sabtah, is generally thought traceable among the Adramitae on the Red Sea coast of Aden, where we have the modern name of Hadramaut. Cl. Ptolemy and Arrian speak of them, and Pliny the elder (N. H. vi. 32) notices a city, Sabatha, which seems to recall their forefather. It is mentioned by Knöbel (in his book on these peoples) that there is a dark race in that quarter though not confined to it, quite different from the ordinary Arab, and pointing to a Hamitic stock.

More distinct is the identification of Raamah, not only through his own name, but in his sons' too. Indeed Ezekiel names father and son as represented long after by the merchants from the eastern coast of Arabia. “The trafficking of Sheba and Raamah, they were thy traffickers; they traded for thy wares with chief of all spices, and with all precious stones and gold” (Ezek. 27:22). These were preeminently products of Arabia Felix on the Persian Gulf. It is interesting to observe, as Mr. E. S. Poole points out in Smith's Diet. B. ii. 983, that the LXX. version of our text helps to trace Raamah's name, Ῥεγμά in connection with the same in Ptol. (vi. 7) and with, Ῥεγμά in Steph. Byzant. (de Urb. ed. Berk. 653). Mr. Forster (Arabia, i, 62, 64, 75) thinks that the tribe's name, whether in Ptol. or in Pliny, is drawn from “Rhamanitae,” and hence from their progenitor; and he says that Ramah is still the name of a town as well as of a tribe and a district in that region.

Sabtecha is the last-named of Cush's sons, of which scripture makes no mention beyond the genealogical list here and in 1 Chron. 1. Hence we cannot say anything sure, and need not repeat more than Bochart's conjecture that they found their way to Carmania on the Persian shore of the Gulf, and that the name seems changed to the Samydace of Steph. Byzant. In his Thos. Gesenius suggests a yet less probable idea.

Of Sheba and Dedan, sons of Raamah, we may say more when we come to compare them with the same names in the Shemitic line. This only may be noticed that in Ezek. 27 Sheba occurs twice; first, with Raamah in ver. 22, which fixes him as the Cushite in the same part of Arabia; secondly, with Asshur, &c., in ver. 23, which points to the Shemitic line, confirmed by the distinct merchandise of each. In like manner the men of Dedan in Ezek. 27:15 appear to be Cushites on the Persian gulf (where the isle of Dedan perpetuates the name) and with imports and exports accordingly; whereas we have Dedan distinguished in ver. 20, who seem to be Shemitic through Keturah. Compare ch. 25:13.

The Jews therefore did not err in assigning to Cush, not only Ethiopia and the contiguous parts in Africa, but the opposite coast of Arabia and the southern shore of Asia generally unto India. But Arabia received also a large Shemitic population, as we shall see, which gave character to their language; and this not only from Joktan, Eber's son early, but from Ishmael's twelve sons, and from Jokshan, Abraham's son still later, with some of Esau's descendants. Even Homer (Od. i. 23, 24) speaks of Ethiopians divided into two parts, the most distant of men, some at the setting sun, and some at the rising. We shall find a Cushite element active early in Babylonia and Africa. It was a Turanian race which included the Turks, but not the Armenians whom they rightly gave to Japhet. But they seem never to have realized that the ancient Persian (Zend) language, and that of northern and central India (Sanskrit), disclose the same Japhetic source.

Divine Care and Interest

THAT the Lord shows peculiar interest for His people is an undeniable fact, of which the scriptures give many a touching sample. Moreover His watchful active care is ever in character with their relationship and position. Nor this only, but the obedience of His people in answer to His revealed mind is made the blessed and timely occasion to draw forth His interests.

In chapter 34 of Exodus where Moses is receiving a second time the Tables of the Law, with other instructions, there is a striking instance of this respecting God's earthly people; not so much in the form of His care, but rather in protecting and preserving what He had freely given them.

When in Canaan Jehovah enjoined three special Feasts for Israel to keep. Three times in the year they were to go up to Jerusalem for that purpose, which involved leaving their allotted portion and sphere, and seemingly exposing their land to danger during their absence. Then it is that Jehovah assures His obedient-people saying “Neither shall any man desire thy land, when thou shalt go up to appear before Jehovah thy God thrice in the year.”

Most telling and significant words when weighed in their connection, calculated to beget uncompromising obedience with unbroken confidence in Himself! True, it is not in the form of Abram who obeyed by leaving the land of his nativity, and going he knew not where, nor by getting to Canaan and becoming a stranger in it. But the land possessed and its portions allotted and enjoyed, they were to reckon on Jehovah to protect both it and their interests, when going up to appear before Him at the appointed feasts. When specially engaged with Him, Whose power drove out the nations before them, He would not allow any even to desire their land. Thus all was secured to them, not by any human expedient or forethought, but in doing the will of Jehovah: their obedience in appearing before Him fully guaranteed His power and protection. Each appointed feast also had its own voice in a still higher key.

Never were they to forget the way and means whereby they left Egypt with its terrible bondage any more than their beginning with Him Who claimed them for Himself from the time they were safely sheltered by the blood of the slain lamb. Their redemption from Egypt to Himself with grateful consistency was evidently the lesson in the first feast; whilst that of the first-fruits manifested the bestowed fruit of their land in the earnest of their blessing being presented to Him, Who was no less jealous of being the primary and engaging object as the Giver. If He claimed the first-fruits, the in-gathering at the harvest became the appointed occasion for them to appear in obedient delight, publicly owning that their God, Who had made them His own by redemption, had given them their harvest of blessing in Canaan.

Jehovah's claims and interests being obediently answered to by His people, they would prove how all their interest and blessing would be cared for, and secured by, Him Who holds the hearts and desires of all in His own keeping, and can turn them to serve His own purpose. Alas! as is ever the case with man under responsibility, they signally failed, using their feasts to serve themselves, forgetting and despising Him Who appointed them. Finally they rejected Him to Whom all pointed—Jesus their promised King and willing Savior, Who when presented was refused, and finally crucified at the time of the very feast, which should have taught them their deepest need of Him.

But to return to the Lord's loving care and interest in His people. In chapter 12 of Luke there is a touching instance given by the Lord Himself to His disciples, in view of His rejection and departure to heaven. It is certainly after another order than that already considered, yet most important, not only for what awaited His disciples, but for a moment like the present, when Jewish feasts and customs are so readily adopted in Christendom. For even true believers little know their present living association with Christ in heaven, together with suffering for Him in the place of His rejection here below. Distinct indeed the change; marvelously so for those who were looking for their Messiah's kingdom in power and glory, and their own assigned portion with Him in it. In preparing them for the practical consequences of His rejection, a volume of loving care and assured interest is told out, making good that the hour of sorrow and difficulty is the time to prove true love. Nor this only; but their rejected and soon to be crucified Messiah seeks to put them in sweet connection with His Father, as well as promises the presence and help of the Holy Spirit.

Whatever awaited them of trial and persecution, they were enjoined to “fear not.” He Who so loved them as to die for them, and for Whom they would be called to suffer, had power over body and soul. Moreover, if their Father clothed the lily excelling the glory of Solomon, and fed the ravens which had neither storehouse nor barn, how much more would He make them the objects of His loving care, so that peaceful confidence should possess their hearts. Moreover, if “fear not” was connected with trial and persecution, together with the exercises in daily circumstances, there was also heaven's side shedding its brightness and blessedness into the heart. For He, Who would have them without anxious thought or care for the morrow, no less said, “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom.”

The Messiah's kingdom being in abeyance, the gift by the Father of the heavenly kingdom, according to His good pleasure, would take its place, and thereby set those having part in it in like position as their Lord in relation to the earth. Indeed this precious heavenly promise follows the enjoined truth, not to live in anxious suspense or be seeking the things of this life, after the manner of the nations. “But rather seek Ye the kingdom of God, and all these things shall be added unto you.” Thus at least this promised care is in character with Jehovah's promise (although obedience was henceforth in connection with heaven and its things) to insure interest in the daily necessaries of the life here. If the disciples made heaven and its things, with Christ the central object, their purpose and heart's concern, it would be the happy occasion for the supply of their Father in the things He knew they stood in need of.

Such is the change of dispensation. Moreover when Christ had gone to heaven, it would no longer be a question of any desiring their land, but they were to sell what they had, and give alms.

This was actually done, when the Holy Ghost was given. Then they learned their treasure was in heaven, and that they were one with Christ there. To form their hearts by this marvelous change of place and circumstances was the grand mission of the Holy Ghost, as well as testimony to Christ in the gospel of His glory. When Christ and the heavenly kingdom thus became known, no wonder that the hearts of the disciples should turn there, as their feet trod the scene of their Lord's rejection, and tasted, in their given measure, their share in it.

Beyond this their privileges excelled; for with the departure of their Lord to heaven, the blessed hope of His return from thence was given. They were enjoined to have their loins girded and lights burning, so as to be waiting to open to Him immediately. To have their possessions with Christ above, crowned with a Father's loving care as to all their need here below, left nothing save doing the will of the Lord in the new order of obedience, conscious of His love Who knows and cares in character with such associations and privileges.

Surely in all this there is a lesson for to-day, particularly now that Christ and heavenly things have been made known, not only according to Luke 12, but in the fullness of heavenly life and blessing unfolded in the Epistles, and no less made good by the Holy Ghost. All being so secure and precious in Christ, that none can either desire or in any way, touch the believer's portion, it needs only to give heed to the two little words in Col. 3, “seek,” and “set” the mind and heart on the things above, where Christ (Who is the believer's life) sits on the right hand of God. There the things below, often so engrossing and ensnaring, would not detain the heart, or hinder the feet moving obediently onward, toward Him Who is saying to-day, “Surely I come quickly,” and will welcome the hearty response, “Even so, come, Lord Jesus.”

Till that moment may the indwelling Spirit beget deepened devotedness, and our fuller restful confidence in a Father's love, and the Shepherd's constant care, conscious of an interest in character with the relationship of the heavenly family, whose possessions are on high, and their home with the Son in the Father's house.

In spirit there already, Soon we ourselves shall be,

In soul and body perfect, All glorified with Thee:

by Father's love is cheering The brief but thorny way,

Thy Father's house the dwelling Made ready for that day.

G. G.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 7

Chapter 6

THIS portion opens with that which looks a slight matter under His hand Who works unseen; but it proved full of the most important consequences. The king could not sleep and asked for the strangest soporific that was ever sought—to hear the records of the kingdom. He had forgotten the best deed yet rendered to him. When two of his chamberlains plotted against his life, Mordecai came to know their wickedness and saved the king. But unaccountably as it seemed, it was quite forgotten. The king, now on hearing, inquired what was done, and learns to his own shame that so great a debt was unrequited; which made him the more urgent to remember it now.

“On that night sleep fled from the king; and he commanded to bring the book of records of the chronicles, and they were read before the king. And it was found written that Mordecai had told of Bigthana and Teresh, two of the king's chamberlains, of those that kept the door, who had sought to lay hands on the king Ahasuerus. And the king said, What honor and dignity hath been done to Mordecai for this? Then said the king's servants that ministered unto him, There is nothing done for him” (verses 1-3).

Even so, though a neglected duty was now to be repaired, far more was in His mind Who wrought secretly, and, what was most surprising, by means of the bitterest enemy, not merely himself to honor in the highest degree him whose ruin he was at that moment come to seek, but to deliver a whole people, His own people, whose existence was at stake. The banquet which seemed abortive on their behalf, the delay which in all likelihood must have tried Mordecai, was just the occasion to prepare the way effectively for the overthrow of the enemy, and the exaltation of the instrument of a greater preservation.

“And the king said, Who [is] in the court? Now Haman was come into the outward court of the king's house to speak unto the king to hang Mordecai on the gallows that he had prepared for him. And the king's servants said unto him, Behold, Haman standeth in the court. And the king said, Let him come in. So Haman came in. And the king said unto him, What shall be done unto the man whom the king delighteth.to honor? Now Hainan said in his heart, To whom would the king delight to do honor more than to myself? And Haman said unto the king, For the man whom the king delighteth to honor, let royal apparel be brought which the king useth to wear, and the horse that the king rideth upon, and on the head of which a crown royal is set: and let the apparel and the horse be delivered to the hand of one of the king's most notable princes, that they may array the man [withal] whom the king delighteth to honor, and cause him to ride on horseback through the street of the city, and proclaim before him, Thus shall it be done to the man whom the king delighteth to honor. Then the king said to Haman, Make haste, [and] take the apparel and the horse, as thou hast said, and do even so to Mordecai the Jew, that sitteth at the king's gate: let nothing fail of all that thou hast spoken. Then took Haman the apparel and the horse, and arrayed Mordecai, and caused him to ride through the street of the city, and proclaimed before him, Thus shall it be done unto the man whom the king delighteth to honor” (vers.4 -11).

So it is, the pride of the wicked blinds them to their own destruction no less than to hate the righteous they despise. He Whose eyes are over all is slow to act that men may show out what they are, while in the end He accomplishes His counsel manifestly to His own glory. Haman, after honors beyond example, assured that he only could be the one whom the king delighted to honor, and invited by the king to indicate its largest measure, was certainly unbounded in his suggestions; and thus did he fall into the pit which he had himself made, and which awaits those who ignore and defy Him Who never forgets His own, however faulty, or those who hate and would injure them. Mark however how all seems to flourish brightly for the enemy and to threaten inescapable danger for His own till the hour is about to strike.

Nor could any issue be more evidently righteous. The man (whose immense benefit to the king, in the discovery of murderous treason, had passed into oblivion) is justly honored, and so much more because of his own unselfishness and that of the queen his near relation. The man, who only sought his own things and the destruction of those who, owning the true God, stood in his way, by his own advice plays the part of attendant on the one whom he most abhorred, and whose immediate and ignominious death he appeared to have within the hollow of his hand. But no power in present things allowed to Satan annuls the will of the invisible God. What will it be, when the “old serpent” is consigned to the bottomless pit, and Immanuel takes the public rule of the world?

Meanwhile at the last moment the wicked man is not left without solemn warning, as is often given, before the blow of doom falls on his guilty head; and this warning from the last quarter whence it might be expected. His own mortification and misery prepared him for bearing the worst. What a contrast with the righteous who returned in peace and lowliness to his post of duty!

“And Mordecai came again to the king's gate. But Haman hasted to his house, mourning and having his head covered. And Haman recounted unto Zeresh his wife and all his friends everything that had befallen him. Then said his wise men and Zeresh his wife unto him, If Mordecai, before whom thou hast begun to fall, [be] of the seed of the Jews, thou shalt not prevail against him, but shalt surely fall before him. While they [were] yet talking with him, came the king's chamberlains, and hasted to bring Haman unto the banquet that Esther had prepared” (vers. 12-14).

The Eastern Little Horn: 2

Dan. 8

CARE is taken that one cannot among the nations and kingdoms of the earth find anything really analogous but the Medo-Persian kingdom, thus assailed and superseded by Alexander the Great. He of course is the he-goat's notable horn. All is contrast. No other horn comes up to dispute with that conspicuous horn. Yet was it broken, as neither Nebuchadnezzar was, nor Cyrus. Alexander did indeed come from the west as one that touched not the ground, and in the fury of his power ran upon the hitherto mighty Persian power that pushed westward, and northward, and southward. Yet in the strangest and saddest way Alexander's course was cut short as a young man of thirty-two, in the midst of far-reaching plans beyond all his predecessors. And his generals began, as they often do, to fight one with another, if one could not inherit all, which should have the largest possible share of the broken Macedonian or Greek empire. After a few years' conflict emerged four kingdoms, four notable horns. Give if you can, out of all history, anything that so clearly answers to the vision. The facts are notorious and exactly correspond with the prophecy, and as contrasted as can be conceived with other conquerors in the East.

But two of these four horns are specified, and in a continuous manner beyond example in Dan. 11, whereas in this chapter 8. one only is selected. Why? Because of its bearing upon Israel and their worship in contempt of their God, Who at the set time (“the end of the indignation”) will surely judge it. It is not at all here a question of Christianity but of the ancient people, already captive and scattered, a revelation for whose instruction and consolation was given to the prophet. There was then no such thing as the church as we know it now. Only one people had the law of God, yet broken and unhappy, because they had been guilty and even apostate—people, priests, and kings. But still they had most of the Old Testament scriptures; and God looked on them with matchless patience. So He is still doing with fallen Christendom in spite of those men whom it ill becomes to fight against Him and His word. And while the Gentiles are being called by the gospel, God has not done with Israel, who are, spite of all, beloved for their fathers' sake. “The last end of the indignation” is an instructive statement in this very chapter, which shows how God, while cutting off the transgressors of Israel, will yet assuredly accomplish the promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. For God cleaves to His word and His oath, though we may have to wait for the set time. Israel will yet awake to far greater love than that of the fathers, and on a deeper basis. They are beloved of Christ, and will be brought into living relationship with Jehovah under the new covenant.

It is clear that this time is not yet come. But all these visions bring us down to the border of that wondrous change, if they do not prepare the way for it. Accordingly, toward the end of chapter viii. in the interpretation given to Daniel, we find not the date named in the vision, which appears to be already verified under Antiochus Epiphanes, the type of the coming foe, with details about this closing personage. The main interest centers in what is still future. There is no excuse for turning back on the past after so close an intimation from Him Who knows. Full information is given immediately after from verse 19, where we read “Behold, I will make thee know what shall be in the latter time (or end) of the indignation.” What was the beginning of the indignation? What does “the indignation” mean? It is first employed, similarly applied as far as one knows, in the prophet Isaiah, as you may verify for yourselves in chapter 10 especially: God's holy displeasure at the persistent idolatry and corruptions of Israel. Therefore did He at length let the Gentiles not only master them but use their victory to expel them from the land. The “end of the indignation” will terminate in their restoration inwardly and outwardly, as all the prophets testify. It has nothing at all to do with the Christian or the church.

Christian interpreters rack their wits in vain to bring in their own relations with God and His Son; and as the Papist tries to fasten on Luther or Mahomet, so do Protestants on the Pope. But this controversial style is a wholly unintelligent way of reading prophecy. Besides, it panders to the selfish and schismatic leaven which alike produced, and is perpetuated in, the anomalous sections of the Christian profession. We surely ought to search and understand the scriptures, having the Holy Spirit to this end among others; and we are bound not to force or twist them, either for outdoing others or for our own comfort. In the gospel we have got good measure, well pressed down, and running over. Being thus blessed as we are in the Lord Jesus and by His perfect work, we ought to be under no temptation to take anything away from Israel. There they are through idolatry first, and rejecting the Christ last, in the worst plight possible, scattered and banished till the latter day, when they must pass through a tribulation unparalleled; and for what could it be but because of national apostasy? They will once more return to idols, little as they think it, and set up “the abomination of desolation” in the sanctuary. They refused the Christ; they will receive the anti-Christ as the retribution. God never chastises nor does He ever give His people up to their enemies, except they flagrantly depart from Himself. Then His aggrieved love proves that He is a jealous God, and has indignation against the enormities of His people. Judgment begins there.

What has all this to do with the Christian or with the church? It was through Israel's fall that salvation came to the Gentiles, but even thus ultimately to provoke Israel to jealousy, and to display at the end the saving unfailing mercy of God. You may tell me Christians are often unworthy in their ways; and so they indeed are. You may tell me the church has been quite as guilty as ever Israel was in the past; so much, that one, who knew what it was to be alternately a Protestant and a Papist and a freethinker, ventured to say, “The annals of Christendom are the annals of hell.” He who so spoke never knew the Lord in any of his phases; yet his words do not misrepresent Christendom. He was a brilliant historian, but not having the Son of God, he therefore had not God. He could see evil, but knew neither grace nor truth. Thus and there it is, that man's judgment comes into such collision with everything divine, while believers are bound to judge the wickedness of a hollow Christian profession. “Everyone that is of the truth heareth My (Christ's) voice.” The only true God is faithful and true, and having given us grace and truth in the Lord Jesus, He calls us to be decided and uncompromising before the world. Begotten by the word of truth, it becomes us to be ever careful about the truth; but where we are not assured of it from God, it were well to wait in silence, yet earnest to learn and confiding in His love.

To resume then, this power that stood up (one of the four from out of the broken Greek empire) has its representative at the end of the indignation. “The ram which thou sawest having two horns; they are the kings of Media and Persia. And the rough goat is the king of Greece (Javan); and the great horn that was between his eyes is the first king,” Alexander of Macedonia, surnamed the Great. “Now that being broken, whereas four stood up in its stead, four kingdoms shall stand up out of the nation, but not with his power. And at the latter time of their kingdom, when the transgressors shall have come to the full, a king of bold countenance and understanding dark sentences (or riddles) shall stand up.” Who are “the transgressors” in this or in other scriptures? The reprobate among the Jews; and why? Israel only had the law of God given direct to themselves, the violators of which are therefore termed “transgressors.” How does scripture describe Gentiles? “Sinners of the Gentiles,” not transgressors. We of the nations were led away to dumb idols, howsoever we might be led, as the apostle describes it; and by the gospel we were brought straight from idolatry to Christ. Gentiles did not pass through the kind of legal apprenticeship which the children of Israel knew. It is plain that the correct designation of our once heathen state is therefore “sinners of the Gentiles.” Scripture is more accurate than theology or any human authority; and to unlearn current phraseology in divine things is an invaluable Biblical exercise.

The text intimates here that the Jews are at the end of the age to become worse than even now. So said Isaiah and the prophets generally; as our Lord also in the parable, as we may call it, of Matt. 12:43-45. The unclean spirit, which had gone out of the man, but returns to his house, empty, swept, and garnished, takes with him to dwell there seven other spirits worse than himself, and thus the last condition of that man becomes worse than the first. So shall it be to this wicked generation also. “Empty, swept, and garnished” had been, was then, and is now the condition of the Jews. In striking contrast with their ways of old, there has been no idolatry among them for more than 2,000 years. God's discipline in sending them to Babylon suppressed their inveterate love of strange gods, which were no gods but demons. As a clever Hebrew apologist admitted in the Quarterly Review some few years ago, the Jews that forced Pilate to crucify our Lord, Pharisees, priests, and all, were just like the Jews of the present day. Granted; and therefore did our Lord characterize them as “this wicked generation “; but as He said elsewhere, “This generation shall not pass away until all these things shall be fulfilled.” It is still the same moral state, till all that the prophets predicted of “the end” be accomplished. This Christ-rejecting generation that crucified Him is going on still; there is the same self-will, the same enmity, against Him Who came to die sacrificially. There is no change for the better, no repentance to believe. The house is still “empty, swept, and garnished.” The Holy Spirit does not dwell there. Consequently the Jews, though fairly moral and clear of idolatry, have no life Godward, and lie open to the final delusion. So the Lord declared there is a sad change coming at the end; and that change is parabolically described by the old unclean spirit accompanying the seven spirits worse than himself, when he returns for the close. How little the Jews believe they are going to establish idols again! Yet this is as certain from various scriptures as anything can be, notably Dan. 9:27, and 11:38, 39, which await their fulfillment. Thus the last state will be worse than the first. But only at that time will deliverance come, as well as destructive judgment for “the many.”

The Guilty Husbandmen

THE parable before us is morally historical. It presents briefly but fully the ways of God with His people of old up to their ruin in the rejection of the Christ, and not morally alone but nationally. The Lord even adds from the scriptures His own consequent exaltation, and their setting aside meanwhile, Himself in humiliation the stumbling-stone of unbelief, but about to return in power as the executor of judgment in this world.

“Hear another parable: There was a householder who planted a vineyard, and made a fence round it, and dug a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and left the country. But when the season of the fruits drew near, he sent his bondmen to the husbandmen to receive his fruits. And the husbandmen took his bondmen, and beat one and killed another and stoned another. Again he sent other bondmen more than the first, and they did to them likewise. And afterward he sent to them his son, saying, They will feel respect for my son. But the husbandmen, when they saw the son, said among themselves, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, and get his inheritance. And they took and cast him forth out of the vineyard and killed [him]. When therefore the lord of the vineyard shall come, what will he do to these husbandmen? They say to him, He will wretchedly destroy those wretches, and let out the vineyard to other husbandmen who shall render him the fruits in their season” (vers. 33-41).

It is plain that the Lord here takes the ground, not merely of relationship and conscience as in the preceding parable of the two children, but of responsibility to render fruit to God Who had done all possible for His people to that end. The prophet Isaiah had similarly appealed in his chap. 5. Here the Lord adds a great deal more, but on the same ground, and with similar result, only yet more plainly proclaimed. For it is not only that the vineyard, instead of grapes, brought forth wild grapes. Here the upshot was growing enmity manifested to the lord of the vineyard. In both what could have been done on behalf of the vineyard that He had not done? The prophet announced that Jehovah was going to lay His vineyard waste; and so it has been, as the state of the Jews proves. The Lord shows the patience that for ages waited on those active among the Jews, if there might be fruit for Jehovah. But His bondmen, the prophets, whom He sent to recall His people to their duty, met with nothing but contempt, ill-usage, and death. Others He sent increasingly, as the evil grew; but they fared alike contumeliously.

Lastly, He sent His Son. The Lord spoke of Himself. But the dignity of His person and the intimate nearness of His relationship to Jehovah gave the opportunity to the religious leaders among the Jews to demonstrate their contempt and deadly hatred to both the Father and the Son, as the Lord says in John 15, Could evil go farther? Other sins, shameful and ungrateful as they were, became in comparison as nothing. “If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. He that hateth Me hateth My Father also. If I had not done among them the works which none other did, they had not had sin; but now they have both seen and hated both Me and My Father.” And they had been fully warned. For they simply fulfilled what was in their law, “They hated Me without a cause.” It was not only utter unrighteousness, but deadly enmity to Jehovah and His Anointed, to the Son, their own Messiah.

And the Lord, on the near approach of this fatal result of their rebellious alienation from God, Himself puts the question to them, “When therefore the Lord of the vineyard shall come, what will He do to those husband men?” And they could not but answer, “He will wretchedly destroy those wretches, and let out the vineyard to other husbandmen who shall render him the fruits in their seasons.” So it is that the guilty own in their consciences their just punishment for positive rejection of One so good and faithful, and of their own obligations to Him, yea, of apostasy carried out to blood.

Is this nothing to you, reader, with the still greater privileges of Christendom? Are you hardening your heart against the truth, and shrinking from the God Who came so near to you in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, not reckoning to men their offenses, and having put in His servants the word of reconciliation? Beware then of a fate not better but worse than what befell and is to befall the Jews. “Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, this was made the corner-stone: of Jehovah this is, and it is marvelous in our eyes. Therefore I say to you that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits of it. And he that falleth on this stone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will scatter him as dust” (vers. 42-44). Such is the danger of stumbling now; such the judgment the Lord will execute on living man when He appears in glory. And the time hastens. See therefore, lest that come upon you which is spoken in the prophets, “Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish; for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, if one declare it unto you.”

Reflections on Galatians: Introduction

THE epistle to the Galatians has a character peculiarly its own. It is not an orderly doctrinal treatise as Romans, nor an unfolding of the eternal counsels of God as Ephesians, but an earnest effort on the part of the apostle (guided by the Holy Ghost) to recover to the truth souls who were being allured from it. Scripture has many uses, as we learn in 2 Tim. 3:16, not the least important being “correction.” It is to be noted that we owe a large measure of revealed truth (humanly speaking) to the failure and delusion of man. So wondrously does the goodness of God rise above man's evil.

Paul had planted the gospel of Christ in Galatia. Though through (or in) infirmity of the flesh he preached to them, they received him as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus (Gal. 4:13, 14). But alas! the enemy followed in his track. Men from Jerusalem, ever ready to subvert the heavenly testimony of the apostle insinuated themselves among them, telling them that, unless they added circumcision and the law of Moses to their faith in Christ, they could not be saved. In every direction Paul had to meet the same efforts: so ready is man to teach and to adopt that which puts honor on flesh.

Apostolic energy checked it to a large degree; but when this was removed, how widely and generally the Galatian leaven spread! The general condition of souls in Christendom in our own day tells a sorrowful tale. In connection with this Judaizing, the law-teachers invariably called in question the apostleship of Paul as being independent of the twelve and of Jerusalem. This the apostle explains in chaps. 1. and 2., and speaks of his connections with the twelve specially with Peter, whom he had to publicly rebuke for dissimulation at Antioch.

In chap. 3. he challenges them as to their reception of the Spirit, and his own working of miracles among them. On what principle had all this been—faith or works? Faith surely. The contrariety of the two principles is then plainly shown, and in connection with Abraham, the question is then raised as to the relation of law to promise. The law was added subsequently “because of transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made.” But what was the state of believers before the coming of the Seed? (chap. 4.) It was that of infancy. They were kept “under tutors and governors” — “were in bondage under the elements of the world.” Believers now whether Jews or Gentiles are sons, and have the gift of the Spirit, “whereby we cry, Abba, Father.” The apostle then appeals touchingly to them, reminding them of their happiness when he was among them.

He desires them to hear the law, i.e., the Old Testament scriptures. Had they not heard of Sarah and Hagar? These set forth the two covenants. The fruit of the one was cast out, while the child of promise inherited the blessing. “We are not children of the bondwoman but of the free.”

The Galatians were to stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ makes free and not be entangled again in the yoke of bondage (chap. 4.). If they adopted circumcision they were debtors to do the whole law, and upon that ground Christ availed them nothing. This persuasion was not of God. He had not led them to this: they had been hindered in their race—turned aside by the enemy. But he had confidence in them through the Lord. Yet those who had beguiled them should bear their judgment.

At verse 13 the apostle enters upon another phase. If the law cannot justify, can it sanctify? Is it the believer's rule of life? Nay, Christians have been called in this respect also unto liberty. Such are to walk in the Spirit, and thus flesh is subdued. The law provokes sin—it does not produce holiness. But the Holy Spirit is in the believer to work this out. The works of the flesh are known, and to be shunned: the fruit of the Spirit is looked for in all in whom He dwells. But if any be overtaken in a fault (chap. 6.), the spiritual are to restore him in the spirit of meekness. The law of Christ is to be considered, not that of Moses. If responsibility cannot be shifted, godly care is to be exercised over each other. We get here God's standing governmental principle, “whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.” Was it flesh or spirit the Galatians were sowing to? Their law-teachers sought a fair show in the flesh, and to avoid persecution. As for the apostle, he would glory in nothing but the cross of the Lord Jesus. He bore in his body His stigmas (or brands). Let none trouble him. Such, briefly, is our epistle.

As evidence of his deep concern for these brethren, and the grave light in which he regarded their departure, the apostle mentions that he wrote this letter with his own hand (ch. 6: 11).

James 1:19-20

The critical correction which opens verse 19 rests not only on excellent authority, but on internal evidence of no small weight; while the common reading followed by the A. V. seems a rather obvious change of transcribers who failed to apprehend the force of the verb here.

“Ye know [it], my brethren beloved; but let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath; for man's wrath worketh not God's righteousness” (vers. 19, 20).

