Bible witness and review for the presentation and defence of revealed truth

mmm

tmrn

,1 t\u ®hfo%,V«, ^

PRINCETON. N. J.

Division S. _| - . _ _ —

Section /...

Shelf. Number

(7. ^- —

'^■^^ !:

■ :• ■ \-

?..*"^.

'^•'•:

^■,

. ^ V ^

.»• ■•'5 •.

BIBLE

WITNESS AND KEVIEW

FOR THE PRESENTATION AND DEFENCE OF
REVEALED TRUTH

E/'s a.'rro'Koyiav rou ivayyi^.m xs^xa/
Phil. L 17

SECOND EDITION

LONDON

OFFICE OF rUBLICATIOX, 25 PATEKNOSTEr. SQUARE

1877

hjli.mOETOIT
,htC. MAR18b2
THSOLOGIC

CONTENTS.

PAGE

The Feasts of Jehovah. — Lectures on Lev. xxiit. . . i

The Olive Tree, Fig Tree, and the Vine ... 49

Union in Incarnation the Root-Error of Modern Theology 55

Scriptural Unity and Union . . . . 76

Have wb-a Revelation from God ? . . . . loi

Christological Pantheism . . . . . 193

The Church and its Privileges . . , .240

The Bearing of 1 Peter il 24 . , .251

Biblical Annotations . . . . . 2G2

Epistolary Communications . . . . .364

(

htC. iVlABl882

THSOLOGICAL

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

LECTUEE I.

The Sabbath, the Passovee, and Unleavened Bread.

Lev. XXIII. 1-8.

It is my hope to bring before you, in the Scripture we have
entered on to-night, the whole outline of the dealings of God
with His people on earth, not of course in detail, but, first, the
original purpose as before God ; next, the foundation which He
laid in order to accomplish this purpose ; then, again, the ways
of God in the application which He made of the mighty work
thus accomplished ; and, finally, the direct and full result.

It will be proved in the course of these remarks that God did
reaUy look forward far beyond His ancient people. These feasts
had a simple and primary application, as no one doubts, to the
Jewish people ; they, at any rate the chief of them, served the
purpose of gathering Israel around Himself where He had
placed His name. But it is impossible to limit Scripture to
such an application. I hope to give you what the Holy Ghost
contemplates in the types ; for God was looking on to other
things, and far greater than men are apt to allow. All was
future in this point of view ; and even now we may see what
will be, as well as that which is, and what has been accom-
plished. He has anticipated that which would have an entirely
different and superior character, indeed what we commonly call
Christianity ; He removes the veil from the age to come when
He will establish the kingdom in glory. Thus we shall be able
to trace the dealings of God, first, not merely in letter but in
grace, and then, when it will be no longer grace but glory, and

B

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

that not only for heaven, hut mainly for the earth. It is quite
a mistake to suppose that His glory is connected only with
heaven. Undoubtedly He has allowed Satan to do his worst,
but He has already M'on the victory morally in Christ, and
efficaciously in His death and resurrection ; and He will prove
it before every eye in a day fast approaching. But now we
walk by faith, not by sight, and I trust that the Scripture thus
brought before us may contribute to strengthen the faith of those
who believe, as well as to rebuke those who dare to disbelieve,
the word of God.

L The Sabbath.

The first thing I would draw your attention to is this, that
the Sabbath is introduced in an altogether peculiar manner.

This is no mere idea of mine, nor of any one else. It is
marked very clearly in the opening of the chapter before us.

"And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the
children of Israel, and say unto them, concerning the feasts of
Jehovah, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even
these are My feasts. Six daj'S shall work be done ; but the
seventh day is the Sabbath of rest, an holy convocation ; ye
shall do no work therein ; it is the Sabbath of Jehovah in all
your dwellings." Thus the feasts open ; but let us notice that
the fourth verse begins again, " These are the feasts of Jehovah."
Hence we see that in the beginning of the chapter, where the
feasts are introduced generally, the Sabbath is named in par-
ticular ; next, in verse fourth, there is a fresh beginning,
which excludes the Sabbath. Now there is nothing in vain in
Scripture ; not a word from Genesis to Revelation which God
wrote could be changed but for the worse. I know certain
minds find this diflicult to believe ; and the reason is because
they judge of God by themselves. If you or I had written it,
there would have been many a word to change for the better ;
and we are apt to attribute our infirmities to God's word. No

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

man can riglitly reason on God's word from himself ; nor is
it sound to reason from nature up to nature's God. We
must begin with God, and reason from Him, or His word,
down to His works. If we begin with what we find in reason
or things here below, we begin with what is frail, feeble, incon-
stant ; and how can we reason soundly when we start from that
which breaks at the touch ? When w^e begin with God and
His word, we are guided by that which judges all around.
But the tendency of men is to take on them to judge the word
of God : did they believe that the word of God judges them, it
would be safer and more becoming.

Now if God has given a revelation of His mind, that revela-
tion must be worthy of Himself; and He has taken particular
pains to call it His word. Undoubtedly He wrought by various
means ; but He never calls it the word of Moses, or David, or
John, or Paul, but the word of God. Let us never forget this.
It may be said that there is here a difficulty, and what appears
even to be an irregularity. The Sabbath is introduced first as
the beginning of the feasts ; and then, secondly, we begin again,
when the Sabbath is left out. Why ? Because the Sabbath has
a character altogether peculiar to itself. Evidently as a matter of
fact, and merely looking at it from a literal point of view, all the
other feasts were celebrated but once a year, the Sabbath every
week. There is therefore a distinct line of demarcation ; and so
the second beginning is justified. But still the Sabbath has the
character of a feast, and with a most important aim, if in a
way that marks no other ; for that feast, and that alone, was to
be continually repeated, as the end of the week came round.

And here let us not fail to notice the difference between this
and what Scripture calls " the Lord's day." Those who would
and do confound the two understand neither. The Sabbath
day was historically and originally at the end of the week, when
man had accomplished his ordinary round of toil. The end lie
gave to God. He had laboured Himself for six days, on the
seventh He rested. According to God's law, it was not merely

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

Ob seventh, but tlie seventh day. No other day of the week
would have done so well, or at all, if one looked at it as truly
fearing God. From an utilitarian point of view, one day was as
good as another ; and that is man's way of dealing with things.
But God knows that man is prone to forget Him even in crea-
tion, and above all to forget the gracious purposes of God
pledged in the Sabbath.

AVhat is it that God means to bring in ? A rest for His own,
a rest worthy of Himself, and a rest which He will share with
His people. AVhen will this be ? Not till the end of all things.
I am far from meaning that every man will enjoy that rest. No
one can think or say so wlio believes what sin is, or that God
will judge the world by the INIan risen from the dead and
ordained for it. But while acknowledging that God must show
His deep resentment against evil, m'c believe also that He has
brought in a Deliverer and a deliverance for us ; in due time a
full and a perfect deliverance for creation. This is precisely
what God will make good in the day of Christ's coming ; and
His rest it will be.

Let me refer here to the great New Testament Scripture on
the rest of God, In Heb. iii. and iv. you find the Spirit of
God (after pointing to Christ on high, Sou of God, and Son of
man, who had died atoningly), introducing this rest. What gave
occasion to it was the evident danger for the Hebrew believers of
taking their ease now, and thus forgetting they were only pass-
ing tlirough the wilderness. They were so accustomed to con-
nect with the coming of jNIessiah a present rest, that they could
hardly understand that they were ushered into a scene of trial
answering to His who suffered without the gate, and called to
count it their privilege. They were in danger of seeking to make
themseh'es at ease and comfortable here. The first Epistle to
the Corinthians sliows that they were not alone in this. It is a
very natural snare to the heart of man, even to those who have
found the Saviour. After there has been doubt and anxiety,
the soul knowing what the judgment of God on sin is, and its

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

own utter giiilt and condemnation, when deliverance in the
Lord Jesus is once found, there is often danger of reaction. The
soul is apt to settle down,' thinking that the campaign is over,
because the great battle has been fought, and the victory is
given through the Lord Jesus Christ. They flatter themselves"
that there can be no more trouble, because the deep soul-distress
is past. It is sufficiently plain that these Hebrews were in some
such state, and the apostle not only reminds them how joyfully
they took their early spoliation and sufferings, but here instructs
them that they are not yet after the pattern of Israel settled
in the land, but like Israel passing through the wilderness.
Accordingly w^e find that the w'hole argument of the epistle
supposes not the temple, but the tabernacle, from first to last ;
and thus hails from the camp, not from the throne or kingdom
set up after the conquest of Canaan. Hence he says, " Let us
therefore fear, lest a promise being left us of entering into his
rest, any of you sliould seem to come short of it" (ch. iv. 1).
We see at once that the apostle is not speaking of believing
in the Lord Jesus for present rest of conscience. Had this
been the point before him, he would have boldly assured
them there was no need to fear.

If we speak of the blood of Christ, and then should exhort
to fear, it w^ould be the denial of Christianity. The gospel is
the declaration of full remission, yea, of more than this, of jus-
tification, of reconciliation witli God through the Lord Jesus.
If forgiveness through Christ's blood was the question, he would
rather call on them to vanquish every fear ; for, as the apostle
John says, in discussing that point, " Perfect love casteth out
fear," not " perfect love " on our j)art (the law asked for that, and
never could get it), but the perfect love of God, which is only
revealed in and throucfh the Lord Jesus Christ. "What are we
to be afraid of then ? Not of the blood of Christ failing, not of
losing the remission of sins through any change of mind or at
any moment from grace in God. But be afraid of settling down

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

in this world, and coming short of the true outlook of pilgrims
and strangers on the way to a Ijetter land. To have rested in
the wilderness would have been fatal to an Israelite ; and so we
have to remember that this is not our home, and that to settle
down would be virtually to deny ourselves the rest of heaven.

In passing let me remark that this epistle was written by
the apostle Paul and no one else. Men may question, as they
do everything now-a-days, but there is no real ground of doubt-
ing it. For Peter proves it in his second epistle, where he says
(chap. iii. 15) — " Even as our beloved brother Paul also, accord-
ing to the wisdom given unto him, hath written unto you!'
Now, as we know, he was then addressing believing Jews ; so
that Paul must have written to them also, and this can be only
the epistle to the Hebrews. I refer to it now, simply because
Satan is trying to undermine everything, and it becomes of
growing consequence to meet lesser questions, as well as daring
attacks on the word of God. It is high time that every man
who is by grace a believer should declare plainly what he is.
Does His goodness not claim it at our hands to be confessors if
not martyrs %

1 say then, that in this epistle the Spirit of God brings
before us the necessity of going forward to the rest of God ;
and I press this as the only genuine meaning, because it is often
applied to soul rest, which it rather tends to enfeeble or destroy.
Tliat it is not within the scope of the passage in the text, we
may see from verse 1], where it says, "Let us labour, therefore,
to enter into that rest." AVhat sort of a gospel would it be to
tell people they must labour for rest of conscience ? Evidently
it would be to upset the gi'ace of God ; for it means no other
than salvation by works. On the face of it, all can see that the
apostle here is addressing such Jews as professed Christ, and
that they then wore in danger of slipping into present ease,
instead of pressing through the wilderness world on their way to
that rest of God, the rest of His glory.

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

Do not suppose that I deny for a moment that there is in
Christ a present rest for faith. The Scriptures speak of it
plainly : — " Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest." This is the rest of grace now,
not of glory. Then there is something farther too : — " Take my
yoke upon you, and learn of Me ; for I am meek and lowly in
heart ; and ye shall find rest unto your souls." First, He gives
rest unconditionally, in pure sovereign favour, to all the weary
that come ; and then, when walking in the path of submission
to Him and obedience, the faithful find rest. For if one is dis-
obedient, one must have (as John says) the heart ill at ease — it
condemns one ; and, then, how can there be rest ? But there
remains a third thing : not only rest given by Christ as a pre-
sent relief to the conscience, and, again, true rest of heart found
in the path of obedience and learning of Him ; but, thirdly, the
rest of God when it is no longer a question of man and sin
and self-will and misery, but all the chequered scene of toil
and suffering will be over, when Cod will rest in the satisfaction
of His own love and glory, having brought His sons and people
into His everlasting rest.

Doubtless, as the apostle argues, God gave the Sabbath at
the beginning ; but this was not His rest, for sin spoiled creation,
and He says afterwards, "If they shall enter into my rest."
" If " implies that they had not entered it, and might fail also.
So again, after Joshua (or " Jesus ") had put down the Canaanites
(lie never completely conquered them), after Israel had settled
themselves in the land, was that the rest of God ? By no means ;
for the Psalm which speaks of that rest w\as written long after
Adam and Joshua. The conclusion, then, is that "there remaineth
therefore a rest {m^i^arieiiog, a keeping of sabbath) to the people
of God." Consequently it has not yet come. The apostle strength-
ens this from another principle, namely, that one cannot be
both working and resting, in the same sense, at the same time.
If one has entered into rest, one has done with works, even as is

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

said of God Himself (ver. 10). But the bright day when we
shall rest is not yet arrived. So that he is exhorting the
saints to labour. NoV) is the time for work ; and every one
that has the love of Christ in such a world as this must feel it,
for the simple reason that there is sin and wretchedness in the
world. Divine love, whether in God or in His people, refuses
to rest in the midst of evil. After Christ comes this will not be
so. " There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God."

It is not the same principle which wx find in the Lord's
day, for this is the intervention of divine power in the resur-
rection of the Lord Jesus, after He had gone down into death
to make propitiation for our sins and reconcile us ami all things
to God. Consequently the Lord's day is an excellent day for
spiritual toil, for the work of faith and the labour of love ; and
no one acquainted with Christ would think it wrong, if able, to
preach a dozen sermons on that day, nor to take a dozen Sab-
bath-days' journeys to preach them. Were it the Sabbath-day,
he could not do so lightly. Thus they have a wholly different
character. The source, nature, and end of the Lord's day is
marked out by grace in the resurrection of Christ from the dead,
as the Sabbath is by creation and the law of God.

It seemed good to the Lord then, and it is necessary for man,
that there should be first the great truth of the Sabbath set
forth before we enter on the ways of God. Before He accom-
plished the mighty work. He hung out clearly and distinctly
this initiatory pledge of rest at the end. I am coming to have
my rest, He says, but not to have it alone : you shall share it in
glory with Me. The Sabbath is to be fulfilled in a day yet to
come ; and that both for heaven and earth. But the rest is
after all work is done, whether in type or anti-type.

II. The Passover.

But now we come to another thing : God laying the founda-
tion of it all ; and mark first, lie does not eifect it hastily. There

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

are many who think it would have been exceedingly good if God
had at the beginning given His Son to die for sinners. Instead of
this He waited for 4000 years. Why so ? In the word we get the
key to the difficulty. " When the fulness of the time was come,
God sent forth His Son," etc. It was not on the first day of the .
first month that the Passover was instituted, that great stand-
ing type of Christ slain for sinners, but on the fourteenth day.
Was not God in this delay signifying the fulness of time ?

First, He leaves man to his own way ; and then, lest man
should complain that he had gone astray because abandoned to
himself, God took him in hand and tried him under law. So Israel,
as the centre of mankind, was placed under His government.
What was the result ? After all possible pains the bad tree bore
more bad fruit. Israel at the close was worse than at the beginning.
The end of man was the Cross of Christ. They hated the Son and
the Father. Therefore do we hear of Christ's death at the con-
summation of the ages. It is not a chronological expression ; but
God had tried man in various ways, which ended in nothing but
wickedness and ruin. AVhat does God do then ? He displaces
man's religion and his failure by the infinite work of redemp-
tion ; and this is what we have in the Passover.

Verse 5, " In the fourteenth day of the first month, at even,
is Jehovah's passover." What was the great principle of this
feast ? God had come down to deliver His people from the
house of bondage. It was not because of any good in them, for
the children of Israel at that time were worshipping false gods,
and were utterly indifferent to the glory of the True. But next,
if God delivers them, He must deliver them righteously. Pay
particular attention to this. It is not simply a question of
mercy in forgiving those who are wicked, but He will have them
before Him on a foundation of right. He is a just God and a
Saviour. Hence on that night He sent through the land a
destroying angel to avenge sin. It was judgment of evil, and
the first thing done. He came down by that angel to deal

lo THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

with whatever was offensive to His character. And there was
but one thing which stayed the hand of the destroying angel.
What was it ? The blood of the slain lamb. Wherever it was
not on the doorposts or upper lintel, death reigned. Not that
God was yet judging all mankind. It was a sample, which tes-
tified what sin deserved, and what alone could screen from God's
judgment. God declared, in that blood on the sprinkled doorposts
of the children of Israel, that death only could stay judgment.

It was in the last degree solemn — the lamb judged for sin.
But what M'ondrous grace ! Judgment falling on the lamb ; not
on the guilty, but on their substitute ! It was the judgment of
God because of our sins which Christ had to endure, the spotless
Lamb of God. What was it made the Lord Jesus sweat, as it
were, great drops of blood ? Was it the mere act of dying ?
This would lower the Lord below yourself if you are a believer.
Why, a Christian rejoices in the thought of departing to be with
Christ, who alone suffered and died for our sins.

