This leads me to notice the foundation of the argument of the paper I am commenting on, namely,” that Israel is the elect nation of God to hold an eternal place before him, not only in this world, but also in the new.” this that had to be proved is assumed on page 184 at the very outset, although proof “for the benefit of those who have never perceived it” is attempted at page 188
Now the texts on which this rests are all from the Old Testament, save one in Rom. 11, which is to dispel the last lingering doubt of any one who demurs to the startling doctrine, and Rev. 19; 21, which has to be proved to have anything to do with them. But I doubt whether this treatment of the subject will commend itself to those who read their Bibles. Of such I would ask if it is in the Old Testament that the veil is lifted to let in the light of eternity, where eternal life is only twice mentioned, and the eternal counsels of God are not revealed according to the express statements of the New. (See 1 Tim. 1:9), “Who hath saved us.... according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and incorruptibility (for that is the word in the original) to light through the gospel.” And Titus 1:2.: “In hope of eternal life, which God that cannot lie promised before the world began, but hath in due time manifested his word through preaching, which is committed to me.” (Rom. 16:25, 26; Col. 1:25, 26.)
The New Testament is the revelation of eternity, and sheds the clear light of it on the passing scene of this world. The cross, that is the ground in time and on the earth of the fulfillment of the promises made to the fathers, lays also the foundation for the bringing in of that which was before all promise—the eternal purpose of God.
The counsels of God are thus connected with eternity, as the promises made to the fathers are with time. Now, the only passage quoted from the New Testament to prove that these last are eternal is Rom. 11. But this scripture brings us down in express terms to the tree of promise on the earth. God had not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Some of the branches had been broken off because of unbelief, and branches of a wild olive-tree grafted in to partake of the root and fatness. These are warned that they only stand by faith, and may in their turn be cut off, and the natural branches grafted in again into their own olive-tree. Even so it shall be; and in this way all Israel shall be saved, as a nation, instead of a remnant, blessed as now according to the election of grace. And so Isa. 59:20, 21 would have its fulfillment: “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” But if blessing had come to the Gentiles through their fall, how much more through their fullness; “for if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be but life from the dead?” So then, what Christianity as a professing system had been cut off from on earth, Israel is to be graffed into again. This, we are told, is eternity, and the proof of Israel's portion, “of eternal distinctness” (p. 188), and “in exact correspondence with Rev. 21” (p. 189). Is the reader at a loss for any trace of such a correspondence? The author supplies it, by introducing in the bias of his system a resurrection condition of things wholly foreign to the truth of Rom. 11— “in a risen people, a people raised from the dead, Abraham shall read the fulfillment of the everlasting covenant. And so in resurrection all Israel shall be saved, not as individuals, but as a nation.” It remains for us to consider what is the force of the Old Testament expressions that seem to make the duration of Israel's blessing eternal. The Psalm (89) I have already referred to must be held to throw important light on the subject; see verses 1-4; 28-37, in which Israel's full future blessing is before us, founded on the mercy and faithfulness of Jehovah, and set up in the king of whom it is said, “I will make him, my first-born, higher than the kings of the earth.” But how is the duration of the blessing defined? “His seed also will I make to endure forever, and his throne as the days of heaven.” Again, “As the sun before me; it shall be established forever as the moon, and as a faithful witness in heaven.”
The use of the expression is the more remarkable as applied to that which is eternal, according to full New Testament revelation, that is, the throne which never passes from David's Son, though He gives it up as man to take it as “God all in all.” But even when that part of the blessing which is essentially eternal is spoken of, the language used does not go beyond the utmost limit of time— “it shall be established forever as the moon.” The last verses of Isa. 66 are quoted (p. 188), as though the new heavens and the new earth spoken of were identical with the new heavens and new earth of Rev. 21:1. It is easily seen that this is not so by the mention of them in the previous chapter, 65:17-25, which describes the course of government against the ungodly and transgressors. It is the great moral change that takes place in the regeneration, when “the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption with the liberty of the glory of the children of God,” that is spoken of—not the heavens and the earth of the new creation.
Two passages remain to be noticed as supposed to “bear upon this study.” (See p. 217.) The first is Gal. 4:26, of which it is said, “this has been supposed to confirm the view that Rev. 21 describes the church.” “We shall see whether it does or not. “But examine the passage with its context,” and see if it says anything like what the writer makes it say— “To Israel has been committed the oracles of God, and through Israel, that is the inspired Jews whom God employed to write and preach the glad tidings, have the Gentiles received the grace of life: Israel is therefore the mother of us [all].” This is the result of our author's reasoning, that “our mother must be something of the past,” instead of examining the passage with its context, in which we find the apostle explains himself by quoting Isa. 54:1. This speaks of what Jerusalem is yet to be by grace, as free, in contrast with its condition under law. In that coming day of its millennial liberty and joy, Jerusalem will look back and own us Christians, the children of promise, as Isaac was (ver. 28), as her children, and that thus the period of her apparent desolateness was really fruitful to her. in the richest way: only that, while the apostle speaks thus, he adds a word which just connects us with even a higher thing than Jerusalem emancipated, namely, “Jerusalem, which is above all, is free.” There is a heavenly Jerusalem as well as a restored earthly one.
Many a passage of Old Testament scripture gives us the earthly; Rev. 21; 22 gives the heavenly, and in this the Christian has his portion, “for our citizenship (πολίτευμα) is in heaven.”
“Another passage quoted against this interpretation,” according to the author, is Heb. 12:22, though he does not say where he finds the argument (p. 218), that “ye are come to the new Jerusalem,” means that we are the new Jerusalem! I am glad to be able to accept in the main what he says of it, that it is “an enumeration of the glorious circle of the saints' inheritance.” It is the circle of things we are connected with by grace, through a glorified Christ, in contrast with a living Messiah on earth. The passage says nothing as to “the nature of the connection,” and therefore cannot be taken in proof of the writer's interpretation any more than of that which is opposed to it. Still I do not think the order is without significance, or that there is wanting in it what confirms the truth, as we have seen it, of Rev. 21; 22. For is there not an ascending and descending scale of glory here, so to speak?
The eye first rests on “Mount Sion” on earth, the seat of the nation's establishment in grace under the king (see for the type 1 Chron. 15-16; 2 Chron. 5:2: Psa. 78:67-72.)
Then the eye lifts, and sees what is connected with the center of earthly blessing, but yet is above it— “the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.” Then, as more immediately connected with the divine center of all— “an innumerable company of angels, the general assembly.” But in the innermost circle round the throne, the church, in its own proper character as “the church of the first-born which are enrolled in heaven.”
Then, having risen up “to God the judge of all,” we come down next “to the spirits of just men made perfect,” the Old Testament saints, in their ordered place and blessing; “and to Jesus, the mediator of the new covenant,” thus looked at, in connection with the people to whom it belongs; “and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel,” inasmuch as it lays the ground for the whole blessing in both its heavenly and earthly parts, instead of crying for judgment.
Thus, if place was found in this circle of glory for the church's connection with the kingdom, as Mount Sion naturally leads on to it, we have it in its own essentially heavenly character and calling as well.
I do not know that there is anything else in the paper that calls for remark. The Lord give us a deeper understanding of the things so freely and richly unfolded to us in His word, and, above all, the abiding enjoyment of them as the things in which we live in communion with Him. J. A. T.
(Concluded From Page 48)
Courtesy of BibleTruthPublishers.com. Most likely this text has not been proofread. Any suggestions for spelling or punctuation corrections would be warmly received. Please email them to: BTPmail@bibletruthpublishers.com.