It is characteristic of Christianity to know not only the privileges and experience of saints but the depths of God, as we are told in 1 Cor. 2:10, and not simply as revealed objectively but in inward spiritual consciousness, as being born of God and thus having a new nature derived of Him. Of this we were fully told in the verse before; and, as knowing it, we have important consequences now urged on us. It is not that saints of old were destitute of that nature, as answering to faith which is the ground of all divine affections and of everything that pleases God in holy conduct. But it would be difficult to find, throughout the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets, so simple an enunciation of it as our Epistle lays down; and this not as a novel communication to those addressed, but as a truth so known to them that there was no need of enforcing the fact or enlarging on its importance. We are therefore led at once to weighty practical results.

Others were given to set forth the work of redemption in Christ, or His personal glory, which are outside the believer and of all moment for purging the conscience and filling the heart. But it was the place of James writing to those peculiarly liable to be content with objects of sight only, to instruct in that interior dealing with the heart which is no less essential to the Christian, and secured to faith, both by a life given in Christ and by the gift of the Holy Spirit consequent on His blood-shedding and ascension. Here James had taught them in the clearest terms, that of His own purpose God gave us birth by the word of truth. So in the Fourth Gospel the apostle told us that “as many as received Him (Christ), to them gave He title to become children of God, even to them that believe on His name: who were born, not of blood nor of flesh's will, nor of man's will, but of God.” It is inexcusable to mistake so plain an intimation, or (if seen) to lower its importance. The believer has already this new life, knows it, and is called to manifest it accordingly. Christianity is not only the revelation of a Lord and Savior not less truly divine than the Father, but this inseparably from a new nature now imparted to the believer, who is responsible to walk suitably in the practical exercise of that life.

The exhortation therefore here is: “let every man be swift to hear.” Christ Himself is the model of this, as of all else that is good. Though the Holy One of God, never was any so swift to hear God's word. So the prophet distinguished Him, “The Lord Jehovah hath given me the tongue of them that are taught, that I should know how to speak a word to him that is weary. He wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as they that are taught. The Lord Jehovah hath opened mine ear, and I was not rebellious, neither turned away backward.” Nor was it otherwise with His bearing in presence of the tempter: the word of God was His constant resource, and only the more if Satan perverted it. “It is written again” was His lowly God-honoring answer. And so it is, and has ever been, with His sheep. They hear His voice, and follow Him; they know not the voice of strangers.

The word of truth abides in its value. By it they were begotten of God; by it the new life is fed, formed, directed, and strengthened. All the written word is prized as well as authoritative; but for special instructions God has been pleased to furnish those communications we call the New Testament. If we rightly heed all scripture, we assuredly shall welcome every word that explains the new life and its duties, and His glory and grace Who is its spring and fullness.

But we are told also to be “slow to speak.” For we have another nature which is self-confident and impulsive; and there do we need to be on our guard, that, knowing ourselves weak, ignorant, and naturally prone to evil, we may look up to God and wait dependently on Him. As born of Him, it is ours to be jealous that we may neither misrepresent nor grieve Him. And therefore are we warned of another danger, when it is added “slow to wrath.” How often it is impotent and hasty self-will! We are now sanctified to do His will, to obey as Christ obeyed. There is of course a right occasion for wrath. So the Lord looked round about on those that misused the sabbath to oppose God's grace in an evil world. But we are exhorted to be slow to wrath, and to let it soon be over. “Be ye angry and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath; neither give place to the devil” (Eph. 4:26, 27).

A weighty reason is added which calls for explanation, because the similarity of phrase might lead the hasty to confound it with the well-known but little understood language of the apostle Paul. The two writers can only be rightly appreciated by giving due weight to their respective aims. In Romans and elsewhere in that apostle's writings, it is God's consistency with what is due to Christ's work in redemption. God therefore justifies him that believes in Jesus according to the value of His atoning death in His sight; and so we are made (or become) that righteousness in Him risen and ascended. But James is occupied with our practical ways in consistency with God's sovereign will in begetting us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of first-fruit of His creatures. And He looks for conduct according to that new nature He has given us by faith. Submissiveness of heart becomes us in hearkening to Him, and in avoiding our natural haste of speech and proneness to wrath; for, he adds, man's wrath worketh not God's righteousness. It is practical, not our standing according to Christ's work as in Paul's epistles; and it recalls our Lord in Matt. 6:33, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness.” This again is not our standing in Christ by virtue of God's righteousness, but the power of His kingdom and character in our souls and ways.

Priesthood of Christ: 6

IT is, however, the fact now, that throughout Christendom theology limits sin to flagrant, or at any rate overt, acts of transgression, and teaches men that, human nature being what it is, there must needs be sin on the part of the Christian; and one reason of this Christ-dishonoring result is very plain. They agree in general to put themselves under the law as the rule of life. Now, as surely as the flesh is in us, it is utterly impossible that the law should not provoke those under it to sin. Nay, it was what the law was given for. It is not meant to make men sinners, which God could not do, but when they were sinners, to make the sin evident, and to bring it out unmistakeably. In a certain sense the object was wholesome and merciful in the result, because it was to hinder people from deceiving themselves. It was directly calculated to guard those that had sinned, and really were guilty before God, from being able to gloss over their sins and pretend they had none. It was to prove them distinctly obnoxious to judgment, and to make them cry out to God for mercy, glad to find the free grace that God has provided in the Lord Jesus Christ and by His redemption.

Such a process it pleased God to carry on before the Savior came, preparing the way for Him and His work in this as in other respects. But then it is another thing altogether, now that He is come, and the grace and truth of God in all its fullness, and the redemption that Christ has accomplished. It is a totally different thing to go back from the gospel and put oneself in that condition of law in which souls necessarily were before, in order to make them feel the impossibility of law availing them and their need of grace in Christ. If it was in due season then, it is unbelief now, when God's word entitles the believer to the enjoyment of what He has wrought and of what He is. Law is not enacted for a righteous man (which and more the believer surely is), but for lawless and insubordinate souls, for impious and sinful (which believers are not); as, on the other hand, the right and intended use of the saving grace of God is to teach us, that, having denied impiety and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, and justly, and piously in the present age (or course of things), awaiting the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. By grace, therefore, the soul is put as absolutely clean by virtue of Christ's redemption before God, once utterly guilty and lost, but now without a charge on His part.

What more do I want? That the same Savior who died and rose for me should be now living and active on my behalf in all the gracious exercise of His watchful loving holy care, succoring me in the midst of my trials for His name's sake, and from man's, the world's, and Satan's hatred. He is in the glory, and I am in the wilderness, going on, toiling, suffering, but awaiting Him to come and take me to Himself in that glory whither He is gone. For the present I am here. He was crucified, and, while here, exposed to very various enemies, not only to their malicious power, but to the serpent's wiles. And who and what am I to stand or march through? It is here that priesthood applies to saints, and for such ends. It is to minister to them the suited succor, that we may receive mercy and find grace for seasonable help. It is from One too, Who knows all by His own experience in depths beyond comparison; Who knows what an enemy Satan is, and how great his subtlety and his malice; from One therefore not only as divine, but that can succor on the ground of being once tried to the uttermost Himself as man, but still One Who is priest as Son of God, and not merely because He has that nature which I have, although I have it in a fallen unholy state which He had not. I have humanity tainted: He was and is the Holy One, not only as God, but as man. Certainly however, this is no reason why He should not sympathize, but the contrary. For it is selfishness and sin which hinder sympathy, not holiness and love.

But we are told “we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities.” Mark, the apostle does not speak about our sins; nor is there any ground whatever to confound “infirmities” with sins. He supposes a people that have now done with their sins by the grace of God, because by the blood of Christ they are blotted out forever. They are set, therefore, with their faces Godward and heavenward; but still they are in the wilderness. And above is the Lord Jesus in all His active love and grace occupied with them individually, and able to sympathize with our infirmities, as One tempted in all things in like manner apart from sin. No doubt one of the sources which commonly pervert the character of Christ's priesthood is from looking in a natural way to our Lord Jesus. Men can not make out how He can be dealing with every one at once according to His word. But this is a simple matter of faith. The word of God is as plain about the suited care of the Lord Jesus in His priestly office, as about the efficacy of His redemption for each believer. And as to the total absence of sin, there is exactly the same phrase used for the one case as for the other, as displayed in salvation when He appears a second time. (Compare Heb. 4:15 with chapter 9:28).

Accordingly it is in this way that the Holy Ghost treats it. “Having therefore a great high priest passed as he hath through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast the profession.” For therein lay the difficulty. Their peril was lest they should compromise Christ Jesus or go back. The apostle never hints at the danger of assurance, but insists on holding it firm to the end. That they should doubt the forgiveness of their sins does not occur to the Spirit of God, if I may so speak. Beyond controversy He could not treat the work of Christ with such contempt as to raise the question whether it does not absolutely effect the end for which God had given Him to die. Rather does He call on the children to hold fast the boldness and the boast of hope firm to the end, resting in their simplicity, which is their wisdom, on the fullness of divine grace in Christ. It is for this very reason they in their trials want sympathy, as well as to be helped and strengthened; and the priesthood of Christ does this for the holy brethren.

It is not a question here of meeting unholy men, and pardoning those who are taught of God to cry to Him about their sins and ruin. This is in the gospel of God's grace found elsewhere, but not here. It is not the point in priesthood, but rather “let us hold fast the confession.” Christ was in all points tempted like as we are, without sin excepted. It is not merely without sinning, but without sin:” temptation in His case was absolutely apart from sin. “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need,” grace for seasonable help.

In the next chapter (5.) this is pursued, and in a manner full of importance and interest, although men often overlook it. “For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God.” This they apply to the Lord Jesus. “Well,” you ask, “was He not taken from among men?” I answer that the Holy Spirit is not giving this as a description of His priesthood at all, but of priesthood in contrast with His. “For every high priest taken from among men is established for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins; who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way, for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.” The third verse ought to make it indisputably plain to any believer. The same high priest of the first two verses is described in the third verse also; and he expressly requires to offer for himself—not merely for others, but also for his own need—to offer for sins. Is it not obvious then, that it is such a high priest as Aaron or Aaron's son, not such a one as Christ, Who, if compared, is accordingly also contrasted in the description? “And no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called by God, as was Aaron. So also Christ glorified not Himself” (ver. 4, 5). He begins with a point of similarity, but it is only to bring out contrast. He did not take it to Himself. He Who said to Him, Thou art My Son, said also elsewhere, A priest Thou forever after the order of Melchisedec. He was addressed by God accordingly. Thus the essence of our Lord's priesthood here, where the root, stock, and fruits are all before us, is this, that He was not merely Son of man, but the Son of God.

Most blessed to see, that being Son of God He deigned to become a man, the Son of man; but the ground laid down is what He is essentially in His own right and title, not merely what He became, but what He is, the Son of God, as none else was of men or angels. The high priest, with whom chapter 5 opens, is merely a child of Adam like another, who could exercise forbearance toward the ignorant and erring, because he was no better himself. He was himself also clothed with infirmity. It was but natural therefore that he on this ground should feel for his fellows. But all this is exactly in contrast with the place, and dignity, and grace of the Lord as priest.

(To be continued, D.V.)

The Titles in the Epistles

THERE are but Paul and Peter who name their apostleship at the beginning of the Epistles; and Paul, supposing the Epistle to the Hebrews to be his which I do not doubt, does not call himself so there. This title is not found in Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians, and Philemon, the character of which epistle is much more personally fraternal. He associates also others; but this is not by itself the absolute reason. But these facts show that the title is assumed with a definite purpose and meaning: Paul and Barnabas, and in result Paul, having mission to the Gentiles, and Peter to the Jews, assume their title when in special exercise of their mission.

The others write according to the wisdom and gift of God. This is the case with Paul to the Hebrews, for he had not the place of apostle with them; and the kind of intercourse, as with the Thessalonians and Philemon, instead of claiming such a title, rendered it unsuited to the occasion. It was not authoritative revelation, or mandate, or the assumption of this place as title or ground of intercourse, but brotherly occasions of tender care or thoughtful communication. Though the truth he might announce might be the same, and its authority equal, its proper bearing is evident in the cases in which it is used.

Paul had never seen the Romans, and he was to present himself as the called apostle of all the Gentiles. Among the Corinthians he had to exercise this authority, and an authority contested, to put things in order. In the Galatians it was the question in a great measure, though scarce, of the truth which he taught. In the Ephesians and the Colossians he is the depository, as apostle of the Gentiles, of “the great mystery,” of Christ in them the hope of glory. The position of Timothy and Titus, who were to regulate important things in virtue of his authority, makes the use of this title evident and clear. Hence the use of it in an inspired Epistle is not to be looked for without a reason; and, generally speaking, Peter and Paul alone are in this place in respect of their scriptural relationships with the church. The authority does not come simply from apostleship, but from the will of God acting by inspiration. The manner of address is connected with the bearing of the letter, though it be an instruction for all times. For it is in these circumstances that the ways of God in the church are fully developed, and the proper Christian relationships, as well as divine truths, unfolded.

J. N. D.

The Judgment, Not Reunion, of Christendom

IT need not surprise anyone that, in a letter to the Archbishop of York, an experienced and able politician of the day has expressed the hopes of such as look for a reunion of Christendom. Some were unprepared for this, and are pained at a tone throughout very deferential to the Pope, to say the least. In fact, however, Mr. Gladstone is more consistent with himself than on most of the burning questions he has ever approached. Christendom has always been a cherished idol. In this he is unchanged still.

Now, if we believe the scriptures, Christendom spiritually judged is a ruin; and this by the confession of almost every conscience when probed. The Pope, to begin with, acknowledges it in his manifold anathemas; so in effect do Mr. G. and all that yearn after reunion. Were things according to God, there would be room for neither. Much more deeply do those feel the ruin who habitually in sackcloth and ashes confess the sins which caused it. By divine constitution all the saints since Pentecost had originally but one communion. There might be thousands or myriads that believed (Acts 21:20); but they were “the church of God in Jerusalem,” in Antioch, in Corinth, in Ephesus. So it was everywhere in apostolic days. Churches in distinct provinces or countries of course there were. But the gospel even then was preached everywhere, the Lord working with those who preached (Mark 16:20, Col. 1:6, 23); and the believers throughout the earth were builded together as God's house, a living God's assembly, pillar and base of the truth.

On a rough reckoning of Christian profession there are said to be 216 millions of Romanists; but there are 137 millions of Anglicans, Lutherans, Reformed and other Protestants, and 97 millions of Greeks, orthodox or others, with Nestorians, Copts, Abyssinians, &c. There are at least as many that bear the Christian name outside as within Roman-ism, though itself containing far more than any other single denomination. But unity there is none. Can any claim be weaker in presence of the facts? It is equally certain, that holy unity in the truth ought to have ever been, and that it has for ages ceased to be. The claim therefore is now demonstrably false, its absence a sure proof of ruin. Catholicity of the visible church is a self-complacent dream. And if apostolicity in the historic sense count, it is plain that Rome cannot vie with eastern churches, which, planted by one or other apostle, were ruled by John, the last. Rome never had apostles save as prisoners or to die: the assembly therein was planted or ruled by none of them. As to this scripture is decisive.

Much is argued in a human way for succession. But what faces the believer first to last in scripture is the vanity and breakdown of man, no matter when, where, or how tested by God, no matter what the privileges conferred on man. So it was with Adam, with Noah, with Abram, &c.; with Moses, Aaron, and Israel; with Saul, David, and Solomon; with Nebuchadnezzar or any other of the Gentiles. In nothing did God fail, but sustained faith notwithstanding failure in His own; yet man failed under each and every trial. Meanwhile God pointed to the Second man Who not only stood perfectly, but will in the end gloriously display all the titles which crumbled away in the first man and his sons: the Last Adam, First-born of all creation, Governor of the earth, Seed of the woman and of promise, Priest on His throne, King in Zion, Son of man Whom all the peoples, nations, and languages shall serve in the age and habitable earth to come.

But is not the church an exception to the law of human failure and misery? By no means. Hence the momentous caution (and to the saints in Rome notably in chap. 11 by the great apostle of uncircumcision), that they should not be wise in their own conceits. If the professing Gentile did not continue in God's goodness, thou also shalt be cut off,” as the Jew had been. Are any so blind, hard, or high, as to say that Christendom has continued in His goodness? Will the Pope affirm it of half the baptized? Will the Protestant of the Romanist majority? Will the pious Anglican say it of his own community? Will a God-fearing Nonconformist plead, Not guilty, for his society or for any other? But if it be so, scripture (without a single qualifying word in any other passage, with many and even more solemn menaces elsewhere) lays down inflexibly, “thou also shalt be cut off.”

Christendom, mother and daughters (Rev. 17:5), falls under the universal sentence. God's ways with the faithful fail now no more than ever; God's purpose of grace will be established in Christ and the church on high beyond all the power of the enemy. But there is no difference from the Jew in the Gentile as to responsible profession on earth. The one exception is the Lord Jesus, Who will give effect to this as to every other design of God in the coming day. He, not the Pope, is the head of the body, the church; He Who is the beginning, firstborn from the dead (for it is in this condition, not as incarnate merely, that church relationship begins), that in all things He might have the pre-eminence.

Let none deceive in any way. The day will not be, as the apostle assures, except the falling away, the apostasy, first have come (not reunion but apostasy, unless indeed the two coalesce) and the man of sin have been revealed, the son of perdition (2 Thess. 2). Those who believe with Luther and Calvin and Knox, with Cranmer and Jewel and Parker, with Baxter and Howe and Owen, that Romanism is the apostasy and the Papacy the man of sin, must profoundly regret the aged statesman bowing before Pope Leo xiii., and deprecating that which the power behind the Vatican will demand in their never-failing pride and the unslumbering thirst after universal domination for their chief. But while it is sheer unbelief to doubt that Rome is the harlot of the Apocalypse, a more audacious portent will be the issue of the baptized, including Popery and Protestantism and Jews too in a more complete apostasy, and in the exaltation of the lawless one whom the Lord will destroy by His shining forth, and thus introduce the days of heaven on the earth, as He alone is competent and worthy and fore-appointed.

With this agree all the oracles of the New Testament as of the Old. The darnel (Matt. 13) ruined the crop; but there is no remedy sanctioned till the Son of man judges in the consummation of the age (13: 27-43). As in the days of Noah and of Lot, so it will be when the Son of man is revealed (Luke 17), not reunion, but judgment of the quick. 1 Tim. 4 and yet more strongly 2 Tim. 3 prove non-continuance in God's goodness, and therefore the necessity for excision (as in Rom. 11). And what mean 2 Peter 2, Jude 1 John, and the Revelation? Even 1 Peter 4:17 declared the time come for judgment to begin at the house of God.

Individuals may be through grace delivered. But evil as a whole once insinuated abides worsening till divine judgment; which assuredly is nigh, as the Lord is ready to judge living and dead. The hope of reunion for Christendom is not only unwarranted by one word, but opposed to the uniform testimony, of the Lord and His apostles. It springs from fallen self; which first departs from God's will, and then neglects or defies His word, never abandoning vain trust in man. The prophets declare that God will in sovereign grace restore Israel. The New Testament is equally explicit that He will destroy, not restore, Babylon.

How can sober men expect her who says in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall in no wise see mourning, to quit her spurious throne, and to betake herself to the dust in repentance? Now especially, that they have set up an impeccable woman and an infallible man as their new calves of gold? Does her forehead yet blush for worship in one form or another to the virgin and the angels, to dead men's bones and clothes, to the crucifix and the wafer? Is she ashamed of a celibate priesthood with its auricular confession and other horrors direct and indirect? Does she repudiate her pretended transubstantiation, and her real enmity to scripture reading? Has Rome delivered herself from that lie in her right hand, the Mass? On her own showing it is a propitiatory sacrifice for the living and the dead. This would be, according to scripture, a sacrament, not of the remission of sins (as the Lord's supper announces), but of their non-remission. Is it not a sacrifice avowedly going on day by day, with just the same proof of inefficiency as in Jewish sacrifices, which the Epistle to the Hebrews contrasts with the offering of Christ's body once for all (Heb. 9; 10), and its result now to the believer? For where remission of sins is, “there is no more offering for sin.” This the gospel proclaims, and the Mass contradicts: a different gospel, which is not another.

What then can one think of Anglicans listening to Rome, when their own Articles of Religion (xxxi.) pronounce that the sacrifices of Masses are “blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits?” and that Rome (xix.) “hath erred not only in their living and manner of ceremonies, but also in matters of faith?” Has not the profound and progressive alteration of the last half-century in the Anglican body been a return, not to “that which was from the beginning,” but to the rites and doctrines of unreformed Christendom in East and West? Has it not led to this retrograde letter?

If you value scripture, if you cleave to the gospel, if you have redemption in Christ, if you honor the Son as the Father, if you know that corporately you are God's temple and your body a temple of the Holy Spirit, beware of reunion with the city of confusion, doomed to destruction as God is true. Beware even of looking back, lest you become a pillar of salt. For God is not mocked, and the Lord may be provoked to jealousy. W. K.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:8-10

FROM the manner in which Nimrod is introduced, it would appear that he was a descendant of Cush rather than son in the strict sense. Why else should he be named after not only the five sons of Cush, but his two grandsons through Raamah?

“And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before Jehovah: wherefore it is said, like Nimrod a mighty hunter before Jehovah. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar” (vers. 8-10).

Nimrod then was assuredly a Cushite. This only it was of moment to communicate, because of a new departure which originated in him. And as we do not hear particulars of his immediate connection beyond that fact, so neither are we told of his descendants. Personal ascendancy is ascribed to him first, which made the brief notice of himself of sufficient interest to turn aside from the hitherto simple tracing of the genealogical lines, the origin of the various races. “He began to be a mighty one in the earth.” It was no question of divine appointment or providential succession. His own right hand wrought on his own behalf. The Jews have as usual much to say where scripture is silent, and strive to fill up the outline of truth into a fabulous picture. So do others follow them in this natural propensity, which they represent as hoary tradition; so in Arab astronomy Nimrod is transformed into the constellation Orion, “Giant,” in Hebrew “Chesil” (Job 9:9; 38:31, Amos 5:8). We need not occupy our readers with the various hypotheses which have been reared on this latter word; but those curious in such speculations can find them in Michaelis Suppl. ad Lex. Hebr. No. 1192.

But there is nothing mythical in the little that scripture says. Nimrod “began to be a mighty one in the earth.” Not so had it been with Abel or Seth, with Enoch or Noah. What they enjoyed was God's gift. They looked for Him Who is coming; Nimrod sought great things for himself like Cain who was the first builder of a city in primeval days, as Nimrod was the first after the deluge, and on a large and repeated scale. Present power was his aim; and God allowed it apparent success.

We are further told that “he was a mighty hunter before Jehovah.” There seems no sufficient reason to question that this is meant literally. It made a great impression on his contemporaries, so that his prowess as a hunter became proverbial. “Wherefore it is said, like Nimrod a mighty hunter before Jehovah.” It evidently gave him the exercised skill and strength which passed at length into another field of far deeper interest and gravity.

Yet more important is it to note that Nimrod was the first to set at naught the patriarchal headship which hitherto prevailed, as it subsisted elsewhere for ages afterward. His ambition could not be bounded by the chase, and led him from wild beasts to mankind. “And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel.” We have to wait for the chapter which follows to see the significance of this fact; and we learn from it and other remarks how little our chapter has to do with chronology. For though it does give the origin of races in their lands and tongues, it intersperses notices by the way which occurred not a little while after; and this episode of Nimrod is one of them.

It was among the Hamitic sons then that a kingdom was first set up among men. God was not in any of Nimrod's thoughts; He was not sought, nor did He give the least direction, in the case. Nimrod conceived the design through his own ambition, and executed it through the force of his will, and the address and skill he had acquired in his hunting. How different the way of Jehovah at a later day! For, when Israel would have a king in imitation of the nations and chose one who served himself, and brought no deliverance even from Philistines within their border who slew him and his sons, He took His servant David from the pasture, from following the sheep, and made him prince over His people, over Israel, to feed them, and assured him that his house and his kingdom should be made firm forever before him—his throne established forever.

But the present use made of this is not the perpetuity of that kingdom, secured as it did become in Christ risen, the sure mercies of David; but the beautiful preparation which pleased Jehovah Who chose him lay, as we have seen, in his lowly and tender care of the sheep, in marked contrast with the first king among men who made his mark in the snaring and slaying of wild beasts. The race of man had already proved how little it regarded aged Noah who was not only chief of all the saved from the deluge but set up by God with the sword of magistracy then first committed. And if he had through heedless self-indulgence fallen into an act whose effects put him to grievous shame, what wickedness in and near him to expose him to mockery who had covered all his own through the dangers of the flood! Of this line it was, though not of Canaan's descent, that Nimrod arrogantly set up first a kingdom. Terrible and dreadful we may say, as the prophet said of the Chaldeans, his judgment and his dignity proceeded from himself.

His kingdom Nimrod began with Babel. This is most characteristic. What recked he, if it had begun in impious self will to centralize mankind in direct opposition to the divine design and command of replenishing the earth? or if it had been abandoned by the builders under a divine judgment which compelled them to scatter abroad upon the face of all the earth? The abandoned city and tower exactly suited his project of a kingdom for himself, not a universal commonwealth. So “the beginning of his kingdom was Babel.” And success in his project encouraged him to go forward; “and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh in the land of Shinar” followed. As there is no doubt about Babylon, there need be as little that Warka (Irka, or Irak), some forty-three miles east of Babylon, answers to Erech, certainly not Gesenius' identification with Aracca on the Tigris, any more than Jerome's notion of Edessa (or Urfah). More weight is due to Jerome's report of Jewish judgment, that Accad was represented by Nisibis, the ancient name of which was Acar (Rosenmuller 29). The Talmud identifies Calneh with Niffer, about sixty miles south-east of Babylon. Here Arab tradition revels abundantly; but their flights of fancy are not worth recounting.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 8

Chapter 7

THE catastrophe soon follows the second banquet. The murderous plotter against Israel, in their low estate for their sins, perishes by that which he designed for Mordecai.

“And the king and Haman came to banquet with Esther the queen. And the king said again unto Esther on the second day at the banquet of wine, What is thy petition, queen Esther? and it shall be granted thee: and what is thy request? even to the half of the kingdom it shall be performed. Then Esther the queen answered and said, If I have found favor in thy sight, O king, and if it please the king, let my life be given me at my petition, and my people at my request” (vers. 1-3).

For the third time the king renews his desire to know and to grant the queen's petition. He who was made to remember his forgotten deliverer did not forget that some deeply-felt request of Esther remained behind. The moment ordered by His secret providence Who alone can order aught aright was now come. And the queen unburdened her pent up soul freely in terms the most pathetic as to her people, the most indignant as to their enemy. “For we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish. But if we had been sold for bondmen and bondwomen, I had held my peace, although the adversary could not have compensated for the king's damage. Then spake the king Ahasuerus and said unto Esther the queen, Who is he, and where is he, that durst presume in his heart to do so?” (vers. 4, 5.)

Astonished to the highest degree, and with burning wrath, the king demands, who and where was he that could dare to do a villainy so monstrous, now to learn, to his amazement, how he himself had been entrapped into it by his own prime minister. Esther however spoke only of him who had malice against her people. “And Esther said, An adversary and an enemy, even this wicked Haman. Then Haman was afraid before the king and the queen” (ver. 6). The king would feel his own part. No wonder that in his agitation he sought to be alone; while Haman made abject supplication to the queen, for he could not doubt the fate that otherwise awaited him. His very earnestness exposed him to the king's mistaken resentment when he returned; and the information of Harbonah furnished the occasion for immediate execution. “And the king arose in his wrath from the banquet of wine [and went] into the palace garden: and Haman stood up to make request for his life to Esther the queen; for he saw that there was evil determined against him by the king. Then the king returned out of the palace garden into the place of the banquet of wine; and Haman was fallen upon the couch whereon Esther was. Then said the king, Will he even force the queen before me in the house? As the word went out of the king's mouth, they covered Haman's face. Then said Harbonah, one of the chamberlains that were before the king, Behold also, the gallows fifty cubits high, which Haman hath made for Mordecai, who spoke good for the king, standeth in the house of Haman. And the king said, Hang him thereon. So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai. Then was the king's wrath pacified” (vers. 7-10).

When the favorite falls, not a voice is raised to shield him from those who till then had bowed most servilely before him; nay, he who was blamed for his presumption in refusing it to Haman is now praised for his service to the king. Such is man, inconstant as the wind, and not least so at court. But He who rules unseen accomplishes His righteous judgment wherever He sees fit, till the day when He will act immediately and perfectly by the One Whose right it is to the joy and peace of all the earth.

The Eastern Little Horn: 3

So shall it be also to that wicked generation. Here the transgressors shall come to the full, and God allows the Gentile scourge in “a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentences,” who shall stand up. “And his power shall be mighty, but not by his own power; and he shall.... corrupt the mighty ones, and the people of the saints.” Scripture describes Israel according to their privileges and moral responsibility, even when they are as far as possible from answering to them. “And through his policy also shall he cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he will magnify [himself] in his heart; and by peace (or prosperity) will corrupt many; he will also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand” (vers. 19-25).

This evil agent is not the willful king or Antichrist who is to reign in Palestine in that day. It is another king that from without opposes Antichrist, is no less wicked, and perishes as awfully. He is the same who in the last prophecy of Daniel (11:40-45) is called “the king of the north.” Many no doubt are aware that out of Alexander's broken empire arose the kingdom of Syria which fell to Seleucus Nicator. Of that line Antiochus Epiphanes (Dan. 11:21-32) persecuted the Jews and insulted the God of Israel beyond all others, and sought to destroy the Jews and their religion. Who was raised up as a stay in that day? A great empire? Nothing of the kind; the Maccabees who knew their God and were strong and active. This movement among the Jews, mingled as it was, is described in Dan. 11:32-35; but we need say no more now, as it will come before us later.

The Seventy Weeks: 1

Dan. 9

Let us now turn to the next chapter which contains Times and Seasons with their deeply interesting introduction. Why do we rise here? Because Christ is brought in, and Christ rejected. Notice further that here for the first time in these prophecies is Jerusalem expressly mentioned. There is also the sanctuary, and the One who sanctifies it and is infinitely higher, whatever unbelief may think or say. In order to have such a vision Daniel was again and more than ever on his face. It was a truly remarkable epoch too. Daniel was a student, among the other prophets, of Jeremiah, who is the weeping prophet of Israel. More than anyone else was he the witness of deep suffering, sorrow, and shame, and aware that deeper was coming. The consequence is seen in a whole book of his devoted to “Lamentations.” And Daniel had thorough communion with him, and knew through him that the time was come for “accomplishing the desolations of Jerusalem, even seventy years.” Instead of elation, as the natural impulse would have been in hailing such an auspicious event, he betook himself to humiliation before God. “And I set my face unto the Lord God to seek after prayer and supplications with fasting and sackcloth and ashes; and I prayed unto Jehovah my God, and made confession.” A holy man, he looked beneath the surface of circumstances, so pleasant to the Jew, of returning to his own land. No doubt, the Jew was entitled to have a deeper feeling than others. It was “Immanuel's land,” and one day to be made worthy of the name, as Israel will be of Jehovah's choice. But the realization is inseparable from faith in the Messiah, Who alone will make either land or people what promise intends them to be.