What was the meaning of that cry, " My God, my God, why
hast Thou forsaken me ?" It was the judgTnent of sin which
then fell on Christ. It was not what the Jews did, nor Pontius
Pilate, nor Herod, nor man in general laid on Him. I know
the popular hymn says, " I lay my sins on Jesus." But the
truth is far better than that : God laid them there. If it had
been you or I that must bring our sins for expiation, we might
have forgotten many ; but Jehovah laid our burden on Him.
And hence the Lord suffered on the Cross as never did before
either any other or Himself. For if He had been bearing sins
aU. His life, as sofne say, either He must have been forsaken of
God all His life, or God must have acted as if sin was tolerable
till then. Is either thought true ? Neither ; indeed, without
even an appearance of truth. Christ suffered once for sins.

This judgment of God falling on the Lamb alone explains
what sin is and deserves ; and the sprinkling of the blood on
the doors answers to the believer's application of Christ's

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

blood by faith to his own case. In this and this alone was
seen that which has made it a righteous thing to put away
sin. God's judgment fell on His Son, because He is His Lamb,
who was able to bear it. The blood of the Lamb is the witness
of the judgment, but in richest fullest grace because it was on .
His Son it fell. This was God's view of it ; and you must re-
member that in these types we are considering not what Moses
or others understood, but what God said and faith receives in
and through our Lord Jesus. Do you ask my authority for all
this ? Turn to 1 Cor. v. 7, " For even Christ, our Passover, is
sacrificed for us." Is not this ample authority ? And God says
this to those who had been Gentiles and now were His church ;
for He was looking far beyond the Jew on to another day, and
this is the day in which we find ourselves. Christ's death is
the groundwork of all our blessing, the blood of the slain Lamb,
the Lamb of God that beareth away the sin of the world. We
may see too, that it was not a question of continuous or re-
peated offering ; as the apostle argues in Heb. ix. 26, " For now
once in the end of the world hath He appeared to put away sin
by the sacrifice of Himself" Further, " He bore," as Peter says,
" our sins in His own body on the tree." The consequence of His
work is perfect peace to the believer. If it were continually
going on, one could, one ought, never to have settled peace.
The perfect efficacy goes with the singleness of Christ's offering,
through righteousness as the apostle teaches in Rom. v.

III. The Feast of Unleavened Bread.

But there is another feature to be noticed. The Passover
was followed immediately by the feast of unleavened bread.
There was not a single day that intervened.

Now, as an ordinary rule, there was a space between these
different feasts ; but here is an exception to the rule. And let
me ask you, who could, save by God's power, have appreciated
the force of this beforehand ? Now that it is revealed, we may

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

follow. Like JMoses from the cleft of the rock, one cau see Him
as He passes before us ; but who can go before Him ? The
Passover was followed immediately by the feast of unleavened
bread. There was not the lapse of a day between them — one
being on the fourteenth, the other on the fifteenth, day of the
same month. Indeed, as the feast of unleavened bread in
the N'ew Testament is treated as beginning with the killing of
the paschal lamb, the immediate response of the Christian to
Christ's blood is to walk in holiness. God will not have him to
take a single day to himself. At once he is called by the grace
of God to own himself responsible to put away all leaven. We
know from 1 Cor. v. that leaven is symbolic of corruption.
Yer. 7 : " For even Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed for us ;
therefore let us keep the feast." What feast ? The Passover ?
No ; the feast of unleavened bread.

This feast, again, we see, is not like the Passover ; for one
day was to be kept in the latter case, seven days in the former.
I may assume that all here who have read their Bibles know
the force of " seven days." It was a complete cycle of time,
and also doubtless in connection with God's people on the earth.
" Day " might be used of heavenly or eternal things, not " seven
days."

AVe may get important instruction in God's ways from all
this. There are in Scripture several applications of leaven. The
Lord speaks of the leaven of the Pharisees, of the Sadducecs, and
of Herod. The Holy Ghost uses the expression " a little leaven"
twice in the Epistles of Paul ; but from this we do not well to
allow the thought that thej^ are parallel passages. Each has its
own force, though there is of course a common character. But
I feel very strongly, as to all such passages aj^t to be loosely
huddled together and called parallel, that we should seek to dis-
criminate. True wisdom is not manifested, as the sages say, in
trying to see resemblances in things which differ, but in discern-
ing the real difference among those which resemble one another.

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

What you need to cultivate is a sound judgment, and you will
never get it by hunting up so-called parallel passages. The habit
is, on the contrary, destructive to intelligence in the word of God.
Hence I believe it would be far better if such references were
left out of our Bible, and the readers had to learn it thoroughly-
for themselves. I do not mean you should not have a concord-
ance or kindred help ; but the Bible should be printed alone, and
is incomparably richer without than with these additions, which
habitually mislead by confounding the distinctions which lie
under phrases more or less verbally similar. The headings of
the chapters and at the top of the columns are often worse than
useless, conveying at best the mere views of men, and encum-
bering the page which should give only what is divine.

It is written then that " a little leaven leaveneth the whole
lump." Hence to many, as the same words appear in two
different passages, the too rapid inference is tliat they point to
just the same thing. So far is this from being true that the
application is wholly different. AYhat then is the bearing of
each ? Let me call your attention to the general principle,
that, if you wish to understand any verse of Scripture, you must
always interpret it by its context. In 1 Cor. v. leaven represents
what is unclean and corrupting, and manifestly immoral. They
were not to allow " the wicked person " in their midst, for evil
sj)reads, and ever so little leaven, if allowed, sours and taints the
whole lump. In Galatia evil was taking what we may call a
religious or legal form (Gal. v. 9). The Christians were ob-
serving days, months, times, and years. They were crying up
circumcision as a desirable supplement to faith. This was the
Pharisaic leaven, as the other was the Sadducean. The leaven of
the Sadducees was the evil of free thought and licentious
action. The leaven of the Pharisees was that of rigorous
legalism and human tradition.

Keeping the feast of " unleavened bread " typifies the main-
tenance of personal holiness. So Scripture insists : Pom. vi.

14 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

xiL xiii. ; 1 Cor. v. vi. ; Gal. v. vi. ; EjdIi. iv. v, ; 1 Thess. iv. 1-8 ;
Heb. xii. 14, etc. If we do lift up our hands to the Lord, let
it be piously, without wrath or doubting ; let the walk and
ways be under the sense of responsibility, as separate to the
Lord ; let love be without dissimulation and with incorruptness.
But is the person all ? Not so. Leaven was to be banished
from the house as well as from the individual. You will often find
people careful and jealous as to personal walk, and to the last
degree lax as to ecclesiastical impurity. The Lord calls on us
here to beware of the allowance of leaven anywhere. Cor-
porate purity is worthless without due regard to personal holi-
ness. Some bring their horror of clericalism or of the sects into
shame and contempt by their carelessness about their spirit and
ordinary walk. We are bound to eschew all evil, whether
collective or individual. In short, what God has at heart is
this — that we should please Him in every relation, in what is
collective as well as individual walk. The feast of " unleavened
bread " takes in the entire pilgrimage, our whole course public
as well as private. Thus we may see that if the feast was to
begin on the first day after the Passover, the greatest care is
taken to show that it was to be continued throughout our entire
life here below. To keep this feast is ever our calling while on
earth.

LECTUEE IL
The Wave-Siieaf and the Wave-Loaves.

Lev. XXIII. 9-22.
I HAVE already shown the character of the Sabbath, and
how God introduced it in a manner altogether peculiar. He
presented it at the very beginning of the feasts, though in fact
its accomplishment, viewed now as a type, wdU be at the end.
It is the great purpose to which all lead. As a present witness
to this God attached such importance to the Sabbath, that,

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 15

differing from all the other feasts, it was to be repeated at the
end of every week.

Further, it is a mistake to suppose the Sabbath is done with,
for it is to be in force throughout the millennium. I am not
speaking of the Lord's day, when we very properly meet to-
gether as Christians ; and I believe, so far from its being a
mere question of man or churches appointing that day, that it
has the very highest divine sanction. So true is this, that a
Christian losing sight of the import, object, and character of the
Lord's day would be more guilty than a Jew that dishonoured
the Sabbath day. But as the Lord's day came in by the resur-
rection of Christ for the Christian and the church meanwhile,
it will be the Sabbath and not the Lord's day when the Lord
God establishes the kingdom and our Lord Jesus Christ reigns
manifestly ; when idolatry shall be abolished, superstition swept
away, and every kind of iniquity that now raises its head Avill
have met its end ; when every creature in this world will be
restored. For I pity the man who thinks the world was only
made to be spoiled : certainly he who does not believe it is
spoiled must be more lamentably wrong ; but it is a gloomy and
false thought that God made creation only to be ruined. As surely
as the first Adam was the means of universal ruin for the
creature, so the Second Adam will be the great Deliverer not
only of us but of it. He will reconcile to God all that He
made, that is, all things : I say not ^i^crsons, for this is fatal error.
In Scripture you never read of all persons being reconciled.

One little word makes all the difference between blessed truth
and hateful error. What can be more false than the infidel
dream of universal restoration ? God M'ill judge all whose sins
have not been borne away by faith in Christ and His cross.

There is a day coming when all creation will rejoice, when
the heavens and the earth and all in them will sinu to'^ether.
God has taken particular pains to express the earth's joy also,
and it is a singular proof of the infatuation of man that he can-

l6 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

not see it though clearly revealed. This will be the rest of God ;
and, when it comes, the Sabbath and not the Lord's day will
again be the distinctive sign of God, which He will have
observed and honoured through the whole earth. You will
judge then from this that I am anything but an anti-Sabba-
tarian. Yet it is an indisputable fact now that all is changed.
We do not keep the last but the first day of the week. And
what principle lies at the bottom of the change? That the
Lord is risen indeed, and not only so, but is gone to heaven, and
the first day of the week shines from the person of the risen
Lord Jesus in the heavens, now opened, on a heavenly people
who are as yet here, but going to be with the Lord Jesus there.
Hence it will always follow that, when men confound the
Sabbath and the Lord's day, they are earthly-minded. As the
Sabbath is bound up exclusively with the earth and an earthly
people, so is the Lord's day with those who are heavenly.

The next feast, indeed the first of the feasts proper as here
begun, is the passover. " In the fourteenth day of the first month
at even is Jehovah's passover." The foundation of all the ways
of God for a fallen people is laid not in grace, only but righteous-
ness ; it is the deatli, the efficacy of the blood, of the Lamb.
Theology would ho//e ordered otherwise, and made it tlie law or
Christ's obedience of it. But mark it well : the first feast is
not even a witness of the incarnation, nor of the Lord's path. on
earth ; but His blood staying divine judgment. God begins with
Christ's deatli : and no wonder ; He could not overlook our sins ;
and there they were for the first time righteously met, and one
may add, as far as the type goes, for the last time as well as first.
They were perfectly met for us by Him. It made no difference
to the revealing Spirit whether the facts were present or future,
so far as the communication of God's mind was concerned. All
was before His eyes, though in Christ and after redemption the
truth comes out with deeper and infinite fulness. But every
scripture is divinely inspired, and it was just as impossible that

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 17

God could lie before His atoning work was accomplished as
when it was ; and that is in part my reason for taking this
chapter to speak on. It is high time for every Christian to stand
for the word of God, and for every written word of His. The dif-
ficult times of the last days are come. Those that hesitate their
dislike, or openly declare it, against what they call verbal in-
spiration, are apt to lose all right sense of God's word. It might
be profitable, for such as shrink from the inspiration of the
word, to say what remains for themselves to depend on. If you
give up to the infidel the words of Scripture, he will not leave
you the thoughts of God. You may try to separate the truth
from the words of God ; but truth is communicated by words ;
and the apostle claims to speak " in words which the Holy
Ghost teacheth." The Bible is the only book which possesses such
a character ; and the Christian who is led by the Spirit in searching
the word of God wiU learn how worthy of all confidence is the
only and absolutely perfect communication of the mind of God.

On the paschal night God acted as Judge. This was neces-
sary and righteous. And let me remark here how dangerous
it is when people talk about His love, where they ought to
think and bow before His solemn judgment of sin.

I do not deny love for an instant ; but even the boundless love
of God cannot treat with sin, except by His own judgment of it.
K sin were to be judged in our persons, we must be lost for ever.
But then grace provided an offering, the only adequate one, in
Christ on the cross ; and, accordingly, all the holy unsparing force
of God's judgment fell on the head of the Lord Jesus there and
then. It is not merely that He died in love in order to meet our
need — this He did most surely, but far more and of deeper im-
port, for He met the judgment of God. He suffered what sin
deserved at the hand of God. And this is so essential to truth
that one could not call a true believer in the atonement the man
who only sees Christ dying in love to man, and so only takes in
the outward fact and human side of the cross.

C

i8 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

It is plain fact tliat those who that day only saw Christ
crucified were none the better, but rather worse. They were
hardened at the sight, and afterwards more careless than ever.
Those whom grace gave to believe what God wrought therein were
saved from wrath. It was shadowed in the blood of the slain lamb.

Thereon immediately (and there is nothing morally more
remarkable in these feasts) follows the feast of unleavened
bread. Indeed, as may be seen elsewhere, the two are so bound
up together that they are both sometimes called the Passover.
Not one day is allowed to separate them ; and this because God
will not allow that the remission of our sins brought in by the
blood of the Lamb shall be for ever so little separated from our
responsibility to holiness. The moment the Israelite was under
the shelter of the blood of the lamb, he was forbidden to eat
leavened bread, or have leaven in any shape within his house.

The Wave-Sheaf.

But now we come to another principle. It was not merely
that God was at the cross as the Judge of sin. What was shown
at Christ's resurrection ? We all know, as it is written, that God,
the very One who smote Jesus, raised Him from the dead. Sin
was condemned, not for every one, but for those who believed.
For those who do not believe there will only be the greater con-
demnation, for their sins are aggravated by the fact that, in the
face of God, they have despised and rejected the Son of God ;
and, more than that, the Son of God dying as a propitiation for
sins. Thus the divine judgment of sin on the cross makes the
case of the unbeliever incomparably graver ; for he is not only
a sinner, but refuses the grace of God that M'ould save him.

Here we come to a new section, and indeed a new utterance
of Jehovah to Moses, not precisely a new feast, but at any rate
introductory to a new feast and indeed the whole pivot on
which it turns. " Speak unto the children of Israel, and say
unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 19

you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a
sheaf of the first-fruits of your harvest unto the priest" (v. 10).
What is the bearing of this ? I am addressing those who, it may
be taken for granted, believe that every word of God has a mean-
ing, and a most important meaning. You do not require to be
reminded that God's word before Christ is just as truly inspired
as the New Testament.

The wave-sheaf then is introduced as quite separate from
the passover and accompanying feast of unleavened bread. But
in point of fact the wave-sheaf was waved on the first day of
the week that followed the passover. So the Lord was cruci-
fied on Friday, lay in the grave on the Sabbath or last day of
the week, and rose on the first day or Sunday as the Gentiles
called it. He was raised from the dead on the very day the
wave-sheaf was waved before Jehovah. Little did the priest
who waved it conceive the power and character of the truth set
forth in the first-fruits he was thus presenting before the God
of Israel. But the Eisen One and Eaiser of the dead had left
the grave and broken its power for the believer, whether they
knew it or not; and if the Jew refused to listen, the Gentiles
by grace would hear. Indeed there is no apter figure of resur-
rection in the Bible than that of the grain falling into the
ground and dying, and then springing up. It is the Lord's own
illustration in John xii. 24 : " Except a corn of wheat fall into
the ground and die, it abideth alone ; but if it die, it bringeth
forth much fruit." Of whom was it spoken ? Of His own
death and resurrection, with its mighty consequences. If He is
not raised, vain is apostolic preaching, and vain the Christian's
faith. But Christ is raised from among the dead, first-fruits of
those fallen asleep. So here it is said, " And he sliall wave the
sheaf before Jehovah, to be accepted for you " (v. 11). Xor is sal-
vation ever known Avitliout it though souls may be born again.
For it is the light of His resurrection which chases away all
gloom and dries every tear of anxious sorrow. It is the resurrec-

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

tiou of the Lord which brings out the acceptance of the believer
without question before God. In His death our evil was dealt
with atoningly, the sole righteous basis for the forgiveness of
sinful man ; but Christ's resurrection declares that the sins are
for ever gone for those who believe. " He was delivered for our
offences, and raised for our justification." " On the morrow after
the sabbath the priest shall wave it." The type is fully con-
firmed by the striking coincidence of the facts.

This then is what w^e have prefigured in the wave-sheaf:
Christ raised by God's power and the Father's glory ; by His power
entering the grave of the Lord Jesus, after all that He felt and
could do against sin was exhausted in the cross. Therein was
God glorified so, that it was His right to raise up Jesus from the
dead, never ceasing till He set Him at His own right hand in
heaven, and gave Him a name which is above every name. As
man He died ; as man He is raised up and exalted. As a divine
person, the Son has everything ; but He became a man, and hum-
bled Himself, yea, to death of the cross ; and now, in resur-
rection, He is taken up as man by the power of God, who raised
Him from the dead and gave Him glory, that our faith and hope
might be in God.

With the wave-sheaf there was to be no offering for sin. Tins
is a remarkable exception. If Israel or the Christian had been
meant, there must have been a sin or trespass offering. Here it is
Christ, and as fittingly there was no sin-offering. When it was a
question of bringing Israel out of Egypt, blood was put on every
door-post. The passover was thus a striking type of blood
shed and sprinkled to stay divine judgment, with holiness fol-
lowing. Here is a fresh thing in the wave-sheaf. For there
are two great principles : one displayed in the death of Christ ;
the other in His resurrection ; and they are so distinct that God
employs two different types to show them forth in our chapter.

It is certain that this typifies Christ's resurrection, and none
but His ; for we see there was no offering for sin connected with

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH, 21

it. He was the only man since the world began who could he
presented to God without blood. An offering for sin was needed,
even for the high priest, " as for the people, so also for himself f
but not so for Christ, who died for our sins. Ver. 12 : " And ye
shall offer that day when ye wave the sheaf an he-lamb, without
blemish, of the first year, for a burnt-offering unto Jehovah :
and the meat-offering thereof shall be two tenth-deals of fine
flour, mingled with oil ; an offering made by fire unto Jehovah
for a sweet savour." It is clearly then a question of Christ only,
For here we have the two great offerings of sweet savour : the
burnt-offering and the meat-offering, both speaking of accept-
ance personally in His perfection ; and of a double perfection —
perfection of life lived in the meat-offering, and perfection of
life given up, or death, in the burnt-offering. As usual, there
was of course the accompanying drink-offering, but not a trace
of anything inconsistent with the savour of rest that God found
in Christ ; for it is of Him, and of Him alone, that the Spirit
here speaks j)rophetically,

I would direct your attention for a little to the next verse,
and for this reason : — It helps to explain an expression in Luke
vi. 1, about which I dare say some here present have found dififi-
culty, as certainly most people elsewhere. " And it came to pass
on the second sabbath after the first that He went through the
corn-fields ; and His disciples plucked the ears of corn and did
eat, rubbing them in their hands." What is the force of " the
second sabbath after the first " ? For this I fear it is of little
use to send you to the commentators, for they are all at sea about
it as about most real difficulties for which you want their
help. Some have had recourse to a very harsh way of getting
out of the difficulty, and that is cutting out the word (for in
Greek it is only a single word) diursooT^uiTuj : a very dangerous
principle where the Bible is concerned. One celebrated critic
thus guilty repented, virtually confessing the fault by replacing
it. But it is no bad moral lesson for us to have to say, " I do

22 THE FEA STS OF JEHO VAH.

not know." This at least is true and lowly ; and if one looks up
for light, it is well, for then God can give what is lacking.

"Without saying more at this time about the critics, let us
look at verse 14, for it is important, and helps to clear up
a phrase otherwise dark. Now it is a vital claim of piety all
through Scripture that God must have His portion first, before
the believer can becomingly take and enjoy his. One feels how
right it is that God should be considered in the first place ; it is
due to Him, and true in everything ; and if we do not render it,
we must suffer the bitter consequence. So distinctly was this
impressed on the statutes and ways of Israel, that no godly
person there would have attempted to touch his corn before the
first sheaf had been waved before Jehovah. How blessedly this
applies to Christ, we all feel ! Once Christ is the waved first-
fruits, what may not follow ?

For remember that Christ is a man (not only the eternal Son
of God), but One who having become a man has accomplished
redemption. To His resurrection the wave-sheaf pointed in type,
and this for our acceptance. As man risen from the dead He
goes up to heaven. He was not taken up in a merely excep-
tional way, as an individual like Enoch or Elijah ; He was head
of the new family whose sins He liad borne, going up into the
glory of God, accepted for man, that is, for those who believe.
By man, when He was here below, we know how He was rejected
and crucified ; but God raised llim up from the dead, and gave
Him glory, that our faith and hope might be in God.

And now the disciples were going with their Master through
the corn-fields ; and, being hungry, on that Sabbath accordiug to
the gracious permission of Jehovah they plucked and ate the ears
of corn. Now it is said here that this particular Sabbath was " the
second after tlie first," or second-first. How striking that this
should be the first Sabbath on which it was allowable ! It was
of no use to show this to unbelieving Pharisees. For what did they
care for the truth ? Their only wish was through the disciples

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 23

to damage the Lord, being blind instruments in the hand of
Satan. But the Lord vindicates amply His guiltless followers.
On this I need not enter, but will just explain the force of the
term in question. The first Sabbath of the paschal feast was
emphatically said to be a high or great day (John xix. 31).
And no wonder when we take in what God foresaw. But so it
was also in Jewish estimate. Alas for man ! It was the very
day in which Christ lay in the grave, the only day, Sabbath as
it was, marked by that awful crime throughout its entire evening
and morning. It was only a part of the other two days, out of the
three, which was reckoned day and night. On thcd first Sabbath,
immediately before the wave-sheaf as it was, no Jew would have
partaken of the corn. The day after it was the first day of the
week, when the wave-sheaf was offered. The following Sabbath
was "ihe second-first "immediately after the wave-sheaf. The one
was the first, the next the second-first, because associated with it.
But why do I mention all this ? Just to show how precious
is Scripture to explain Scripture. Nothing else, as a general
rule, can : but we need the Holy Spirit to give us it aright. The
word " second-first " occurs nowhere but in this verse of Luke.
We see the value of the Old Testament to understand the New,
not only the New to understand the Old. Holy Scripture is
inspired and profitable ; yet it is a fact, as singular as it is sure, that
we only begin to appreciate intelHgently the Old when we are at
home in the New. They both go together for faith and blessing,
as they ought ; and the key to both is found in Christ the Saviour
alone, but Christ, King of Israel as well as Head of the Church and
of all nations too, for we must not limit or confound His glories.

The Wave-Loaves, or Feast of Weeks.

Next let us turn to the feast of verses lb et scqq.: " And ye shall
count iinto you from the morrow after the sabbath, from the day
that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering, seven sabbaths
shall be complete." There is the peculiar expression of fulness

24 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

here, such as we liear of nowhere else. This feast only is marked
out by seven sabbaths intervening. It is the fe,ast of weeks, but
among the Hellenists, or Gr^^ek-speaking Jews, the number fifty,
as is well known, has given the name to this feast, which is
therefore called " Pentecost." "What then was fulfilled when the
day of Pentecost was fully come ? The Father made good His
promise, that incomparable promise of which the Lord Himself
had said, " It is expedient for you that I go away." What could
outweigh the blessedness of His presence with His disciples on
earth ? The gift of the Comforter, not merely gifts but Himself
baptizing them, no longer in hope but accomplished in fact.

Therefore they were told on that day to offer a new meat-
offering. 1 daresay you are all familiar with the repugnance
that many, believers even, have to looking at the Church as a
new thing. They like to think of it as that which has always
been and which shall always go on till eternity. Yet it is re-
markable that not only does Paul give it the name of the "one
new man," but Moses here calls it a " new meat-offering? " There
was a meat-offering before, unambiguously shadowing Christ, as
here a man devoted to God's service. Here was something "new"
on the day of Pentecost. What did "the new meat-offering"
mean? I leave it to yourselves, to your own conscience and
intelligence : the answer is so certain that one need not say more
about it. At that day began here below a thing so new that it
was entirely without precedent.

Again, in verse 17, we hear of "two wave-loaves." ]\Iark
the association with Christ. He was the wave-sheaf, and He
alone : these were wave-loaves, and there were to be two. Do
you ask if it be not said that the Church was a mystery hid for
ages and generations ? How then can it be thus typified here ?
My answer is, God took care, though giving this type,7io^ to reveal
the mystery. He did show some important truths that meet in
the mystery, but never disclosed itself. For instance, if He had
meant to reveal it in this type, He would (as it appears to me, if

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 25

I may reverently so speak), have spoken of " one loaf." Certainly,
when the mystery was revealed, it was marked as "one new man,"
" one body," etc. ; and in the sign of the Lord's Supper we have,-
not two loaves, but one bread or one loaf as one body The time
then had not come to reveal the mystery, for Christ had not been
rejected nor redemption as yet wrought. Consequently the Spirit
of God has only given us here the witness of our association
with Him : what may be called a shadow, not the very image.
The symbol was plain in the one loaf when the Church began.

I am aware that some excellent men have supposed the two
loaves to be the Jew and the Gentile ; but it seems to me incorrect.
No doubt ecclesiastical history will tell you as much ; but I do
not believe men but God. Ecclesiastical history may assure
us that Peter and Paul founded two churches at Eome ; but we
know that the church at Eome was founded by neither apostle,
and indeed by no apostle. It is perfectly certain from Scripture
that the saints in Eome were gathered long before an apostle
went there ; and it is very hard to learn on what ground they
ever went there, except as prisoners of the Lord. Peter may
have been crucified there ; Paul may have gone to prison and to
death there ; but as to founding the Eoman Church, they never
did, and no claim is put in for any other apostle.

Further, in the Book of the Acts, so called, we have the
fullest evidence of the care then taken to avoid having two
churches anywhere. When Philip went down to Samaria, though
people were converted and baptized, there was no church formed
till the apostles Peter and John went down. Thus the link was
kept up with the church in Jerusalem in the most careful manner.
Of laying on of hands we hear not in Jerusalem, there being no
necessity for it that day : in Samaria there was, or there might
have been ground taken for an independent church, of which
there is no trace in Scripture. Geographically there may be ever
so many churches, but there is only one church of God, only one
communion recognised on earth. I know there are persons ex-

26 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

ceediugly sore as to that point : it is usual when people feel
their weakness. What they need to see is that it is no ques-
tion of opinion or will, but of submission to God and His word.

I say then, the two wave-loaves do not mean two churches, a
Jewish and a Gentile : the very worst notion possible, one may
add, as it would have kept up the old distinction ; while the very
essence of the Gospel, as well as of the one body, is to break all
this down for ever, as well as to save, in Christ.

"When God gives a witness, His regular way is by at least
" two." So we read " that in the mouth of two or three wit-
nesses every word may be established." When there was to be
a full witness, and not a barely valid or sufficient testimony,
there were three. So the Lord was three days in the grave ;
there was the fullest witness to His death. Two witnesses
were necessary. And so it will be by and by, when things
come to a serious pass for the Lord in Jerusalem. Ther6 will be
" His two witnesses : " not that I understand this to be said nu-
merically, but according to the figure of adequacy. Here Christ
was risen — the wave-sheaf. AVhat witness was given next of
the power of His resurrection ? Ourselves, as the two wave-
loaves. Tlie Christian company are witnesses, not to the law of
God like Israel, but to His grace in Christ risen from the dead.
Such is the contrast that Paul brings out in 2 Cor. iii., where
he speaks of our having Christ written on us. He takes par-
ticular pains to show that it is not on tables of stone. He
leaves this to the Jew, who, without doubt, was called to be a
witness to the law of God, as the Christian is to a dead and
risen Christ in the power of the Spirit.

The wave-loaves, we see, were to be of fine flour baken with
leaven. Here are two constituents in the types, so opposed to
each other that one who knew their use elsewhere might wonder
what to think of them here. Fine flour ! — why, that is like
Christ, pure, without sin ; and leaven! — that is like ourselves, na-
turally corrupt and corrupting ; and is not this just what Scrip-

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 27

ture teaches ? Yet there is where so many find a difficulty about
the two natures ; but really I am unable to find an excuse for their
want of light as to both Scripture and themselves. I do not think
that Christians ever so young in truth should find it hard to
believe that they have two natures within them, one craving after
what is evil and old habits of self, the other delighting in the
will of God and loving what is of Christ. We do not need to
go to Epistles, like those to the Eomans, Corinthians, or Gala-
tians : here we have the type wrought out that the wayfarer
may not err. I know that a short time ago some zealous folk
came over from America to preach up that the Christian might
be a perfect being without any sin. Moses refutes it all. Here
we have two seemingly contradictory things mingled in what
typifies Christians — fine flour and leaven. Experience tallies
with it. Not that there is the least excuse for sin ; but sin is
there, set out by leaven, not at work but baked in the bread.

Thus we see how truth all hangs together, and from first to
last God only speaks perfect truth ; and man, without Him, can
only find out and utter what is not true in spiritual things.
Our part in the things of God is not to theorise, but to believe.
But the Spirit is as necessaiy to the understanding of the
word, as the word is the necessary material for the Spirit to
use. Yet I am sure that one safely finds the truth not as
a student, but as a believer. God is dealing with the heart and
conscience. You cannot separate real growth in the truth from
the moral state of the soul : if we essay it, we may appear to get
on very fast in learning the Bible, but it is to be feared that the
next step will be a fall.

Again, in verse 18, we read, " And ye shall offer with the
bread seven lambs, without blemish, of the first year ; and one
young bullock, and two rams : they shall be for a burnt-offering
unto Jehovah." The Christian should have the sense of com-
plete acceptance before our God and Father ; and even this is
not all In verse 19, " Then ye shall sacrifice one kid of the

28 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

goats for a sin-offering, and two lambs of the first year for a
sacrifice of peace-offerings." In the case of the wave-sheaf, as
we saw, there was enjoined a burnt-offering and a meat-offering.
It is just the same here : the church by grace has the same
acceptance as Christ had in Himself. The object of redemption
was that we might be even now as completely free from charge
of sin before God as the blessed Saviour ; but He in His own
perfection, we in virtue of His work for us. Nothing can be
plainer than the type, unless it be the divine explanation in the
New Testament. Consequently we have the same figures and
similar language used ; but now we come to a different thing, for
there is a most striking difference. With the wave-loaf there
was to be a peace-offering and also a sin-offering ; there was
none in the case of Christ. In Him was no sin. It is not
merely that Christ never sinned, but in Him was no sin ; and I
particularly press this. He never had a sinful nature, else He
must have required a sin-offering for Himself. But it was
absolutely needful that an offering for sin should be essentially
sinless. And again, when it was a question of Him or of His
person, peace-offerings have no place. The peace-offering was when
communion was restored, or in communion ; but it followed the
sin-offering of course. The application is to us and not to Christ.
On another word of the Spirit I must be brief. It is verse
22 : " And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not
make clean riddance of the corners of thy field." What is the
meaning of this ? Does it not seem rather singular that, after
the two wave-loaves have disappeared from the scene, good corn
should be found still in " thy field ? " The wave-loaves, we all
agree, mean the Christian body. Some may go farther back
than others, Init none deny that they are Christians at any rate.
How comes it, when these are gone, that we hear of grain left in
the corners of the field ? Can the wave-loaves typify all saints ?
Do you not see that such an instance as this proves that there
will be true believers on the earth after the church has dis-

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 29

appeared ? There will be here below good corn. Of course they
are not members of the one body ; but God has other purposes, and
purposes both for the Jew and Gentile ; as here some corn was to
be left for the poor and the stranger. The Apocalyptic saints
may illustrate this — saints during the last week of Daniel's
Seventy, after we see the elders in heaven.

To-morrow, if the Lord will, I hope to enter on the revelation
of what is entirely future. We have had the past, and the
present too, before us. This last verse touches on the cut-off
week in the future, but it does not develope the great and dis-
tinct plans which God has unrolled that we may learn in the
closing feasts.

LECTUEE III.

The Feasts of the Future.

Leviticus xxiii. 23-end.
The last portion of the chapter which occupied us was (save
verse 22) the feast of weeks, a distinct type of God's dealings
with the Christian calling. It is hardly possible that any man
possessing the slightest claim to the name of believer should
question the fact. That is, the feast tallied to the very day with
God's sending down the Holy Spirit, and beginning to gather
together His children. Ko doubt they all were Jews at first,
but along with it went this remarkable peculiarity : they were
Jews that spoke every language under heaven ; Jews that spoke
not only the language of Canaan, but the tongues of the Gentile
world. Surely this was a most significant fact ! But more than
that : not only were such brought in, but Jews of Palestine, yea
of Galilee, were employed by the power of the Holy Ghost to
address them in all sorts of languages never before learnt. The
miracle showed the widely-flowing grace of God that was coming
and to come out. It was not as yet that all creation, groaning
in bondage, was to be delivered, but the whole of it under
heaven was to hear the gospel Hence the power of the Holy

30 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

Ghost enabled the unlettered fishermen of Galilee thus to address
their fellow-men in the language of every land into which the
judgment of God had scattered them. Besides a gathering
power to Christ as a centre, grace was meeting men in the
variety of tongues to which the judgment of God had doomed
them at Babel. For it needs no reasoning to prove that God's
work at Pentecost was not merely to save sinners. Those who
say so have a most superficial idea of the great work done that
day. Undoubtedly salvation was going on, and it was a new
fact. Salvation before this was only held out in promise. ISTow
the promise was accomplished. Clearly then those who sup-
pose salvation to be no more than promised do not understand
the immense step God has taken in His ways. It is really
because of the low estimate they have, not perhaps of Christ,
but of His work. The root of the mischief lies there ; it may seem
a distant point, but, when approached, it will always be found to be
an inadequate view of redemption. There is not the reception
of God's testimony within. Of course I am speaking here of
soul-salvation, as we hear in 1 Pet. i. : " Eeceiving the end of
your faith, even the salvation of your souls." The salvation of
the body is not come yet ; the salvation of the soul is as com-
plete as it ever can be. This is Christianity, in fact ; which
comes in after the work of Christ was done, to save the soul
before He again comes to save the body. It is exactly within
tliat interval that we find ourselves now.