No Christian should envy such a prospect: alas! that one should speak of a feeling so unworthy in a believer's heart. Are we not blessed with every spiritual blessing in the heavenlies in Christ? Let us rejoice that Israel are yet to be blessed on earth, and to be a blessing to all the nations of the earth.

But Daniel, knowing the moral state of the Jewish captives, poured out his confession in verses 4-19, and found no rest save in God's manifold mercies. He was right. The heart of the remnant was sadly wrong. Nor in fact did Daniel return. As things were, he justly thought that he might as well die in Babylon as in Jerusalem. As we hear later (Dan. 12:13), his hope was in God for the end, and meanwhile it was for him to rest, and stand in his lot at the end of the days. He was waiting, not for Cyrus' proclamation, but for the great trumpet to be blown, that shall gather the perishing in Assyria and the outcasts in Egypt, who shall worship Jehovah in the holy mountain at Jerusalem. Indeed it will be his to hear ere that a greater trumpet at Christ's coming, when “we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in the twinkling of an eye.”

Daniel the prophet did not slur over his own sins, holy as he was, but he also confessed the sins of all Israel. Yet there was but a small part of Israel in Babylon, a little remnant of two tribes. Where were the ten? They are still in the east; and as Psa. 83 calls them, “hidden ones,” to emerge in due time. What nonsense has been talked about them! The American Indians, the Nestorians, the Anglo-Saxons! Nobody as yet knows anything of them; but all the world shall learn at the right moment. This will begin when the Lord has performed His whole work upon mount Zion and upon Jerusalem.

I met Dr. Joseph Wolff many years ago, and a question was raised by a person of learning, how it was that Israel, as compared with the Jews, only came distinctly forward in the middle or third book of Psalms (73.-89). In order to solve the question, during the course of a long conversation, W. was asked if he did not recollect once meeting a family in Central Asia, who claimed to be, not Jews, but Israelites? He had an excellent memory but had forgotten it, though repeatedly related in his Journals and Travels. Their tradition was that, when Cyrus proclaimed liberty to return, some did not avail themselves of it, to escape some terrible evil into which those returning were to fall. Therefore did they prefer to remain dispersed, till Messiah could recall His people triumphantly into the land. It is not far to seek. For as Isaiah long ago had predicted the rejection and sufferings of Messiah through Israel's unbelief (Isa. 1; 53), so it is made known in this very chapter to our prophet; and Zechariah named it more than once (ch. 12:10, 13:6-7). This extreme enormity of sin befell the Jews or two tribes that went up from Babylon. God is always righteous in His dealings, and special sin brought special suffering. Therefore are the Jews to go through the tribulation without parallel at the end of this age. The same people who rejected the true Christ will receive the Anti-Christ. The ten tribes, not having so treated the Messiah, will take no part with Anti-Christ. For the Jews is reserved this last hour of Jacob's trouble in its intensest degree. Then God will bring the ten tribes from their hiding place. Apparently this is what will trouble the last king of the north (Dan. 11), as we shall see later.

But here Daniel brings all the people before God. Is this what you do about Christians? The Pope is busy sending out his emissaries in the vain effort to unite all Christendom. If it could be, what would be the effect? “A hold of every unclean spirit, and a hold of every unclean and hateful bird,” and if any saints could be there, only the more a conglomerate of horrors. More and more do the professors of Christianity deny the spotless humanity of Christ, as others His deity, while we hear of His person divided now as of old. Most prevalent is the revolt against God's judgment of sin, as well as against the divine authority of scripture. These abominations are as rife at least among Romanists as among Protestants, Anglicans, &c. What sort of Christians are such? and what would be the value of their re-union?

The Jesuits of course are committed to this and every other ambitious project of the Papacy; but Babylon is doomed to fall. Strong is the Lord God that judgeth her. For all saints there is revealed “the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto Him.” This is our sure re-union, but it will be under a heavenly banner, and to the one Name, Who is worthy of all glory. In scripture we see that when Israel broke up into two kingdoms, and idolatry was imposed to keep up the breach, the time came for the dispersion of the ten tribes among the idolatrous heathen. In their case no such thing as re-union can be until Christ comes. Is it otherwise with the church? Long has it been broken up through sin and idolatry; never will it be re-united in a holy way; and the deeper the plunge of Christendom is into unbelief and pride and indifference to grace, truth, and holiness, the less desirable is the gathering of such abominations into one. The only way that glorifies God now is to keep Christ's word, and not to deny His name. Pretentiousness is of all things the least becoming in God's sight; as humiliation for all saints is precious to Him.

So Daniel brings “all Israel” (vers. 7, 11, 20) before God—the people as a whole. This was faith and love; for in fact only a remnant of Judah and Benjamin was in Babylon. Let us weigh too the righteous feeling, as well as the faith in God's compassion that pervades His prayer, “We have sinned” (5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15). It is a mere cheat if we confess only some of our sins, and perhaps not the greatest. God will have all out in order to forgiveness. And oh! the sin and folly of making confession of our sins to man. Grace alone removes guile and imparts integrity.

When Daniel was humbling himself; and while he yet spoke in prayer, fresh light is given through Gabriel, who told the prophet that he was now come to make him skilful of understanding. It lies on the surface that Daniel was encouraged to consider the matter and understand the vision; and as he was inspired to write it, the Jews had it before them, as we now have had it before us. By faith alone can we understand this scripture or any other.

Marriage Feast of the King's Son

Matt. 22:1-14

THE parable of the guilty husbandmen at the close of Matt. 21 shows the issue of God's testing men on the ground of His own claims and their responsibility to yield Him fruit. It is just the question raised with the Jew and settled by the rejection of their own Messiah, the Son, yet to be avenged when He comes again.

In the parable with which chapter 22. begins the Lord handles a wholly different case. It is therefore, what the last chapter nowhere furnished, a likeness of the kingdom of the heavens; and therein God is manifested in the ways of His grace, not man under His just claims. God no longer requires fruit from man, though He may and does produce fruit in those who receive His grace in Christ. But in the gospel it is no question of demanding fruit from man. He is represented as in sovereign majesty making a marriage-feast for His Son. This means a total change in His ways: not God requiring from men what is due, but His own grace blessing them in honor of His Son. “It is more blessed to give than to receive “; and this not the law but the gospel vindicates for God, Who gave His dear and only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have life eternal.

“The kingdom of the heavens is likened to a king which made a marriage feast for His son; and sent forth his bondmen to call those who had been called to the marriage-feast; and they would not come. Again he sent forth other bondmen, saying, Tell those that have been called, Behold, my dinner I have made ready: mine oxen and my fatlings are slaughtered; and all things [are] ready: come to the marriage, feast. But they slighted [it] and went off, one to his own land, another to his traffic; and the rest, seizing his bondmen, insulted and killed [them]. And the king was wroth and, sending his troops, destroyed those murderers and burned their city. Then saith he to his bondmen, The marriage-feast is ready, but those that were called were not worthy. Go therefore unto the outlets of the roads, and, as many as ye shall find, call to the marriage-feast. And those bondmen went out to the roads, and gathered together all as many as they found, both wicked and good; and the marriage-feast was filled with guests. And the king on coming in to behold the guests saw there a man not clothed with a marriage-garment; and he saith unto him, Friend, how earnest thou in here not having a marriage-garment? But he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind his feet and hands, and take and cast him out into the outer darkness; there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few chosen” (vers. 2-14).

Here too we have an historical unfolding, not of the past under law, but of God's dealings in grace. We begin with the gospel of the kingdom before our Lord's death in verse 3. Next in verse 4 the gospel goes forth on the ground of His finished work. Only then was the urgent message that “all things were ready “; and then, too, the rebellious hostility ripened into insult and bloodshed; as also in due time retribution came on those murderers and their city (vers. 5-7).

But grace must reign and do its wondrous work, whatever the hindrances. Accordingly the offense of the Jew is salvation to the nations, and the loss of the one is the wealth of the others. The Jews but filled up their cup of sorrow, and wrath came on them to the uttermost, as far as the gospel is concerned; and this salvation of God has been sent to the nations, who also will hear, as the apostle added. This luminously follows in our parable (vers. 8-10).

Nevertheless God is not mocked under gospel any more than under law; and contempt of His grace brings an even sorer punishment than violation of His law. The acceptance of God's testimony by faith is and always has been the soul's turning-point from death to life, from darkness to light, from the power of Satan to God and His kingdom. And His testimony has ever been to Christ, whatever the measure once, whatever the fullness now. Hopeless effort under law was used to drive to Christ those who were not won by promise. Grace and truth came as a fact through Jesus Christ, Who is both life and righteousness to the believer, as He is the image of the invisible God and declared Him. Christ is all, and in all. This therefore becomes the surest of tests, as it is the fullness of grace.

But the King, when He entered to behold the guests, saw one who had not on a marriage-garment. This was conclusive. The King provided all in His royal bounty; but here was a man who preferred his own clothing. It was no question of anything else. The man's robe might be splendid or sordid. But it was not the marriage-garment. It was therefore a direct offense against the grace which alone could and did provide according to the king's majesty and magnificence. Nothing could justify such wanton scorn of the king's honor and goodness; nothing could excuse the man's preference of his own things, especially on an occasion expressly to honor the King's Son. The man was speechless at the charge. The outer darkness must be his portion: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.

It is not providential judgment like that which befell the city of murderers; it is personal and absolute, away forever from Him Who is love and light, from Him Whose grace was so thoroughly despised. To render this all the more impressive, a single individual is thus specified, though the moral at the close prepares us for its applying to individuals far and wide. “For many are called (i.e., by the gospel), but few chosen.” In result it is but a “little flock “; not because grace was not ample for them all, but because grace is abused and Christ is in so few, though He is all in such as have Him.

Have you then, my reader, received the Christ, Jesus the Lord? If so, “walk in Him, rooted and built up in Him and assured in the faith as ye have been taught [in the written word of God], abounding in thanksgiving.” See to it that you have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new, renewed into full knowledge according to the image of Him that created him: wherein there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian, bondman, freeman; but Christ is all things, and in all. Remember that there is no putting on Christ on high, unless you have put Him on now here below. Here we have the joy and duty of confessing Christ; as it will be His to confess us before His Father and before the angels.

If baptism be made the marriage-garment, it is only a less destructive delusion than making it the Lord's incarnation, In the one case the baptized in Christendom would be all elect, if it were not a contradiction in terms; in the other case, all mankind would be. The parable is really subversive of both these dreams, and is meant to show that no mere profession can save, that only the reception of God's grace in Christ will stand in that day.

Salvation by Grace: 2

It was in Jerusalem—the city of solemnities, in the midst of the ancient people of God, of those who had the law and the prophets, where these events occurred. There was not then for Jews a single idol in Jerusalem. I dare say the Roman soldiers, as their manner was, worshipped their standards, and may have had some of their little gods in the castle or elsewhere. Ah possibly you have got some little idols in Montrose. At any rate they are to be found in most places throughout this country. What is worshipping a wafer? That is a little enough god, I am sure. Think of angels, saints, the Virgin, the crucifix, or any relic of that kind! It is of no use saying that people do not worship them. There is a great deal more worshiping of Mary than of the true God in the Roman Catholic body; and it is in vain to tell me that they are not professing Christians. They are; and this makes it truly awful: real idolatry among professing Christians I

I do not wish to allow an unkind thought about them, and I have not one. There is no Roman Catholic in the world I would not serve so far as I could for God's glory, without the cheat of torturing or burning heretics, and calling it an act of faith and God's service. I could not be expected to join them in what I believe to be wrong: for why should one do wrong for any person under the sun? But to do good to them—or even for that matter to a Turk or a Jew—surely that is the business of a Christian man in this world; to magnify the Lord Jesus in well-doing to others, and in bringing the truth to bear upon them. But take care to do so in a loving way, and not so as to hinder the very truth you desire to commend to their consciences. Such was the way the Lord Jesus took with this poor man. For is it not absolutely certain that there is not a single sheep ever brought to God that the Lord Jesus does not personally pursue? does He not go after till He finds it? does He not lay upon His shoulders, and bring it home rejoicing?

Would you like to have the Lord Jesus laying you upon His shoulders, and bringing you home with joy? Why not now—this night? Why not have the blessed Savior your Savior, and know it? You may tell me, Oh, but the man was in such danger! It was no wonder he turned to God. I tell you that if you were crucified, you would not think it a nice time for conversion. You do not know what it is to be in the agonies of the cross. It was one of the most cruel and shameful forms of torture; one reserved for slaves only. But then it was, while the man was suffering such agonies, that the Lord Jesus won his soul to God.

But this also I would point out to you: people of every sort think this is quite an exceptional case. It is altogether a mistake. Granted that there is a grandeur and simplicity about it that exactly suits the cross of the Lord Jesus; but I maintain that the way whereby the man was brought to God is that in which you must be brought to Him: not of course by the outward agony, but by the word of the Lord; by the Holy Ghost applying the word to your conscience, and by your submission to it as the grace of God that bringeth salvation. It is no use to say it has not appeared to you. The grace that bringeth salvation hath appeared to “all men.” It is not meant that all men have seen it. A man may plunge his head into a dark cave and cannot see the sun shine; but the sun shines over the rest of the world for all that. There are men that do not see the sun. It may be that they are blind, and there is such a thing as moral blindness; and above all there may be a willful turning away from God. But still the true light already shines.

The Lord Jesus, by the grace of God, tasted death for every man (or everything). This does not mean that every one will be saved. But every man ought to have that grace presented to his soul. It is true that the church of God has not been faithful; that the servants of the Lord have not done their duty. Even very real Christians are too often content with doing a little now and again, instead of all living only and always for Christ.

The Lord's charge was that the gospel should be preached to the whole creation. Thus nobody should be shut out from the bright light of the gospel—no class so bad that they are excepted. And just as there were these two men on either side of the Lord Jesus, so there are always two classes in the world now—those who believe, and those who refuse. On which side are you? Have you been won to God through hearing the blessed word of Jesus? “He that heareth My word, and believeth Him that sent Me, hath eternal life.” The law of Moses would not suffice. It could not give life. Law could not set free. “He that heareth My word.” Now, this is what one poor robber did, as the other did not. Yet physically both heard. Externally one robber was just as near as the other. And you too have been just as near the gospel. Have you heard with your soul? Have you taken those words as good for you, valid and sufficient for salvation? The converted robber believed the word. He heard the word of Christ, and believed God that sent Him—gave Him credit for truth, gave Him credit for love, in sending the Savior of sinners; and he reaped the blessing.

And look at his testimony. He could give the lie to all the world; for all the world had said that Jesus was a malefactor, and treated Him as such in the most gross and shameless manner. Alas! we do not find that even the two robbers were hurried to death in the way that Jesus was. Then His trial was one of the most scandalous transactions of its kind. They rose early in the morning to do their bad work, and rushed it through as if their very salvation depended upon their injustice to that Blessed One. This was done by the Sanhedrim; the highest council in Israel. But what an awful thing this world is without Christ! Take care that you are not arrayed against Him, and on the side of the devil.

Has Satan insinuated into the heart of any of you to refuse the Savior to-night? This is as great an insult as you can do Him. Now He is seeking to bless you. Now He is appealing to your souls. He wants you to rest upon His precious blood, just as the poor robber did. Oh, beware of turning away from Him! Remember those solemn words of the apostle Paul, “How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?” One of the robbers did, the other did not. Many a one has said he would not like to be with a robber in heaven. Would you prefer to be with the other in hell? This is what it comes to. With one or other of the robbers you must be. Nobody can help that. If you were a king, you could not avoid it: but what folly of men to refuse to be saved on the only ground on which men can be saved—God's absolute sovereign grace in Christ!

But it is not grace without righteousness. Where is the righteousness? It is God's in Christ. In yourselves you are not righteous. I know few in this hall; but I do know this of every one of you, that there is no righteousness here that could stand in the presence of God. Where is it? In Christ Jesus only. Oh! to have the righteousness of God by faith of Christ, to have righteousness fit for the throne of God. That righteousness is ours if we believe in Him, for “God made to be sin for us Him who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.” Have you, then, got it, or are you content to live without it? Without it you must be judged; and if you are judged, you are lost forever. Do you deserve to be saved? Dare you say so?

There are two things in Scripture—judgment and salvation. The people that are judged are not saved; and the people that are saved are not judged. It is not that they do not tell out all that they have done here below. Every person must do that—saved or lost. Every man must out with what he has done in the body, and out with it to one Man, the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the Judge, not God the Father. All judgment is committed to the Son. It was the Son who was insulted; it is the Son who is to judge. Men turned upon the Son of God because He became man; but as man He will judge all mankind. All emperors, kings, and commanders—all the mighty men that have ever lived—must bow down before that one Man. So must you; no man so obscure, no man so hidden in the crowd of this world, as to escape. If a man be buried in the deepest abyss of ocean, it must give him up—Hades give up his spirit, and the ocean give up his body. For we must all stand to tell out all our lives to the Savior. But if you have not got Him as Savior, you will meet Him as Judge.

Those who believe have Him now as Savior; and when they tell all out, they will do so to One who loves them with perfect love, to One who shows them the secrets of their heart, to One who explains every difficulty. We shall know then as we are known. We shall assuredly learn, from that wonderful transaction before the throne of the Lord Jesus, the depth of His love, the extent of His goodness towards us, and our own inexcusableness. We shall then see perfectly how nothing but His work could have saved us.

But if you refuse Him now as Savior, then His unsparing judgment will fall upon your guilty heads—spirit, soul, and body. For every man has got all this complex being. It is a mistake to suppose that it is only believers who have got spirits as well as souls. All this is merely the description of a man. The believer has a new man, which is another thing. He has in Christ a new life, a new nature. The spirit, the soul, the body, are characteristics of men, no matter where they are or what they are. And there is the solemnity of it. If man had only a body of flesh and blood, or if he had only an animal soul, we could understand his carelessness; for a merely animal soul will never appear in the resurrection. Precisely, because MAN alone, of all animals on the earth, has got a reasonable soul, a soul that came from the inbreathing of God—therefore it is that he only is to rise, as his spirit returns to God who gave it. Brutes do not rise—man must. But those who are Christ's will rise in all His beauty and glory; and those that are not Christ's must rise to be judged, not merely to give account. The believer will have to give an account, but not as a criminal. A criminal has to give an account no doubt, or at any rate an account is taken of what he has done; and he is judged. The believer is not judged. The words quoted show this, particularly as given in the Revised Version of John 5:24, as many knew it long before, I refer to it now, not that I have a very high opinion of that revision, but it is often right. “He that heareth My word and believeth Him that sent Me hath life eternal, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.” Our old version had “condemnation;” and many of us used to say that it was not exact, and the Revisers say so too. “He that heareth My word... cometh not into judgment.” How blessed! There would be no sense in judging a man who is already saved. Till a man is saved, he is under judgment; and when he is saved, he is taken out of judgment. Only theologians talk of putting him into the dock again. The whole thought is a mistake. The believer is justified while in this world. Where is the sense of his being judged afterward? Would it not be a denial of his being now saved? The mistake arises from nature always denying grace.

Do you know how it is that in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred people are mistaken about the teaching of the Bible? It is because, being not right about the gospel, they are not sound as to the first foundation. Everybody knows that if a foundation is faulty, the building is sure to have cracks in it, and is not to be trusted anywhere. May grace keep one from finding fault; but I do want Christians to understand how it is that they are not more happy. Is it not for the same reason that poor anxious souls are kept, for years perhaps, in misery and doubt? It is for want of seeing the fullness of the grace of God that meets them in our Lord Jesus. Scripture knows no such a thought as that people should wait for weeks, or months, or years before knowing themselves saved. You have only to read the Acts of the Apostles and see men that knew nothing at all before, who were saved the same hour. Look, for instance, at the gaoler at Philippi, or at the Ethiopian treasurer to Queen Candace. It does not matter where you turn, to Jew or Greek, they were through faith blessed at once.

( To be continued, D.V.)

Priesthood of Christ: 7

THE priesthood of Christ is in relation to the trials of those who are His, loved in the world and unto the end. It is for the succor of such when tempted, as He was, when suffering for righteousness' or for His name's sake, when tried in every way in which they can be here below, unless it is because of their sins. There may be, and is, pity even there; and God's grace may mercifully come down to such need, and deal with one who is buffeted for his faults. He knew too well that it would be all over with us if it were not so; but it is not what the Spirit of God treats of here. Now this is of all possible consequence for us to be clear about. For we must never put a strain on scripture. Probably the teaching might, if introduced here, seem more compact to one's mind and wishes, and a shorter road to comfort thus open to the children of God if they looked on the priesthood of our Lord Jesus Christ as dealing with our faults and applying itself in grace to sins. Still the path of faith is to read the Bible as God has written it, and the only real power and comfort of the Spirit will be found to accompany subjection to His word.

It will be my business, if the Lord will, when we next assemble for the purpose, to take up the other part of my subject, the provision of grace, not for the weakness of the children of God, nor for their sufferings from the enemy, but when alas! through unguardedness they have been drawn away or slipped into evil, into sin. I shall show that the grace of the Lord Jesus can meet this as every other difficulty. But the sympathy of the Lord could not be with our evil. We can only dwell on this for a moment now.

When we were nothing but sinners, it was not a question of sympathy or of priesthood consequently, but of suffering for sins, as He alone suffered. This was what we wanted, not sympathy for our sins. No right-minded person, no saint of God, could want sympathy with his sins. Suffering for us, the Just for the unjust, blotting them out with the precious blood of Jesus, was the way in which God met that need, and met it conclusively. But they being made now a new creation in Christ, washed not only in blood but also in water by the word (for this is He that came by water and blood, Jesus the Christ, not by water only, but by water and blood), both atoned for and already clean by reason of the word He had spoken to them—being thus on every side and in the fullest sense holy and beloved, then they want and find One that succors in all trials, difficulties, sorrows, and sufferings that befall saints here for His sake.

This is exactly what the Lord is doing for us now, occupied with each believer; for the very point of the blessedness in it is that it is individual. He is not priest for the church: I know no such doctrine in scripture. Nor is it even for an individual viewed as a member of His body, though of course the Christian is such. But if one think of oneself as a member of Christ's body, then is to be seen only what is absolutely perfect, what is truly of the Holy Ghost. But then I am exposed to the enemy in this world; I am passing through a howling wilderness, a pilgrim and a stranger. There is exactly where I want and where I have the grace of Christ's priesthood.

The children of Israel, it will be remembered, when they were journeying through the wilderness, brought out in a humbling but instructive way the presumption of man, though altogether vanity. They thought one was as good as another; for they were all a holy people, and therefore needed no priest given them by God. The consequence was that a plague set in, and the earth opened her mouth, Jehovah's judgment swallowing up those rebels against His authority. But immediately afterward they are taught in the most significant way the all-importance of priesthood. He directs the heads of the families to put a rod for each tribe in the sanctuary. Aaron does the same. When looked at in due time, Aaron's alone buds, blossoms, and bears fruit. That rod of the high priest accordingly becomes the characteristic of the chosen priesthood. There could not but be authority, nor could a saint wish otherwise; for God, not man, must command. But it was not the judicial authority of Moses's rod. It was not a rod marked by judgments executed on wickedness. Such was the well-known rod of Moses, which would have only brought destruction on such a people as the Israelites were; for, after all, how often they were breaking down! For this we find God's wonderful resource, the rod of grace, of priestly grace, the rod of living power—of the life that was after death and that bears fruit on the face of it. By this significant token Jehovah showed that the way to lead such a people through the wilderness would not be by such an act of delivering power as brought them out of Egypt. This did not suffice for Him or them. Thus had they been by mighty hand led into the wilderness, but what could bring them through the wilderness? The grace of priesthood in the figure of the power of an endless life, which bears fruit out of death, as set forth by the wonderful token of it thenceforward laid up in the holiest of all, at least in the desert—Aaron's rod that budded.

So we see in our Lord Jesus, as we read in Heb. 7, set forth in all the precision and fullness of inspired teaching: “He is able also to save to the uttermost those that come unto God by him.” He saves them completely. How could the Son of God fail as priest any more than as Savior, or in any other way whatever? It is not here a question of the redemption of slaves, but of His saving the saints of God, of bringing them safe through in presence of a power opposing itself to God's purpose about them, and from all the consequences of their weakness here below. He is always living to make intercession for them. But they are associated with One who was “holy, harmless, undefiled.” There is no allowance of sin, and least of all by priesthood—no such thought as a company of sinners who have a priest that takes care of them in spite of their sins. Such is not the doctrine of Christ's priesthood. They are holy; for God it is who has begotten them again to a living hope by Christ's resurrection from the dead. They are consequently not born of God only, but sufferers here below while He is on high, where as priest He is always living to make intercession for them.

Undoubtedly, in spite of such great mercy and privileges, they may, through unwatchfulness, sin; and it remains to be shown that they are not left to perish in the folly of an evil way into which they were surprised. We shall see how God meets all this, and that it is in a somewhat different manner, though it be by the same Christ. But it is Christ in a way suited to that need in His wondrous grace. Enough has been now pointed out from Scripture, I trust, to clear the subject of Christ's priesthood for the Christian: this was all that one proposed for the present.

James 1:21-22

CONDUCT is bound to be according to relationship; and this flows from what God our Father has already formed by the acting of His own purpose and mind in giving us birth by the word of truth: a fact which it was the more important to press on saints who were used to take their stand on being sprung from Abraham as their father. They were now taught how much higher and holier was the new descent; and this not only from God but in the most blessed way which gave full place to the Son as well as the Spirit, and had its title-deed indisputable in the written word. So the Lord had Himself laid down to the Jews, “If ye abide in My word, ye are truly My disciples; and ye shall know the truth; and the truth shall make you free.... If therefore the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.” How little souls, that loudly boast of their liberty, suspect that they are bondmen of sin and thus in Satan's chains! Even the believers, whom Christ has set free, are but a kind of first-fruits with an evil nature in no way set aside as a fact by the new nature which is ours through the word and Spirit of God. In virtue of this we have by grace to judge and refuse every working of the old nature, living on the Living Bread whereof we have eaten, yea, eating His flesh and drinking His blood, and so living not merely by reason, but on account, of Him, as He did when here below on account of the Father. No character of life for purity can compare with that which the word of truth conveys. How different and inferior is the being of blood or of flesh's will or of man's will, which we once sadly knew, as our only experience, and still know to be productive, if allowed, only of evil, even since we were born of God!

But it is not enough, though it be much every way, to be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath. The exhortation follows definitely against imminent dangers. “Wherefore, having laid aside every sort of filthiness and overflowing of wickedness, receive with meekness the implanted word which is able to save your souls. But be word-doers, and not hearers only, deluding yourselves” (vers. 21, 22).

It is well to take note of the aorist in ver. 21, as compared with the present in ver. 22: in the last a constant continuous call, in the former acts done once for all. Pollution might be, as the apostle tells us in 2 Cor. 7:1, of spirit no less than of flesh, and the more ensnaring because more subtle. But the call is to have once for all put every kind of filthiness away, as also of that rank growth of wickedness which is inherent in fallen Nature. It would be indeed a hopeless call if we had not a new life in Christ; but this every believer possesses, and the Holy Spirit's indwelling to work suitably to Him Who is its source, fullness, and standard. The flesh is still there; but in the cross of Christ it has already received its condemnation in Him Who was the one and efficacious offering for sin (Rom. 8:3). Thus there is no excuse for the believer allowing its evil working in himself or others: God condemned it fully when Christ thus suffered, that we might have even now this immense comfort for faith as a settled thing.

“The word of truth,” which first reached us when under the dominion of the falsehood of sin and Satan, and delivered us through faith in Christ and His mighty work, is spoken of also as “the implanted word” which we are told to receive as an accomplished act. It is in contrast with a merely external rule that could only condemn what was opposed to itself. It works inwardly in that life which the believer has, being perfectly akin to it and congenial with it, as both are of God. Hence there is nothing strange in the call; and the call is to receive it “with meekness,” as becomes those who have already tasted that the Lord is good, and desire to profit more and more. For indeed only that word is “able to save our souls” (compare the end of 1 Peter 1, and the beginning of chap. 2). The God who began so gracious a work does not forget or relinquish His care. He exercises and disciplines our souls, He spares no fault; but He has proved fully in Christ that those whom He loved that were in the world He loved unto the end. Still He works not by rites or forms, but by our faith in His word (compare 1 Peter 1:5). We are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to he revealed in the last time.

But as this exceeding value of God's word is capable of being abused into a school of dogma, and consequently of mere knowledge, the next verse summons us habitually to reduce the word to practice. “But be word-doers, and not hearers only, deluding yourselves.” This is the great business of every day. Our Lord had already enforced His most solemn warning against the same self-delusion. “Not every one that saith to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of the heavens; but he that doeth the will of my Father that is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name cast out demons, and in thy name done works of power? And then will I avow unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work lawlessness” (Matt. 7:21-23). The word must not only be heard but produce fruit accordingly. To hear the Son is the urgent call of the Father, but it is to form the new life in obedience; otherwise it is to mock God and delude ourselves. And hence the grave caution here.

The Mystery: Part 1

THE object of the author of this tract is to show that the “mystery” as used in the New Testament Scriptures has reference to God's calling out, during the time of Christ's rejection, a people from both Jews and Gentiles whose position, association, and hope are intimately connected with Christ on high. Of necessity therefore, he rightly condemns the traditional confusion of Old Testament and New Testament saints, which dates the church from the gates of paradise. Nevertheless he himself falls into serious aberration from the truth in regard to this very portion of the subject.

“The Old Testament Saints,” says Dr. B., “are a great burden to Expositors of New Testament Truth” (page 50). So he very kindly undertakes to relieve them of this embarrassment once and for all. While the church forms the body of Christ, we are now told the elect saints of the Old Testament constitute the bride of Christ, the Lamb's wife. He forbears to blame too severely those who have long held the identification of “the Body with the Bride,” owning that “there is certainly some little excuse for its having been so generally entertained” (page 49).

Having duly noted and acknowledged this gracious remark of Dr. B.'s, we proceed to consider the scripture he advances to show that the Bride is the elect of Israel, and not the church which is Christ's body.

On page 49 we read, “The Bride in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Hosea, is Israel, or at any rate the elect of Israel.” This appears fair enough, save that his phrase, “elect of Israel,” has an air of novelty, which amounts to suspicion when it is further explained to be, “those who were partakers of the heavenly calling in Israel.” Dr. B. evidently wishes us to see that the O.T. prophecies concerning the Bride only contemplate a portion of the nation of Israel. He refers to Isa. 54:5-8; 62:4; Jer. 3:14; Hos. 2:16, 17; adding, “These and other passages clearly prophesy that an election of Israel shall be the Bride” (p. 50).