But there is another thing besides salvation, and that is the
kingdom of God in mystery, for it is not yet manifested. The
Lord Jesus is exalted, but not in a public manner. He is not
yet on His own throne, but on His Father's. Tluis, M-hilc there
is now a kingdom of God, it is of course in a mysterious way
with its own distinctive principles accordingly. None who bear
His name can escape the responsibility of such a place of privi-
lege ; while those who are in the secret by the S[)irit suffer with
Him now, as they walk in grace and will be glorified together.

TH-E FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 31

Besides salvation and the kingdom, there is a still more
wondrous work going on at the same time — the calling of the.
church. Let me warn you against confounding these things.
This confusion has been one of the early causes of the ruin of
Christendom, and essentially characterises popery, which could
not subsist without it. Papists abuse the idea of the kingdom to
get earthly power. But it is gross ignorance of the word of God.
The Lord Jesus always draws a marked distinction between the
church and the kingdom, as in Matt. xvi. xviii.

These three things then go on now : first, the salvation of the
soul ; secondly, the kingdom of God, or of heaven, as the case
may be, which differ somewhat but are substantially the same
great fact ; and thirdly also, the church, the body of Christ.
This last was in a general way intimated in the portion of the
chapter we had before us under the figure of the two wave-loaves.

We saw, further, that in the corner of the field corn was to
be left. I do not mean by this that members of Christ will
be left behind by the Lord when He comes for His own, but
that God's Spirit will work and that believers wnll be called
after the church is gone. They will be found in that little
interval that follows in the last or seventieth week of Daniel.

If any one wishes to trace the history of this transitional
space, the details of it will be found in the central parts of the
Revelation and the latter half of Daniel. There may be read
the full answer to the question of the corn which is to be left
in the corners of the field.

The Feast of Trumpets.

Having given this brief summary of what was before us in
the central portion of the chapter, we find ourselves in presence
of an entirely new scene from verse 24 : " Speak unto the children
of Israel, saying. In the seventh month in the first day of the
month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of
trumpets." So far from the gospel being a continuous work to

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

the end of the world, as many suppose, we see here that the
Lord will begin a fresh testimony with a suited instrumentality
for this new work when the church is gone. Observe that it is
said here " in the seventh month : " this was the last month in
which Jehovah instituted a feast. He brings to a completion
the circle of His ways on the earth and for Israel.

In the very beginning then of this closing period of God's
dealings, we have what ? "A memorial of blowing of trumpets."
God then is inaugurating a fresh testimony. The trumpet is
always a figure of God's intervention to bring in some signal
change. It may be for judgment, as we find in some cases ; or
it may be a distinct testimony in grace, as we know in other
cases. It is clearly a loud summons from God to people on the
earth. And here we find it is not merely a blowing of trumpets,
but " a memorial " of blowing of trumpets. It is a recall of what
had long passed out of memory. It is God calling to mind what
had once been before Him, but long dead and gone. "What can
this be ? It is the recall of His ancient people on the earth. The
Jew is again brought into remembrance before God. No wonder
that there should be such " a memorial of blowing of trumpets ! "
Hundreds, one might say thousands, of years had passed since
they had stood before Him as His people. The return from
Babylon was only a partial work : as a whole, Israel never
returned but were dispersed all over the world. Where was
the bulk of them ? They were lost among the Gentiles ; and so
to this day they have remained in a peculiar condition, unlike any
other since the world began. They are in all countries without
possessing their own, and yet a people ; they are without a king,
and yet a people ; without a prince, and yet a people ; without
the true God, without a false god, and yet a people ; a stand-
ing rebuke to the infidel, yet largely, deeply infidel themselves !

But that very people are yet to return to their land, and seek
Jehovah their Lord and David their king ; and shall fear
Jehovah and His goodness in the latter days. But what does God

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH 33

do in the first place ? He awakens them. The day of shadows
is gone for ever. The cross of Christ has closed unrealities. By
the power of His resurrection the Christian is introduced into the
new creation. The old is gone, the new come ; and before God
we have our place in Christ. "When this work is finished,
grace will begin to act in Israel, and they will be awakened.

Nothing more distinctly proves that God will have done with
the Christian ; for the gospel goes out to the Gentiles (though to the
Jew first), and in the church, as in Christ, there is neither Jew
nor Greek. The Feast of Trumpets is God's taking up Israel
afresh to awaken them. Undeniably then this feast is after and
quite distinct from Passover and Pentecost in which we have
our interest ; and the first thing disclosed in it is God's loud
summons to a people who once had a place before Him and
again Come into remembrance for mercy, not judgment. It is
evident that this could not consistently apj)ly to the gospel
that has been going out since Christ's death and resuixection.
We have had our sacrifice and call to practical holiness and the
gift of the Spirit long ago. But when God has done with our
blessing, the chapter reveals that in the seventh month dead
Israel is to be raised from the gi'ave by God's trumpet, as
Ezekicl predicted long after (chap, xxxvii). As this is clearly a
new work, let us trace what light other Scriptures throw upon it.

Let me take you to the Psalms. There you will find how truly
they and the prophets agree witli this figure in the law. See
Psalm Ixxxi. There is a plain enough testimony as to its force :
" Sing aloud unto God our strength ; make a joyful noise unto
the God of Jacob. Take a psalm and bring hither the timbrel,
the pleasant harp with the psaltery. Blow up the trumpet in
the new moon, in the time appointed, on our solemn feast day."
If men were not prejudiced, none would deny the application to
Israel. The moon, that luminary which wanes and loses her
brightness, once more renews her light. How strikingly is this
to be verified iu the Jew ! You could not say it of the church

D

34 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

or Christendom. The apostasy of the Gentile is fatal. Take
Babylon ; and what does Scripture teach as to this ? Babylon
never recovers the old light ; Babylon is the corrupt woman
that assumes the credit of being the bride whilst false to Christ,
a mere harlot with the kings of the earth ; and her end will be
judgment and destruction : no renovation for her ; no new moon
shining out in fresh strength and brightness. Babylon will
never rise again. Destruction is determined, and determined
from the Lord God, but by the hand of the revived Eoman
empire and its satellite kings, avenging those she had corrupted
too long. It is quite different with Israel, which never had the
privileges of the church. The Jew was under the law : what
did he know of being under grace as we are ? By and by
Israel will be put under the new covenant, but this cannot take
place till the trumpets have blown once more, and the new
moon is shining, as we hear in the Psalm, the new moon at
the time appointed. The language is suited for Israel, and not
for the church. They sing and make a joyful noise to the God of
Jacob. Why confound this with the God and Father of our
Lord Jesus Christ ? Why deny their hope of mercy?

It is a mischievous perversion to apply everything of the sort
(the blessing at least, not the curse) to the church. Are we not
blessed in heavenly places ? We are entitled to take delight in
these promises, but then it is not truly to enjoy them if we
appropriate them to ourselves. Let us rejoice to know them as
yet in store for other people, even Israel, in the latter days.

If I know any converted, am I to be jealous of their blessing ?
Am I not to rejoice that the grace of God that visited me is thus
going out to many others ? that it will embrace a larger circle by
and by ? So here, when we see in the Scriptures that poor guilty
Israel is to emerge from the grave, from their long lasting
and dense darkness of unbelief, why wish it to be for the church?
Indeed it is to lower our character of blessing from heaven
to earth. Let us rather rejoice that at length God will

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 35

awaken His people and accomplish all His purpose in them
here below.

And here let me briefly call your attention to a passage
on this subject very poorly rendered in our translation. It is
Luke ii. 32, " A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of
Thy people Israel." It should be really " A light for revelation
of [the] Gentiles." I understand this to mean that Christ is a
light for bringing Gentiles into divine view, and that it is ac-
complishing now, besides His being the glory of Israel by and by.
The Gentiles, instead of being in darkness as they once were in the
ways of God, have, as privilege and responsibility, the true tes-
timony of God. Not before the millennium wiU He be the glory
of Israel. The Gentiles were once in the dark as the Jew is
now ; ere long the Lord will come for the glory of His people
Israel. ^ Luke's is the only Gospel wliere we have the coming of
Christ thus viewed as present light for revealing the Gentiles
and as future glory for Israel. I conceive this to be the true
interpretation of the passage, and, when saying so, I do not mean
in a half sort of way. It is important we should seize the in-
tended real bearing of the word of God. We must not be too
hasty in assuming it ; but when w^e know that we have got it,
let us hold it fast and use it for the Lord.

The eighty-first Psalm then speaks of the blowing of trum-
pets distinctly in connection with Israel. No one doubts there
is the iigure of a trumpet for ourselves — in general as in 1 Cor.
xiv., or precisely as in 1 Cor. xv. ; but tlien it is never in our
case a memorial of blowing of tnimpets. Thus the " last trump "
is a blessed and solemn word as to us. Wliat is its connection ?
It was a figure taken from the military usages of the Eomans,
then familiar to everybody. "VVe must remember that the
liomans were at that time masters of the world, and that people
knew too well what their legions were. Few and distant were
the places where men did not feel the grinding iron bondage of
that imperial power. I think it is Josephus who gives an ac-
count of their encampment, and lets us know the various and

36 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

successive signals given for the different movements of the
army. But finally there was the "last trump ;" and, the mo-
ment this sounded, they all moved off. This may serve to
explain the Spirit's application of the phrase to the final sum-
mons of His people for meeting the Lord in the air.

It may be well to look at another Scripture, Isa. xxvii. 12 :
" And it shall come to pass on that day, that Jehovah shall beat
off from the channel of the river into the stream of Egypt, and
ye shall be gathered one by one, 0 ye children of Israel." This
is the gathering not of believers to heaven, but of the children
of Israel to their land. "And it shall come to pass in that day,
that the great trumpet shall be blown ; and they shall come
which were ready to perish in the land of Assyria and the out-
casts in the land of Egypt, and shall worship Jehovah in the
holy mount at Jerusalem." Is not the application evident and
sure ? " Eeady to perish " would not apply to the gathering of
the church to heaven. We will be glorified in that day — a very
different thing from their being ready to perish. It is clear that,
just before God interferes, the people are to be in the last ex-
tremity of trial, being set upon by all their enemies.

As long as Israel is unnoticed or chastised by God, the Gen-
tiles can be peaceable ; but directly there is any movement for
good going on, and God is working to make Israel the head and
not the tail, the old enmity will soon follow. In that day, then,
they shall be gathered by God to Jerusalem. It is not Jerusalem
above, where our portion is by grace ; but Jerusalem on earth,
where Jehovah in due time shall reign according to His good-
ness and promises many. This awakening of Israel then is
clearly what answers to the feast of Trumpets.

It is written in Matt. xxiv. 29, " Immediately after the tri-
bulation of these days" — this may illustrate their being ready to
perish — " shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not
give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the
powers of the heavens shall be shaken ; and then shall appear

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. yj

the sign of the Son of man in heaven. And then shall all the
tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man
coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.
And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet,
and they shall gather together His elect from the four Avinds,
from one end of the earth to the other." The context proves
that His elect here are of Israel, not elect Christians. This
remark may not satisfy some, who, whenever they see any good
tiling held out in Scripture, instantly assume that it must be for
the church. But we can afford to rejoice in the future gather-
ing of Israel. Have our brethren learnt the "parable of the
fig tree" ? What means the fig tree ? Not more surely is the
rose tlie emblem of one part of our land and the thistle of an-
other I could name, than the fig tree was similarly used of Israel.
" When its branch is yet tender and putteth forth leaves, ye know
that summer is nigh." They have had their long winter, and now
the Sun of righteousness is rising with healing on His wings.
This may suffice to confirm the meaning of the Feast of Trumpets.

The Day of Atonement.

Next we come to a still more solemn feast, the great Day of
Atonement, from verse 27 : " Also on the tenth day of this
seventh month there shall be a day of atonement." And it is
well that we should observe liow events are crowding on during
this eventful month. God is finisliing His work on the earth.
He is going to put out the evil that had so long ravaged among
men, and to bring His ancient people into fulness of blessing.

On this day Israel are to be brought under the atonement of
Christ. For first let me remind you how impossible it is to
think that this day can be for us in the chronological scheme of
the feasts. We have seen Christ as our sacrifice in the Pass-
over long ago, and do not want it a second time here : to repeat
the work for us would be to impeach its everlasting value. It
is really the work of Christ applied to Israel. They had the

38 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

testimony to the Lamb ; but they refused it. We meanwhile
by grace have been brought into the blessing. Are they to be left
out ? Assuredly for a time only. The day of Atonement in the
seventh month, so long following the Passover, indicates, not
that the work is to be done over again, but that there is to be a
second application of that work, and of course to a different
people. Do you ask me for Scripture proof of this ? My
answer is John xi. 51, 52:" And this spake he not of himseK;
but, being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should
die for that nation ; and not for that nation only, but that also
He should gather together in one the children of God that were
scattered abroad." In this passage then we have most clearly
put this double aspect of the work of Christ ; but " that nation,"
the Jews, refused it, for it was to the Jew first that the offer was
made. Next, you notice, it is not only for that but to gather in
one the children of God. They are both saved and also gathered
into one. It is the church baptized by the Holy Spirit. But
then there remains for Israel their blessing by and by. It is sus-
pended for the present ; but the precious blood, the death, of the
Lord Jesus in all its efficacy cannot fail for them also — for the
very people who of old refused it. How patient the grace of God !
On the tenth of the seventh month, in God's time, the day
will surely come ; and you may find the most sensible difference
in the language employed here and that which is used of us :
" And ye shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by
fire unto Jehovah." You do not find such words as these under
the paschal lamb ; and no wonder. For God will make them
feel their sins, as He could not be unobservant of their long
unbelief ; and when their day of blessing comes, do you think
they wiU be insensible ? Is it conceivable that Israel will regard
themselves as other sinners ? Certainly not. They will say. We
are the guiltiest people on earth. The Messiali, the Christ of
God, was sent to us, and we refused Him. He was not yours
yet you bowed to Him. It is the Messiah rejected by Israel

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 39

who is become the suffering yet exalted Son of man, and the
Gentiles do hear Him.

Joseph rejected by his brethren was in another land exalted
to the throne ; and there too he had a bride unknown to his
brethren, while next to the one who set him in the highest place.
And when the true Joseph presents himself to the sons of Israel,
will they not afflict their souls as Joseph's brethren did when
the house of Pharaoh heard? There never was so genuine a mourn-
ing as this for the seed of Jacob. And so yet more, yea incom-
parably, will it be in the day that is hastening. And it could not
be otherwise, if God wrought real repentance as He will in
Israel. The day of atonement bears the distinct mark of what
will only, or at least most fuUy, apply to His people in that
future day, when God's plans for the earth are being completed.

But this is not all. In verse 28 we read, "And ye shall do no
work in that same day ; for it is a day of atonement to make an
atonement for you before Jehovah your God." Could this be
said so fittingly and emphatically to any other people ? Were
they not the people of all others who boasted of their works, and so,
going about to establish their own righteousness, "stumbled at the
stumbling-stone" ? Acceptable works are found only in believers.
We know that those who have the Spirit of God working in them
really show forth the fruits of the Spirit and do not boast.
Where all is felt to be of grace, how could they boast ? Others
who slight faith and consequently talk of the law do in fact
nothing. The righteousness of the law is fulfilled in those who
are under grace, not law. The Jew boasted but stumbled over
the lowly ISTazarene, the crucified Saviour ; but it will not be so
in that day, when the reality of faith will not only work repentance
but exclude pretension to work. Not that works will not follow,
but the day of atonement will shut out everything, if I may so
say, but Christ, their propitiation and siibstitute ; so that their
self-loathing will be as complete as their abandonment of their
own works. The very fact of their now believing what God

40 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

had done for tliem in Christ makes them ashamed of the least
reference to any works of their own.

There are the two effects : on the one hand, affliction of soul
in the confession of their sins ; and, on the other hand, no
mingling any work of their own with that which Christ suffered
for them before God. In verse 29 you see the same sentiment
repeated : " For whatsoever soul it be that shall not be
afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his
people. And whatsoever soul it be that doeth any work in that
same day, the same soul will I destroy from among his people."
Again, in verse 32 : " It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest, and
ye shall afflict your souls." The two things, no work and afflic-
tion of soul, mark this day of atonement. How blessed when
Israel know and feel this ! And here again I may appeal to
other parts of Scripture. Let me refer you now to one of the pro-
phets in connection with this day of atonement, Zech. xii. 9-14 :
"And it shall come to pass in that day, that I wiU seek to
destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem." You see
the nations are now jealous and hostile to Israel. " And I will
pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of
Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications." Is not
this the day of atonement ? " And they shall look upon Me
■whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for Him." It is
a day of afflicting their souls : " As one mourneth for his only
son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitter-
ness for his first born." " In that day there shall be a great
mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in
the valley of Megiddon. And the land shall mourn, every
family apart, and their wives apart." Conscience leads one to
be alone with God, that confession may be true and deep. Such
is the effect of real Spirit- wrought sorrow ; for the conscience,
when it is thus really reached by the Spirit of God, always
isolates itself — it makes the soul desire to go alone to God.
To whom alas ! could I tell out honestly all I am ? What good

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 41

would it do to any one else ? It might do harm. It is to God
then we must go, and to God we must confess. And it is good
for the soul ; for God wants sterling honesty ; He wants guile to
be taken away ; and this is accomplished by His own grace. It
is the day of atonement, when Israel hide not like Adam, but
their sins are poured out into the bosom of God.

" Every family apart." So close, so real, is the work that it
is said, even " their wives apart :" the nearest and closest rela-
tionships are apart, that there may be now, for the first time,
" truth in the inward parts." And what are the families named ?
" The family of the house of David apart, and their wives apart ;
the family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart."
AVhy David and why Nathan ? Once there was a time when the
king trembled as he stood thoroughly convicted, and the faithful
prophet was strengthened of God to convict him : " Thou art the
man." Now what a change ! It is no humbled king nor convict-
ing prophet. All are convicted, and so profoundly filled with the
sense each of his own sins, that they feel thoroughly the need to
be alone with God. It is not only real but deep work ; it is not
the mere effect of feeling or sympathy fed by a weeping crowd.
They go alone, each before God, that all may be out and clear.
And surely this should be a word of warning as to the danger in
these days of multitudinous meetings, revivals, etc. I do not say
it to weaken any one's confidence, but that all may see how mo-
mentous it is for souls to get alone with God as to their sins.

Nor is this the only picture ; we have two others to com-
plete the scene. " The family of the house of Levi apart, and
their wives apart ; the family of Shimei apart, and their wives
apart." The margin gives " Symeon " as the alternative, and so
does the oldest version, the Septuagint. Of course there is a
difference of opinion as to this as in all things ; but it is a com-
mon thing in Scripture to find two names for the same person,
as, for instance, Paul and Saul, Silas and Silvanus, Jude and
Thaddeus. But if we accept the view of the Greek translators,

42 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

they were two sons of Jacob of painful notoriety in their earliest
history. It was revenge then brought them together. No doubt
the Gentile was guilty of gross wrong, and dishonoured their
sister ; but their wrath was cruel, and their revenge as deceitful
as outrageous, and Jacob was ashamed of his unworthy sons, who
had been united in deadly purpose under the guise of religion.
But now they have found the Saviour, or rather the Saviour has
found them, and they are confessing each his own sins. Thou-
sands of years had passed over ; but here are the descendants
of these two fathers in Israel bowing down before the Lord who
died for them. This is the true meaning of tlie Day of Atone-
ment as applicable here to Israel ; and let us rejoice that God
will extend thus His grace, through that blessed Saviour, even to
guilty Israel, kept for tliis and other great ends of God.

The Feast of Tabernacles.

Then begins the last feast in verse 34 : " Speak unto the
children of Israel, saying. The fifteenth day of this seventh
month shall be the feast of tabernacles for seven days unto
Jehovah." For seven days ! It is to be remarked that we have
had nothing about seven days since the feast of Unleavened
Bread, and this, as I showed, signified our walking in sincerity and
truth, in Christian holiness, the true import of that feast, because
Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us. It is the whole course
of those who are under the pilgrimage of grace. Now here are
seven other days for a different purpose ; and what are they ?
Seven days of glory on the earth. This may startle some ; for
there are very many Christians who, when they think of glory,
always connect it with heaven. So they speak of souls having
gone to glory at death. Now I am very far from denying that
the Christian is destined to heavenly glory. We do belong dis-
tinctly to Christ on high. We depart at death to be with Him.

But I am far from thinking, with a valued countryman of
yours, that the glorified Church is to live and reign on the earth.

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 43

It is not in a likeness of heaven we are to dwell for ever ; we
are going to heaven itself. The Father's house does not mean
the earth, however sublimated or etherealised, but heaven, and
the brightest part of heaven. It is not some distant corner or
outskirt of glory ; it is where the Son abides, where the Father's
love satisfied itself in receiving the Son. There shall we be with
Him, in the Father's house of many mansions. " And if I go
and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you
unto myself ; that where I am there ye may be also." It is
where He is. The portion of the Christian is Christ in the Father's
house ; so we shall be ever with the Lord. He would not tell
us so if it would raise our hopes too high. He did so tell us that
He might inspire us with the same expectation that filled His
own breast. The bride is to be with the Bridegroom. I reject
the notion therefore, as unfounded, that the scene of our glory is
to be on the earth ; and, no matter what the piety of men who have
such low views, I reject them as doubly injurious. They deny
the Church's glory to be distinctively heavenly, and they do not
leave room for Israel's future glory according to promise on the
earth. It is really therefore a mistake of grave consequence,
which affects our interpretation of all the Bible, and confuses the
entire scheme of God's ways. Hear what the New Testament
teaches : " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly
places in Christ." We are blessed there in title already in Christ
as we shall be there in fact with Him after His coming for us.

But in the portion before us we have another thing brought
out. Here it cannot mean our going to heaven, for we do not
speak of " days " there. It is one eternal day in that sphere of
unchanging light and blessedness ; and by a figure it may be
called very well the " day of eternity." Indeed this is the way
the apostle Peter does speak in the last verse of his Second
Epistle : " To Him be glory, both now and to the day of eternity."
But glory will assuredly come to the earth. Thus : " Arise,

44 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

shine ; for thy light is come," etc. WTiere is that ? In heaven ?
No ; Zion is here on the earth ; really it was that mountain on
which the king's palace was built, and now significant of grace
yet to buUd up the broken house of Israel, when God will give
them the true David !

Let me draw your attention here to two schools of theology,
as the truth in question is of practical moment as well as
doctrinal. It may be instructive to see how both fail and come
short of what the Holy Spirit reveals for the glory of God. As
to this then we find these two schools in opposition. One says
that the scene of future glory is to be the earth, where Christ
died and God has wrought so graciously, and as to which He has
promised such glorious things. Fully do I admit this ; but their
inference as to our being glorified there is unsound. The other
school holds that heaven will be the only scene of glory, and
this so exclusively as almost, if not quite, to forget the body and
its future resurrection from the grave. They are in danger of
thinking only of the soul, and of heaven as a place of pure spirit,
which, I submit, is a poor substitute for the Christian's hope, and
not at all what the word of God teaches. It is quite true and
blessed that even now the separated spirit goes to be with Christ ;
and no believer should seek to weaken this truth. A recently-
converted robber was to be that day with Him in paradise. It is
lamentable to know how little this is believed by modern theo-
logians ; and I doubt not that their feebleness here is due to
their scanty knowledge of Christ and redemption. But this
intermediate blessedness is not resurrection ; though departed
saints, when risen, shall be, as now, in the " paradise of God."
As the paradise of Adam was the brightest spot on cartli, so the
" paradise of God " is the brightest spot in heaven. Sinful man
was cast out of the one ; believing man is received into the
other. Christ was the first fruits, as was due to Him, the Son
and Saviour ; afterwards those that are Christ's at His coming.

But there is another thing, the kingdom of God, which has

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 45

" earthly things," and for these needs new birth (John iii.), as well
as for " heavenly things." So it will neither be heaven alone, nor.
the earth alone, but both. (Compare Eph. i. 10 and Col. i. 20.) In
Scripture faith finds no real difficulty, and is far larger than
theology, which is invariably short of the truth of God. Theo-
logy is an attempt on the part of man to reduce the word of God
to a science, and a science for man, converted or not, to learn.
No wonder that this is always a total failure, as it deserves to
be. You cannot squeeze what has life into this iron vice of theirs
without destroying its strength and tissues and beauty. Both
heaven and earth are to be under Christ, the distinct but united
spheres of His reign to God's glory. In the fulness of the times
God is going to gather all things under Christ ; not all persons,
for this will never be. Alas ! those who despise the Lord Jesus
will, at the end, be cast into the lake of fire. But all things,
the groaning creation, guilty of no sin but suffering from the sin
of man, will be delivered through the victory of the Second Man.
For this we and it are waiting.

It is not true, therefore, that the earth is the only scene of
glory, but also heaven. I might prove this from other Scriptures
besides Ephesians and Colossians. But I would remind you
that it is no good sign to require many passages. One, if plain,
is conclusive. Who would admire the state of soul that, when
one Scripture is given, asks for another ? Even if you had only
to do with a man's word, do you wish him to repeat the same thing
half-a-dozen times over? In fact, if he were to do so, it ought
rather to arouse suspicions. But, if such is the case with
man, is it not most dishonouring to God to look for ever so many
assurances from Him ? I grant that in certain cases He may
present the same thing in various forms, but this is only pure
grace in consideration of the weakness of man.

But I direct you to Ps. Ixxiii. 24, and I do so in order to
clear out a singular mistake of our translators. There we read
these words, a favourite text with many : " Thou shalt guide me

46 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

with Thy counsel, and afterward receive me to glory :" very
good Christian doctrine ; but is it the object of the Psalm to
teach anything of the sort? Let us be subject to Scripture.
You see the word "/o " is inserted. And what is the reason for it ?
" To " would require authority, for it cannot be inserted or left
out in this sort of way. The truth is that our translators could
not understand the meaning of the words as they stand, especi-
ally as it was taken for granted that the Psalm was speaking of
what we Christians want for our comfort ; and so they thought
it must mean, " Thou shalt guide me with Thy counsel, and
afterward receive me [to] glory." They never thought of the
peculiar hopes of Israel, and so they could not find out the
meaning. It is confusion if you apply these to the Christian.
But then they did not know anything worth mentioning of God's
ways for the future, when Christ shall reign over the earth.

Now, let me tell you, people are learning to translate
accurately, whether they understand the meaning or not. This
may not be pleasant, stiU it is more honest ; and thus grace may
the sooner use some one else to help them to the meaning. But,
further, I may say that one of our American kinsmen has lately
brought out a new translation of the Psalms. The late Dr. J. A.
Alexander, of Princeton, was a man not to be despised. His
book on the Psalms, as a version, is respectable, though some
of us would think its exegesis rather dark. He did not under-
staiid what he was writing about ; yet he was a scholar, and
trai^islates uprightly his text. But let me add, that being a
scholar will never enable one to understand the Scripture. The
one and only means of understanding it is by the Holy Ghost,
who gives us God's mind in it. If it is the churcli in the New
Testament, I must see it in its relation to the Head ; if it is
Israel in the law or the Psalms, I must see them as they
stand related to their Messiah.

Now the late Dr. Alexander never saw the true distinction
between Israel and the Church, but being honest and competent,

THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH. 47

though he did not know -what the passage meant, he translated
it as it really stands, " In or by Thy counsel Thou wilt guide me,
and after glory Thou wilt take me." Now what is the meaning
of this ? The last clause is obscure, he says.

The Christian, no doubt, is received now, and will go up at
the coming of Christ to heavenly glory; but His dealings with
Israel are quite different. He will come in glory to the destruc-
tion of their enemies, and bring them in deep penitence to
Himself ; and then they will be received as His people before
the universe. This will only be " after glory." The glory will
have shone first. Take Saul of Tarsus for an instance, though
he was a pattern not only of the Jew but of the Gentile. All
will remember that he had a vision of the Lord in glory, and
after that he was brought into acceptance before God.

When we see this, it helps us to understand how the chil-
dren ^f Israel will be brought into their blessedness. There
were to be seven days of suffering grace, as we have now (that
is quite a distinct thing), and seven days of glory in the age to
come. This will be the feast of Tabernacles in its ordinary
character for Israel on earth.

Then, further, verse 39 : " Also on the fifteenth day of the
seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruit of the land,
ye shall keep a feast unto Jehovah seven days." When they
had gathered in the fruit of the land, when the harvest was past,
and the vintage over ; what is the- meaning of this ? That judg-
ment will have taken its course. The harvest is that character
of judgment where the Lord discriminates the good from the
bad. The vintage is where He will trample down wicked
religion unsparingly. It is the infliction of divine judgment,
and mark, it is of the living : the judgment of the dead is at the
end of the kingdom, which is not spoken of here. This is the
judgment of the quick at the beginning of the kingdom.

Now we get something further (verse 39) : " Ye shall keep a
feast unto Jehovah seven days : on the first day shall be a
sabbath, and on the eighth day shall be a sabbath."

48 THE FEASTS OF JEHOVAH.

It is not only that there is a complete term of glory as we
are now going through a complete term of grace. In one fea-
ture, we may see, the feast of Tabernacles stands distinct from
all the others ; and what is that ? The eighth day. There has
been no mention of this in the other feasts. The seven days we
saw were glory for the earth ; but there is the " eighth day too."
It is heavenly and eternal glory ! So it is not " days " now, but
this one " day," " the eighth day," and therefore it has a begin-
ning, but it will never have an end.

We have seen then in this chapter — first, the purpose of God
generally sketched ; next, the mighty work of the Lord Jesus,
with the holy call it involves on all blessed by it, and the
witness to Christ's resurrection in those risen with Him. But
the application of that work is first to the Gentiles now called
in. By and by, too, Israel will be awakened and confess their
sins, when the days of glory dawn on earth, and not only this,
but with a glance at that which is heavenly and eternal in the
eighth day.

May the Lord bless His own word, so that you may be
simple and clear and wise in the truth unto salvation ! And
may you have your faith strengthened as you see how God has
given a complete cycle of His ways in one of the most ancient
books of the Bible. Wlien the theological professors of our day
are misusing their position to give currency to the cavils of un-
belief, which have lost much of their acceptance even in free-
thinking Germany, it is time for men whose fathers valued re-
vealed truth to wake up to these insidious efforts at undermin-
ing their faith under the pretentious claim of learning and
science. The best of all answers to Satan is a deepening en-
trance by the Holy Spirit into the truth, and an enlarged sense
of that divine wisdom and grace in the word, which is as much
superior to ^lohistic and Jehovistic theories, or such like
vanities and speculations, as the Second man is above the
first. " Sanctify them by Thy word : Thy word is truth."

THE OLIVE TKEE, FIG TKEE, AND
THE VINE.

There are three fruit-liearing trees, much esteemed and culti-
vated by the inhabitants of Palestine, which are fruitful in in-
struction for us who possess and peruse the New Testament.
They are the Olive Tkee, the Tig Tree, and the Vine. It was
these of which Jothan made mention in his parable to the men of
Shechem, which furnish parabolic teaching about Gentiles, Israel,
and Christians. Privilege, profession, fruitfulness, such are the
topics in illustration of which these trees are severally introduced.
1. The Olive Tree furnishes special instruction for Gentiles,
as such, in the way of dispensational teaching. We meet with it
once in this manner in Eom. xi., where a word of warning is
given to those who are not of the race of Israel. Promises be-
longed to Israel as the children of Abraham (Eom, ix. 4). To
tlie covenants of promise Gentiles were strangers (Eph. ii. 12).
Promises there were, as has been remarked, about Gentiles, but
not to them. To Abraham were they made and to his seed
(Gal. iii. 16). Israel, on the ground of their lineage "after the
flesh," looked for the fulfilment and enjoyment of them. John
the Baptist had warned them how mistaken they would find
themselves, if they trusted in this matter to natural birth with-
out being born of God. God could of the stones around them
raise up children to Abraham. The warning was in vain, as far
as the nation was concerned. Tor they rejected the One to whom
the promises made to Abraham were confirmed — that One was
Christ, the patriarch's seed. God, therefore, has cast them off
nationally for a time, and is dealing now with Gentiles. It is of

E

50 THE OLIVE TREE, FIG TREE, AND THE VINE.

tliis dispensation al change that Paul writes in Eom. xi., and, to
illustrate it in a manner within the comprehension of his readers,
makes use of the simile of an olive tree, with which those in Italy
■would be familiar. From this tree, a good olive tree, some of the
branches have been broken off, that is all the nation of Israel,
except the remnant according to the election of grace, who
remain branches in the olive tree, where they had always
been.

Into this same tree other branches have been grafted, taken
from a wild olive tree, one which had never been brought under
culture. Now these are the Gentiles, with whom God is at pre-
sent dealing in sovereign goodness, brought thus outwardly into
connection with Abraham, the root of promise — the root, to carry
out the figure, of the olive tree. Before the cross God v>'as deal-
ing witli Israel as the elect nation, but not directly with the
Gentiles. Privileges belonged to the former in which the latter
had no part. The Syrophoenician woman had to acknowledge that.
She felt it, and she owned it. After the cross a new feature in
God's dealings with man was displayed. The privileges which had
marked Israel as God's special people on earth they enjoyed no
longer, for they continued in unbelief. The aged Simeon had
declared that the child he held in his arms would be " a light for
revelation of the Gentiles," to bring them out of the obscurity in
which they had hitherto been dispensationally, as those with
whom God coidd prominently deal in goodness ; and Paul tcaclies
us this took place, when Israel for a time, as a nation, was cast off.

Advantages, then, Gentiles now possess such as they never had
before the cross. The root of promise has not changed. The
olive tree has not been cut down, but some branches have been
broken off, and branches from a wild olive tree haA'e been grafted
in on the principle of faith. As grafted in they partake of the
" root and fatness of the olive tree." Privileges are theirs, as
brought into direct association with the root of promise, Abra-
ham, the father of the faithful. AVhat flows from the root,

THE OLIVE TREE, FIG TREE, AND THE VINE. 51

therefore, they share in ; " of the root and fatness of the olive
tree" they partake, being as Gentiles grafted in by faith into
the line of promise on earth.