Now before passing on to the development of Dr. B.'s theory, a very slight consideration of the prophecies named will show that they speak of a time when Jehovah will re-assume the character of husband to her who is a widow—when in fact Israel will be brought again into relationship with Himself as an earthly people. There is certainly nothing in the prophecies adduced to indicate that the subjects of them were “partakers of the heavenly calling” (a phrase Dr. B. has appropriated from the New Testament, not the Old, to bolster up his theory). Take his first passage, Isa. 54:5. It says, “Thy Maker is thine husband” truly; but the very same verse gives Him another title, “The God of the whole earth.” What is this but earthly blessing in the millennium? So also in verse 3 of the same chapter, speaking of Israel, “Thy seed shall inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited.” We are sure Dr. B., with the regard he continually avows for the congruity of figures, will not seriously connect “desolate cities” with the heavenly calling.

But neither does Isa. 62:4. yield real support. We have there not a celestial but a terrestrial sphere. “Zion” and “Jerusalem” in verse 1 locate the promised blessings, and “righteousness” and “salvation” are for the saints in the “land.” “Thy land shall be married” we read; and therein Israel shall enjoy the corn and the wine (verses 8-9). Does Dr. B. really expect us to credit that these prophecies refer to a heavenly Bride?

We turn now to Jer. 3:14., “I am married unto you.” This chapter treats of the still future restoration of the Jews to Palestine. We are unable to trace the slightest reference to “the partakers of the heavenly calling.” But treacherous Judah and back-sliding Israel repent and come to Jerusalem, the throne of Jehovah. They will come out of the land of the north to the promised land; and all nations even shall be gathered to Jerusalem (verses 17-18). Can there be any doubt that the figure of marriage is here applied to the re-establishment of God's earthly people, and has no sort of reference to the partakers of the heavenly calling?

Hos. 2 is no less conclusive that an earthly people is the subject of the Spirit of prophecy. Earthly judgments first fall upon that guilty nation (verses 9-15); and then Jehovah promises to make a covenant for her with the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven, and to break the bow and the sword, and to make them lie down safely. “And the earth shall bear the corn, and the wine and the oil, and they shall hear Jezreel” (verses 18-23). It is unquestionably pictorial of a scene of earthly blessedness under renewed relationship to Jehovah. The teaching therefore of the four O. T. prophecies to which Dr. B. makes reference is that a time is yet to come when Israel will be the “Bride” of Jehovah; and that time cannot be until the chosen nation is gathered into its own land under the sway of Jehovah and His Anointed.

Turning to Dr. B. we are astounded at the position he takes up. He coolly asserts (for it is really without either scripture or argument to support it) that “the elect Saints of the Old Testament will form the Bride,” which is the “great City, the holy Jerusalem” of Rev. 21:9-27. This, he contends, “is the city for which all those who were partakers of the Heavenly Calling looked” (page 51); and he refers to Heb. 11:13-16.

As a matter of fact, after observing how many folks Dr. B. seeks to set right in his little treatise of rather less than sixty pages, we were scarcely prepared to fall upon such glaring inconsistency in the author himself.

For, observe, he will have it (page 50) that the saints of old who died in faith are those who form the heavenly Bride of the Lamb. But he quotes four prophecies (pp. 49-50) that refer to Israel's restoration to the land under the figure of marriage. And he knows these are yet to be fulfilled, because he tells us that Israel's blindness will come to an end (p. 10). When that is so, there will be the earthly Bride. So that if Dr. B.'s notions have any foundation, there will be two brides—a heavenly and an earthly. And he is found to hold the very thing that he himself condemns on page 49 (viz: that there are two brides), and sets himself to disprove. It has rarely been our lot to come across such an instance of thinly-disguised self-contradiction as this.

The truth is that there are two brides; only the heavenly one is the church, and not the saints who died in Old Testament times, as Dr. B. maintains without adequate support.

There were always, he says, those in Israel who lived “by faith” and “died in faith,” and were “partakers of the heavenly calling.” They looked for a heavenly country where God had prepared for them a city (Heb. 11:13-16). Abraham also looked for a city which hath foundations. Turning now to Rev. 21, we are reminded that the Bride is there introduced under the symbol of a city. Now, exclaims Dr. B. in emphatic capitals, “what are we to understand but that this CITY—which is declared to be the BRIDE, the Lamb's Wife, is the city for which all those who were partakers of the Heavenly Calling looked; and that these elect saints of the Old Testament will form the Bride” (page 51)? We do not, however, understand the same from these scriptures as Dr. B., even with the aid of his capitals. It surely does not follow that because “city” occurs in Hebrews. and in Revelation it necessarily symbolizes the same truth in both places. We had not yet learned that because we read of an “ark in Gen. 6 and Ex. 2 and in Ex. 25 of the ark of the covenant, the ark of bulrushes and Noah's ark were synonymous terms. Indeed we must remind Di. B. that on pages 13-15 he himself has shown that a single word (eeclesia) can be used in several senses. Why, therefore may not the word, “city,” be used to convey two different ideas in two books?

In Heb. 11 the word is used to portray that established and permanent abode in heaven for which the Old Testament saints looked in contrast with their temporary and uncertain residence upon earth. Abraham awaited the time when he should exchange his tent for a city, and so did the other patriarchs. But in Rev. 21 the city symbolizes the saints themselves, just as in Rev. 17., 18. another city, Babylon, sets forth corrupt Christendom in the last days. Here then the Bride is the city: while the Jewish saints hoped to be in a city, that is, a glorious dwelling place on high. But the holy Jerusalem which John sees seems emblematical rather of a seat of government than a habitation.

To be continued (D.V)

Letter of Pope Leo XIII on the Unity of the Church: 1.

Souls may be profited if one subject this document to the test of God's word. It professes to come from an infallible man; and after full consultation with all who could render aid, rather than alone, we must presume. It is on a momentous article of faith, on which, if anywhere, infallibility should not falter. “If they speak not according to this word, surely there is no morning for them.”

1.-THE FOLD.

Let us begin with an all-important question raised in the first sentence. Pope Leo XIII. speaks of “the fold.” It is no slip of the pen. It re-appears with similar emphasis near the middle of his letter. It is reiterated in the final “appeal to sheep not of the fold,” p. lvii. But the Lord Jesus, whom the Pope acknowledges to be “the Chief Pastor of souls,” has ruled otherwise in John 10 He led His own sheep out of “the fold,” the only such enclosure set up by God; and He forms “one flock” in contradistinction, Himself the “one Shepherd,” as indeed is owned. So it is said in Matt. 16:18, they are His church; as in the epistles, the church of God.

“The fold” applied to the Christian body is a vulgar mistake, or, if you wish it, as universally current a tradition as could be produced. What can one think of its adoption by the religious chief over 200 millions of baptized? by one who aspires to gather under his authority a still greater number, who bear the name of the Lord but do not accept his title? Is it not strange to find an infallible claim, not only stumbling on the threshold, but persisting in so palpable an error throughout? For the Pope ignores “the flock,” which the Lord of all instituted, and recalls the sheep to “the fold,” out of which the Lord led them. It is no mere quibble of words, but distinctive truth. For “the fold” out of which the Savior led His own sheep was governed by the law, and fenced by ordinances on pain of cutting off; it had a succession of priests; it provided continual repetition of sacrifices, and boasted of a gorgeous sanctuary, splendid vestments, and captivating music, to say nothing of saints such as were found nowhere else. Yet out of this fold the Lord leads His own sheep; and into such a fold, as far as man could imitate it, does the Pope seek to win the sheep now.

“The flock” which the Good Shepherd forms has quite another character. He had entered by the door into the fold of the sheep, as their Shepherd, the Messiah, with the utmost difference from those who claimed them as theirs. Prophecy and miracle, light and love, made Him plain save to those who, being enemies of God, received Him not. The porter opens the door; the sheep hear His voice, and He calls His own sheep by name, but leads them out. The confession of His person (John 8:58) provoked from the Jews not worship but an effort to stone Him; whilst His work of gracious and divine power (ch. 9.) drew out their agreement that every confessor of Him should be put out of the synagogue. The Jews thus condemned themselves. Jesus was come that those that see not (like the blind confessor) might see, and those that see (like the unbelieving Jewish leaders) might be made blind.

The Lord further sets forth Himself as the new separating and gathering object; no longer as Messiah entering “the fold,” but as “the door of the sheep “—not of the sheep-fold, as some misinterpret.

“I am the door: by me if anyone enter, he shall be saved, and shall go in and go out, and shall find pasture” (ver. 9). In these divine words we learn who and what they are that compose “the flock.” They follow Jesus because they know His voice; and He came that they might have life, and have it more abundantly. He is the object of faith; not “the flock.” “He is the true God and eternal life.” “He that hath the Son hath life.” If any persons on earth could assuredly assert that they were God's people, theirs the fathers, theirs the covenants, theirs the Messiah, it was the Jews. Yet when proved to reject the Lord, as once for serving idols, God gave them up; and Jesus was the warrant for His own sheep to follow Him outside, where they enjoy salvation, liberty, food, and shelter from the enemy, in Him Who laid down His life for the sheep. “And I have other sheep which are not of this fold [namely, Gentile believers]; those also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice [this is the main criterion]; and there shall be one flock, one shepherd” (ver. 16).

Such is “the flock,” not “the fold.” The flock consists alike of the sheep separated from Judaism, which was “this fold,” and of the sheep scattered among the Gentiles that had no fold: these are the “one flock.” He Who is indeed infallible speaks of no “fold” now for His sheep; the Pope does. Can any child of God hesitate which to believe? The sheep hear His voice; an alien will they not follow, but will flee from him, for they know not the voice of aliens: The sheep follow Him, for they know His voice. “We walk by faith, not by sight.” Blandishment is as vain as threats. Ever before, while “the fold” was owned, Jews and Gentiles were rigidly kept apart; now if they hear His voice, they are “one flock.” It is a new thing, where grace reigns; and Christ is all, and in all. What a contrast with the fold of old or any new one His person and work are the guarantee of every spiritual blessing to those that believe on Him.

Is it said in excuse that not only the loose speech prevalent in Christendom but the Vulgate of Jerome misled? Yet Pope Leo is a student of Scripture, they say, and probably familiar with the Greek original of the N.T. He ought therefore to have known and avoided so flagrant a mistake. In the same verse 16 of John 10 is the word (αὐλὴ) rightly translated “fold", the Jewish enclosure. Here the Lord declares that the sheep He had which were not of this fold should, with those He was leading out of the fold, be “one flock” with one Shepherd. No such gathering into one had been hitherto. It was reserved for Christ when rejected by the Jews. As the law was given by Moses, grace and truth came by Jesus Christ, Who died to gather together in one the scattered children of God (John 11:52).

Oh! how the truth has been forgotten, and “the fold” set up again into which the Pope devotes his “endeavor” to bring back “sheep that have strayed.” It is part of that fatal judaizing against which the great apostle of the Gentiles strenuously labored and fought throughout his blessed course. Therein the apostle Peter grievously failed: a feeble foundation for the church, and for the Roman claim of universal jurisdiction. Why should anyone hide that Peter was untrue at Antioch to the divine vision of Acts 10? He had rightly used the keys of the kingdom to admit the Jews, and afterward Gentiles. He at first had eaten with Gentiles, the sign of fellowship; and then when certain came from James, he was drawing back and separating himself: not vacillation and inconsistency only, but schism and despite of the “one flock, one Shepherd.” And it was the more deplorable cowardice now, because he had confronted the narrow Pharisaic brethren in Jerusalem once (chap. 11.) and again (chap. 15); and all the worse, because he was so honored and influential. But the apostle of the uncircumcision was faithful and resisted him to the face, because he was (not merely “reprehensibilis,” as the Vulgate improperly tones it down, but “condemned". Indeed the apostle writes thus severely, “And the rest of the Jews also were guilty of like dissimulation [or hypocrisy], so that even Barnabas was carried away by their dissimulation. But when I saw that they walk not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before all,” &c.

Has Pope Leo XIII. laid this solemn admonition to heart or those who helped Pope Pius IX. to proclaim papal infallibility? To the believer can there be a plainer instance of the care God has taken in scripture to anticipate and condemn human presumption? Holy Peter broke down where not only his faith as a saint should have kept him firm, but where his apostolic authority compromised the faith of the gospel and the unity of the church. It was a brief but sad slip into “the fold” again; but we read his censure for our warning in God's imperishable word. There is a painfully instructive tale of patristic dishonesty that hangs thereby; but to tell it here would cause too great a divergence from the present question, and so it must now be left.

But there is another fact of immediate bearing, which, if not familiar to all, one might expect so experienced a theologian as the present Pope to know. The correct and only tenable rendering we now discuss is given in copies of the old Latin Gospels, both African (or unrevised) and of the Italic revision. Thus in the God. Vercell. we read “fiet una grex, et unus pastor “; in the God. Veron. (with which here agrees God. Corbei.), “fiet unus grex, et unus pastor “; and in the God. Brix., “fient unus grex et unus pastor “: each independent and differing perceptibly, but all agreeing in the sure and weighty truth of “one flock.” This the Hieronymian Version perverted, the Popes' and Councils and clergy ever since sanctioning it, ignorantly or deliberately, for their return more and more to the Jewish fold; as in fact there is none but that one. The blessed difference of the “one flock, one shepherd” they do not appreciate. It is all one to them no doubt.

Let me add that even the Gothic V. of Ulphilas is correct: why Gabelentz and Loebe have given a misinterpretation in Latin is the more strange, because in their note they rightly convict Schultz of error on this point. It is well-known that the Peschito Syriac gives the just sense, as does the later Philoxenian: so also the Aeth., the Anglo-Sax., the Arabic, the Arm., the Georgian, the Memph., the Sah., and the Sclavonic. Luther translated correctly, as did Tyndale; but Cranmer and the later English wrongly followed the Vulgate, which was natural in Wiclif and the Rhemish. Erasmus in his note cites Valla, who knew that ποιμνὴ is “grex” rather than “ovile “; but he left the error uncorrected in all his five editions. Beza corrects it in his fourth and fifth editions, though wrong in the first three. But there can be no question to those who adhere to the word, either of the truth, or of its importance. In Matt. 26:31, Luke 2:8, and twice in 1 Cor. 9:7, the Vulgate gives “flock,” not “fold” without hesitation, and thus condemns itself in John 10:16, where it is dogmatically of moment.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:11-12

The important fact imparted to us, in the verses immediately preceding, we have seen to be the first establishment of royal power in the Cushite Nimrod; and this by force and fraud, transferred from hunting wild beasts to acquiring dominion over mankind for personal aggrandizement. His city building in Babylonia we have also seen, the earliest development of the kind since the deluge. Nor is any architecture more characteristic of race, as Mr. Ferguson has shown, than the massive monumental style of the sons of Ham.

This is confirmed by the true sense of Mic. 5:6, where “the land of Assyria” is expressly distinguished from “the land of Nimrod,” which last was really the plain of Shinar. They were quite distinct and separated by the Hiddekel or Tigris. In “that land” i.e. Babylonia there were Shemitic and Japhetic elements no less than the Hamitic, which at first was predominant.

It is such an episodical notice as seems to account for the mention in this place of a counter movement on the part of the Shemite Asshur, of whom we read in his due place afterward. A step forward among men naturally finds imitation ere long. And the record of the new policy in the south is followed by that of a similar course in the north as far as the building of cities is concerned, though this may not have been at all contemporary but later than that. Their kindred nature sufficiently explains the mention of both at this point.

“From that land went forth Asshur, and built Nineveh, and Rehoboth-Ir, and Calah, and Resen between Nineveh and Calah: this is the great city” (vers. 11, 12). It is not intimated that Asshur was driven out by the Hamitic race, but rather is it inferred from the language that the success of Nimrod set the example, and gave the impulse to a like ambition. How completely Noah's authority (for he still lived) was forgotten by all, is evident by all that is revealed. Patriarchal place yielded to men's thoughts and will.

Of these four cities, the first is beyond any just question. Yet it is late in the history of the world when we hear of Nineveh. Then in the days of Jonah it was a “very great city,” according to some of still greater extent than Babylon when the “golden city” rose to its zenith. But human accounts of cities long passed away need to be read with caution, as the chroniclers long after were apt to stray through exaggeration. Still the Biblical intimation of its later existence is of immense extent, vast population, and exceeding splendor. The remains exhumed in our day attest that the words of scripture are here as reliable as everywhere else. Yet we need not conceive anything more when Asshur wrought his work than a little beginning of that which was at length to attain such power and magnificence. This it retained to triumph over the ten tribes of Israel and to menace Judah and David's house, when it received a blow so manifestly divine that it never troubled the holy land again. Ere long it fell never to rise, when God was pleased to bring forward Babylon from a provincial position, though with a king, and sometimes independent, to become the mistress of the world, and the captor of the guilty capital and king and people of the Jews.

Rehoboth-Ir appears to be so specified to distinguish it from Rehoboth the Nahar— “of the river.” This latter (Gen. 36:37; 1 Chron. 1:48) was unmistakably on the river Euphrates; and in fact the name is still found given to two places on the river, one on the western bank, eight miles below the junction of the Khabiir (Rahabeth, Chesney's Euphr. i. 119, ii. 610), the other with an added name (Rahabeth-Malik), which Gen. Chesney does not notice, but it is given in Mr. Layard's Nineveh, a few miles lower on the eastern bank. Rehoboth-Ir was in Assyria proper. Kaplan, the Jewish geographer, identifies Rehoboth of the river with Rahabeth-Malik, but distinguishes it from Rehoboth-Ir, which he believes to have disappeared (see Smith's Diet. of the Bible, iii. 1026, col. 1). As no trace of this city has as yet commended itself to any explorer, it may be worth naming that Jerome, not only in the Vulgate but in his works (Quaest. ad Genesim), gives it as his opinion that it was part of what became Nineveh, meaning “the streets of the city” (i.e. plateas civitatis). This is a mere conjecture, which may be cleared up by better knowledge.

But Calah was too important a city to be so easily hidden. This the Septuagint renders Χαλάχ, and distinguishes from Halah in 2 Kings 17:6; 18:2, and 1 Chron. 5:26, rendered Ἀλαέ Chesney (i. 22, 119) appears to accept Sir H. Rawlinson's identification of Calah with the ruins of Holvvaa” situated near the river Dipitah, and about 130 miles east of Baghdad. If so, it is now Sar. pitli Zohab on the slopes of the Zagros, and in the high road leading from Baghdad to Kirman Shah, vol. ix. 36 of Royal Geogr. Journal (Chesney ii. 25). It seems once to have been the capital of the empire, the residence of Sardanapalus and others, till Sargon built a new capital on the site of what is now called Khorsabad. But it still retained importance till the empire fell.

Resen has been by some identified with the Ῥέσινα of Steph. Byz and Ptol. (Geog. v. 18); this, however, was not in Assyria, but far west. Bochart (Geog. Sac. iv. 28) suggested the Larissa of Xenophon (Anab. iii. 4, §7) which can hardly be doubted to correspond with the remarkable ruins now called Nimrild. Mr. Rawlinson leans to the view that these ruins answer to Calah, and that Resen, therefore, lay between that city and Nineveh, and that its ruins are near the Selaimyeh of modern times; and cuneiform inscriptions at Nimrud give Culach as the Assyrian name of the place. This tends to support the claim of Calah rather than of Resen.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 9

Chapter 8

No reader of O.T. prophecy can fail to note that the fall of the enemy, threatening the Jews with imminent destruction, coincides with their deliverance, joy, and honor under the Great King. So runs the word from Isaiah and before him to Malachi; and the N. T. so far as it discloses the future of the earth (for its main and peculiar witness is to Christ in heavenly glory) is to the same effect. Here we see the type continued which began in the last chapter. Judgment proceeds.

“On that day did king Ahasuerus give the house of Haman the Jews' enemy to Esther the queen. And Mordecai came before the king; for Esther had told what he [was] unto her. And the king took off his ring, which he had taken from Haman, and gave it unto Mordecai. And Esther set Mordecai over the house of Haman. And Esther spoke yet again before the king, and fell down at his feet, and besought him with tears to put away the mischief of Haman the Agagite, and his device that he had devised against the Jews. Then the king held out to Esther the golden scepter. So Esther arose, and stood before the king; and she said, If it please the king, and if I have found favor before him, and the thing [seem] right before the king, and I [be] pleasing in his eyes, let it be written to reverse the letters devised by Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, which he wrote to destroy the Jews which [are] in all the king's provinces. For how can I endure to see the evil that shall come unto my people? and how can I endure to see the destruction of my kindred? Then the king Ahasuerus said unto Esther the queen and to Mordecai the Jew, Behold, I have given Esther the house of Haman, and him they have hanged upon the gallows, because he stretched his hand against the Jews. Write ye also to the Jews, as it pleaseth you, in the king's name, and seal [it] with the king's ring: for the writing which is written in the king's name, and sealed with the king's ring, may no man reverse, Then were the king's scribes called at that time, in the third month, which [is] the month Sivan, on the three and twentieth [day] thereof; and it was written according to all that Mordecai commanded unto the Jews, and to the satraps, and the governors, and the princes of the provinces which [are] from India unto Ethiopia, a hundred twenty and seven provinces, unto every province according to their writing thereof, and unto every people after their language, and unto the Jews according to their writing and according to their language. And he wrote in the name of king Ahasuerus, and sealed [it] with the king's ring, and sent letters by couriers on horseback, riding on swift steeds that were used in the king's service, bred of the stud: [stating] that the king granted the Jews who were in every city to gather themselves together, and to stand for their life, to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish, all the power of the people and province that would assault them, [their] little ones and women, and [to take] the spoil of them for a prey, upon one day in all the provinces of king Ahasuerus, [namely] upon the thirteenth [day] of the twelfth month, that [is] the month Adar. A copy of the writing, that the decree should be given out in every province, [was] published unto all the peoples, and that the Jews should be ready against that day to avenge themselves on their enemies.

The couriers that rode upon swift steeds that were used in the king's service went out, being hastened and pressed on by the king's commandment. And the decree was given out in Shushan the palace. And Mordecai went forth from the presence of the king in royal apparel of blue and white, and with a great crown of gold, and with a robe of fine linen and purple. And the city of Shushan shouted and was glad. The Jews had light and gladness and joy and honor. And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a good day. And many from among the peoples of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews was fallen upon them” (vers. 1-17).

Mordecai no longer abides at the gate of the court, but is brought forward worthily to administer the kingdom here below, after service of the utmost value against treacherous men of blood.

So we read of the twelve called to sit, in an even higher honor when “the regeneration” comes, on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19). What meaning has this to those who see nothing more than the gospel followed by the judgment of the dead and eternity? They ought not to ignore the thousand years' reign, as distinct from the present as from the changeless day which is after the great white throne. It is this intermediate period of blessing which Israel enter after they say, Blessed be he that cometh in the name of Jehovah (Matt. 23). Jerusalem is trodden down by the Gentiles, but only till their times are fulfilled (Luke 21).

In Acts 3:19-21 (cf. Acts 1:6) we have a beautiful anticipation of that day of glory for all things, in contradistinction to the Holy Spirit now come and witnessing in Pentecostal presence. Then only will be the fulfillment of God's holy prophets, when “all Israel shall be saved,” instead of a mere remnant now during the call of the Gentile complement (Rom. 11:25-32). Then will not the Messiah only but the saints from on high judge the world and angels too (1 Cor. 6). Again, 1 Cor. 15:54 furnishes the most instructive synchronism between the coming of the Lord to raise the saints from the dead, and the restoration of Israel nationally yet spiritually to honor and glory in the land of promise (compare Isa. 25-27).

God will gather together in one all things in Christ, the things in the heaven and those on the earth—in Him in whom also we were allotted inheritance (Eph. 1:10-11). For we are heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ (Rom. 8, Gal. 4), the Reconciler of all things to Himself, whether earthly or heavenly (Col. 1:20). This is not eternity, but the previous and predicted blessing of the Kingdom, which is again quite in contrast with the walk, while Satan reigns, of faith and suffering under the gospel. Now it is the kingdom and patience in Christ (Rev. 1), but then the world-kingdom of our Lord and His Christ (Rev. 11), the coming age and habitable world to come of Heb. 2 and vi., when the rest of God shall be brought in for earth as well as heaven (Heb. 4), and the Father's will be done on earth as in heaven, the Father's kingdom having come (Matt. 6). If some complain of these distinctions as nice and difficult, let them learn that they are only such to souls fed on the traditions of men, so hindering the discernment of the things that differ, which is essential to genuine progress in revealed truth.

Fig Tree

Matt. 24:32-35

We have the Lord's authority for regarding the fig-tree here as the groundwork for its parable. “Now from the fig-tree learn the parable. When its branch is already become tender, and putteth forth its leaves, ye know that the summer is nigh; even so ye also, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, at the doors” (vers. 32-35).

It is clear that the Lord treats this tree as symbolic of the Jews. So He had done shortly before, and both so graphically that no believer need miss the meaning. Mark gives details, as often beyond others, illustrating His ministry. Seeing a fig-tree (there was but one, as Matthew says), and being hungry, He came and found nothing but leaves. This was decisive, for it was the season of figs, it was too soon for gathering; so that if none were there, the tree must have borne none.

The Lord therefore said unto it, No one eat fruit of thee henceforth forever; and His disciples heard. On the morrow, as they passed by, they saw the fig-tree dried up from the roots; and Peter remarked on it, when the Lord's answer dwelt on the all-importance and the power of faith. There is no obstacle too strong to resist; only the grace that forgives all personal wrongs must accompany the faith of him that serves Christ. And so it has been. Not only have the fruitless Jews, as responsible under the first covenant, lost their religious position, but they are no longer a power. They are scattered and swamped in the sea of peoples.

It was one of the two miracles of the Lord which was not an expression of grace but judicial; and both told the destinies impending on Israel because of their evil and unbelief. The one, as we have seen, was their judgment under legal responsibility as barren after all God's care and claim of fruit. The other was set forth by the destruction of the swine, when the demons expelled from Legion entered and drove the herd into the abyss. So it will be in the latter day when the apostate Jews are given over to uncleanness and energized by the powers of darkness. These were the two exceptions. All the other miracles of the Lord displayed the glory of God and grace toward man.

What then is the parable to be learned from the fig-tree in our chapter? The Lord is opening to the chosen disciples His appearing for the Jews first (Matt. 24:4-44); then (vers. 45-25:30) His dealings with professing Christians; and lastly (25:31-46) His judgment of all the nations or Gentiles.

It will be seen therefore that verses 32-35 concern the Jewish remnant directly, however we may profit by this as by every other scripture. The Jews will be objects of grace once more, and come under the new covenant in that day. Here accordingly the fig-tree falls under no curse. Far from withering away from the roots, Israel, which knew nothing but misery and ruin from trusting its own righteousness, is cast on the Messiah in repentance and faith; and now mercy henceforward flows as a river. But “the many,” the mass, judge themselves unworthy of life eternal and perish with their Antichrist; the godly remnant become the strong nation, and they are “all Israel” that shall be saved. They will have dates which must run their course; and also have successive events which must be accomplished. Times and seasons particularly characterize them.

Here the Lord deigns to give them signs in a way He never did to us of the church who are called to walk by faith, not by sight. So we may observe in the early verses of Matt. 24 and specially in verse 14. Still more emphatic is what follows from verse 15, where Dan. 12 is referred to, and, more than any, verse 11. There is a tribulation without parallel, but no translation to heaven; and the coming of the Son of man is like the lightning. For there is pre-eminently the carcass, whither gather the eagles. Immediately after the tribulation convulsions above and below follow; and then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven; and all the tribes mourn, and they see Him coming to the earth. And His angels gather His elect (who seem here to be of Israel, as in Isa. 65, 66); for over these He will reign in the promised land. The heavenly saints are seen in their own place. Here our Lord treats of Israelitish saints.

The fig-tree is no longer barren; for the Son of man received, and the new covenant with Him, will change all. These are early days; and we hear no more than of the branch tender, and putting forth leaves. The time of fruit will come; but as yet they only know that summer is nigh. “So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, at the doors.” Grace will not fail to work its due effects.

How is it with you, dear reader? Have you learned that you are no better than the barren fig-tree? If you have, it is well. For most deceive themselves and are indifferent. If you know that you have neither fruit nor life, oh! look to Him by faith Who is life and gives it to all that believe. It is ruinous to talk of your privileges. The greatest is that you have the New Testament as well as the Old. But only Jesus, the Son of God, can avail; only His blood cleanses from every sin, when you will have the seal of His Spirit and bear fruit by His grace. “Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.” “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” Thus will you welcome His coming Who says, “Surely I come quickly,” and you will answer, “Amen, come, Lord Jesus.”

The Seventy Weeks: 2

The prophecy is distinguished by several defined times, more marked than any other vision of scripture. There is no small variety in the character of the prophecies. God gives the very best of every kind; but here we have certain definite times. You may recall what the Lord said in the beginning of His ministry (Mark 1:15), “The time is fulfilled.” What time? Does He not allude to this vision of Daniel? Notoriously, as a matter of fact, “the people were in expectation,” and all men reasoned in their hearts concerning John, whether haply he were the Christ. The Magi in the East might not know the recent prophets; but they had preserved the remembrance of a vision seen of old by a Gentile seer, hired to curse Israel, yet compelled of God to bless. He had said, “I see Him, but not now, I behold Him, but not nigh. There shall come forth a star out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out of Israel,” &c. When God gave the star to these gazers, it was enough to send them to Jerusalem. Evidently they had conscience toward God, and when they saw the star they connected it with the ancient prophecy, and set out on their long and arduous journey to pay honor to the one born King of the Jews.

Certain it is that they were in earnest, and the Lord blessed them. Thus not only the Jews but also distant Gentiles were on the watch when the time arrived. It was more especially “fulfilled” when the Lord presented Himself to Israel as the Messiah and began to preach the kingdom of heaven as drawn nigh.

Here are the terms of this prophecy. “Seventy weeks are decreed (or apportioned) upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish transgression and to make an end of sins, ant to make expiation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up vision and prophet, and to anoint the holy of holies (ver. 24).

Here the scope is laid down with precision. The period as a whole regards, not the gospel or the church, or even Israel in general, but the Jews as such: “Seventy weeks are apportioned (or decreed) upon thy people and upon thy holy city.” Nor is this all, but we have this result— “to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins,” &c. This cannot be for the Jews distinctively till they shall say, Blessed be He that cometh in the name of Jehovah. Then will they see the Messiah with the eye of faith. It will only be when the last week has run its course; but this, as will appear shortly, supposes the condemnation of this age, and the beginning of the age to come. No doubt we receive the blessing of the gospel now, while the Jews as a people are wrapped up in unbelief. We who know Christ gone on high after suffering on the cross do not wait for expiation till then; whereas the Jews have it only when the Great Priest comes forth from the heavenly sanctuary by-and-by, as Lev. 16 shows. Then for them will everlasting righteousness be brought in, vision and prophet be sealed up, and the holy of holies anointed; for us who walk by faith, not sight, God foresaw and bestowed “some better thing.” But the Jews will surely have their good portion at the close of the age.