Now this is not salvation, for they might be " cut off." It
is not church position, for church position is new both to
Jews as well as to Gentiles who enjoy it. But here it is, Gentiles
coming in to share the privileges on earth of those who, as faithful
among the Jews, had never lost them. We say on earth, for the
simile of the tree teaches us, that the position, thus illustrated, is
one enjoyed on earth.

"Would, then, the Gentiles continue in this privileged place ?
That depended upon them. " If thou continue in goodness."
Have they ? One must surely admit they have not. Excision,
therefore, must take place. And, if the natural branches abide
not in unbelief, they shall be grafted into their own olive tree.
The good olive tree is Israel, the root is Abraham ; and the ad-
vantages Gentiles, as such, now possess, they cgn lose by un-
faithfulness, for they stand in that place only by faith. God is
now visiting the Gentiles (Acts xv. 14), and the outward result
of this is what we term Christendom. Privileges those possess
who are part of Christendom, but these privileges entail respon-
sibility. Could the Gentile glory then over the Jew, the branches
broken off ? He could not. To the Jew his natural place was
in the olive tree, it was only from his sin of unbelief that he was
broken off'. To the Gentile it was of Divine goodness that he
was there at all, grafted in on the principle of faith, to be con-
tinued there only if he abode in God's goodness. All those then
who are really saved are in the olive tree, but far more than they
are numbered amongst its branches. It takes in the faithful rem-
nant of Israel. It includes all Christendom. The Gentiles, if
once cut off, will never be restored. The Jews may be, and will,
if they abide not in unbelief. How truly will that be felt and
confessed by and by, when that which Zech. viii. 13 says, shaU
receive its accomplishment '

52 THE OLIVE TREE, FIG TREE, AND THE VINE.

2. The Fig Tree suggests teaching of a dijEferent order, and
was used as an illustration to a different audience. The Lord
made use of it when warning Israel, and instructing His disciples
(Luke xiii. 6-9 ; Matth. xxi. 19-21 ; Mark xi. 12-14, 20-23). Its
fruit makes it of such value. . If the tree is fmitless, why let it
occupy the ground ? Now there is one feature in the fig tree
which made it so suited to depict the state of Israel. Its flowers
are formed hefore the bursting out of its leaves. Hence the pre-
sence of leaves suggests the promise and appearance of fruit.
One sees at once, then, how fit an emblem such a tree would be
of Israel, who by profession were God s peoj)le, but who, never-
theless, when the Lord came, proved by rejecting Him their un-
fruitfulness for God. The olive tree, as an evergreen, fitly repre-
sents the continuance of the line of promise on earth, which
never would end, even in appearance, during all the ages that
should precede the establishment of the Kingdom of God in
power upon earth. As the olive tree from its character suggests
the thought of continuance, the fig tree from its habit is well
adapted to illustrate profession, which should be accompanied by
the proofs of fruitfulness. And if it lacks such proofs, cutting
down surely the tree richly deserves. God's forbearance then
with the nation of Israel till the cross, the parable of the fig
tree in Luke xiii. sets forth. The sentence on the barren but leaf-
clothed tree on Olivet was the indication of the carrying out of
the judgment against Israel, of which the Lord had previously
warned the people. A tree cut down ceases to be seen by men.
Israel, as an ordered nation, would cease to exist. Profession
without fruitfulness will never do for God.

3. Turning to the Vine, we get instruction of a different
character. It speaks of, and to. Christians in truth.

God had a vine, which He had brought out of Egypt : tliat
vine was Israel (Ps. Ixxx. 8-11). A Adne which is unfruitful is
useless, as Ezekiel (xv, 2-4) reminded his countrymen. The Lord
then, in John xv., teaches His disciples that He is the true vine ;

THE OLIVE TREE, FIG TREE, AND THE VINE. 53

hence fruitfulness in them could only be produced as they abode
in Him, For those who were of the Jewish race this teaching
was important : national position, a lineage after the flesh, sncli
would not avail. They must abide in Christ to bear fruit
for God : — teaching, too, this for us, useful, needful at all
times. " I am the true vine, aud my Father is the husbandman.
Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away : and
every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring
forth more fruit. Now ye are clean through the word which I
have spoken unto you. Abide in me, and I in you. As the
branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine ;
no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are
the branches : he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same
bringeth forth much fruit : for without me ye can do nothing.
If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is
withered ; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire,
and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide
in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done imto you.
Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit ; so shall
ye be my disciples " (John xv. 1-8).

When we come to the Lord's teaching about the vine, we leave
dispensational truth about Gentiles and Jews, and come to that
which is vitally important. But, to understand it aright we must
ever remember, that the simile of a tree suggests something which
is upon earth, not something about heaven. Keeping this in
mind, w^e shall understand the bearing of what He says. He
speaks of that which is seen upon earth : a branch, therefore,
might be in the vine, and yet be unfruitful. But no cue coukl
be in Christ before God without being really a child of God. If
we bring in standing before God when we read of the vine, we
shall get all wrong. If we remember that a tree is a simile of
something existing upon earth, we shall be kept right. A branch,
therefore, in the vine is a professing Christian. There might be
that without the person being a true believer. At the moment

54 THE OLIVE TREE, FIG TREE, AND THE VINE.

the Lord was speaking tliere was a marked illustration of it in
Judas Iscariot. He was one of the twelve, appeared to be a be-
liever, was a branch in the vine ; but his occupation at that very
moment indicated that he had not abode in Christ. Mere profes-
sion, then, would not do. The Lord, however, does not stop
here. He is not merely impressing on them that there must be
reality and life to be fruitful ; He is telling them how, and how
only, they can be fruitful, viz. by abiding in Him. The curse on
the fig tree showed that God would not be satisfied without fruit.
The Lord's teaching about the vine makes plain how fruitful-
ness can be ensured. Professors there might be, there have
been, there are still. Of such, if that is all they are upon earth,
the Lord speaks in verse 6 ; but let the reader remark He does
it in language which, while pointedly showing the dreadful future
of such, carefully guards against the idea of any real Christian
perishing. Speaking to those who were true. He says, " Ye."
Describing the barren professor. He says, "Ifa man" etc. There
is no discouracrement to the weakest believer. There is the most
solemn warning for tliD mere professor.

UNION IN INCARNATION,
THE ROOT EEEOR OF MODERN THEOLOGY.

The subject on wliicli I would engage tlie attention of your
readers is one which affects the whole character and nature of
Christianity, branching out into what is really mfidehty on one
side, and abominable heresies on the other ; but held in its root
principles by persons who would utterly reject both. It is
found in the most highly esteemed ministers of the Free Church
of Scotland and widely spread in it, in the Baptist Colleges, and
taught by eminent Baptist ministers in the United States ;
elaborately developed in the revived energy of evangelicalism
in Germany, whence it has passed in a gross Puseyite shape to
the Dutch Reformed Church in the States. Its full doctrinal
results were developed in Irvingism. The worst kind of infi-
delity is based on it, to which the German doctors approach
wonderfully near.

The question is this : Was Christ in incarnation united to
humanity to renew it ? or is the life of believers a wholly new
life, in every case, and in the case of the church, believers united
by the Holy Ghost to Him glorified ? Those orthodox in the
main take up only the renewal of the first man ; the full-blown
doctrine is Christ's union with fallen man. It is a capital ques-
tion ; because one makes fallen man, the first Adam, that wliich
is taken up of God for blessing as such, to which the "Word
therefore united Himself, and that (however sinless they may
hold Christ to have been personally) in its sinful state, before
redemption ; the other looks upon man in the flesh as utterly

56 UNION IN INCARNATION.

rejected and lost ; that Christ stood alone, though a true and
very man, till He had accomplished redemption, and then, when
He had accomplished it, a redemption available in justification
and life to faith, before as after the cross, that a wholly new
nature was given, in which man enters into the benefit of it,
there being also in the case of the church actual union with
Him glorified by the Holy Ghost, members of His body.

The Wesleyans have not, that I know of, the doctrine of
such union of Christ with fallen humanity, but they take up in
practice its effect, with the assertion of some good in fallen man,
and that what is wrought in salvation is the setting right the
first Adam, not the communication of a totally new life. The
German doctors agree with them in this. Without it, they say,
there is no " Anknupfungspunkt," no point to which grace can
attach itself. Now God does act on man's knowledge of good
and evil, or conscience, but a new life is given. Christ, the
last Adam becoming our life in contrast with the first, needs no
"Anknupfungspunkt." Irving held that Christ, while sinless
in word or deed, had a sinful human nature ; lust, where the
will did not consent, not being sin, as is held by Eoman
Catholics, Wesleyans, and a very great many others, as for
example our modern perfectionists — a horrible error. The
apostle Paul expressly makes sin the source of lust in Eom. vii.
It is an error which makes void the tenth commandment, as he
there uses it. Christ, according to Irving, by the Holy Ghost
kept sin in the flesh down, and so kept all His ways holy, and
was perfect, and obtained thus the Holy Ghost for us, that we
may do the same. The substitution of Christ as bearing our
sins, and therefore dying for us, he expressly denied (and the
truth of the atonement, viewed as substitution, is involved in the
question), holding that He died because of what He was as a
mortal man, not because of our sins. I need not go farther into
his doctrine.

Dr. Moody Stuart, late moderator of the General Assembly

UNION IN INCARNA TION. 57

of the Free Cliurch of Scotland says : " We are renewed in the
whole man after the image of God," a most false presentation of
what is said in Scripture, where the new man only is spoken of
in Eph. iv. 24, as a new creation, in Col. iii. 10 as renewed in
knowledge ; but in both, the new man, in contrast with the old,
he continues, " in mind, in will, in heart, and sin, hath not domi-
nion over us, because we are under grace," carefully omitting
" because we are not under law."

Mr. M'Leod, Presbyterian minister in Canada, says : " They"
(those whom he calls by a name of reproach) " falsely teach that
in regeneration the old nature remains the same, the new is intro-
duced. They sj)eak of it as if it were the introduction of a new
power into the soul, not as if it were the regeneration of the
soul itself, as if the Holy Ghost created a new being, and
inserted it into us ; while the Bible teaches, not that any new^
power~"is added to the soul, but life from God is breathed into
the soul, as it were, or in the language of scripture, the soul is
born again, passes out of its former state of unbelief and dark-
ness, and enters into a new state of faith and holiness. All the
powers of the soul are so affected as to be renewed, and to bring
forth fruit unto God ; " and, confounding Christ's taking true
humanity with union with humanity as a race, objects to say-
ing, "between humanity as seen in our Lord and humanity as
seen in us there could be no union." He says if so He could not
stand in our stead, again confounding union and substitution ;
whereas it was because He was alone in sinless humanity that
He could stand in our stead.

Dr. Bonar openly ridicules the idea of two natures, or any-
thing equivalent to it, in the Chiistian. He indeed puts Christ
in our sinful place, though sinless, all through His life.

I will give an extract, from the discourse of a president of
a Baptist College, of a sermon preached with applause at a
convention and conference of Baptists, which will show the
doctrine in its fulness and true root plainly stated, not saying

58 UNION IN INC A RNA TION

that all have received every part of it, but as here presented in
a full formal way. It is borrowed, sometimes almost verbally,
from a German theologian, and has been reproduced in the same
terms by one whom perhaps I might call the leading evangeli-
cal minister in Switzerland, at any rate in his own canton. It
is current in a modified shape everywhere, even wdiere its full
bearing is not understood. It has been carried to its extreme
results by Menken, in Germany, of whom I know little, and
by Irving in England, of whom I know a great deal. Its effects,
diluting Christianity and subverting the truth, prevail where, as
I have already said, sometimes its true root is unknown and its
just consequences utterly rejected ; but their Christianity is
mutilated and spoiled by it. The sermon itself is a dream of
Christ's life, founded on the doctrine, of which there is not a word
in Scripture, reproducing the German or Swiss I have alluded to.
" Connected in every fibre of His nature with the common
nature of mankind, He saw that He must suffer, the Just for the
unjust. It could not be that human nature should fail of endur-
ing the settled and necessary penalty of its sin,^ and He not
only had a human nature, but in Him human nature was
organically united, as it never had been before, except in Adam ;
if the members suffer, should not also the Head ? "When He was
but twelve years of age, the consciousness of this divine com-
mission had dawned upon Him. Sitting as an humble ques-
tioner before the doctors of the Law, the conviction had become
overmastering ; I am He, the teacher and prophet promised
long ago. ... I am He, the sent of God, the Son of God. And
the eighteen years that followed had made this conviction part
and parcel of His very being; growing with His growth, and
strengthening with His strength, it had taken up into itself all
the energies of His soul, conscious or unconscious, until His life
and His work were identical, and He could say, ' Lo, I come to
do Thy will, 0 God.' " I will not pursue the wretched picture,

^ Here we see how atonement is involved iu it.

UNION IN INC A RNA TION. 59

created by an imscriptural imagination, M'liich is given of Christ's
conflicts, through realising what was before Him. Suffice it to
say that it resulted in His consecrating Himself, and that
as devoted to death, in His baptism by John. But as to
this the preacher then takes up a third point, founded
on Christ's baptism by John, It is "a proof of Jesus'
connection with humanity, with its sin, and its desert of
death, Jesus' connection with human sin, and His consecration
to death for the sins of the world ; how clearly that stands out
in the baptism !" " Jesus personally," he tells us, " and in every
act and thought of His life, was sinless .... and here we
come to the greatest mystery of God's grace — the person of Jesus
Christ, and His assumption of the common nature of us all. If
Jesus had no connection with a sinful and lost humanity, or if
that connection with a sinful and lost humanity had been
merely a factitious and forensic one, then it would have been
the greatest breach of justice, the sheerest insult to purity, the
most extravagant of absurdities, that the Lord Jesus should have
submitted to an ordinance which was in some sense a confession
of sin, and a declaration that this sin deserved nothing less than
death. My friends, we can never explain the baptism of our
Lord, unless we remember that Jesus was made sin for us,^
taking our nature upon Him, with all its exposures and liabili-
ties, that He might redeem it, and unite it to God ;" not sinners,
mind, but " it." " But this one mighty fact, the taking upon Him
of our nature, does explain it. As one with humanity. He was
about to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself" I might go
on with much more, but it is hardly needed.

In all he says of John's baptism there is not a word of truth.
Actual sins, not sin in humanity at all, were confessed. Did

^ Note here the monstrous interpretation •whicli I had heretofore supposed it
impossible for any to hold, that " Him who knew no sin " means Jesus in His
divinity; and "made sin" the incarnation, "that holy thing," not the cross
and atonement then.

6o UNION IN INCARNATION.

Jesus confess sucli? In Him it was fulfilling righteousness
entering in by the door. Jesus went, not with sinful Jews, but
with God's remnant, in their first step in the path God's word
had led them into, as the door of the kingdom. So far was
John's baptism from being to death, that not one who had been
baptized of him would ever have put Christ to death. If all
had received it, they would have received a living Christ,
Messiah ; and He would not, as far as that went, have been put
to death at all. But this is not my business now. Dr. Strong
uses it as a proof of His doctrine. My business is with the
doctrine itself, which is here pretty fully brought out, not by an
adversary, but by an advocate of it ; and that, not an openly here-
tical teacher, but one who speaks truth when he comes to the
application of it — a fair sample, in its best forms, of the system.
" I also," he says, " must die to sin, by having Jesus' death
reproduced in me. I must rise to a new life, by having Jesus'
resurrection reproduced in me." I do not accept the form of this
statement : still it connects itself with vital truth. But then
comes the ground. " The putting away of the sin and guilt of
humanity, which was the essential feature of Christ's work,
must take place in me, and this I must do by having my life
incorporated with His life."

This really denies the atonement. What is the guilt of
humanity ? But on its own ground this is quite unscriptural.
Not I, says Paul, but Christ liveth in me (Gal. ii. 20) ; but I do
not now enter farther on this. The foundation is thus laid ;
" It was humanity that bore the curse in His death, and all the
true life of humanity rose from the dead in His resurrection."
He then puts our death and resurrection as a result of
corresponding death to sin and resurrection to holiness. This
is an unscriptural way of putting it, based upon the error I
combat — the denial of our evil nature, always the same but
reckoned dead already by faith and kept down tlirough the
Spirit by a totally new life. But I cannot pursue it here.

UNION IN INCARNA TION. 6 1

It is a common way of putting it, and connected with reform-
ing the old man, the root of all being now exposed in this
doctrine, and cropping out all over the world ; largely taught in
the Free Church of Scotland, in various sliades and degrees,
sometimes not knowing what it means, sometimes in its mere
practical results ; but likely to be widely spread by last year's
Cunningham Lectures on the -/.hucii, or self-emptying of Christ,
which are a developed index or " catalogue raisonnee " of German
speculations and heresy ; where their effect too is already seen
in the way the blessed Lord is spoken of, even by the author.

How different, how contrasted with all tliis, is the calm and
beautiful simplicity of the Scriptural account of Christ's life.
Let us see how Scripture states the incarnation. After stating
(John i.) what Christ ivas (Qd; r\v 6 Xoyog), John tells us (verse
14) what He hecamc; the word was made flesh (ca^^ \yivi7o), and
dwelt amongst us. So in Heb. ii. 14 : "As the children were par-
takers (xgxo/vwi/)jx£i') of flesh and blood, He also Himself in like
manner took part (jj:,iri(s-xiv) of the same, that througli death He
might destroy him that had the power of death." He became a
man, was made a little lower than the angels, that He might die
(Heb. ii. 9). But His being born in flesh was by the power of the
Holy Ghost, so as to be holy as so born (Luke i. 35). " The Holy
Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall
overshadow thee : therefore that holy thing (rh aym) which shall
be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." He was as to the
flesh born of God, holy. Son of God ; what was born of Mary was
a holy thing. He was, by divine power and the operation of the
Holy Ghost on that blessed and obedient handmaid of the Lord,
born a holy thing, as man. This was not sinful flesh. He was
(Gal. iv. 4, 5) ysvo'Mivog sx. yvvaixog, ysvo[jjivog vrrl vo/mov, that He might
redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the
adoption of sons. But this, in us, is thus the fruit of redemp-
tion. To as many as believed (John i. 12) on Him He gave
authority to take this place, to none others. But to proceed. "We

62 UNION IN INCARNATION.

have here no union with sinful humanity ; but, what was wholly
unique, a sinless man, born holy in a miraculous w^ay. The
place of sons for others belongs only to those who received Him,

Does Heb. ii. lead to any pther thought ? " Behold I, and the
children which God has given me ;" only these are spoken of.
These children were in flesh and blood ; so He took part in it.
But the objects of His doing so are carefully distinguished from
the race. I am not questioning that Christ died for all ; I
believe it. But His drawing all men was by His death, not by
incarnation, but by what wrought redemption when man had
despised and rejected Him, and the world was judged, and the
whole of it lay in wickedness (1 John v. 19). He had to draw
those (John xii. 32) not united, but far from Him. But I have
said the objects are carefully distinguished from union with the
race. They are (Heb. ii.) the children God had given Him. He
took up (took up their cause) not angels — what an occasion to
speak of His connection with the race ! — but He took up the seed
of Abraham. As they were in flesh He took it, but not a \vord
of union with humanity. But more than this, we have the
positive statement of who those are who had part in this one-
ness. He M'ho sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, are all of
one (f^ ^>">?)/ and they are so as so sanctified. Death He tasted
for every man ; but union with man is unknown to Scripture.
They speak of His being bone of our bone, flesh of our flesh ;
Scripture never. If the words in the New Testament (Eph. v. 30)
be genuine, we are of His flesh and of His bones when He is glori-
fied. And in the Old Testament Eve was such of Adam, not Adam
of Eve. In every form the theory is as false as it is mischievous.

The other quotation in Heb. ii. confirms the same truth : " I
will declare thy name unto my brethren," wdiich was accom-
plished after His resurrection, as the 22d Psalm plainly in-
timates, and is so beautifully unfolded in its accomplishment in
the 20th of John's Gospel. The words Avhich follow fully

^ It is couliued to those wlio are sanctified. They are e^ ei'os.

UNION IN INCARNATION. 63

establish tlie point : " lu . the midst of the church will I sing
praise unto Thee." The truth is, there is no such thought in
Scripture as Christ being united to men or humanity. He was
a true man, but there was no union with other men in their sins.
ISTor is union with humanity a Scriptural thought at all. The
only connection with men, which can in any way be alleged or
pretended, is in 1 Cor. xi. " The head of every man is Christ,"
but there it is power, not union, which is spoken of, relative
position of dignity. The setting union previous to redemption
work falsifies Christianity and the state of men. The passage
has been quoted, that we were " crucified witli Him." This is
indeed faith's apprehension, and God's apprehension of us as
looked at as in Christ, inasmuch as He died for us. But it only
confirms the great truth I seek to establish. Who are the " we "
or the "I" crucified with Christ? The believer, and the
belicA^r only ! Were all the ungodly sinners who die in their
sins, and never heard of Christ, crucified with Christ ?

That He was a propitiation for the whole world I read in 1 John
ii., but there He was alone for others. It was done towards God,
and the blood on the mercy seat opens the door of the gospel to all
sinners. But tliis has nothing to do with union with the race.
It was done for, not with them. When the title of Son of man
is shown to belong to the Lord, how does He take it up ?
Through His death ! The Father took care that, if men despised
and rejected Him, the testimony to who He was should be there.
The resurrection of Lazarus demonstrated Him Son of God ; the
riding in on the ass bore witness to the glory of tlie Son of
David ; then the Greeks come up, and the Lord says (John xii.
23) : " The hour is come that the Son of man should he glorified."
Here the race is in question. " Verily, verily, I say unto you,
except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth
alone ; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit." Son of God
and King of Israel He was, according to Ps. ii. ; but to take His
place as Son of man, according to Ps. viii., in the glory that be-

64 UNION IN INCARNATION.

longed to Him according to that title, He must die. His Spirit
then enters anticipatively into that scene, and He warns His
followers they must follow Him in that path, but bows in
perfect submission to His Father's will, seeking only His glory ;
and this, as it ever did, opens out to Him the vista of His glory
which flowed from it ; " I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will
draw all men unto me." For in truth they were far away. So
far was it from union, that it was as wholly rejected from the
earth, lifted up and away from it, that He would draw men.
When man had rejected Him utterly, and the world was judged
in consequence (John xii. 31), lifted \ip out of it. He, the crucified
Jesus, through death, and by it, became the attractive point to
all men in grace. The sin of man, in total alienation from God
and the love of God, in redeeming power for such, must both be
made manifest, and meet in the death of the Lamb of God, be-
fore there could be any bond between them. Eedemption is the
sole basis of blessing. A living Saviour was, as in the world.
Son of God, Messiah, entitled to be King of Israel. A Son of
man who has died and risen again can alone take the world,
and take it as a Eedeemer and Saviour. He who descended
into the lower parts of the earth is the same that is ascended
far above all heavens, that He might fill all things (Eph. iv. 10) ;
and He, and in that character, takes the place and power in
grace and glory which belongs to Him. So when His hour
was really come (see verse 51 in Luke ix.), and the disciples
own Him as the Chrjst of God, " He straitly charged them to
tell no man that thing, saying. The Son of man must suffer
many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and
scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day" (Luke ix. 20-
22) ; and then shows them His glory.

No doubt as Son He quickens whom He will, and has, from
Adam on ; but He is not for us the life and the resurrection, but
the resurrection and the life (John xi.) Hence in John vi.,
where He is the bread of life. He so insists on resurrection at

UNION IN INCARNA TION.

the last day. It was on totally new ground, founded on His
death, man could have blessing (verses 39, 40, 44, 53). He gives
His flesh for the life of the world ; and unless men eat the flesh
and drink the blood of the Son of man, they have no life in
them. Whoso eats that has eternal life. Union with men, and
sinful men, without giving life or redemption, is a Socinian
fable ; unwittingly often I freely admit ; but it is so. " Except
a corn of wheat fall into the ground, and die, it cibiddh alone!'
He took flesh and blood, but stood alone, quickening indeed, as
Son of God, whom He would, but as man in the flesh, alone in
the place He stood in, until by death He could righteously
bring in others, and redemption (without which — save of course
Himself — none could have to say to God) was accomplished. A
Son of man, alive in the days of His flesh, in union with men,
without giving life, and without justification or redemption, is
unknown to Scripture ; but a union with sinful man, giving life
and redemption, or justification, before His death, is alike un-
known to it, " I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all
men unto me." A union of Christ with sinful man is wholly
unknown to Scrijoture.

What then was God doing with men before ? Quickening
souls assuredly from Adam on ; but in His dispensations with
men testing their state for their own instruction ; in the former
world setting them in innocence in the Garden of Eden, where
they fell, and then on to the flood without any special institu-
tion, though not without testimony. That world became so bad,
that it was destroyed by the flood. Then came government in
Noah in the new world ; promise to Abraham called out from
the midst of universal idolatry ; the law, testing men and bring-
ing in transgression ; the prophets, to recall to the law and
testify of Christ. Then God said, I have yet one Son : it may
be the}' will reverence INIy Son. And when they saw Him they
said. Come let us kill Him, and the inheritance shall be ours.
Not only was man lawless without law, and a transgressor under

F

66 UNION IN INCARNA TION.

law, but wlieu grace came in the person of the blessed Son of
God, they would none of it. The presence of a Divine person
drew out the enmity of the heart of man against God : " Now
they have both seen and hated both ]\Ie and My Father." So
far from there being a link with humanity, or man as a race,
it was the final test of their state : God come in grace, as a
man in their midst. The result was : Now is the judgment of
this world.

Hence, in speaking of Christ's death (Heb. ix. 26), it is said,
"Now once in the end of the world (the consummation of ages)
He hath appeared." Morally it was the end of man's history ; not
the communication of life, hypothetically even, to a race, nor the
taking it up into union organically ; but the deliberate and entire
rejection by that race of Him in whom was life. And so it is
stated (John i. 4, 5), " In Him was life, and the life was the light
of man," — emphatically such ; " but the light shineth in darkness,
and the darkness comprehended it not." " He was in the world, and
the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He
came to His own, and His own received Him not." To as many
as received Him, He gave title to be children ; but they were
born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of
man, but of God (ver. 13). It had nothing to do with the first
Adam and his nature ; if He was received, it was in being born
of God. Light had come into the world ; and men loved darkness
rather than light, because their deeds were evil That light was
life, but with the testimony of John the Baptist, of Christ's
work, of the Father, of the Scriptures, whence they thought they
had eternal life, they would not come to Him, that they might
have life. There was no mixing the last and first Adam, no re-
newing the latter by the former, but the utter rejection of the
former by the latter, and the judgment of a world convicted of
sin by His rejection. Union in incarnation is a mystical and
mystifying fable. Man must be born again.

This leads me to the second point — the form this error takes

UXION IN INCARNATION. 67

when union with sinful man in incarnation is not so distinctly
held as by the Germans and their scholars among Presbyterians
and Baptists — namely, that nothing new is given to man ; that •
the old and new man are not contrasted in tlie renewed man ;
but that there is simply a renewal of man as he is, in his affec-
tions, thoughts, and whole soul. Such is the AVesleyan doctrine.
Such is the basis of perfectionism ; such is the current doctrine
amidst crowds of Christians and their teachers, exalting the
first man to the losing of the full and blessed truth of grace
in the Second. Amidst a large class, such as the "Wesleyans,
it has taken this form : man, body, soul, and spirit, was in a
good state before the fall, in a bad state after it ; then, by the
operation of the Spirit, in a good state again. And thus, they
consistently hold, a man may be born again ten times a week,
and also be perfect ; bat it is the perfection of the first man,
not of a Christ in glory, conformity to whom is alone spoken
of as our goal in Scripture. With all classes who have these
views, varying in details, lust is not sin, unless the will consents
— a horrible, unholy doctrine ; and denying that sin in the
flesh is condemned, and the whole truth of the fallen state of
man. But my part is to see and state what Scripture says as to
tliis, not now to go into details as to the false doctrine itself.
Possibly at the close, if there be any profit in it, I may state,
from the respective writings of those who hold them, the views
into which this evil root of doctrine has branched out.

Scripture states distinctly that divine life is a wholly new
thing given of God, always in absolute contrast with the flesh,
for which death is the only remedy. I have been somewhat
surprised at this truth being contested. Certainly some years
ago the conflict of flesh and Spirit was generally owned amongst
real Christians, if we must not except the Wesleyans. But our
business is with the Word of God. First, I quote the well-known
passage (John iii.), " Except a man be born again " {avuQiv), again
l\x its origin and source, for amdiv means from the veiy beginning

CS UNION IN INCARNATION.

or starting-point, as in Luke i. 3, " from the very first." And
this was in reply to Nicodemus, who thought he could be taught,
and led right by teaching. Further, in insisting on it and an-
swering Nicodemus, who did not see how so totally a new life
could be possible and puts the case of a natural new birth, the
Lord declares that that which is born of the flesh is fiesh, is of
that nature, as every animal even is of the nature of that which
is born ; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit — has its
nature. Now the mind of the flesh (Eom. viii.) (not the carnal
mind, as a condition of soul, but r6 (po6n,iJ.a ttis caozo;) is enmity
against God, is not subject to the law of God, neitJier indeed can
he; so then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. They
that are after the flesh mind the things of the flesh ; but ye are
not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God
dwell in you. Is not that a new thing altogether ? And if any
man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His, So that
all have not this new thing. And if Christ be in you, the body
is dead, because of sin ; and the Spirit is life, because of right-
eousness. Is not the Spirit being life, Christ being in us, a new
thing ? But again (1 John v. 11, 12) : " This is the record that
God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He
that hath the Son hath life, and he that liath not the Son of
God hath not life." Is not having the Son a new thing to the
sinner ? Not merely changing his affections and thoughts, but
having the Son, we have life ; not having Him, we have not
life. Hence Christ says, " Because I live, ye shall live also" (John
xiv. 19). He gives His sheep eternal life (John x.) He is that
eternal life (1 John i. 2) which was with the Father and was
manifested to us. The last Adam is a life-giving Spirit (1 Cor.
XV.) " When Christ, who is our life," says the apostle (Col. iii. 4) ;
and again in Gal. ii. 20, "Nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ
liveth in me." It is life which is given us, life in Christ in the
power of the Spirit ; " the law " — that is, its nature and unifonn
character — " of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus." We are alive

UNION IN INCARNATION. 69

unto God in — not Adam, but — Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom.
vi. 11). It is a well of water (Jolm iv.), God's gift in Christ,
springing up unto everlasting life, in its highest state of eternal
glory. When the fuU Christian place is understood and en-
joyed, there is a life of which God is the source. We are born
of God through the Spirit, and the Spirit dwells in us, giving
power and liberty in this life with God, and from sin, through
the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. But into this, blessed
as the subject is, I cannot enter here.

Being by the word (James i. 18), that which is heavenly and
divine, yet suited to, and, when in Christ, belonging to man, is
communicated for the sanctifying of the affections and thoughts,
a nature having been communicated, when born of God, capable
of enjoying what is thus revealed. " Of His own will begat He
us, by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits
of His creatures." " We are born again of incorruptible seed by
the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever" (1 Pet.
i. 23). Hence we are children of God by faith in Christ Jesus
(Gal. iii. 2G). The things revealed by the Spirit (1 Cor. ii.) are
communicated in words which the Holy Ghost has taught. And
so far as man lives rightly, he Hves by every word that proceeds
out of the mouth of God (Matt. iv. 4). This quickening and
forming of the Christian's affections, by the word revealing
things above, is fully acknowledged and, I trust, cherished by
my readers, as by myself. But the examination of Scripture '
will show that the flesh, or old man, is an evil thing, gauged and
rejected of God and of faith, accounted dead by reason of Christ's
death, but never renewed, never changed. Its history in Scrip-
ture shows it to be hopelessly bad ; lawless when left to itself,
transgressing the law when placed under it ; when Christ came
in grace, hating and rejecting Him ; when the Spirit dwells in a
man, lusting against it, and, if he be taken up to the third heaven,
seeking, if it had been permitted, to puff him up about it. We
are not simply sinners, but sinners dealt with in long patience

7 o UNION IN INC A RNA TION.

by God — a patience that lias brouglit out tbe full evil of our
heart ; we are by nature the children of wrath.

First, that which is born of the flesh is flesh (John iii.), a
positive specific nature, which has its own lusts and delights,
such as they are. Its works are manifest — may be seen (Gal.
V. 19-21). The mind of the flesh is enmity against God. The
renewed mind knows that in me, that is in my flesh, dwells no
good thing (Eom. vii.) The fruit of the Spirit is in formal
contrast with its works ; not onl}^ so, but it lusts against the
Spirit, and the Spirit against it, and these are contrary the one
to the other (Gal. v. 17). They that are after the flesh mind
the things of the flesh ; but if we live after the flesh, we shall
die. If through the Spirit we mortify its deeds — for it is a nature
which has its deeds — we shall live (Eom. viii.) Is there any
forgiveness, any amelioration, any remedy applicable to it? None !
All sins, with one exception, can be forgiven; but there is no
forgiveness of an evil nature. God, sending His own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, has condemned sin in the
flesh (Eom. viii. 3). It is the nature and standing of the first
Adam, and, when we are in this, we are said to be in the flesh.
What then is the remedy ? Is there none ? One only, if remedy
it is to be called, — death. It was condemned in Christ's death,
as we have seen in Eom. viii. 3 (not that He had any of
course, but as made sin for us) ; but that, if it was its condem-
nation, was also death. He that has died is justified from sin.
(Eom. vi.) I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live ; but
not I, but Christ livetli in me (Gal. ii.) They that are Christ's
have crucified the flesli, with its affections and lusts (Gal. v.
24). Knowing that our old man is crucified with Him (Eom.
vi. 6). If ye be dead with Christ (Eom. vi. 8). Ye are dead,
and your life hid with Christ in God (Col. iii. 3). Hence the
very place of faith is to reckon ourselves dead to sin (Eom. vi.
11), and, as the flesh is stUl in us which lusts against the Spirit,
to bear about in our body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the

UNION IN INCARNATION. 71

life of Jesus may be manifested iu our body (2 Cor. iv. 10).
Christ having died, it is, for faith and the life of Christ in us,
as if we had died, and we reckon ourselves dead, crucified with
Him ; dead to sin, dead to the law, crucified to the world, and
the world to us, Christ lives in us, alive to God — not in Adam,
for our old man is crucified with Christ, but — in Jesus Christ
our Lord.