The Seventy Weeks are beyond just question four hundred and ninety years; but we are prepared, not only for sections, but also for an interruption of indefinite length between the last two. This seems clearly conveyed by the language of the prophecy itself in verse 26: “Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem unto Messiah the Prince are seven weeks and sixty-two weeks. It shall be built again, street and moat, even in troublous times. And after the sixty-two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and its end shall be with an overflow, and unto the end war—the desolations determined” (vers. 25, 26).

The first section of seven weeks means a period of forty-nine years; and this was occupied with the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the temple as recorded in Ezra and Nehemiah. Then come the sixty-two weeks besides, which bring us down to Messiah expressly. Of course the starting-point from this period of sixty-nine weeks is itself important. It is the commandment to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, of which we have the inspired account in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. There are two commands of the same king. The one was in the seventh year, the other in the twentieth, of Artaxerxes Longimanus. The one more particularly referred to the temple, and the other to the city. Thus a question has arisen, as to which it is well not to speak too confidently. It is, after all, an interval of less than fourteen years. Between the two the epoch must fall. It may help to observe that the beginning of ver. 26 gives a little latitude, as the text says, not “at” but “after the sixty-two weeks” with the first seven. This appears to leave room for the margin; and such care seems to be consistent with God's wisdom. After the sixty-two weeks then, we are told that Messiah would be received? The saddest reverse: “Messiah shall be cut off, and shall have nothing.”

The prophecy, therefore, is remarkable, not only for giving the time with a noteworthy care, but also for that momentous truth: the actual downfall of Judaism in the rejection of Christ. The latter clause is wretchedly mistaken in the Authorized version. The Revised, on the contrary, gives it right. It should not be, “but not for himself,” but “and shall have nothing.” There is no question on the ground of Hebrew grammar. It can mean only “and shall have nothing.” “But not for himself” is wholly unfounded. Shall I tell you how it came in? Because the Authorized Version wanted to make it sound Christian doctrine. But what had this to do with Gabriel's communication to Daniel? The only legitimate sense is “He shall be cut off and shall have nothing.” With His cutting off went the loss of His Messianic rights, His glory as set king on the holy hill of Zion. All that was His in connection with the Jewish people and Jerusalem passed away entirely for the time. And how true is all this? “They shall smite the Judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek” (Mic. 5:1). Christ has none of the promised glory as Ruler in Israel, though “His goings forth are from of old, from the days of eternity.”

As far as the Jews are concerned in His blessings, He is as if He did not exist. It is blessedly true, as we Christians know, that God raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory of a new kind, altogether outside of prophecy, not David's throne in Zion, but God's throne in heaven. How absurd to confound with this the throne of David! David never reigned in heaven, and Christ does not reign on earth; and that theologians confound the two wholly different things is an error which not only makes their scheme fabulous, but lowers His glory and our hope from heaven to earth. The proper character of Christianity is lost, and Israel are naturally defrauded of their peculiar prospects.

It is not scripture that is wrong, but only men's version and interpretation, made to suit a Judaized Christianity. Our Lord being rejected by the people would and could not reign over a rebellious people. Even when they wanted to force on Him a kingdom on earth, the Lord withdrew to the mountain and would have none of it. He was not to reign over the wicked, the unclean, the unbelieving. Men thought it excellent to have a king that could give them bread without working for it. And such is the socialist craving in another form to-day. Man would provide for the needy out of the means of the thrifty and industrious. Certainly the Jews desired then to make Jesus their king who had proved His power and willingness to feed them freely. There was no repentance any more than faith in that. Why were Jews without bread? Why, servants of the Gentiles? Repentance owns our sins, and faith cannot stop short of remission of sins from the God Who has sent His Son to save. Miracles are a sign to sinners that God concerns Himself compassionately with those who have departed from Him. Only in the Son of God is life, eternal life; and God is giving it in Him to all that believe; and it is He Who bore our sins in His own body on the tree, so that the blessing is complete.

Salvation by Grace: 3

Why should it not be so now? Must there not be some strange barrier in your way? some hindrance of Satan, that keeps genuine souls from entering into peace for months, or even years? And the worst of it is, that when people do enter, they dread lest they should deceive themselves. It is curious enough that in the two hymns we sung tonight I was really embarrassed; because they both take for granted that the Christian must die, that the tongue shall be silent in the grave. Both are assumptions, although the authors of them were excellent persons—John Newton the writer of the one, and W. Cowper of the other. They were both of them, beyond a doubt, true saints of the Lord; but the truth should be dearer than either.

Now just look at the grave departure from Scripture. I ought never to assume, as a Christian, that I am going to die, but rather to be waiting for Christ. One may die, of course, as is perfectly true; but I ought not to speak as if I must die, as both hymns do. I was rather hard put to it to find a hymn I could sing, and just refer to it to show how adulterated the truth is in reference to the question. Do you think people do not lose by it? Of course they do. What is the remedy? The grace and truth of our Lord Jesus Christ as set forth in the gospel. We know people say this is dangerous! The truth of God dangerous! The grace of God dangerous! Just wait for a moment, and you will see how excessively false and evil such a notion is. Nay, it is rebellion against the grace of God, as God has revealed it in His word.

Look again at this man. I have shown the blessed testimony he bore to the Lord Jesus as the Holy One, who had done nothing amiss. Surely He must have been more than man to have done nothing amiss. But then the dying robber does not rest there. He turns to our Lord, and strikingly said, “Remember me when Thou comest in Thy kingdom” —not exactly “into,” but “in Thy kingdom.” This is a particular point, because our Lord does not go into His kingdom there. He comes in His kingdom from heaven; He receives a kingdom from God and comes back. It is given Him by God before He comes, as is shown in the parable, where it is said that “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive a kingdom and to return.”

Is it not a marvelous thing that the robber should know the truth better than our authorized translators? They made the mistake of thinking He had come into this kingdom there. The robber knew more about the kingdom than they. He no doubt had heard the Prophets read—had heard of the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven, and all His angels with Him; and he asked to be remembered of the Lord. When you think of how the robber had lived up to that time, what a thing it was for him to ask of Christ “Remember me when Thou comest in Thy kingdom!” That the Lord Jesus in that august moment, when claims of the countless interests of the kingdom over all the earth rested upon Him, should remember the new-born one, the poor converted robber! For him personally to be remembered by the King of kings and Lord of lords at that moment, you would say was a bold request. Yes, but the Lord Jesus loves the boldness that confides in Him. What you have to guard against is just the contrary—the bravado of unbelief. Oh, think of this!

People talk about the presumption of believers. It were wiser to warn them of the presumptuous sin of unbelief. Is it not truly presumptuous to think that they can ever make a title to the skies, or a title to Christ's kingdom comparable with His grace? You never can have so good a title as the robber had unless you have his title. There is but one title good. The title of grace is perfect; and this is Christ—Christ in all His worth—Christ in His perfection—Christ in all the power of His redemption. Is that your title? If so, blessed are you: you have got the same title as the converted robber; you cannot have a better; you may easily have a worse. All else is good for nothing. There are some Christians who consider it the way of wisdom and prudence to mix a little bit of self with grace. The more they do so, the weaker they are, the less happy. And so they deserve; for they dishonor Christ, by marring grace, and darkening the truth.

What a deliverance to have done with self! What self-abandonment to have only grace, and nothing but grace, and all grace! Such was the case with this poor man. He saw he could look in the Lord's face, and say to Him, “Remember me when Thou comest in Thy kingdom.” And the Lord did not reply, “What! you talk about that. You may think yourself well off to be just the boy borne with, as it were, in heaven.” The Lord will not have one in heaven save like Himself. He will not allow a person there with a single token of shame about him. They are resplendent every one in the beauty and glory of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I remember seeing a curious mistake in a tract by one of our brethren; for you must not suppose we want to maintain that they do not make mistakes. “The Broken Crown” was the point of the tract. But seriously, in heaven there are no broken crowns—nothing of the sort. When saints go with Christ to heaven, they are crowned: no broken crowns are there, nor men in robes that are not the best robes. Nay, the best robe is given here. What is the best robe? Christ. Put on Christ: no robe so good as He. Be true to Christ. It is impossible to have Christ, and not have the best robe. This is the truth of the figure; and the man that had not on the wedding garment was one who dared to come in his own righteousness. So that, when the robber begged the Lord to remember him when He came in His kingdom, he was thoroughly within the just petitions to Christ. He was there, if I may so say, swimming in that blessed sea of love in which he was made to find his true bliss. He was at home there, at ease there, breathing freely there. He was buoyed up and made strong in the grace that is in Jesus Christ; yea, he was as good as preaching from that cross to every creature, and showing what the cross of Christ can do for a poor guilty sinner.

Is this to be your portion now? I call on you not to believe half the gospel, nor to seek and find a little something for your soul. I want you to see that Christ does not give in such fashion at all. It is not His way to give a little now and a little again. The crumbs that fall from His table are turned into richer and still richer blessing. He gives better than the whole loaf of man. He was asked, “Remember me when Thou comest in Thy kingdom.” What is the answer? It is in accordance with a blessed principle of God, that, whatever faith asks, grace gives yet more. The Lord knew well that the boldness of the man's faith was to be eclipsed by the fullness of God's grace. The grace of God will always be greater than any faith on man's part. The man asked a very great thing—to be remembered when the Lord comes in His kingdom. His heart was filled with assurance that at such a moment Christ would be able to remember him; but the Lord lets him know He will do it and far more. “Verily,” said Jesus unto him, “I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.”

This is surely more than to be remembered in the kingdom. You will not suspect me of running down the kingdom, or of willingness to depreciate the day of the Lord. You know that one loves often and publicly to insist on it, and on its great importance. You will not think, therefore, that slight of it is meant. But this I do say, that, great as may be the glory of the kingdom when our Lord Jesus comes, to be with Christ in Paradise is even more and better. The two blessings go together, and therefore it is not at all a question of setting the one against the other. But there is this difference. The kingdom will be an outward display when the Lord will give five cities to one servant and ten to another. It will be a day of rewards for service, for fidelity, when every laborer will account according to his labor. But to be with Christ in Paradise means the fullness of grace; and beyond doubt, great as is the importance of the kingdom, the privilege of a sinner saved to be with Christ in the presence of God is one that nothing can exceed or equal.

Reflections on Galatians 1:1-10

The opening address is remarkable for its singularity. “Paul an apostle (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father who raised him from the dead), and all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia.” He is careful to assert his apostleship and the source of it, the Judaizing teachers of his day invariably calling it in question while seeking to undermine the doctrine of free grace (2 Cor. 11-13). It was an offense to such that Paul had not received his commission from the twelve and from Jerusalem. So petty and narrow is the human mind that it is slow to enter into the breadth of God's thoughts and the divine sovereignty of His action. These men would have had Christianity revolve around Jerusalem as a center, and would have supplemented faith in Christ with circumcision and the ordinances of the law. But God's thoughts are not as men's thoughts. Christianity is no mere branch of Judaism (which had a divinely selected earthly center), but a totally new order of blessing, founded upon the work of Christ, having its seat in heaven, where Christ sits as the glorified Head at the right hand of God.

It was true that Paul had not been called from Jerusalem. He was called to both grace and apostleship near Damascus, and when sent forth to evangelize the Gentile world, it was from Antioch. Thus early did God break in upon successional order. Therefore, while asserting his apostleship, he adds, “not of men, neither by man.” He sets man aside, as either the source or the channel of ministry. The source of all ministry is the risen Christ. “When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. And he gave some apostles,” &c. (Eph. 4). Here there is no room either for official men or the church. The authority of the former is in every case pretended, not real, while the latter has no place, according to scripture, save as a receiver of all the blessing. It is an infringement of the rights of Christ for either to step in between Himself and His servants. Yet how general is the departure from scripture in this very respect! In what religious body in Christendom could ministry be described as “not of men, neither by man?” Many would probably assert that man is not the source of ministry, but can anyone say that man is not the universally recognized channel? Human authority, in one form or another, is looked for on all sides, ere a man can be regarded as a “regular” minister of Christ. Scripture furnishes no warrant whatever for such a notion, though it be ancient. Laborers are responsible to the Lord alone, Who fits, calls, and gives them to the church.

But here we must distinguish between gift and office. Scripture speaks plainly of elders and deacons. Elders were chosen by the apostles, either personally or by delegate, to care for the spiritual state of the saints locally; deacons were nominated by the assembly to undertake the temporal affairs, as caring for widows, &c. Both classes were apostolically appointed. But this was not for the ministry of the word. It was not an absolute requisite for men of either class to be able to labor in word and doctrine. No doubt, where this was, the laborer was worthy of double honor (Acts 14:23; 6:3-6, 1 Tim. 5:17).

But ministry, if Scripture is to be followed, is free, those who have received gifts being responsible to the Lord Jesus to exercise them. Good doctrine, not official appointment, was to be looked for (compare 3 John). When Apollos went to Ephesus, it was not his ordination that was inquired into, but his doctrine; and having approved himself there (after godly help), being “disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote exhorting the disciples to receive him” (Acts 19). And when at a later date, Paul greatly desired him to go to Corinth, it was not at all his will to go at that time (1 Cor. 16:12). Liberty prevailed all round in apostolic days when the truth was held fast, as the apostle himself records.

Paul was not alone in his earnest protest to the Galatians, He adds, “and all the brethren which are with me.” This was to silence objectors. 2 Cor. 11; 12 shows what base insinuations his opponents could throw out. Therefore he is careful to show that what he wrote was with the fall concurrence of all who were associated with him in the work. He briefly addresses them as “the churches of Galatia.” He does not add, “beloved of God,” as to the Romans, nor “to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus,” as to the Corinthians. It is the shortest possible address, unlike the general style of the affectionate apostle. How could it be otherwise? The souls were trifling with the very foundations of Christianity; what could he say for them? “I stand in doubt of you,” he says farther on. Nothing was more serious, in his judgment, than to turn to the law after confession of faith in Christ, still his heart was towards them. If he was not so expressive as usual, he coup wish most unfeignedly “Grace to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ.” This word is specially important, if only because of its constant repetition in the New Testament. But the Galatians could not enjoy either grace or peace while they trafficked with law. These are the precious fruits of the work of Jesus, and for the enjoyment of our souls day by day.

But the apostle adds of our Lord Jesus, “who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world (age), according to the will of God and our Father: to whom be glory forever and ever, Amen.” What more could He give for our sins than Himself, and what else would have availed? He bare the sins of the many, and they are gone, cast into the depths of the sea. But was the putting away of sins the only object of His work? Nay, there is more, “That he might deliver us from this present evil world.” Is it strange that such a word should come in here? By no means. It was needed urgently in Galatia. To follow the law is an aspect of worldliness, however startling it may sound to some. Law was given to correct and restrain flesh, and to direct man viewed as living in the world. But the Christian has died and is risen; so that Paul could say, “Why as though living in the world?” &c. (Col. 2:20). Where this is understood, the heart is proof against legalism, because it enjoys a heavenly Christ as its only object. If the Galatians ever knew this, they were letting it slip.

The apostle expresses his astonishment at their early declension from the truth. “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel; which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.” Theirs was not gradual decay after long years of profession, but a very sudden turning aside. How could they be so fickle? To turn now to law was to turn from God. He had called them by Paul to grace, not law. Time was, when to follow the law was to walk with God. But faith is come, and those who were under the schoolmaster are so no longer. For Gentiles, after profession of faith in Christ, to turn to law, is to turn from God. No wonder the apostle stood in doubt of the Galatians! But he would not admit that it was another gospel. There were no glad tidings different from those preached by him with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. It was a perversion of the gospel of Christ, and the men were troublers, and should bear their judgment.

Paul felt that the foundations were at stake, which made him vehement. “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.” Faith working by love can speak strongly at times, when the truth of Christ is involved. The apostle would pronounce anathema upon himself if ever he corrupted the gospel committed to his trust.

But it was possible that these Judaisers might seek to persuade the Galatians that they had not received all the gospel and that what they taught was merely supplementary, and what the apostle would have set before them had he remained long enough. This would be plausible, but it is met, “As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.” Paul had taught them all, and they had received all: all pretended developments were but error. In speaking so strongly, the apostle had Christ before him, not men. “For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.” Paul had not learned the unwholesome principle of our day, that for unity's sake all sorts of error should be tolerated. None could be more careful than he not to unnecessarily wound any, nor could any be more considerate to souls who were slow in their growth in the truth; but when the foundations of Christianity were undermined or attacked, the apostle forgot men, and acted for Christ. An important principle for our souls at the present crisis.

James 1:23-24

Reality is indispensable. It was so of old and always; much more is it now due to God, who has done such great things for us in Christ. Begotten of God with the word of truth, we are called to walk accordingly. The higher or holier the speech, if it go no farther, the more are we self-condemned and inexcusably guilty. Life is given to the believer for exercise in every way pleasing to God.

“Because if any one be a word-hearer, and not a doer, he is like a man considering his natural face in a mirror; for he considered himself and is gone away, and straightway forgot of what sort he was.” (vers. 23, 24).

It is a privilege of no small value to have the word, which is of God; and as it was that which revealed Him in Christ to the soul, so also it was made the means of quickening. It therefore is the appropriate nourishment of the life that was given, as the Holy Spirit used it thus efficaciously. So He does to the end, making us know that the Trinity is no mere idea nor objective dogma, but a living truth in active operation day by day for those who believe. Hence conscience is continually exercised; for we have another nature, not only human but fallen and prone to evil, as previous verses in this chapter fully notice; and we pass through a world which is wholly opposed to God and His glory, having already been tested from the beginning and proving its enmity by crucifying the Lord of glory. Inwardly and outwardly therefore is the most real danger, especially when we take account of a subtle and sleepless power of evil, one who secretly avails himself of every means to compromise the saint and draw him into the dishonor of the Lord.

Nor is there any way more perilous than ensnaring the believers into a merely formal reading of the revealed word. For the conscience may be satisfied that the word is heard, while the heart is unmoved; and thus all becomes powerless. Yet therein God has communicated the most solemn truths, and of the nearest interest to Himself as well as to us; so that reading them there perfunctorily inflicts deep moral loss on the soul, and leads into a hardened state that lays one open to a thousand snares.

Therefore does our epistle urge us to be not hearers of the word only, but doers, comparing him who is a mere hearer to a man considering in a mirror “the face of his birth,” as it literally runs. For, it is added, he considered himself and is gone away, and straightway forgot of what sort he was. A similar warning, we have seen, had the Lord given in the close of what is called the sermon on the mount, as it is indeed not only for all that turn away from what they hear for the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, but expressly for such professors of His name as content themselves with reading or hearing His good word, which is able to make wise unto salvation. Life is not only receptive but energetic; it is holy and works by love, for it is inseparable from the Son of God, Whose words are profitable indeed: “they are spirit, and they are life,” as He has told us. So also had He said, “That which is born of the Spirit, is spirit.” This no external institution, however important, can possibly effect; nothing but a divine person giving the soul to believe the word and Him who made it known.

Thus is the truth kept sure and safe on all sides, without room for superstition or fanaticism. For the Holy Spirit ever employs the word which witnesses to Christ and His work, and thus brings into communion with God; and as one is thus born of God, so does he grow and work practically. Where only the mind is reached or the affections, it is no more than a sight of the natural face in a mirror. There is no abiding self-judgment, no going out after Christ, no delight in God's will intimated in His word. It was seen for a moment but forgotten.

The Mystery: Part 2

In the following page (52) we encounter some extraordinary statements indeed. On the gates of the city Dr. B. finds the names of the twelve tribes of Israel, and in the foundations the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. We should have supposed that the names of all the twelve apostles would have satisfied even a divine of the nineteenth century that the holy city was the church of God. But they are no match for Dr. B.; with one stroke of his pen he cuts off the whole band. We are familiar with wholesale excommunications by arrogant popes; but even they were never bold enough to turn Peter and the eleven en masse out of the church of which they were the honored foundations (Eph. 2).

But Dr. B. is troubled by no squeamish scruples. What can he do with his theory about the Bride if the apostles form part of the body of Christ? With rare effrontery, urged on by overwhelming zeal for the offspring of his imagination, he declares that the twelve apostles are “separated off from the church!” The church is part of the Bridegroom, but the apostles form no part of the bride! There is therefore, according to our author, not the shadow of a shade of a doubt that those who have regarded Peter and John, for instance, as among those whom God set first in the church, have been the unfortunate victims of an egregious delusion!

The fact that the names of the twelve apostles are seen in the foundations of the symbolical city of Rev. 22 receives explanation from the Epistle to the Ephesians (2:19-22). It indicates, in spite of Dr. B.'s reveries, that the apostles had a good deal to do with the church. So far from being outside of it, they are as closely connected with it as a foundation is with the building raised upon it. Saved Jews and Gentiles were and are being built upon a foundation which is not of the apostle Paul to the exclusion of the others, but “of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ being the chief corner stone.” This building under the workmanship of the Holy Ghost is growing unto a holy temple in the Lord. In that same word the Ephesian saints, with other believing Jews and Gentiles, are viewed by the apostle as forming God's house upon earth, God dwelling in it by His Spirit.

Here then in this Epistle, which specially treats of the mystery, the body of Christ is presented as a building having the apostles for a foundation, and growing to a temple in the Lord, but is even now God's habitation in the Spirit (cf. 1 Peter 2:5, 6); while in Rev. 21 a building is again presented to us, having foundations in which are the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. Now what more simple and unstrained than to see in both places a figure of the church, the body and bride of Christ?

Nay, says the author of the “Mystery,” that cannot be. What are we to do with the promise of Christ to the apostles which has never been abrogated, that they should judge the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28) if they form part of the body of Christ (page 52)? But it is puzzling to see how membership of the body of Christ would hinder the apostles from judging the tribes of Israel, any more than it would hinder the Corinthian saints from judging the world (1 Cor. 6:2), or the overcomer in Thyatira from ruling the nations with a rod of iron (Rev. 2:26-27). Will Dr. B. amputate the body still further by cutting off the Corinthian saints and those in Thyatira? The sole justification for his monstrous excision of the apostles is a “comparison of Matt. 19:28 with Rev. 21:14.” Let wise men examine for themselves. What necessary connection is there between the names in the foundations and sitting on twelve thrones?

On page 54 Dr. B. sums up in very decided terms, “What is clear and certain is that the church is the body of Christ Himself, and that the members of the body being in Christ (mystical) are PART OF THE BRIDEGROOM, and cannot possibly, therefore, be the bride herself.”

Now it is hardly conceivable that our author is unaware of the common danger of confusing the sign with the thing signified. He surely knows also that it is a frequent and well-understood practice to compare an object in two perfectly dissimilar ways, for the purpose of illustrating two distinct qualities of that object.

We will give an example of this to make our point quite clear. Let us suppose that an impatient reader, referring to a treatise of inconsequential ideas and vain fancies, alludes to its author as “a goose,” and subsequently as “a mule.” By the first figure he would probably wish to convey the general vacuity of thought characteristic of the writer, and by the second his stubborn persistence in wrong notions. And though the figures might perhaps be more forcible than elegant, they would be perfectly admissible. But Dr. B. would contend that they must refer to two different persons. For, he would say, if a man is a goose how can he be a mule? One is a biped, the other a quadruped. One cackles, but the other kicks; and so on with other dissimilarities. But does he not forget that though a goose cannot be a mule, a man may be both a goose and a mule at the same time, inasmuch as it is quite possible for him to be not only foolish but obstinate as well?

Dr. B. keeps insisting that the body cannot be the bride, when the truth is that it is the church which is figured both as the body and the bride. While it is perfectly true that these figures are allied in character, they are nevertheless used to set forth distinct ideas. The “body” indicates that intimate degree of living unity existing between Christ and His members, and is used particularly of the church during its stay on earth. On the other hand, the foremost thought suggested by the “bride” is that of association. The church is to love and share Christ's glory, reigning with Him. Hence where the professing church is shown as the false bride (Rev. 18), she is seen taking her glory from the kings of the earth with whom she enters into unnatural alliance. But the true bride awaits the heavenly glory of Christ.

We must, however, say a word as to Dr. B.'s treatment of Eph. 5:28, 29, which is another instance of his pitiful trifling with these sacred themes. Here, he says, “the great secret is employed as an argument to the reciprocal duties of husbands and wives. In neither case is it said that the church is the wife or that Christ is the husband. But that as Christ loves His body (the church), so husbands ought to love their bodies (their wives)” (page 54). Now Dr. B. admits in so many words that a man's wife is here spoken of as his body, but where the question is the church as both the body of Christ and the Lamb's wife, he is completely boggled. He simply shuts his eyes, and says the only thing “clear and certain” is that it cannot possibly be.

Now the point in the verses is that a bride is a man's body, that he and his wife are mystically “one flesh.” This was literally true in the case of Adam and Eve; for the rib that God took from Adam He builded into a woman; and God called their name, Adam (Gen. 5:2). And these figures are applied by the apostle (we are not so concerned about “New Testament Expositors”), to Christ and the church. “This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church” (Eph. 5:32). So that the passage bases the love of the husband to the wife upon the identity (in figure) of his body and his bride; adding, that so it is with the Lord and the Church.

Dr. B.'s remarks on Matt. 25:1-13 afford another example of his riding a figure to death. The virgins cannot be the bride, because they are her attendant companions! We wonder if he objects in the same way to the Lord's similitudes of the kingdom of the heavens in Matt. 13. Does he say it is “clear and certain” that the great tree cannot be the leaven hid in three measures of meal, any more than the latter can be the same as the treasure, because it is likewise “clear and certain” the treasure was hid in a field and not in the three measures of meal? The Lord, however, likens the kingdom of heaven to all three, however they may differ when compared among themselves. In point of fact, just as the types of scripture cannot be understood until we know the truths they typify, in like manner, paradoxical as it may seem, the language of scripture cannot be correctly interpreted without knowing the underlying thoughts,

This the Lord said to the Jews, “Why do ye not understand my speech? (λαλιὰ) even because ye cannot hear my word” (λόγος) (John 8:43). The case of Nicodemus illustrates the same thing, for he utterly mistook the meaning of the Lord's words (John 3:4).

But why does Dr. B., dwelling upon the nonidentity of the bride and the virgins, her companions, reiterate the ruler's question, “How can these things be?” Is it not best first to ascertain the purpose of the parable? This is supplied in Matt. 25:13, “Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour.” Now we can understand attendant virgins slumbering and sleeping; but how incongruous would it have been to represent a bride falling asleep on such an occasion? Do not the “Spirit and the bride say, Come?” (Rev. 22:17.) Beside half of them are shut out, a circumstance quite foreign to the figure of a bride, but faithfully illustrating the fate of the mass of professing Christendom, as we are taught in unfigurative language elsewhere. The ten virgins therefore set forth the mixed company of those who take the place of Christians, while the bride figures the church in glory associated with Christ in His public appearing and reign.

Dr. B. maintains (page 55) that Rebekah does not illustrate the church but the bride, that is, O.T. saints spoken of in Heb. 11. The sole reason given is that the bride (Rebekah) was not to be of “the Canaanites,” and “Gentiles were expressly shut out” in contrast with the church which embodies Jew and Gentile.” But Dr. B. overlooks that amongst those expressly named in the “great cloud of witnesses” (to which he refers in Heb. 11) Rahab is included (verse 31), who was both a Gentile and a Canaanite. We think this fact rather spoils the symmetry of Dr. B.'s argument; and it is undeniable that theories must give way to facts.

The “better thing” (Heb. 11:39, 40) is said by our author to refer to the position of greater glory and honor the body of Christ will have than the bride; whereas it refers to the present blessing of Christianity which God has now provided for us and which we enjoy already, while they had only unfulfilled promises. Nevertheless both they and we shall be perfected together in the first resurrection (compare the use of “better,” in Heb. vii, 19-22; viii. 6; ix. 23),

We have now examined the scriptures that Dr. B. has brought forward to show that the body of Christ is not identical with the heavenly bride of Christ; and we find that not one of them bears him out in his misshapen theory. Being over-occupied with the nature of the metaphors employed, he has missed the truth signified. The “body,” which indicates in a word the nature of present living unity betwixt Christ and the church, is characteristically found in the Epistles; while the “bride” signifying the future association of the church, when perfected and glorified with Christ, is appropriately used in the prophetic visions of the Apocalypse. What is first His body becomes His bride, as in the case of Adam and Eve (Gen. 2), which Eph. 5 authorizes as a picture of Christ and the church.

Until the nuptial day the church awaits with joyous anticipation. “The Spirit and the bride say, Come” (Rev. 22:17). How perverse to suppose that the Holy Ghost is moving the spirits of the departed saints of O.T. days, who are now on high, to cry, Come! The bride here can only refer to the church, which alone is the habitation of the Spirit. Besides it is the saints on earth, not those in the presence of Christ, who say, Come. The fact is Dr. B.'s theory does not accord with the truth as revealed. He has offered us bread, but we find it is a stone.

We propose (D.V.) to examine some further points raised by Dr. B. in this tract.

Letter of Pope Leo XIII on the Unity of the Church: 2. Unity

2—Unity

To attract the stray sheep Pope Leo has “thought it most conducive.... to describe the exemplar and, as it were, the lineaments of the Church. Amongst these the most worthy of our chief consideration is Unity” (p. v). Now in scripture the church has unity, not bare, but of a most distinctive character. It is the unity of God's presence in light and love, of which Christ is the head and center, and the Spirit is the power, where therefore falsehood and evil are, as intolerable, judged by the written word. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth. Where this is not realized, the unity becomes the enemy's snare attaching the name of God and binding souls helplessly together to that which sanctions any iniquity and error. Unity, which exalts man and his will under pretense of God's authority, letting in error and allowing evil, is the hateful antithesis of the Spirit's unity, the object of God's wrath and sore judgment, as John predicts for the harlot city of Rev. 17, 18. No wonder then that all votaries of corrupt and spurious unity should both slight openly and secretly dread the last book of holy prophecy.

The truth is thus unworthily ignored, or strangely taken for granted. But even if this were a sound and spiritual judgment, how sad! For nothing is more certain than the fact that “unity” no longer exists among Christians. There was a time when the apostolic exhortation in 1 Cor. 10:32 could apply absolutely and without explanation: “Give none offense [no occasion of stumbling] either to Jews or to Greeks or to the church of God.” There was no Latin church opposed to the Oriental, each claiming to be Catholic and Apostolic, to say nothing of the Russian patriarchate independent of Constantinople. There were no Jacobites, nor Nestorians; no distinct communities of Abyssinians, of Armenians, and of, Copts. Again, how refuse the Christian name to the multifarious Protestant bodies who date from the Reformation, or to such as the Anglicans who boast of ecclesiastical continuity of a dubious sort for long ages before it? It must not be forgotten that more of the baptized are outside Rome than within it; and if one may at all speak not of mere profession but of real children of God, the preponderance is enormously against Rome. Yet godly and intelligent Protestants have immensely added to the disunion of Christendom. Who can deny it? or is it a light matter?

In apostolic days the church was one. How could it be otherwise if it were, as scripture declares it to be, the body and bride of Christ? It was not only that the individuals who composed it were sons of God with the Holy Spirit given to each, and crying, Abba Father. They were one with Christ. corporately, His body; which relationship created the responsibility of walking as such together on the earth. They were heavenly in title already as belonging to the Heavenly One, before they bear His image at His coming again.. “By one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all given to drink of one Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:13). It was not an invisible light here below; but out of the most discordant elements expressly one, that the world seeing it might believe that the Father sent the Son Who constituted it.

The church therefore was as distinctly separate from the world, as it was Christ's alone, bearing witness, wherever it existed on earth, to its Head in heaven. The Christians formed the “within,” as all who were not, Jews or Gentiles, were the “without.” It was the only divine society here below. Israel of old had been Jehovah's chosen nation. But this place they for the time forfeited. Thereon God visited Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name, called by sovereign grace to incomparably higher privileges, and to heavenly glory as heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ. The same cross of Christ which ended Judaism founded God's reconciliation of both Jews and Gentiles that believe in one body, the enmity being slain thereby. Thus through Christ we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. So real and efficacious the presence of the Spirit, that in each locality (as at Corinth) the gathered saints were addressed as “Christ's body” (1 Cor. 12:27); and so are they all together on earth “the church” (1 Cor. 12:28). The unity was universal as well as local. A member of Christ was so equally in Antioch and in Ephesus, in Jerusalem and in Rome, so were apostles and prophets, evangelists, also pastors and teachers. There was one body, and one Spirit.

It is beyond controversy that this visibly and practically maintained unity no longer subsists. The later Epistles are full of warning for Christendom, as the O.T. prophets for Israel. The apostle Paul too in an early one had predicted that “the apostasy” should come before the day of the Lord. Nothing worse was ever said to the Jews. He declared that “the mystery of lawlessness” was already at work even in his active days. It may be held down for the time, but at last would issue in the revelation of the lawless one, the man of sin, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy when He appears. Was not this to write from God sentence of death on Christendom? 2 Thess. 2 intimates with divine certainty, that lawlessness was even then at work, breaking out in heterodoxy and unholiness, in schisms and heresies; that there is no uprooting of it, whatever the Spirit may do to suppress or check it; but that it will, when God's restraint is removed, rise up at last into the most impious defiance of God and the most openly lawless arrogation of His glory, judicially closed by the Lord shining forth in His day.

That the church which Christ builds on the rock, on the confession of His own person and divine glory, will prevail over all the power of Hades, is certain (Matt. 16:18). But this in no way clashes with what scripture attests of ruin for the professing mass. What we now see around us, if we have the least spiritual eyesight, is thus clearly accounted for. God is no more pleased with the state of Christendom than of old with that of Israel (1 Cor. 10). Since the departure of the great apostle grievous wolves came in, not sparing the flock; and from among Christians themselves men rose up speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after them. Hence the last apostle could only say, “even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last hour” (1 John 2:18): not the triumph of the church, but alas! the spread of anti-Christianism. So far too is Rome from being set out in scripture as the indefeasible guarantee of unity or of aught else, to the saints there above all others is addressed the solemn word for the professing Gentile, “Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but on thee goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off” (Rom. 11:22). If there is a spot on earth perpetually infamous for iniquity, moral, doctrinal, and ecclesiastical, it is Rome, in Popes, Cardinals, priests, people, monks, and nuns: such have been the confessions of many of its own most distinguished adherents. Must I cite Gerson, Baronius, or a crowd of witnesses before and since? “Thou also shalt be cut off.”

Is it meant, as too many think, Protestants as well as Papists, that all is hopeless, even for such as sigh and cry for all the abominations done in Christendom? Is there nothing but Christian work now? Is there no common walk and worship, no longer communion of saints reliable for the believer, or acceptable to God? God forbid that we should doubt Him, defraud our souls, or dishonor the Spirit given to abide with us forever. There is a path and a center for faith in a day of ruin. The name of Jesus is not the ground and pledge of salvation only, bit of unfailing security for those who are gathered to it. And the Holy Spirit is here to make good His unity for all that use diligence to keep it according to the written word in the uniting bond of peace (Eph. 4:3). Those gathered to the Lord's name, even “two or three,” wherever they be, have His promise and sanction as keeping the unity of the Spirit. Were 200 millions gathered otherwise (e.g. to the see of St. Peter), they have no such promise; if 400 millions were re-united otherwise, it would not mend matters, but only make them worse. To be gathered to His name is His own resource for a day of evil, and stumbling blocks, and scattering; and it is an unfailing resource to such as have faith in Him.

Diligently to “keep the unity of the Spirit” is as far as possible from the letter, or spirit of a sect. For a sect falsifies things by being sometimes broader, more commonly narrower, than the church of God. Thus nationalism departs from it by embracing a whole people in principle by sacraments; as dissent forms mere voluntary societies by adhesion to particular views. In both ways God's design is lost sight of and His children err.

But even in a day of confusion and ruin the path of His will is open to the single eye of faith. His word abides forever. It is a solemn duty, not a sect, where Christians turn away from all that hold a form of godliness, but have denied its power (2 Tim. 3). It is a plain call of God not to forsake the assembling of themselves together as members of Christ—the only membership they recognize as of His grace. So it was originally according to His revealed will; and it remains ever true and obligatory. Yet to assume the title of the church of God, for the few who now act on it, would be pride and heartlessness, as virtually denying the many who are scattered here or there in the present state of ruin. But on no other ground should believers act; for only this is obedience, which remains always valid for action as for faith.

Kingdom of Heaven Taken by Force

Q.-Matt. 11:12. What does this mean?

A.-The Baptist was now in prison, and shortly to suffer unto blood. The Christ was more and more despised and rejected of men, especially of man religious after the flesh but not believing God. Hence the path becomes increasingly separate; and faith of the rejected Messiah is more and more in contrast with Jewish order where rights and privileges descend and are perpetuated in a natural way. John the Baptist marks the transition. From his days until now, says our Lord, the kingdom of the heavens is taken by violence, and violent persons seize it. It was no longer a question of swimming with the stream even in Israel and with Messiah present. He was going to act in all-over-coming power another day when He appears in glory (Psa. 110:2-3). Now the believer must in the energy of faith break with natural ties, and rise above hindrances when least expected and most abundant. The kingdom of the heavens is taken by such force as this: only those that can thus resist seize it. As He says later, “If anyone desireth to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever shall desire to save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake shall find it.” And this He said, when He told the disciples no longer to say to anyone that He was the Messiah (Matt. 16:20). He was now on the road to Jerusalem to suffer from the religious chiefs and to be killed and raised the third day as Son of Man. Thus was Christianity piercing through the clouds, and leaving Judaism to vanish away.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:13-14

LET us now look a little into the family of Mitzraim. “And Mitzraim begot the Ludim and the Anamim and the Lehabim and the Naphtuhim and the Pathrusim and the Casluhim (out of whom came the Philistines) and the Caphtorim” (vers. 13, 14). So it is also in 1 Chron. 1:11, 12.

As there was a Shemite Lud (ver. 22), it is important to distinguish from him, the ancestor of the well-known Lydian race in the west of Asia Minor, those descended from Mitzraim, who spread themselves west of the Nile. They were archers as we learn from Isa. 66:19, and Jer. 46:9, where the African people seem enumerated and so described. It would appear to be the same in Ezek. 27:10, and in 30:4, 5 also. In the Auth. V. of Jer. 46 is given the word “Lydians,” as in Ezek. 30 “Lydia.” This conveys the impression that our translators probably understood the Asiatic people. But there ought not to be a doubt that they were African.

We next hear of the Anamim, of whom nothing more is said in the Bible than in the two genealogical lists. It may perhaps be gathered, from comparison with the names which follow, that they were a race that settled in the Delta of Egypt. But it must be allowed that no reliable trace is known either in the ancient Geographers, or in the monuments hitherto deciphered. Here we have the unfailing record of God, Who alone saw the end from the beginning and has been pleased to communicate to us the truth otherwise unnoticed. The judgment of the habitable earth in a day which approaches will prove that the races are not extinct.

The Lehabim, called also Lubim in 2 Chron. 12:3; 16:8, with the people called Phut, or Put, (if not Pul, as in Isa. 66:19), answer to the ancient Lybians; save indeed that the ordinary usage of Lybia in olden time is vague, and extends far and wide to almost all Africa west of the Nile. The Phut of scripture apparently corresponds with the hieroglyphic bow, or Pet. This is also applied to a people, or rather confederacy of peoples, conquered by Egypt, and called “the Bows,” or “Nine Bows,” Na-Petu, though Brugsch understands simply “the Nine Peoples.” This would seem to connect itself with the Naphtuhim immediately following the Lehabim, who are the same as the Lebu or Rebu of the Egyptian inscriptions, as Mr. R. S. Poole has shown, the Libyans proper. The A. V. renders Phut “the Libyans” in Jer. 49:2 (“handling the shield”) distinguished from the Lydians, or Ludim (“handling and bending the bow”); and in Ezek. 38:5 “Libya,” again marked with other powers by the “shield.” In Nah. 3:9 we see Phut and the Lubim helpers of No-Amon (the god Amon of No, or Thebes of Upper Egypt), the ruins of which, in spite of Cush and Mitzraim, is set by the prophet as a warning to Nineveh. Again, and bearing on what is still future, we are told that when the last king of the north subdues and spoils Egypt, the Lubim and Cush shall be at his steps, though Edom and Moab and the chief of the children of Ammon shall be delivered out of his hands.

What plainer proof can there be to the believer that these races are yet abiding and to take their part in the great catastrophe of the latter day? The reign of Antiochus Epiphanies, directly or indirectly, did not extend beyond Dan. 11:31, 32. That which we have pointed out is after the great break of ver. 35, and expressly supposes the renewal of the two powers of the north and the south, when “the king,” the lawless one, is in “the land” between them “at the time of the end.” Thus that time is as clearly future as sure. Compare Isa. 11:14, which not only confirms the fact of the old cognate but hostile races on the borders of the land, but declares their final subjection to Israel under Messiah “in that day.”

Of the Naphtuhim a little has been already said when speaking of the Lubim. More is given in scripture respecting the next name of Pathrusim. From Isa. 11:11 Pathros as distinguished from Egypt would seem to be the upper part of the land. Ezek. 29:14; 30:13-18 are supposed to point at the Thebais the desolation which the prophet declared should overtake all the land. The chief difficulty is, that Jeremiah speaks of Pathros (44:1) in connection with cities in Lower Egypt, and in a yet more general way later on (ver. 15). But there does not appear in the group anything so decided as to set aside our referring Pathros to the land farther south.

There remain the “Casluhim (out of whom or whence came the Philistines) and the Caphtorim.” These races can hardly be doubted to have occupied the Delta before the Philistine migration to the Shephelah. Some suggest here a transposition; as Deut. 2:23, Jer. 47:4, Amos 9:7, expressly connect the Philistine immigrants with the Caphtorim. Pusey, commenting on the last of these scriptures, inclines to the conclusion, that there were different immigrations of the same tribe into Palestine (as of Danes and Saxons into England, where they all merged into one common name). The first may have been from the Casluhim; the second in time but chief in importance from the Caplitorim; and a third of Kerethim (probably from Crete) in the era of the Judges added but a little to their strength (1 Sam. 30:14-16). Of these last, Cherethites and Pelethites figure as lifeguards of King David, foreigners like the Gittites.

It is plain and certain that the architecture, whether of temples or of palaces, the sculpture and painting, and the various other monuments of Egypt for living or dead bear, like its original language, the marks of extreme antiquity and of high civilization. Idolatry flaunts us everywhere, but as Herren remarks (African Nations, ii. 271, Oxford, Talboys, 1832), “The first idea which presents itself from a view of these monuments must be that Thebes [the No, or No-Amon, of Scripture] was once the capital of a mighty empire, whose boundaries extended far beyond Egypt, which at some distant period comprised a great part of Africa, and an equally large portion of Asia. Her kings are represented as victors and conquerors; and the scene of their glory is not confined to Egypt, but often carried to remote regions. Prisoners of distant nations bow the knee before the conquerors, and count themselves happy if they can obtain their pardon.... This is further confirmed by the many examples which evince the refinement of domestic life, and the degree of luxury to which the people had arrived. The narrow valley of the Nile could not supply all the articles, such as costly garments, perfumes, &c., which we find here represented. An extensive commerce was requisite, not only to obtain all this, but also to produce that opulence, and that interchange of ideas, which constitute its foundation.” Denon (Voy. dans la basse et haute Egypte, 1802), the great French Government work (Description de 1' Egypte, 1811, 1815), Hamilton (Remarks &c. 1809), Belzoni (Narrative &c. 1822), Minutoli (Travels, 1824), and both series of Sir G. Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, are the chief modern authorities.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 10

Chapter 9:1-19

THERE is no assurance more clearly, frequently, and solemnly given throughout the Prophetic books than the final restoration of Israel to the joy of all the earth and the blessing of all the families of man. But there is no feature of it more characteristic than the execution of judgment on the wicked whatever they may be, especially on their enemies. Herein it stands in the fullest contrast with the church's hope in pure and heavenly grace—to be taken completely on high to join the Lord Jesus and be in the Father's house; just as Christ rose and ascended without the least sign of retribution for the world. The Jews pass through the fires of that day and are purified thereby. The church is simply caught up to be with Christ. We may readily see that the type of the earthly people's deliverance is pursued in what follows, “And in the twelfth month, which is the month of Adar, on the thirteenth day thereof, when the king's commandment and his decree drew near to be put in execution, in the day that the enemies of the Jews hoped to have rule over them (whereas it was turned to the contrary, that the Jews had rule over them that hated them), the Jews gathered themselves together in their cities throughout all the provinces of the king Ahasuerus, to lay hand on such as sought their hurt. And no man could withstand them; for the fear of them was fallen upon all the peoples. And all the princes of the provinces, and the satraps, and the governors, and they that did the king's business, helped the Jews; because the fear of Mordecai was fallen upon them. For Mordecai was great in the king's house, and his fame went forth throughout all the provinces: for the man Mordecai waxed greater and greater. And the Jews smote all their enemies with the stroke of the sword, and with slaughter and destruction, and did what they would unto those that hated them. And in Shushan the fortress the Jews slew and destroyed five hundred men. And Parshandatha, and Dalphon, and Aspatha, and Poratha, and Adalia, and Aridatha, and Parmashta, and Arisai, and Aridai, and Vajezatha, the ten sons of Haman the son of Hammedatha, the Jews' enemy, they slew; but on the spoil they laid not their hand. On that day the number of those that were slain in Shushan the fortress was brought before the king.”

“And the king said unto Esther the queen, The Jews have slain and destroyed five hundred men in Shushan the fortress, and the ten sons of Haman; what then have they done in the rest of the king's provinces! Now what is thy petition? and it shall be granted thee: or what is thy request further? and it shall be done. Then said Esther, If it please the king, let it be granted to the Jews which are in Shushan to do to-morrow also according unto this day's decree, and let Haman's ten sons be hanged upon the gallows. And the king commanded it so to be done; and a decree was given out in Shushan; and they hanged Haman's ten sons. And the Jews that were in Shushan gathered themselves together on the fourteenth day also of the month Adar, and slew three hundred men in Shushan; but on the spoil they laid not their hand,”

“And the other Jews that were in the king's provinces gathered themselves together, and stood for their lives, and had rest from their enemies, and slew of them that hated them seventy and five thousand but on the spoil they laid not their hand. [This was done] on the thirteenth day of the month Adar; and on the fourteenth thereof they rested, and made it a day of feasting and gladness. But the Jews that were in Shushan assembled together on the thirteenth [day] thereof, and on the fourteenth thereof; and on the fifteenth of the same they rested, and made it a day of feasting and gladness. Therefore do the Jews of the villages, that dwell in the unwalled towns, make the fourteenth of the month Adar a day of gladness and feasting, and a good day, and of sending portions one to another” (vers. 1-19).

In the first book of the law God gave the type of Him Who, rejected by His brethren after the flesh, is exalted to administer the kingdom over the Gentiles, preserving His brethren as others also during days of famine, and at length made known to them. Here in the closing book of history in the O.T. we have not only the arch-enemy ignominiously destroyed who sought their destruction but the adversaries of the Jews everywhere put to; the sword. So full is scripture of this mighty change yet to be accomplished, that it would be easy to point out phases of it in perhaps every book of the O.T., and in none more conspicuously than the Psalms, unless it be in the Prophets. But this it may suffice here simply to affirm. The N. T. pledges the same expectation from the first Gospel to the last, the Acts of the Apostles confirming it; the Epistles, while occupied with the heavenly people and their proper hope, in no wise forget the blessed vista for the earth in the day of the Lord; and the Apocalypse crowns the truth for both heaven and earth under Christ the Heir of all things.

Household Servant Faithful or Evil

Matt. 24:45-51

IT is the first part in our Lord's prophecy at Olivet which bears directly on Christian profession. This therefore is wholly distinct from the parable of the fig-tree which refers to Israel, as all the preceding discourse did, and accordingly from ver. 15 occupied with the land and the sanctuary, the sabbath day, and the tribulation without parallel for the Jews, with signs before and after, heed being expressly claimed to Daniel the prophet, and illustration drawn from the deluge in Noah preserved through it, not from Enoch caught up before it.

Here begins that which is so general that it applies wherever the Lord's name is called on, Jewish peculiarities being quite dropt. The Lord takes the place of other objects. His service in His house is without restriction or addition the prominent character. Relationship to Him and His rules exclusively. We shall find in the third and last parable of the series His gifts conferred on His servants according to His sovereign will, with which each is called to trade according to the figure of talents committed for profit. But here it is the supply of His house with food in season.

“Who then is the faithful and wise bondman, whom the lord set over his household to give them food in season? Blessed [is] that bondman whom his lord on coming shall find thus doing. Verily I say to you, that he will set him over all that he hath. But if the evil bondman say in his heart, My lord delayeth [to come], and begin to beat his fellow bondman, and eat and drink with the drunken, the lord of the bondman shall come in a day which he expecteth not, and in an hour which he knoweth not, and shall cut him in two, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth” (vers. 45-51).

It is clear that the Lord looks for faithful and prudent stewardship in His absence from him who is entrusted with the charge of His household, and that, when He is come, He will deal with this responsibility. Did the bondman dispense food in due time? Blessed that bondman whom his Lord on coming shall find thus doing! It is His mind and will and grace about His own. Already elsewhere He had assured His own sheep that entering by Him they should be saved, enjoy liberty, and find pasture. It is in the last particular that the bondman is here made responsible; and this would test him. Faith and love alone render any one faithful and wise; they attach the heart to the household through devotedness to the Lord. Loving Him leads out to feeding His sheep and His lambs; as the Lord puts it to Peter, restored and reinstated after his fall: which by grace would only make him more tenderly considerate of others. And him who thus nourishes duly Christ's household He will set at the head of His inheritance by and by, when He returns the Heir of all things. It is only Christianity which is based on the Lord already come and about to return, while His own serve during His absence; and hence the prominence given to this in the third parable.

But solemn beyond expression is the doom of the man who, professing to be his Lord's bondman, arrogates to himself dominion, and is no model to the flock, but lords it as his possession. What can be conceived more opposed to the mind which was in Christ Jesus? He in infinite pity to the lost and to the glory of God the Father emptied Himself, taking a bondman's form, coming though yet in the likeness of men; and found in figure as a man He humbled Himself, becoming obedient as far as death, yea, death of the cross. The evil bondman, oblivious of all and heartlessly inconsistent, seeks a place of power and pride; he courts the world as one who never died to flesh nor was crucified to the world, but begins to beat his fellow bondmen, and eats and drinks with the drunken. There is both ecclesiastical oppression and commerce with the world, even in its self-indulgent dissoluteness.

Such is just the general aspect of Christendom for long ages, as at the present moment. There may be differences of degree here or there. But the picture applies to Catholics and Protestants, nationals and dissenters. They are not separate from the world; nor do they walk in the Spirit, as those that crucified the flesh with its passions and its lusts; they boast in man and his literary elevation and his scientific inventions, like heathen that know not God.

And what does the Lord indicate as the occasion if not cause of so ruinous a departure? “But if the evil bondman say in his heart, My lord delayeth [to come].” No one betrays the evil of his unfaithfulness so much as a faithless professor of Christ. And here the Lord puts His finger on his heart putting off His own coming again as a living practical truth. Abandoning that hope, the heart can soon learn to value and associate with the world, to slight and ill-treat Christ's household.

What is the end? “The lord of that bondman shall come in a day which he expecteth not, and in an hour which he knoweth not, and shall cut him in two, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites; and there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.” God's wrath is revealed from heaven upon all impiety, and unrighteousness of men holding the truth in unrighteousness. The Jew if wicked is worse than the Gentile; the professing Christian if evil is more guilty than either. His portion shall be, not with bondmen only, but with the hypocrites.

How is it with you, my reader? You, most of you, are neither Jews nor heathen; are you not a professing Christian? Do you not then own your evil if you slight the word of God, and especially the gospel? Any one who disregarded Moses' law died without mercy on the strength of two or three witnesses: of how much worse punishment, think you, shall he be judged deserving that trod under foot the Son of God, and esteemed the blood of the covenant whereby he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace? But the door of grace is still open. Oh flee for refuge to Him Who is set before you, the only yet sure Savior of the lost. Delay is proverbially dangerous; and nowhere is danger so great as in putting off the word of salvation which God has sent you. For as He was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, when He sent Him into it, so even when Christ was rejected, God made Him Who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might be made divine righteousness in Him.

The Seventy Weeks: 3

THE vainest of delusions is to talk of man's rights in the presence of Christ's cross, which proclaims nothing but his wrongs. There all mankind stands convicted; and the Jew cannot cast a stone at the Gentile, as he himself had the greater sin. For the Jew took the lead in cutting off the Messiah by the hand of lawless men, as Peter preached to them at Pentecost. The cross of Christ denies the rights, and demonstrates the wrongs, of man. But God thereby wrought atonement and set forth Jesus a mercy seat through faith in His blood, not only for vindication of His passing over of sins that are past in the forbearance of God, but for declaration of His righteousness at this gospel time, in His being just and justifying the believer.

This however is the apostolic doctrine in Rom. 3:25, 26. The prophecy in Dan. 9:26 does not go beyond the sin of Messiah cut off, and its consequence in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple by the Romans, as well as in the disastrous history of the Jewish people to this day. The cross of Christ accordingly has two sides, the judgment of man, and the grace of God. Man displayed therein his wickedness, the Jew his hatred, to the uttermost; as God thereby is justifying freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Whom God raised from the dead and set at His own right hand in a glory incomparably higher than David's. Then is the church formed, from Jews and Gentiles, and by the Holy Spirit sent down united to the glorified Head on high as His one body. This was an entirely new thing, which the N. T. makes as plain as possible; but it is wholly distinct from what the prophecy discloses.

The Jew is blotted out meantime, but will as surely reappear as the object of divine dealing in the end of the age, as we see in ver. 27. Israel in the new age will have the first place on earth. She that was cast far off shall be made a strong nation, and the former or first dominion shall come to Zion.

But what was to happen as the judicial consequence of Messiah cut off? “The people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary.” And so the Romans did, as the Lord warned in Matt. 22:7, and in Luke 19:42-44. It is not said, that a Roman prince should come, but the people of the coming prince. This prince was not Titus. He no doubt came with his people, his army; but here it is the people of the prince that shall come, the future imperial enemy of God, the Beast or fourth empire of that time revived, not the foe but the avowed friend of the apostate Jew and of the Antichrist reigning over Jerusalem. The people came then, but under another prince, for the destruction of the city and sanctuary; the prince here predicted is not come yet. They came then to destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof was indeed with a flood or overthrow, and even to the end was desolation determined.

The Jews tried to rebuild Jerusalem later, and were almost exterminated by the Emperor Hadrian. Since then what slaughter and persecution in almost every country under the sun! Sad to say, our own forefathers were guilty of selfishly and savagely ill-treating the Jew. Things no doubt are changed now, not because the world compassionates the Jew as God's ancient people suffering for their sins, but rather through a godless respect for the fancied rights of man. But this will fail, when God begins to move on their behalf, as we read in Isa. 18:6 and elsewhere. “And he shall confirm covenant with the many for one week.” Attention is called to the correct rendering, which when pointed out no scholar can fairly question. Who is the “he"? Not a few imagine it is the Lord Jesus. But where is the sense (I do not even ask, the spirituality) of such a view? How could Christ be referred to in “He shall confirm covenant with the many for one week” or seven years? Christ make a covenant as here “with the many” or mass of faithless Jews! for seven years! Short-lived princes may make short covenants with their fellows; but the idea is preposterous of Christ (Who had been “cut off,” and is therefore risen again) making a covenant for seven years! and with had people, as “the many” invariably means in Daniel, is yet more so! Theologians who do not understand the prophets may believe it, as they seem never able to rise above the weakest tradition.

I looked purposely at dear old Trapp, and found him no better than the rest. For he endorses the same delusion. You may perceive how much depends on the right consideration of the article, which is here doubly misrepresented. “Covenant” has got the article without warrant, and “many” has been stripped of it. What corresponds with our “the” is as important a factor in Hebrew as in other languages. To be brief then, let me repeat the true force: “And he shall confirm covenant for one week with the many.” How very different a thing from Christ's confirming the covenant! Are the wicked mass of the Jews the persons with whom the Lord made covenant? The context makes it all plain and sure.

The last person named is the far different and coming prince of the Roman people. He is already familiar to us in chap. 7; the same “little horn” who is to aggrandize himself by the uprooting three of the first horns, and then by his blasphemies he leads the entire empire to its destruction by the Most High, when he shall be given to the burning of fire. He it is that makes a covenant with the wicked Jews at the close, when the last or seventieth week receives its fulfillment. Isaiah seems to refer to this as “a covenant with death,” and “an agreement with hell” or Sheol: totally different from the gospel or even the law. No thoughtful mind should overlook a covenant expressly limited to seven years, any more than that the coming prince of Rome is the last personage named, or than the “many” with whom it is to be made.

Besides, this brief agreement is soon broken. How could it be if grace made it? The Roman prince breaks it. He allows their worship for three and a half years, the first half of the seventieth week; “and in the midst of the week he shall cause sacrifice and oblation to cease.” That is, he puts an end to the Jewish ritual, in order, as we learn explicitly from elsewhere, to bring an image of himself into the holy place, the abomination of desolation, as it is called.

You all perhaps know that “abomination” is the regular term for an idol. And here we read, “And for the wing (or protection) of abominations [is] one that maketh desolate.” I understand the meaning to be, that because of the protection given to abominations, or idols, by the Roman emperor and his ally in Jerusalem (the Antichrist), there shall be a desolator, a power quite opposed to both. He is in fact no other than the one whose career is given in the close of Dan. 8, the “little horn” of the East. He may pretend zeal for God in opposing the Antichrist and the Western chief; but he is just as wicked as they, and will meet with a no less terrible end in due time. This we shall see clearly in the close of Dan. 11. The Antichrist is to reign in the land; and he, too, is to set himself up as God in His temple, as we know from 2 Thess. 2, where the Roman prince sets up his image. This the king of the north resents and opposes. How the Lord deals with each will be shown in the next lecture. Here we are only told that “[there is, or shall be] a desolator, even until the consumption, and what is determined shall be poured upon the desolate.”

The prophecy is by no means obscure. It is only when misapplied that men complain of difficulty. When we seize the Holy Spirit's aim in it, all flows with an easy and onward current. Without His guidance no scripture can be entered into or yield enjoyment and profit. May it be yours to search “the scriptures whether these things be so.”

Salvation by Grace: 4

BLESSED be God, when the kingdom comes, we shall not lose our communion with Christ in Paradise. We shall eat of the tree of life in the Paradise of God; and this will be in the days of the kingdom. We shall be remembered, not one forgotten, when Christ comes in His kingdom, and we shall reign with Him. Yet I say that Christ is Himself more precious than what He gives one, and that to be with Christ is even better than to sit upon a throne in His kingdom. This is all glorious; but to be with Christ, when we remember what Christ is, to be there the object of His love, to be able then perfectly to behold His glory, is a deeper privilege than to be crowned in the kingdom. Yet it was what the thief entered into that day. There was also great force in being there “to-day.” All the thoughts of gradual preparation here, all theory of waiting dimly in another world, every form of purgatory—I do not mean only of a Roman Catholic pattern, for many a Protestant has got a quasi-purgatory of his own—all these things are completely dissipated to the winds. Here was a man in himself black enough to be kept out forever doubtless; none the less was he to be with Christ that day in Paradise, perfectly purged by His blood for the intimate presence of God.

What a comfort this ought to be to any of you who have fears that you are not fit for heaven! For it is meant for you that believe as much as for the penitent on the cross. Have you not Christ too? Are you not resting on grace? is it a different measure to you from what it was to the dying robber? If it be the same way of faith to you as to him, is it not really the same portion with Christ in Paradise? Hence death, when you look at it thus, is no longer to be regarded as an enemy. Assuredly death is the last enemy apart from Christ, is it really so to the man who possesses Christ? To him death is in truth only a servant to open the door, and let him in to be with Christ. Is this an enemy's work? Death is yours who believe, as all things are.

May God then bless His own word. May He bring home the testimony rendered to Christ and Christ's blood to-night; and may you see what a joy it is to wait for Christ to come in His kingdom, and, above all, what it is to have a portion with Christ by faith wholly superior to death, so that if Christ were to come to-morrow you would never die in any sense. For “we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.”

“For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with archangel's voice, and with trump of God, and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we the living that remain, shall be caught up together with them in [the] clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” You see then, “we” ought to be expecting Christ, not death. The “we” in that day ought, and the “we” in this day ought, and the “we” in every day ought, to be so. If death comes when we are looking for Christ, that will not at all disappoint us. Death will only be our usher into the presence of the Lord; then instead of waiting for the Lord on earth, you will wait with the Lord in heaven, which is far better. It is a good thing to be waiting for the Lord on the earth; but it is a better thing to be waiting with the Lord in heaven—to come when He comes—to reign when He reigns—but above all to be with Him now, or by and by, and forever, in Paradise. Amen.

James 1:25

APPROACHING the close of this contrast which verse 22 began, we have a phrase of much and weighty import, which lets us into, or at least flows consistently with, the truth here insisted on, especially and expressly in verse 18. The law given by Moses was in no way a law of liberty but of bondage. It forbade and condemned the transgressions to which the flesh was prone. The curb it applied to man's will provoked the old man, and the offense consequently abounded instead of diminishing. The law therefore could not but work out wrath; as it is the strength of sin, not of holiness.

But here the Spirit of God presents, as the gift of God's will and grace, the new nature which characterizes the faithful, the effect of God's giving birth to His own by word of truth. Christ, as we know from elsewhere, is this life, which he has who believes in Him. And this life, as in Him so in His, shows itself in obedience as its primary action. “What shall I do, Lord?” is the ready answer of the quickened soul to the revelation of “I am Jesus of Nazareth.” We are sanctified to obedience no less than to the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus. The word of God has His authority over us; and feeling our ignorance and the goodness of His word, we prize and welcome all that He gives to direct our way. And the indwelling Spirit of God, glorifying the Lord Jesus, is our power, now that we confess Him Lord and own Him as the Son of God, resting on His redemption and beholding Him on high.

Hence the word of truth, by which God begot us, is also our divine directory, and is here designated “a perfect law, that of liberty,” exercising faith and effecting obedience by grace. For those that are thus called by the gospel are made conscious of their new and holy relationship to God, as the Spirit of adoption gives them to cry, Abba, Father. Christ was the perfect expression of God, as well as perfect example of man; and He, being our life, as well as righteousness from God and before God, forms us here below accordingly. Begotten by the word, we have a new nature which loves the word as well as God Himself; and thus we in virtue of it wish to do what He wills, as communicated in His word, now fully revealed. “As the living Father sent me, and I live on account of the Father, he too that eateth me shall live on account of me” (John 6:57): how blessed, elevating and mighty the motive. May it be ours who follow Him!

“But he that closely looked into perfect law, that of liberty, and abode close,” as living faith achieves, “being not a quite forgetful hearer but a work-doer, he shall be blessed in his doing” (ver. 25). He has a nature in accord with the word which communicated it to his soul. It is not a law from without that forbids what he likes and demands what is irksome. He knows God's love inwardly, and finds His word enjoins what the life he professes takes pleasure in. He delights in obeying God; and this is just what the word points out, what to do and how to do it, with Christ revealed Whose light shines and Whose love cheers and strengthens him. And thus it is the “law of liberty.” His heart purified by faith not only accepts but rejoices in the will of God—His good and acceptable and perfect will. This we behold in its untainted and unfailing fullness in our Lord Jesus. He that keeps His word, in him verily is the love of God perfected. And as there is no fear in love, so neither is there bondage therein; yet no chains are so mighty as its silken cords. The one obedient is accordingly blessed, not in his end only but in his ways—blessed in his doing. A real and great and vital truth it is, that Christ deigns to be our way by faith in a wilderness world where is no way. Only the eye single to Him can see that way; but God is as faithful in this a in all else to the soul that is true to Christ's word and name.

The Advocacy of Christ: 1

THE distinctive character and object of Christ's priesthood has been already set out. In scripture it stands in relation exclusively to those who by the work of Christ are brought to God. It is therefore in no way an association of the Lord with the world or those of it. Its aspect is not to the wants of the sinner as such, but rather to those of the sanctified, whom He is not ashamed to call His brethren. For God's design by it is not to give a standing, but to sustain and succor those whom grace has already brought nigh to Him by the blood of Jesus. This makes the matter sufficiently plain for the priesthood of Christ. Grace would thereby maintain a holy people according to that nearness which He has already given them; and hence therefore in the Epistle to the Hebrews, as we saw, it is assumed that they have free access to God, a privilege never taken away from the saints.

We are brought to God by Him Who suffered once for saints, by Christ's one offering. This nearness the Christian never loses. We may fail and act with grievous inconsistency; and it is most sorrowful when we do. But for the believer remains access to God (being founded, not on legal conditions, but on Christ's blood), and this too of a kind quite absolute, because its measure is the value which God puts upon the work of His own Son; and it is impossible that God could slight that sacrifice. In virtue of it then He acts in our favor, according not merely to our thoughts but to His estimate of what the Lord Jesus has done for us in His sight. Hence, we who believe being thus brought nigh, its efficacy abides unchanged ever more, as scripture carefully and clearly insists.

It is possible indeed, as we are there warned, that some who have confessed the Lord, and been sanctified too by His blood, might give Him up (Heb. 10). Such is the solemn admonition to those who from among Hebrews had been baptized; and a like danger of course applies to the Gentiles also, as we hear in 1 Cor. 10. Evidently, however, not failure is here in question, but abandoning Christ. It is apostasy, though no doubt the Holy Spirit speaks to check the incipient tendency to turn aside, pointing out the awful result. The renewed man heeds the word of God; whereas the warning is lost on the unconverted man, perhaps only attracted by the novel and intrinsic beauty of the gospel as an intellectual scheme; and so much the more in those days when it was first heard by the Jews so long inured to Rabbinical traditions—dry as their parchment rolls, as Gentiles were to the clashing vanities of Greek philosophy.

We can readily understand what refreshing power was in the facts of the Son of God come in flesh, His life, His death, His resurrection and His ascension—facts as wondrous as the heavenly principles of Christianity, which could not but exercise an immense charm on candid minds as minds. But this of itself never lasts; neither, if alone, does affection touched by the sound of God's mercy, unless it lead to repentance. Nothing abides short of a new nature, when the conscience is reached by God's Holy Spirit, Who brings in a man before God as nothing but a sinner, to find his one resource, remedy, and deliverance in the Lord Jesus. Where this is laid hold of by faith, nearness to God is given by the blood of Christ. And the priesthood of the Lord Jesus is that office of divine grace which is carried on by the Lord risen, living, and interceding for us at the right hand of God; whereby His word is applied to keep us up, and to lead us on, in the face of all trial, difficulty, opposition, and suffering, as well as of our own weakness. This is contemplated and provided for by God in giving us such a Priest as His Son in His presence on high, so that we may see it to be sustaining and seasonable mercy. It is that which perfectly meets and keeps, but keeps us a holy people in the midst of dangers as great as our weakness.

Again, we must never confound infirmities with sins, or call sins infirmities. The essence of sin is self-will, not necessarily transgression of law. Whether there be known law or not, self-will is sin; it is acting without a divine motive; if not against the authority or will of God, it is independence of Him and His word as that which prompts the action. When we do not even seek Him, are we not acting without Him and pleasing ourselves? All this is sin, it matters not how fair our ways may seem in the eyes of men. This is not what the priesthood of the Lord Jesus Christ was meant to meet, but the need of those who suffer in striving against sin.

When we suffer for His name or for righteousness, when we are tried just because we seek to follow the Lord, we do need His sympathy and comfort. We shrink from trial and cannot but suffer from it, sometimes with mixed feelings. Our blessed Lord ever felt it holily and perfectly. Not an atom of sin was in His sorrow and suffering, and all His path was full of it; for He was the man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. So with Christians in their measure. It is quite right that we feel the contrariety of things here to God. We wrong Him and yield to the enemy whenever we seem to make up our minds to the awful state that surrounds us now, as if it were any adequate reflection of God, or of His moral government. For, though He does govern in secret providence, and this most wisely and righteously too, carrying on His will in the face of the subtlest foes and of apparently insuperable difficulties, and in the conflict of circumstances, yet is the actual state of the world as far as can be from a due manifestation of God's government. In the midst of such a condition His own must suffer; for there is our weakness, and a hostile world, and a malignant foe, the accuser of the brethren and the deceiver of the whole world. Here it is that the priesthood of the Lord Jesus applies to us—as a people holy, but feeble and persecuted—who feel what is around, and are tried by it, and suffer through it; but the priesthood of Him, Who is all-competent, is established on high to carry us through in spite of all.

( To be continued).

The Mystery: Part 3

DR. B. informs us that the truth of the mystery, (that is, his explanation of the mystery) “removes another popular tradition—that the church dates from Pentecost! It is only a traditional interpretation on the part of man, and is destitute of any authority, unless it can be proved to be so from the word of God” (page 43). The reason he gives in support of his position is novel enough. It is a mistake, he says, to look for anything about the church in the Acts.

This notion of which the Dr. seems not a little proud crops up here and there throughout the tract. He refuses to allow that the church is referred to in either the Gospels or the Acts. Thus, “In the Gospels and the Acts we have the kingdom rejected In the Epistles we have the interval, but chiefly in its relation to the church” (page 11, and similarly on page 15). The Acts “records the transitional history between the rejection of the kingdom, and the setting up of the church” (page 42). The Acts “is like the Gospels, a historical record of the rejection of the King and the kingdom of Israel (page 43). From an expression on page 44 we hoped Dr. B. only meant to emphasize that the doctrine of the church is confined to the apostles; and that he would be ready to grant that in the Acts we have the history of the founding and practice of the church. His expression is, “We must not read teaching concerning the ‘Mystery’ into the Gospels and Acts” (page 44).

But when he proceeds to expel the twelve apostles from the church (page 52), we know not what to think, except that he really means what his words imply, viz., that the church dates from the close of the Acts. If he does not mean this, then his words are without point or force. It requires but little critical acumen to know that an historical book like the Acts is not the place for unfolding the doctrines. Paul, not Luke, is the exponent of “the mystery.”

Surely, however, Dr. B. knows that Paul wrote several of his Epistles during his missionary travels, which are recounted in the Acts. The two Epistles to the Thessalonians, the two to the Corinthians, that to the Romans and that to the Galatians, were all composed by him before his imprisonment at Rome. And if these Epistles do not reveal the doctrine of the mystery as is done in those to the Ephesians and Colossians, it is because they were written for other purposes. Even these, however, are not without sufficient references to show that the truth was known by the saints.

Rom. 16:25, 26 is one of Dr. B.'s “three important scriptures in which the ‘great' secret is specially and formally revealed” (page 16). This passage, without referring to others, tells us that then, at the time the Epistle was written, which was certainly before the close of the Acts, the mystery was being made known by prophetic writings. And it is Dr. B. himself who says, “amongst the prophetic writings may be included four Epistles, those to the Thessalonians and Corinthians” (page 17).

The fact is, therefore, that Paul (and others, too, receiving it from him) was making known by both voice and pen the doctrine of the mystery long before the period mentioned at the close of the Acts: This Dr. B. with characteristic incoherency allows or admits the possibility of. He is not certain, but he thinks “a special work connected with the mystery was about to be commenced,” (Acts 13:1, page 42).

Now this is unsettling the mind of the saints for no purpose whatever. The trumpet gives forth an uncertain sound, Of what value is it to declare the church did not begin at Pentecost, if he does not know when it began, and even makes such conflicting statements as have been referred to?

We propose to bring forward briefly one or two considerations, which indicate that the day of Pentecost was the birthday of the church, the body and bride of Christ.

In the first place, then, we find throughout the whole of the Acts that there existed a newly formed company of believers who were perfectly distinct and separate from both Jews and Gentiles. This company is called “the assembly of God, which he purchased with his own blood” (Acts 20:28).

At the very beginning (Acts 2) the assembly or church consisted of the disciples of the Lord Jesus, upon whom the Spirit of God was poured out baptizing them into one body. The same day three thousand souls received Peter's word of testimony and were added to this company already formed (Acts 2:41). And it became a daily event that the Lord was adding together such as should be saved (Acts 2:47).

Thus there was a new society formed altogether apart from the men of Israel whom Peter exhorts to repent (Acts 3). It is true that these believers were as yet drawn solely from the ranks of Jews and proselytes. But they were nevertheless severing connection with the ancient people of God. When Peter and John were dismissed from the presence of the Jewish council, they proceed at once to “their own company” (Acts 4:23). [In Acts 5:11, these saints are expressly called “all the church.” Compare ch. 8:3; 9:31 (especially in the critical text); 11:26; 12:1, 5; 13:1; 14:23, 27; 15:22; 16:5; 18:22; 20:17, 28.] Further additions are made to this company (Acts 5:14); and the number of disciples multiplied (ch. 6:1-7) to the alarm of the Jewish authorities. The persecution comes and those of “the assembly” in Jerusalem are scattered abroad to strange cities. But wherever they are, they remain distinct from their former brethren according to the flesh, so that Saul can go off to Damascus to apprehend them.

Next, Samaritans are received (chap. 8.) and Gentiles (chap. 10). This is all the work of “the twelve"; and then Paul takes up the work (chap. 13.) after the formal admission of the Gentiles. In this we see the wisdom of God. As soon as Gentiles and Jews were brought to meet together in one common assembly, Paul is commissioned to unfold to them the purpose of God in thus bringing them together. In this new relationship national distinction was obliterated, and Jew and Gentile were united to form one mystical “man,” the church of which Christ is Head. This was called the “mystery,” because it had not been before revealed that Jew and Gentile should be made sit together in the heavenlies in Christ Jesus.

This doctrine the apostle doubtless taught all the believers wherever he went, and not merely the new converts. Dr. B. seems to think that those who believed before the revelation of the mystery did not participate in its blessed truth, not even the twelve apostles. But this notion is only another specimen of his unwarrantable mystification of the mystery. Paul tells us himself that he went up to the apostles at Jerusalem and communicated to them the gospel he was preaching to the Gentiles (Gal. 2:2). They gave him the right hand of fellowship in his work. And when afterward at Antioch Peter would have denied the equality of Jews and Gentiles by withdrawing from eating with the latter, Paul withstood him to the face. Whether he preached the “mystery” or not, the apostle of the circumcision was as much bound to act upon it as any.

It is idle to suppose that Peter, James, and John knew nothing of the “mystery,” because no writings of theirs on the subject remain. It was not committed to them to unfold it, but to Paul. Each apostle had his line of things given him; and in those days every man did his own work, but each of course in co-operation with his fellows.

However, from what is above, it is surely clear that in the Acts there are the plainest indications of the formation of a special assembly of people, composed first of Jewish believers to which Samaritans and Gentiles are added at later stages.

Now what is this company, if not the church? Oh, Dr. B. will say, they are in a transitional state like the disciples in the days of the Lord (pp. 42, 43). Nay, Dr. B.; you have overlooked a most important differentiating fact. In Gospel times the Holy Ghost was not yet given. On the day of Pentecost the Holy Spirit descended to abide. And His habitation is the church (Eph. 2:22). No doctrines (not even that of the “mystery”) ever made the church, any more than the church ever made the doctrines. But the Holy Ghost is the raison d'être of the church. As long as He is here, so long will the church be here.

When He came, it was to unite believers to Christ in glory. Thus the church dates from Pentecost, because of the presence of the Holy Ghost. Ananias and Sapphira are solemn proofs that He was then dwelling in the church (Acts 5:3).

There is the development of the peculiar features of the church as Gentiles are admitted; but this in no degree affects the truth that Pentecost was the date of the inception of the church. To hold otherwise is to dissociate the Holy Ghost from the formation of the church, an historical circumstance which is indicated with notable distinctness in the opening of the Acts; and also to confuse the fact of the establishment of the heavenly relationship of the saints with the revelation of that relationship. Would Dr. B. maintain that no one is a member of the body of Christ, unless he knows the truth of “the mystery?” And yet the sum and substance of his reasoning is to show that the date of the revelation of the mystery must be the date of the formation of the church: a conclusion for which no scriptural warrant can be found.

There are other points of error in the tract, but those already noted will suffice to show that the whole structure of the theory is raised upon an unscriptural basis. We trust, therefore, that Dr. B. will re-consider the whole subject; for we assume from the title of another tract of his, that he agrees with us as to “the importance of accuracy in the study of Holy Scripture.”

W. J. H.

Letter of Pope Leo XIII on the Unity of the Church: 3. Perpetuity

3. Perpetuity

THERE is another truth which the Popes have misconstrued, no less ruinously than unity, to build up their tower of Babel. “This [unity] the divine author impressed on it as a lasting sign of truth and of unconquerable strength” (p. v). They have one and all assumed that the church is to abide on earth conquering and to conquer till time melts into eternity. Not a word in the N. T. warrants such an expectation. Matt. 16:18 speaks of the gates of Hades, which are not in this world. Unquestionably they will prevail against the wicked which Satan brought in, not against His church which Christ built: resurrection will vindicate it, as He was defined Son of God in power thereby. Yet earthly power or glory is assured neither here nor anywhere else; but as the Lord Jesus was once rejected and suffered, so each of His must now deny himself, take up his cross, and follow Him, as He explains at the same time to Peter, sternly rebuked for minding the things of men, not of God. Hence they essay to found it on the promises, psalms, and prophecies which speak of Jerusalem, Zion, and the like in the O. T. But this is wholly unsound and misleading.

Let us weigh the scriptures on which they rely. Here are Pope Leo's words (pp. xiii. xiv.), “That the one Church should embrace all men everywhere and at all times was seen and foretold by Isaias, when looking into the future he saw the appearance of a mountain conspicuous by its all-surpassing altitude, which set forth the image of The house of the Lord—that is, of the Church. And in the last days the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be prepared on the top of the mountains (Isa. 2:2). But this mountain which towers over all other mountains is one; and the house of the Lord to which all nations shall come to seek the rule of living is also one. And all nations shall flow into it. And many people shall go, and say: Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob, and He will teach us His ways, and we will walk in His paths (Ibid ii. 2, 3).”

Now it is vain to quote Fathers in support of an interpretation which is inconsistent with the text, foreign to the prophets universally, and contradicted by all that the N. T. tells us of the church. Beyond doubt the rejected Messiah, the Son of man, was lifted up on the cross, and must be, that (not Jews only but) “whosoever believeth might in Him have life eternal.” “For there is no other name under heaven given to men whereby we must be saved.” But neither these scriptures nor any others teach that the church embraces the whole race. The very name essentially excludes and forbids such a perversion. “Church” means the “assembly,” the calling out which leaves the rest where they were. The Lord therefore, who had before Him the end from the beginning, calls the “little flock” not to fear (Luke 12); and, when looking on to the day of displayed glory, He contrasts those that are then to be perfected in one with the world, which will thereby know that the Father sent the Son and loved the saints then glorified, even as He loved His Son. For are they not manifested in the same glory? The church is catholic, in contrast with God's previous dealing with one people, as comprehending not all mankind, but “out of” every land and nation. Hence in giving the sentence of the council in Jerusalem on the question of admitting the Gentiles, James refers to Symeon's explanation how God first visited to take “out of Gentiles” a people for His name. And this will be complete “in the consummation of the age” (Matt. 13:40-43), in the time of the harvest, when those gathered out are brought to heaven, and shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.

But Isaiah had before him the vision of the new age, when the veil is no longer on Israel's heart, and they see eye to eye, for Jehovah has returned to Zion. Therefore is her light come, and the glory of Jehovah is risen upon her. In this mountain shall Jehovah make unto all peoples a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees. And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the veil that veileth all the peoples, and the covering that is spread over all the nations. Nor will this be without the solemn judgment of the living, which the living are so apt to forget, though He Himself revealed it, as the apostles repeated, and the O.T. prophets predicted of old: a judgment which will fall on the nations, but severely on the Jews, and yet more so on Christendom, more guilty still as knowing better and no less unbelieving and lawless.

Israel will then be under Messiah and the new covenant; and the inhabitants of the world, when His judgments are in the earth; learn righteousness. Such is the basis, such the circumstances, presupposed in the scene, to which the prophet prefixes a title which ought to preclude misapplication: “The word that Isaiah, son of Amoz, saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.” The church at that time will have a still more glorious position. For she is the bride, the Lamb's wife, and is symbolized, not by Zion, or Moriah, or Jerusalem, but by the new Jerusalem descending out of heaven from God, having the glory of God. She had suffered with Christ during her earthly sojourn, instead of faithlessly, like Babylon, seeking present ease and power and glory; therefore will she be glorified together with Him in that day. Jerusalem even then is reigned over. The first dominion comes to Zion; and all the nations shall truly bow to Jehovah's choice and Messiah's seat of earthly rule. But the heavenly Eve of the second Man, the last Adam, has a far higher place and glory, as united to the Head over all, the Heir of the universe. The glorified saints alone shall reign with Christ over the earth.

With this agrees every word of the text. The Lord has not yet taken His great power and reigned, as He will, at the seventh trumpet in the end of the age when the world-kingdom is become His de facto. Then will He reward His servants, and destroy the destroyers of the earth; and the present evil age will yield to the good age that follows when He is come and governs. Then as Zion is His earthly center, so is the mountain of Jehovah's house exalted; and all the nations shall flow thither. The nations are no longer envious, nor is Israel jealous any more. Jehovah Messiah will have wrought in divine attractive mercy as well as in overawing power; and the peoples come up, assured that He (not the church) will teach them of His ways.

The prophet does not say that the gospel as now but that the law shall go forth out of Zion; it is not the Father's word which we know, but Jehovah's word from Jerusalem, No allegorizer is bold enough to deny the literality of Jerusalem here; but this they quit in a moment and interpolate the gospel and the church. But the prophet in ver. 6 goes on to say, “Thou hast cast off thy people, the house of Jacob,” &c. How say this of the church? It is “the kingdom “; and the Great King will judge among the nations, and will reprove many peoples: a wholly different state from the church, wherein is neither Jew nor Gentile, now in training, and sufferings too, in the fellowship of Christ's, for heaven. The time for earth's deliverance and joy and blessing is come. For Jehovah will reign in a way He has never done yet.

Accordingly we are assured that men “shall forge their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning knives: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” So it will be in the age to come. But our Lord has expressly told us that till the end of this age come, “nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.” Thus there is no excuse for the confusion of the theologians. This is not confined to Popery, though there it is extreme and systematized error. It is due to the evil heart of unbelief that loves the world and the things of the world. But the Lord has laid down for Christians that they “are not of the world” as He is not: a principle itself subversive of this evil scheme, which seeks earthly dominion more persistently and unscrupulously than any usurper that ever breathed. But strong is the Lord God that will judge Babylon, and this righteously.

It is not to the church in one single instance, but to Israel (when restored in sovereign mercy, yet also in accomplishment of the promises to the true fathers), that perpetuity is assigned throughout all the O. T. and sealed in the N. T. So Gen. 17 repeatedly assures to Abraham and his seed “an everlasting covenant,” and the land (which decides its literal import) “an everlasting possession “; to Isaac and to Jacob the gift was successively confirmed. But Exodus shows that, while Jehovah remembered His covenant, Israel forgot His free promise and their own weakness, undertaking to obey the law as the condition of their possession. Thus man being what he is, all was certain to be lost. Only through a typical, and therefore temporary, mediator did they pass through the wilderness or enter the land, There (after the fullest patience and the exhaustion of all possible remedial means) ruin came at last under the first, and more under the last, of the four “beasts” or imperial world-powers. But even Lev. 26 which declares the stern chastenings awaiting their sins, lets us know that when their heart is humbled as our Lord taught us to expect—(Matt. 23:39), Jehovah will remember His covenant with their fathers, and remember their land. Jerusalem (said He, Luke 21:24) shall be trodden down by Gentiles—forever? Not so; but only until times of Gentiles be fulfilled. What has all this to do with the church? It has much every way to say to Israel and the future kingdom. Compare Num. 24, 25., and Deut. 32. especially vers. 36-43.

But it is in the Psalms and Prophets that evidence is most abundant, so much so that one need not cite any in particular, unless it be Dan. 2:35, to which allusion is made in the extract from Augustine (p. xix). Now it is absurd to apply to the first advent that judicial act, which effaces not only the Roman empire, but all that remains of its predecessors on the earth. It is He at the second advent alone, who will execute sudden and complete judgment on all hostile powers. Only when utter destruction falls on them, does the stone that smote the image become a great mountain and fill the whole world. It will be the kingdom of God in Christ set up on Zion, when Jehovah makes Judah as His majestic horse in the battle. What can be more decidedly in contrast with the suffering church, the witness of grace and heavenly glory? What more distinctly in keeping with the Lord coming in His kingdom and trampling all His enemies under foot?

Nevertheless theology has habitually confounded these two things; and none more grossly than the Popes, nor any with such evident and interested aim to profit by a deception, which probably deceived themselves. Yet what can be plainer than the wholly different facts when the church was brought in to view at Pentecost? Zion was for the present no better than Aceldama, and Jerusalem doomed to desolation. Instead of all the nations flowing to the mountain of Jehovah's house, the gospel was soon preached everywhere by the scattered Christians and later by the apostles. Instead of judging among the nations from His center of Zion, He executed sentence on Jerusalem by heathen Rome (Matt. 22:7); and instead of nations ever since learning war no more, all history attests, as He predicted, incessant ravages of war. And the day in which we live beholds Christendom, more than ever since the world began, bristling with arms on sea and land, and learning war with a zeal and mutual suspicion beyond all previous zeal. What more infatuated then than the traditional misuse of this vision and of others generally?

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:15-18

THE youngest branch of the Hamitic race now comes before us, already branded with curse (chap. ix. 25), and a bondman of bondmen to his brethren. Yet no doom long seemed more unlikely. They were enterprising beyond any, and no more disposed to tarry at home than the sons of Cush. Who spread themselves abroad as they? Canaan, who naturally gave the general designation, had a more special application to the “lowlanders” of the country. They are carefully pointed out as races which possessed themselves of the land destined for Israel. As the song of Moses so forcibly expresses it (Deut. 32:8), “When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel. For Jehovah's portion is his people, Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.”

This is a revelation of the highest importance for God's government of the world. Men willingly forget that the times of the Gentiles are in this quite abnormal. For He has no direct government of the earth, only providential, during their course. The only time when He governed immediately was when Israel afforded its theater. To this end He chose the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as His people, and gave them the land of promise from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates. To Israel He made Himself known as Jehovah, the one living and true God, as He had to their pilgrim fathers as the Almighty God. But through the self-confidence of unbelief they forgot their redemption from Egypt and their preservation in the wilderness up to Sinai, all of grace; and then accepted law as their condition at Sinai, instead of pleading the promise. Hence their history became a history of sin and ruin, checkered by wondrous interventions of mercy, as well as solemn chastisements of their rebellious iniquity, till at length even the house of David led the last remaining tribe of Judah into abominable idolatry, and God delivered them as captives to Babylon, the first of the four “beasts,” or Gentile imperial powers. Finally under the last of these bestial empires (the Roman), the Jewish remnant, which was permitted to return to the land for a fresh trial, rejected their own Messiah and even the gospel founded on His death, which was first sent to them, and wrath has come upon them to the uttermost.

It is in the Jewish people only that we have a kingdom of the earth set up by Jehovah Himself under the direction of His law. But even under its earliest and brightest phase, when David reigned, what failure and presage of downfall! yet not without shadows of abiding righteousness, power, and glory, as often seen in the psalms! And the man of peace, his son, outwardly more magnificent, brought in but plain evidence of ruin, even then come and far more approaching and sure till there was no remedy. Yet was the history full of instruction both of what man was as responsible under God's law, and of God's ways in blessing and punishing according to the principles of His earthly government.

All this was, however, only a witness in the hands of a people prone to evil and departure from Him. But God has in no way abandoned His purpose for the earth. He is using the interval, since His rejection of the Jews because of their rejection of Christ, to call a people out of both Jews and Gentiles, who put on Christ in Whom there is neither, to form a heavenly family in union with Christ, the body of the ascended Head, God's habitation in the Spirit. When this is complete, the Lord Jesus will come and receive us unto Himself and present us in the Father's house. He will also in due time appear executing judgment, not only on the fourth Beast revived and the Antichrist in the land, but on all hostile powers and peoples, delivering a remnant of Jews then righteous, the nucleus of the nation, believing and expectant, blessed and established forever as a blessing to all the families of the earth. Such will Israel be under Messiah and the new covenant, and mercy endure forever, as they will then sing in truth of heart. And the Gentiles will in that day cast away their idols of silver and gold, and everything high and lifted up, and lofty looks and haughtiness of heart, cordially bowing to the kingdom with Zion as its center, and the mountain of Jehovah's house established in the top of the mountains and exalted above the hills. For Messiah will reign, the only perfect judge between the nations, who shall not lift sword nor learn war any more.

Now the races of Canaan occupied that land which Jehovah intended for Israel. Nor was this all. They were conspicuously vile, most of all the cities of the plain, whose wickedness was not to be named. They were therefore cut off by a sudden and manifestly divine infliction. But when the cup of the Amorites was full, and the land became so unclean that Jehovah must visit its iniquity, He was pleased to make Israel the executioner of His vengeance. What could be more righteous in itself? What wiser for His people, its destined heirs? All unnatural evils as well as idolatries (their very religion ever binding on them these abominations) had become their “customs,” from which Israel must be kept. It was no question of cruelty; and it was Israel's fault not to exterminate as completely as Jehovah enjoined; so that the spared did not fail to ensnare and corrupt the chosen people into like infamy.

Of these races we need dwell on no more than the first two. These can be more easily severed, as they only are personal names, the rest Gentilic. “And Canaan begat Zidon [or Sidon] the firstborn, and Heth” (ver. 15). The name of the first means, like Saida its modern appellation, “fishing.” The city was built on the northern slope of a spur projecting into the sea with its citadel behind on the south. The plain was narrower between Lebanon and the sea. But the daughter city of Tire in time outshines it, as the later prophets indicate. In earlier days we hear of “great Zidon” (Joshua 8, 19:28). So even Homer, who repeatedly speaks of it and its people, never named Tire. They were then skilled in manufactures, later celebrated for their marine and as merchants. But they corrupted even Solomon's house by their abominations.

The Hittites were of Heth or Cheth. Their daughters troubled Isaac and Rebecca, though we hear of Abraham friendly with them and others. They like the Jebusites and the Amorites betook themselves to the mountains from the south, and afterward were outside in the valley of the Orontes. So in 1 Kings 10:29 their kings are spoken of with “the Kings of Aram” or Syria; they seem without doubt to be the Khatti of the Egyptian inscriptions, on the western side of the Euphrates. They had however shared in the efforts against Joshua (9, 11.) and suffered accordingly. In Ezek. 16:3, 45, “thy mother was a Hittite” is no more meant literally than “thy father was an Amorite.” They are the prophet's figures of moral reproach.

As for the races mentioned after these, little more is to be said than what lies on the surface of scripture: “And the Jebusite, and the Amorite, and the Girgashite, and the Hivite, and the Arkite, and the Sinite, and the Arvadite, and the Zemarite, and the Hamathite” (vers. 16-18). The Jebusites held Jerusalem, though defeated by Joshua, but not dispossessed till David. The Amorite was in the mountain land of Judah, but pushed east where on their fall or expulsion the two and a half tribes settled east of the Jordan. The Girgashites disappeared from view. Of the Hivites we have the remarkable tale the Book of Joshua tells, and of its consequences, at least of those in Gibeon; for there were others further north and outside, near whom settled the latter five families, or on the coast, and also in the isle of Aradus.

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 11

Chapter 9:20-32.

THE day comes when the enemies of God and His people shall fall, not by providential means only, but by predicted inflictions of extraordinary and unprecedented character, and finally by the manifest intervention and presence of the Judge Himself. But there will be another immense change antecedent of a spiritual nature. A residue, which in due time will be constituted a strong nation or its nucleus, will be humbled in heart and accept of the punishment of their iniquity, and instead of being as now since Pentecost added together as part of the church of God, will return (as Micah says) “unto the children of Israel.” For the times will have then arrived to form afresh the broken links, and to prove publicly that God has not cast away His people, nor abandoned the land of His promise and oath to the patriarchs, but will fulfill every pledge of blessing to and in them completely and forever. “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.”

What we have in the book of Esther is no more than the witness of secret providence in the face of the extremest dangers looking onward to that grand public issue, and meanwhile yielding a striking and standing ordinance of Him Who delivers though unseen.

“And Mordecai wrote these things, and sent letters unto all Jews that were in all the provinces of king Ahasuerus, both nigh and far, to enjoin them that they should keep the fourteenth day of the month Adar, and the fifteenth day of the same, yearly, as the days wherein the Jews had rest from their enemies, and the month which was turned unto them from sorrow to gladness, and from mourning into a good day: that they should make them days of feasting and gladness, and of sending portions one to another, and gifts to the poor.

“And the Jews undertook to do as they had begun, and as Mordecai had written unto them; because Haman the son of Hammedatha, the Agagite, the enemy of all the Jews, had devised against the Jews to destroy them, and had cast Pur, that is, the lot, to consume them, and to destroy them; but when it [or Esther] came before the king, he commanded by letters that his wicked device, which he devised against the Jews, should return upon his own head; and that he and his sons should be hanged on the gallows. Wherefore they called these days Purim, after the name of Pur. Therefore because of all the words of this letter, and [of that] which they had seen concerning this matter, and that which had come unto them, the Jews ordained and took upon them and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them, so that it should not fail, that they would keep these two days according to the writing thereof, and according to the appointed time thereof, every year; and [that] these days [should be] remembered and kept throughout every generation, every family, every province, and every city; and [that] these days of Purim should not fail from among the Jews, nor the memorial of them perish from their seed. And Esther the queen, the daughter of Abihail, and Mordecai the Jew, wrote with all authority to confirm this second letter of Purim. And he sent letters unto all the Jews, to the hundred twenty and seven provinces of the kingdom of Ahasuerus, words of peace and truth, to confirm these days of Purim in their appointed times, according as Mordecai the Jew and Esther the queen had enjoined them, and as they had decreed for themselves and for their seed, [in] the matters of the fastings and their cry. And the commandment of Esther confirmed these matters of Purim; and it was written in the book” (ver. 20-32).

Here again, it will be noticed, the book cleaves to its sincerely impressed character, and not even then is He named Whom ordinarily and naturally it were the highest duty to proclaim. Yet is the utter difference made plain in man's word; for the Talmud lays down that at the feast of Purim a man should drink till he knew not the difference between “Blessed be Mordecai,” and “Cursed be Haman.” “Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils; for wherein is he to be accounted of?” Judaism, and Christendom where Christ is ignored, each sinking into the driest ditch of heathenism, both dare to sanction a reveling carnival where had been a holy feast.

The Scripture of Truth: 1

ONE of our sages, the founder of inductive philosophy, distinguishes between divine prophecies, and such as have been of certain memory and from hidden causes. These were no better than probable conjectures or obscure traditions that many times turn themselves into prophecies. Lord Verulam undoubtedly was a man of profound thought, and (whatever, his sad failure) a great deal wiser than those who now in effect deny divine prophecy altogether, and merely show themselves out as unbelievers. Now unbelief is an insult to God and His word, and not merely so, but along with it goes as the rule ignorance of Christ and of redemption. Everything is shaken thereby; for the moment you begin to cavil at scripture, where is the line to be drawn? It is no better if you question the beginning. You may begin with Genesis; for the same principle is apt to carry the mind in doubt throughout the Bible to Revelation. There is abundant evidence for scripture, more by far than for any books of antiquity; but evidence of an external sort never raises you to faith. Scripture claims to be the written word of God and carries its own evidence as light to the conscience. Unless received on its own divine authority, men do not really believe it savingly. They may readily allow that it has a character intrinsically superior to other so-called sacred books. But this makes it only a question of old Hebrew sages or of those who wrote in Christian times, who were better or abler men.

In the prophecy which now claims our attention we have as nearly as possible the language of history. We have seen the symbolic style in the earlier visions of the book. Chap. 9 is transitional, the weeks being in a measure enigmatic; the rest plain language with figures interspersed, as in all the interpretations. The peculiarity of the eleventh and twelfth chapters, like the ninth, is in leaving symbolic form for the language of every day on historical matters. Thus we have a succession of kings in a double contemporary series, north and south of the holy land, which was beyond controversy God's center on the earth. We must therefore look up or down from that fixed point.

Here we find a striking introduction before we hear of kings of the north and the south. “And now will I show you the truth. Behold, there shall stand up yet three kings in Persia.” Cyrus was then the great ruling personage. Darius was in honor only as a sort of complementary king; the conqueror of Babylon put him forward in recognition of the Medes who joined his standard, whatever may have been the exact family tie which bound them together. For scripture is silent, and the facts are by no means cleared by the profane writers of history. As Ctesias says that Cyrus made his own grandfather, the dethroned king of the Medes, a satrap, it is not improbable that he is Darius the Mede of the prophecy. Probable it seems that Astyages' daughter Mandane married Cambyses II., father of Cyrus, whom Herodotus mentions as a Persian noble, the monuments as the king, which appears to have been the fact. However this be, Cyrus was a man of real and widely extended power. Thenceforward scripture proof of the succession appears in Ezra 4.

First we have Ahasuerus, the unworthy son of a great father, here (Ezra 4:6) called Ahasuerus, or Cambyses as he is named in ordinary history. It was not he that disturbed the Jewish remnant, after their restoration, but the usurper who followed him when the Samaritan enemies of Israel appealed to stop the work of re-building the temple and the city. This work Artaxerxes (Smerdis Magus) (ver. 7-23) was the more ready to thwart, as he being a Mede paid no regard to the policy of Cyrus, whose son, Cambyses, did; he would be disposed naturally to reactionary measures. Darius Hystaspis became king on the revolt which set aside the pseudo-Smerdis; and he is the king of Persia who confirmed the decree of Cyrus. See vers. 5, 24, and chaps. 5. and 6. This Darius H. is the third in Dan. 11:2, that is, the third after Cyrus the Great.

“The fourth,” it is said, “shall be far richer than they all.” This proverbially rich king of Persia was Xerxes, who tried to follow his father's enmity to Athens (defeated at Marathon, B.C. 490), and strike the Greeks a death-blow. “And when he is waxed strong through his riches, he shall stir up all against the realm of Grecia.” He likewise was defeated at the famous battles of Salamis and Platma, B.C. 480, 479. How exact and terse is the prophet's sketch! “By his strength through his riches.” It was not skill or force of arms, but wealth that mustered the vast hosts of barbarians. But his enormous armies, far greater than those of his father Darius, were unavailing. Luxury had enervated those once hardy warriors. And now also they had overstepped their limits. Whilst they pushed their dominions through Western Asia, God in His providence was with them; but when they sought the sea and Europe, by rushing into Greece, they laid the foundation of that enmity which found its vent in Alexander the Great, who led the Greeks and his own Macedonian forces against the East. The great battles at the Granicus, and at Issus, and at Arbela resulted in the total overthrow of the Persian empire. See how clearly this is set out in a few words in ver. 4: “And a mighty king (Alexander) shall stand up that shall rule with great dominion and do according to his will.” But what about his own dynasty? “And when he shall stand up, his kingdom shall be broken, and shall be divided toward the four winds of heaven; but not to his posterity, nor according to his dominion wherewith he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for others besides these” (ver. 5). This was all verified to the letter.

Thus are we brought to the desired two out of the four parts of Alexander's kingdom—Syria in the North, Egypt in the South. And a most characteristic sketch it is. Gibbon, the skeptical historian, says in his sneering way that Daniel “is too exact for a prophet,” “The four empires are clearly delineated: the expedition of Xerxes into Greece; the rapid conquest of Persia by Alexander; his untimely death without posterity; the division of his monarchy into four kingdoms, one of which, Egypt, is mentioned by name; then various wars and inter-marriages; the persecution of Antiochus; the profanation of the temple; and the invincible arms of the Romans are described with as much clearness as in the histories of Justin and Diodorus. From such a perfect resemblance the artful infidel would infer that both alike were composed after the event” (G. to Hurd, Works, v. 365).

Certain it is that the Lord does authenticate “Daniel the prophet” to every believer, who finds here in short compass a sketch more simple, consecutive, and correct than in all the historians put together, and with slight exception in the common style of history. This is admittedly a feature unusual in prophecy; and because of this some have rashly yielded to incredulity. Dr. Arnold was thus misled; for no piety can quite undo the poisonous effects of unbelief.

But no Christian can doubt that it is as easy for God to give a consecutive anticipation as a single luminous picture. It is the general way of prophecy, no doubt, to hurry on to the judgment, and the blessing that follows the Lord's intervention at the close, as being of supreme importance. But there was good reason in His eyes to give at this junction an account of the kings, north and south of Palestine, and their mutual struggles and alliances, sometimes sought to be cemented by marriage. We have these movements traced with precision; nothing in history can be more exact. Name if you are able any great writer on that time, who gives facts with as great accuracy, simplicity, and clearness, as this chapter.

Take the following curt summary: verse 5 presents Ptolemy Lagi, one of Alexander's chief captains, in remarkable strength; yet another about to be stronger than he, and to have a great dominion, the first Seleucus surnamed Nicator. In ver. 6 after an indicated space we hear of an endeavor to patch up the jealousy which from earliest days had arisen about the land which lay between these powers, when Ptol. Philadelphus gave his daughter Berenice to Antiochus Theus. But Laodice, the injured first wife, brought all to naught and worse than ever by restoration to the northern king's favor, when she poisoned those from the south as well as her husband and Berenice's son. Vers. 7 and 8 tell us of “a shoot” from Berenice's roots, Ptol. Euergetes, avenging her wrongs, when Sel. Callinicus reigned in the north, and gained great successes over the north, surviving his adversary and returning to his own land (ver. 9). Then in ver. 10 we have the efforts of Sel. Ceraunus and Antiochus the Great against the south, the latter of whom alone recovered Seleucia; so that even Ptol. Philopator, ipert as he was, got enraged (11), and Antiochus after various successes sustained an utter rout at Raphia (12). But no fruit remained to the Egyptian king, especially as he oppressed the Jews; but Ant. waited till he could fall on his infant nephew when the Jews revolted (13, 14), and he took Sidon (15), notwithstanding all Egypt could do to hinder (defeated at Panium), and he visited the land of beauty (16). In ver. 17 we hear of his fair words but foul intrigues through Cleopatra, who thwarted his craft; as in ver. 18 his invasion of the isles of Greece was stopped by a Roman chief in the person of Quinctius the Consul at the Isthmus. Inglorious defeat sealed his stumble and fall (19). The twentieth verse briefly tells us of his son Sel. Philopator, overloaded with tribute, as is here strikingly noticed, who fell through his “exactor,” Heliodorus. From vers. 21 to 32 inclusively follows the account of his brother Antiochus Epiphanes with a detail beyond all before, as being the foe not only of the Jews but of their God, the living God. Demetrius was the true heir. “A person vile” indeed was their supplanter. His deceit was as great against his nephew of Egypt as against his brother. At length “ships of Chittim came against him” (ver. 30), as against his ancestor. The Romans compelled him to retire from Egypt; and he vented his indignation on the Jews; as later on by his order “the abomination that maketh desolate” was set up in the temple through apostates that helped him, though valiant opposition was not wanting.

If one ventured to enter into the details of those successive kings, it would take considerably more space than can be now given. But the last king of the north stands out from all the rest.

The Ten Virgins

Matt. 25:1-13

HERE again we have the mysterious likeness of the kingdom of the heavens while Christ rejected but glorified is hidden on high. Only, as the parable looks onward specially to the future, when the difference between those taught of God and mere professors will be manifested, the word is “Then shall the kingdom of the heavens be made like to ten virgins,” &c. “Then” refers to the execution of judgment on the evil bondman who embodied the collective responsibility of Christendom, as our parable sets out rather the secret of wisdom or the lack of it individually.

“Then shall the kingdom of the heavens be made like to ten virgins, such as, having taken their torches, went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were foolish and five prudent. For the foolish, when they took their torches, took no oil with them; but the prudent took oil in their vessels with their torches. Now while the bridegroom tarried, they all fell heavy and were sleeping. But at midnight a cry is made, Behold, the bridegroom: come ye forth to meet him. Then arose all those virgins and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said to the prudent, Give us of your oil, for our torches are going out. But the prudent replied, saying, Nay, lest there be not enough for us and you: go rather unto those that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and those that were ready went with him unto the marriage feast; and the door was shut. But afterward came also the rest of the virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not. Watch therefore, for ye know not the day nor the hour” (vers. 1-13).

The ten virgins vividly represent the Christian profession. All took their torches and went forth to meet the Bridegroom Who is coming again. But if anyone have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. The unction of the Holy One is indispensable. The possession of this, symbolized by oil, depends on having faith in Christ and His work. The foolish never knew their ruin; they were content with ordinances and rites and their own heed to them. To be born anew, to receive remission of sins through Christ's blood, to be sealed with the Spirit, they were strangers: Jews or heathen might want these things; but they had every privilege in their religion, the Christian religion, and had no cause for alarm: such was their self-deception.

Alas! as with Israel so with Christendom, the forgetfulness of God's work and departure from Him were complete. While waiting for the bridegroom they fell heavy and were sleeping. The true attitude of the Christian was lost; the blessed hope no longer animated any. They ceased to go forth to meet the Bridegroom, and turned in here or there to slumber. Prudent or foolish, all slipped away from the true hope.

But God is faithful, and, when things are darkest, He arouses the sleepers. At midnight is made a cry, Behold the bridegroom. All awake, when even the foolish become uneasy, for they perceive that the prudent have a power which they have not. Torches may burn brightly for a while; but without oil they soon go out. But the believer has the Spirit only for himself; and none can receive that anointing save through God's grace on the faith of the gospel. Hence the appeal of the foolish to the prudent is vain. They must go to Him who sells on the terms of grace, without money and without price. Sinners must have to do with God. The creature cannot avail. The sinner must face his sins before Him, Who points the lost to the Savior Those who are religious after the flesh hate grace and shrink from God's presence. They may be zealous; they are willing to do “some great thing” if bidden; but to stand before Him as nothing but guilty ones, and to be saved of divine grace like the worst by a dead and risen Savior, is repulsive to the old man. They may go their way to buy; but this is all we here learn of these self-deceivers.

Meanwhile the bridegroom came; and those that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast. And the door was shut.

Oh, the horror of finding out the truth too late! In vain then to cry, Lord, Lord, open to us! To such as are refusing a like warning and invitation now, His word then will be, Verily, I say to you, I know you not.

My reader, how would the coming of the Savior find you? Those who really long and watch for the Savior have already heard His voice and found in Him redemption, the forgiveness of their sins, through His blood. Hence they are sealed with the Holy Spirit of God unto the day of redemption. They know Whom they have believed, as the Good Shepherd knows such as hear His voice and follow Him. Do not trust in any institution, even of Christ, or any observance of your own, or any class of men however honored, to fit your souls for God's presence. Nothing but the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses from all sin; but this it does perfectly even now on earth for every believer. And unless you here believe in Him and in the efficacy of His sacrifice for your evil case, flatter not yourselves that He will receive you to Himself or present you to His Father.

But if you are born again and resting on the redemption that is in Christ, you will have the Holy Spirit dwelling in you and strengthening you to render a true witness to Him who is on high and about to return. “This is He that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is the truth.” Your hope will be as real as your faith, and Christ the object of both. You will not doubt His love, but long for His coming to receive you to Himself, having the oil in your vessel, and earnest to call the thirsty, or whoever will, to drink of the water of life freely.

The Fullness of Christ: Part 1

THE glory of Christ is the central truth of the Bible. Anyone could see His humiliation; Pilate and Herod and the unbelieving Jews, the Roman soldiers, all the multitude did. But the sight of His humiliation was nothing without His glory; and when His glory was discerned, it was the humiliation of the Lord Jesus that filled the heart with shame and with abasement. This always deepens in presence of the love which made One so high to stoop so low; and whatever humiliation was seen in the days of our Lord was only the prelude of a deeper humiliation.

“Himself bare our sorrows and took our sicknesses,” says the evangelist Matthew, looking on the wondrous grace of His earthly ministry; and it was true. The quotation, which is from Isaiah, does not refer to the atonement, I admit; but His path was one that led straight to the atonement. The bearing of our sorrows and sicknesses is quite a different thing from the bearing of our sins; but it was the same person in grace. Jehovah-Messiah was of course a divine person; but partaking of Mood and flesh, He took the place of man in weakness. He drew from God the Father as a dependent man for every need that came before Him. It mattered not what it was: a sick body, a disordered soul, a mind filled with all that Satan can infuse of fear and terror and all that is most hateful to God and man; nay, death itself—nothing stood in His ray. Whatever He needed, He drew down from God to meet each case; but He always bore the sorrow on His heart. He never was like those we may see any day who get rid of an importunate beggar with a sixpence. He never did so; but He bent under the weight of every sickness and sorrow He relieved. This is perfection. It was the perfection of His life as a man here below, even in doing miracles. Signs and wonders might be wrought by people that have no communion with God, and no compassion for man. He wrought them in grace peculiar to Himself.

The Lord Jesus was always in an unbroken and of perfect relationship with God and of perfect compassionate pity towards man. Yet He well knew that all this was but preliminary to the great work that lay before Him. And what was that?

His death as the Lamb of God—a work not yet seen in all its effects, and never to be so seen till not only the kingdom—which is a grand display—be established on the earth, but full perfection be reached: the new heavens and the new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. No longer will even government be needed—righteousness will dwell in peace, when evil and wretchedness are gone. There will be the full fruit, not only of grace, but of grace reigning through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord, already enjoyed by faith.

Therein is a great ground of confidence for a poor soul that is anxious about its sins. I do not say that the Lord Jesus has taken sin out of the world yet. This may not be quite true; but He is the One who is to do it. There is but One, “the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.” Without saying that all is done, He is the Person; and if you ask me where is the work through which that infinite result is to be effected, on which it rests, and in virtue of which it will be done, I answer unhesitatingly, It is the cross. Love could not banish sin. Power could not banish sin according to God. Power might act, but where then love and righteousness? Had the Lord Jesus appeared merely to put away all evil from before Him, what must become of us? Where could sinful souls find refuge? If I am to stand and lift up my head in the presence of God, it must be on the ground of His righteousness. And this is exactly what the Lord Jesus provided on the cross. On the one hand, there was God in His love and holy nature, in His righteousness and majesty; on the other, there was man in all his sin and ruin; and the Lord Jesus comes between both. He goes not from man to God; but He comes from God to man, and God was glorified in His cross about man's sin. “For God so loved the world that he gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.”

The Lord Jesus did not produce one atom of love in the heart of God that was not there before; by the atoning work on the cross He removed all hindrance for every soul that bows down and owns his sins, but for none other. No one will receive the blessing of grace without faith and repentance; and it would be no blessing to man or glory to God without it. There must be the work of the Spirit in our hearts to produce self-judgment with confidence in God through that which the Lord Jesus has borne for the sake of sinners. If the heart be unaffected, if conscience be harder than a millstone, how could such a soul give praise to God in heaven?

God is not merely working for heaven, He is raising a testimony for Christ in human hearts on the earth before they go to heaven. The best robe for the prodigal does not mean only in heaven, When heaven comes, will there be an elder son out in the field? No murmuring is heard there—if possible less insult to the Father. Nobody in heaven will act thus. It is here and now, alas! that it is done. But there is where people very often stop. They think the only thing that is now true in the gospel is the Father coming out to kiss the son, the order to take away his rags—to invest him with the best robe, and to put a ring and shoes on him. Would to God that even this were better known! There are many who would lessen the guilt of sin and wrong Christ still. Men are not ashamed of this, and do not see it is deep dishonor to Christ, defrauding Him of His just reward. That which God delights in is to make men righteously happy now and in this world; and this not in the smallest degree because of any merits on the sinner's part, but entirely as the fruit of divine grace in His own Son and His redemptive work. But then the heart must bow to it; and this not only by the faith that receives it from God, but by the repentance that judges self, not one's evil works only, but the nature.

Now the feast is given; the calling of the friends and neighbors together is what follows; but it follows here—not merely in heaven. When in the heavenly city, there will be the tree of life with its twelve manner of fruits, and every month. But what the parable of the prodigal son shows us is a feast begun on earth—God's joy (for it was not merely the prodigal's joy) in having back His erring son safe and sound.

Beloved reader, what meaning has that to you? Has it none? Are you, first of all, in the delivered condition of the prodigal? and, secondly, are you entering into the joy and love of God, which goes out and shares your joy? This is what God looks for now in this world. In heaven, no doubt, we shall have it in perfection; but the Christian man is called to enter into the love of God and joy of God while on the earth. He is not merely a forgiven man. He is not at all a man who is forborne with: this was the case before the death of Christ on the cross. When God was dealing in Old Testament times with His people, He forbore to press the debt; and they were then, as men are now in their natural state, liable to punishment. But then the work of Christ was not done, and God, looking on to it, would not exact the debt. He passed over the sins. There was a prætermission of sins; now there is a remission of sins. Not only does the Lord not judge the sins—they are completely gone.

You can conceive a wise, indulgent creditor who knew that you were greatly tried, but who thought proper to pity you, whatever might have brought about your straitened circumstances. He was merciful to you, and did not press the debt. But is this all the gospel? The gospel goes farther, and says that your sins on believing it are completely gone. Remember too it is only the first step—the threshold of the gospel; and this is what brings me to the next truth which I wish to present to you.

By Calling

“PAUL, a servant of Jesus Christ, an apostle by calling” (Rom. 1:1). Thus did Paul present his credentials to a company of saints whom he had not yet visited and to most of whom he was a stranger. Being especially the apostle of the Gentiles, he felt he had a responsibility towards them and desired some fruit among them, as among others. He had not been used of God to found the assembly in Rome; nor indeed had any other apostle. Unlike Philippi and Corinth, we have no scripture record of the commencement of the work of God in the great metropolis of the West. But Paul knew of the work, for their faith was spoken of throughout the whole world; and for many years had longed to pay them a visit, that he might impart to them some spiritual gift for their establishment.

The way being still hedged up, he wrote them the epistle now before us. He introduces himself as “an apostle by calling” —for so the phrase really means. His apostleship was derived from above without any intermediary of any sort. He had not received appointment from those who were apostles before him, still less had he thrust himself into the solemn position; it was a divine call. All ministry partakes of this character according to scripture. The source of it all is the risen Head in heaven. Having accomplished redemption and broken the power of the enemy, He ascended up on high and gave gifts unto men. He distributes the spoils of His victory among the objects of His favor—the members of His body. He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers.

In all this there is no room for man, the work is wholly divine. He who has received a talent is responsible to trade with the same; it is a mark of the evil servant not to do so, or to wait for some other authorization (Matt. 25.). Nowhere in scripture do we find official appointment to preach the word; still less “a church” giving “a call” to a man to become its “minister”. Granted that many human questions and difficulties are avoided by conforming to such ways; but they are a departure from the truth nevertheless. The apostle had to endure a good deal of criticism in the course of his faithful service. The Corinthians sought a proof of Christ speaking in him, and said that he was rude in speech and in bodily presence weak, and that he only desired to make a gain of them. But he held steadily on his way through evil report and good report, setting no value on any human imprimatur, confiding in God. He was an apostle by calling; and this was enough for him.

Those to whom he wrote had experienced a divine call also, though of a different character. We read “to all that be in Rome, beloved of God, saints by calling.” “To be saints” entirely misses the mind of the Spirit. It is no question of what we ought to be in our manner of life, nor of a position or status to be earned; but the place that grace has given once for all to all who believe. Superstition has robbed many of true understanding and enjoyment of the term “saints.” The mass have been long accustomed to think of Matthew, and Paul, as having a place altogether peculiar and which pertain to but few others; and many think of the title merely in connection with certain faithful sons of the church who have been pontifically canonized years after death.

But the word of God is blessedly plain. All who believe, whether apostles or otherwise, are “saints (or holy ones) by calling.” Divine grace has detached us from the world and delivered us from all the guilt and ruin of our former condition, and has set us in holiness in the divine presence according to the value of the work of Christ and the acceptableness of His own blessed person. Nothing can ever alter this. Neither the malice of Satan nor the feebleness and inconsistency of men can affect it for an hour. What unspeakable comfort for our hearts!

Not that this should make us indifferent as to our walk. On the contrary, the more divine grace is known, and the better Christian standing is understood, the more holy and godly will the walk be. The difference is immense between trying to become a saint by earnest painful effort (an impossibility really); and seeking to walk soberly, righteously, and godly, because we know we are saints, beloved of God, established in divine favor. Being holy ones by calling, it behooves us to be holy in practice. As He who has called us is holy, so should we be in all manner of behavior. The new nature which we have received from God should display itself in the power of the Holy Spirit: the old, which faith reckons dead, never can. God looks for fruit in all His own. W.W.F.

Reflections on Galatians 2:1-10

THE apostle proceeds to speak further of his connections with the twelve, and relates his second visit to Jerusalem. “Then fourteen years after, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also” (ver. 1). The circumstances of this visit are detailed in Acts xv. While Paul and Barnabas were laboring at Antioch, certain men from Jerusalem got in among the brethren, and taught them that, unless they were circumcised after the manner of Moses, they could not be saved. This led to much dissension and disputation, for the apostle would not quietly suffer the foundations of the faith to be thus assailed; but God so ordered it that the question was not settled on the spot. Paul and Barnabas, with other deputies, were dispatched to the Jewish metropolis to discuss the question with the apostles and elders. Thus did God preserve unity all round. He would cause the leaders of the Jewish brethren, resident in the very city from which the trouble emanated, to declare the entire freedom of Gentile believers from the law of Moses.

The discussion is given in Acts xv. where Peter describes the law as a yoke “which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear;” and concludes his speech with the memorable words, “But we believe that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.” Remark, not “they even as we,” but “we [Jews] as they” (Gentiles), all fleshly distinctions being now obliterated through the cross of Christ.

But if Acts 15. gives us the human and circumstantial side of Paul's journey, our epistle shows the divine side. “I went up by revelation.” It was thus not merely a matter between Paul and the troubled assembly, or between Paul and the twelve; but he was directly sent of the Lord. He now seeks conference with those whom he had rather avoided before. “I communicated to them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles; but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain” (ver. 2). Here we may see the wisdom of the apostle. He spoke privately to the leaders before the public discussion came on, that it might be manifest that there was no contradiction (whatever difference there might be) in the teaching of those who labored, whether among Jews or Gentiles. He laid before the twelve the gospel which he preached among the Gentiles. Did they judge it defective, as those who had seduced the Galatians? Did they add to him anything? The context shows that they did neither; but rather that they recognized thankfully the grace of God which wrought in him, even though his line was altogether different from their own. When the Spirit is working, there is no room for human pettiness.

Verse 3 should be read as a parenthesis. “But neither Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.” In this Paul was very bold; yet it was not the boldness of defiance, but of Christian liberty. He took, in the face of all, an uncircumcised Gentile brother into the very center of Judaism; and who that was taught of God (however full of Jewish feeling) could say him nay? Yet the apostle, we know, was always very considerate of Jewish scruples, making himself all things to all men for their blessing, as may be seen in his circumcision of Timothy in Acts 16., and in his instructions in Rom. 14. But Titus, unlike Timothy, was a pure Gentile, and it would have compromised the truth of the gospel to have circumcised him to please brethren among the Jews. Titus was saved as a Gentile, apart altogether from ordinances or works of law. This is brought forward here to show that even in Jerusalem was not required what the Galatians had proved themselves so ready to submit to.

Following upon the parenthesis, the apostle explains more fully the cause of his visit to Jerusalem at that time. “And that because of false brethren unawares brought in; who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you” (vers. 4, 5). Thus does he speak of the proceedings at Antioch, of the efforts of the enemy, and of his own earnest resistance of them. How soon did the church fall a prey to evil men through unwatchfulness, when apostolic energy was no more!

Still, as we have seen, even the great apostle of the Gentiles, was not permitted of the Lord to settle this momentous question without reference to Jerusalem; and this for unity's sake: a precious and important principle in the sight of the Lord. But did Paul learn anything in Jerusalem? Was his knowledge of Christianity perfected there among the twelve? “But of these who seemed to be somewhat (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person): for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me” (ver. 6). How could the Jewish leaders add anything to Paul? His gospel was beyond theirs, as is plain. He started with Christ's glory, and proclaimed its immense results to all who believe; they testified of One who walked here, who was crucified, and raised again by the power of God. The testimonies were not contradictory, but Paul's was in advance, nevertheless.

Therefore, instead of disagreeing with Paul, or seeking to alter the character of his ministry, as though it were faulty, or not of God, the twelve gave over the work among the Gentiles to Paul and Barnabas, mutually agreeing each to keep to his own line. “But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter (for he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles): and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace which was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship;

Bible Treasury: Volume N1

Table of Contents

Reflections on Galatians 1:11-24

Compromise.

Λογια Ιηκου Sayings of Our Lord

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision — 2

Proofs of the Resurrection. 3

Proofs of the Resurrection. 4

Scripture Queries and Answers.

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:1

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 1

The Last King of the North

Treasure Hidden in the Field

Proofs of the Resurrection

Position and the Grace That Gave It

The Epistle of James: Introduction

Letters on Singing: Making Melody in the Heart

Answer to Query Last December: Head Coverings

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:2

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 2

One Pearl of Great Price

Priesthood of Christ: 1

Are God's Objects Ours?

James 1:1-4

Letters on Singing: Concluding Remarks

Scripture Query and Answer: Three Words Translated "Net"

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:3

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 3

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 3

The Dragnet

Seeking and Receiving: Part 1

The Ways of God in the Acts: 1. The Calling of the Jews

Priesthood of Christ: 2

A Heavenly Christ, Therefore a Heavenly Church: Part 1

James 1:5-8

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:4

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 4

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 4

The Merciless Bondman

Seeking and Receiving: Part 2

The Ways of God in the Acts: 2. The Calling of the Samaritans

Priesthood of Christ: 3

James 1:9-12

To Correspondents

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:5

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 5

Nebuchadnezzar's Dream and Daniel's Vision: 5

The Labourers Hired

The Ways of God in the Acts: 3. The Calling of the Gentiles

A Heavenly Christ, Therefore a Heavenly Church: Part 2

Priesthood of Christ: 4

James 1:13-15

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:6

The Atonement Money (duplicate Rev)

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 6

The Eastern Little Horn: 1

The Two Children

Salvation by Grace: 1

Not Self but Christ

Priesthood of Christ: 5

James 1:16-18

Time and Space

Scripture Query and Answer: 1 Corinthians 11:20

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:7

Divine Care and Interest

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 7

The Eastern Little Horn: 2

The Guilty Husbandmen

Reflections on Galatians: Introduction

James 1:19-20

Priesthood of Christ: 6

The Titles in the Epistles

The Judgment, Not Reunion, of Christendom

The Early Chapters of Genesis: Chapter 10:8-10

Esther: The Captivity Under Providence Among the Gentiles, 8

The Eastern Little Horn: 3

The Seventy Weeks: 1

Marriage Feast of the King's Son

Salvation by Grace: 2