Scripture is as uniform and as clear as it possibly can
be. There is the flesli whicli lusts against the Spirit, things
contrary the one to the other ; but we are entitled and bound to
reckon ourselves dead, inasmuch as in us, that is in the flesh,
there is no good thing. But Christ being in us, the body is
dead because of sin (its only fruit, if we are alive in the flesh),
and the Spirit life because of righteousness. Hence we say we
have put off the old man, which is corrupt according to the
deceitful lusts, and put on the new, after God created in
righteousness and true holiness, renewed in knowledge after the
image of Him that created us. And note, it is not merely the
deeds, but the old man with his deeds ; the truth as it is in
Jesus is the having done so and having put on the new man.

The first part of the Epistle to the Eomans treats of guilt
and forgiveness, through Christ having died for our sins ; the
second, our having died with Him, so that by Him we might
live to God. Scripture is clear in the contrast of flesh and
Spirit, the old man and the new ;.but we are entitled to hold the
first for dead, and our life to be Christ and not tlie flesh. Also
before God, we are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be the
Spirit of God dwell in us (Eom. viii. 9).

To deny that a new life is communicated to us, and that the
old man, the flesh, is always contrary to the Spirit, is to deny
the plainest testimonies of Scripture ; while our privilege and
duty, if indeed the Holy Ghost dwells in us, is to know that we
are in Christ, not in the flesh, and to reckon ourselves dead, the
old man crucified with Christ, seeing His death is available to

72 UNION IN INCARNA TION.

US for that also. The perfect result will be our being like
Christ in glory, as was shown to the disciples in the transfigur-
ation. Nor is there any other perfection for the Christian than
this : only we are to realise it here, Christ in us the hope of
glory ; and if Christ be in us, as our life, is not this something
wholly new, and contrary to all that the flesh is ? We are in
Him for acceptance, He in us for life and walk. If my reader
would see this life fully developed, let him read Col. iii. 5-17.
Let him note that in ii. 20 our death with Christ is laid as the
basis where our being alive in the world, in the religious aspect,
is not allowed ; and in iii. 1 our being risen with Christ. We are
associated in life with Him risen, now that He is glorified, our
life hid with Him in God. No thought of sustaining the old
Adam-life, nor taking it up into Him, or infusing His into ours
by a kind of incorporating power ; but, on the contrary, we are
dead and gone as to this, and Christ is our life, and so belong
to heaven, where He is, though not yet there.

This only remains to refer to, the positive testimony that our
union is as believers with Christ in glory. AVe have seen it
already, when speaking of the alleged union of Christ with us
in incarnation (Heb. ii.), that only they that were sanctified were
of one with Him. But there remains some positive evidence to
notice. In John xiv. the promise of the Comforter is given,
expressly upon the ground of Christ's being gone on high, — as
in John vii., the Holy Ghost was not yet [given] because Jesus
was not yet glorified.- When He was come, as we read in John
xiv., " In that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and
ye in me, and I in you." Who ? Humanity ? No, the disciples
only. The Comforter was not for the world, — " whom the world
cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, neither knoweth Him ;
but ye know Him ; for He dwelleth with you, and shall be in
you " (John xiv. 17). And this is the more definite, be-
cause in the early part of the chapter the Lord si)eaks of the
Father being in Him, and He in the Father, but not of the

UNION IN INCARNA TION. 73

disciples being in Him, or He in them. This belongs to the
present time, when Jesus is glorified, and the Holy Ghost come.

The same great truth is brought out in Rom. viii. There is
no condemnation for them who are in Christ Jesus ; but this is
through the presence of the Holy Ghost, the law of the Spirit of
life in Christ Jesus, consequent on the death of Christ. " Ye
are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be the Spirit of God
dwell in you. Xow if any man have not the Spirit of Christ,
He is none of His ; and if Christ be in you," etc. Here is union,
and through the Spirit ; Christ being glorified, we in Him and
He in us. So in 1 Cor. vi. 17, " He that is joined to the Lord
is one spirit." " Xow He which stablisheth us with you in
Christ, and hath anointed us, is God, who hath also sealed us
and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts " (2 Cor. i. 21,
22). So " if any man be in Christ, it is a new creation ; old
things" are passed away, all things are become new ; and all
things are of God, who hath reconciled us to HimseK by Jesus
Christ" (2 Cor. v. 17, 18).

So in a more special character of this union, the being
members of His body, it is to Christ as raised from the dead
by God's power and set at His right hand, and we by the
same power quickened with Him, and raised together, and
made to sit together in heavenly places in Him. Thus God
has given Him to be head over all things to the church,
which is His body, the fulness of Him who filleth all in alL
So indeed in Eph. ii. 12-18. So in the fifth chapter, con-
nected witli the comparison with the husband and wife, and
Eve's union with Adam. So it is largely developed in 1 Cor.
xii. as a system established here on earth, that it is by one
Spirit we are all baptized into one body, to which Christ, and
those united to Him by the Spirit, are compared. The whole
groundwork of the New Testament, and the truth taught in it,
is that Christ, though a true man, was alone until He had
accomplished redemption ; and that then, when He was glorified,

74 UNION IN INCARNA TION.

we are in Him, united to Him, by the Holy Ghost, He the
head, and we the members. John gives us our being in Him
individually ; Paul also our corporate union with Him, the
Head, as living members of His body (He, the Head, being glori-
fied on high).

Christ's union with sinful humanity is an anti-scriptural fable.

The life the Christian receives is a wholly new one ; he is
born again. That which is born of the flesh being flesh, that
which is born of the Spirit being spirit. He that hath the Son
hath life ; he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. God
sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live
through Him. There is no renewing or ameliorating of the
flesh ; it is enmity against God and cannot be subject to His law.

Our union is with Christ glorified, in a new life in Him,
through the indwelling of the Holy Ghost, of whom our bodies
are the temple, and against whom the flesh always lusts.

Let me add that God, in His history" of man, has shown what
flesh is, and even the creature left to himself. The first thing
man has always done is t.o spoil what God has set up good.
Man himself — the first thing we read of him is eating the for-
bidden fruit. The first Noah did, after offering thanksgiving
for his deliverance, was to get drunk. Israel made the golden
calf, before Moses came down from the mountain. Nadab and
Abihu offered strange fire the first day after being consecrated,
and Aaron never went into the holy of holies in his garments of
glory and beauty. ' The son of David, Solomon, loved many
strange women, and the kingdom M-as divided. The Gentile head
of gold persecuted the godly, and became a beast, characterising
^[he empires that followed him for the seven times. What shall

^ sav of the church ? How soon did all seek their own, not
we *'

|i^ i-hings of Jesus Clirist, and forsake the devoted and faithful

Aq, ! John could say, "There are many antichrists, whereby we

•u 4 hat it is the last time." But God has worked on in grace,

•/' of this, to show what He is, His longsuffering and

UNION IN INCARNA TION.

goodness and patience. So all those things — man, the law, the
priesthood, royalty in the Son of David, He that rises to reign
over the Gentiles, His being glorified in His saints — all is made
good in its place in the Second Man, the last Adam. ]\Iay His
name be eternally praised ! As is the earthy, svich are they also
that are earthy. As is the heavenly, sucli are they also that
are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy,
so also we shall bear the image of the heavenly. And in the
ages to come God will show the exceeding riches of His grace
in His kindness towards us in Christ Jesus. I speak of man's
evil, not surely to delight in it, but that we may so know it,
and that in conscience, that we may take, through grace, Christ
instead of ourselves, and be occupied with Him.

I cannot but recall to the reader what this system involves
— that " Christ, who knew no sin, was made sin for us," means
that Christ, having been sinless in His eternal divinity, was
made sin in being made man. By whom ? Not when He
offered Himself without spot to God, but He was made a bad
sinful being by God, when coming into existence in this world !

SCEIPTUEAL UNITY AND UNION.^

My object is iu no way to assail Dr. Moody Stuart, of whose
personal worth and piety (though myself unacquainted with
him) I have no doubt, but to take up the true grounds of unity
and union, points not only of great importance but occupying
the hearts and minds of Christians everywhere.

The desire of unity flows, I cannot doubt, from the Spirit of
God. True unity and true union are from Him, and according
to His mind. He will bring all things that are blessed around
Himself as a moral centre. It evidently must be so, for He is
God and the true centre of all blessing. That according to this
there is a special effectuation of this in Christ, in the fulness of
times, is clearly also revealed to us in Scripture. Our question
is : What, and of what, and how, is this unity or union ? How
far is it unity, and how far union ? These are not the same.

Scripture must be our guide in the inquiry. And it is as
precise as Dr. Stuart is vague. It reveals the purpose of God
according to the good pleasure of His will, for the admini-
stration of the fuhiess of times to gather together in one (amxe-
<paKai(Ji(sasi}ui) all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and
which are in earth. It reveals an eternal state when Christ
shall have given up the kingdom to God, even the Father, that
God may be all in all — surely ever Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost ; but God as such all in all, not the subsistence of the
kingdom held by Christ as man ; as man the Son will then be
subject, as we know He was on earth, though God over all

^ A review of Dr. A. Moody Stuart's sermon — " Jesus Christ the Bond of tJie
Holy Universe " — preuched at tlie opening of the Free Churcli General Assembly,
Edinburgh, on Thursday, ISth :\Iay 1876.

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. j-j

blessed for ever, all the fulness of the Godhead iu Him bodily.
I only add this to guard from error, as I have alluded to the
passage in which His giving up of the kingdom and His
subjection are spoken of.

There is another unity spoken of, that is, of saints on earth,
and I may add in glory, and in a twofold way. First, as indi-
vidual saints, a family I may call it, as it specially refers to the
Father — Christ being the firstborn among many brethren. Of
this John speaks ; of the church as the body he never does.
Its second aspect is this. Those in whom the Spirit of God
dwells are really united to Christ by the Holy Ghost, are mem-
bers of His body, who, as man, is exalted to the right hand of
God, in the glory He had witli the Father before the world was.
Both these will be perfected in heavenly places. The sons will
be in glory conformed to the image of the Son. They have born
the image of the earthly; they will bear the image of the
heavenly, made perfect in one. He will be the head of the
body, the church, over all things.

I have thought it better to state briefly the Scripture reve-
lation as to unity. My statements are little more than Scripture
texts strung together, so as to show what its doctrine is distinctly,
before any comment on the statements of Dr. Stuart's sermon.
For the truth itself is Avhat enables us to discern any departure
from it and ideas which are purely human in their true light.
True unity is too precious a thing, too much according to the
heart of God, and must be, not to seek to guard against any
erroneous views as to its nature.

The passages I would refer to, some of which I shall be led
to notice more fully, are John xvii. 11, 20, 21, 22, 23, three
distinct unities. Eph. i. 19-23, compare Col. i. 15-18, the
same twofold headship. 1 Cor. xv. 24-28 ; Eph. i. 9, 10 ; Eom.
viii. 29, 30.

I am somewhat surprised, not at the sermon's producing an
impression, but that its vague statements were not estimated

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

more justly by those who sought its publication- I suppose
want of Scriptural habits of thought is what accounts for it.
Its references to Scripture are everywhere loose and inaccurate.
The text itself connects part of verse 23 of John xvii. with verse
21, leaving out verse 22, which makes a total change in the
phase of unity treated of ; and the effect of that in verse 24 is
left out, or the discrepancy would be manifest.

There are three unities spoken of in John xvii. First, of the
immediate disciples of Christ. The application of this unity to
them is incontrovertible, as is evident from the language of verse
12. The second (20, 21) is of those that believe through their
word, " one in us," and this was to the intent that the world
may believe. Tlie third is unity in glory, the glory given to
Christ Himself of the Father, when the saints are made perfect
in one, that the world may know He was sent of Him, and,
seeing them in the same glory as Christ, know (most wondrous
word !) that we have been loved as He was loved. May our souls
admire such grace, and know what it is to dwell in it !

Dr. Stuart omits the statement of their being in glory (verse
22), and connects the world's believing with their being made
perfect in one. This is not the right way of dealing with Scrip-
ture, and Scripture so solemn and precious in its import as
this is.

He tells us farther, " The union of the true believer to Christ
is set forth in our text, and secured by the double bond of a
mutual indwelling." Now there is a miitual indwelling bless-
edly set forth in John xiv. as known to saints when the Holy
Ghost should be given, as He was on the day of Pentecost. But
no union with Christ is spoken of in the text, nor indeed does
John ever speak of it. It is another thought — one which in
his Epistle he carries on to dwelling in God and God in us,
known by the Spirit He has given. Perhaps it is even a more
precious thought than union, if in such infinite and unspeakable
privileges, conferred by grace, — of which, His grace, God will

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 79

show in the ages to come the unspeakable riches in His kindness
towards us through Jesus Christ, — we can speak of more and
less.

On this mutual indwelling of Christ and us Dr. Stuart insists
much. There is not a word of it in John xvii. The mutual
indwelling of the Father and the Son is spoken of as " Thou
Father art in Me, and I in Thee," but not so of Christ and the
believer. Dr. Stuart has been misled by the sound of the words
in "I in them and Thou in INIe;" but there is no mutual in-
dwelling here at all. It is display in glory — Christ in the saints
and the Father in Christ. The whole statement is a mistake.
We have only to read the passage to see it ; and in privileges so
wondrous, and thoughts so deep, it behoves us to keep close to
Scripture. If we do not, we shall lose much, following our own
thoughts. I cannot doubt that so excellent a person as Dr.
Stuart has done so here in giving course to his own thoughts
instead of cleaving close to the word.

I do not dwell much on the " oneness of evil." There is a
oneness in evil in one sense. It is in man self-will departed
from God, and enmity against Him, whatever its form, lawless
lust, transgression of the law, and hating Christ, and therein
His Father. Still the statements of Dr. Stuart seemed to me to
hang little together. " The oneness of evil is among the most
marked of its characteristics," yet " sin and unity are everlasting
opposites." However, as my object is not to criticise but to treat
the subject of true unity, and there are important moral observa-
tions in the remarks of Dr. Stuart on the oneness of evil, I do
not comment on it farther.

I should wholly object to his use of John xv., which is horta-
tory ; and the true vine applies immediately to the then state
of the disciples, " Noio ye are clean" being really "Ye are
already clean " (^'6>j). Hence, as the blessed Lord knew them,
verse 6 changes from " ye " to " if a man," and returns to " ye"
in verse 7, when fruit-bearing, not withering and burning, is the

8o SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

subject. The true vine refers to the vine brought out of Egypt.
Israel was not the true vine, but Christ ; as Christ, not Israel, was
in result the servant owned of God (Isa. xlix.) It is not church
union. That is union of members to Christ the Head in heaven,
where it is not a question of cutting off, nor of fruit-bearing, nor
of purging. I quite admit that there is the general analogy now,
and the applicability of the exhortation. But I cannot go farther
into the interpretation of the passage here. It has no applica-
tion to Dr. Stuart's object, for it is at all events an exhortation.
All this part of John takes up the responsibility of saints ^vith
the Father. It is "a lower sense" in which the disciples are said
to be in Christ ; namely, their connection with Christ tlien upon
earth {nhri, already), not when He was the exalted Man in heaven,
which alone is church union, as Eph. i. 19-23 makes evident.

But I pass on from this section (which is a matter of inter-
pretation on which I should be glad to hear any godly person,
though not doubting the justice of what I have said), only remark-
ing that when Dr. Stuart says " a lower sense," it cannot have
two senses, and I suppose he would not deny that, if it speaks of
" temporary believers," it cannot refer to union wdtli Christ as
members of His body.

In the following section I admit the difference between the
individuality of angels and the one race of which Adam was the
head. And that Christ was the head of a spiritual race, taking
Adam's place in a higher way, every intelligent Christian taught
in the word will admit, and will moreover feel the importance
of it. Eom. V. and 1 Cor. xv. are clear on the point. Dr. Stuart
has given us, too, some interesting observations on the elements
of all being united in Christ's person, the full justness of which
I am not prepared to speak of without weighing them more than
I have, but which are quite worthy of being weighed, and which
I pass from only to pursue my main sultject, union and unity.
Here all is confusion, and sometimes difficult to seize from the
way it is ex])rcssed. Union and unity as here used have no

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

Scriptural intelligible meaning. That God is the fountain of all
angels' good, and the source of their happiness, and the centre of
their harmony, is certain. But what means their being " united
to Him" ? "Who ever heard, in Scripture at least, of angels being
united to God ? No trace of such a thought is in Scripture. I
am sure Dr. Stuart means no harm in it, but it is tliis loose think-
ing, away from Scripture, which has deprived the church of so
much precious truth. We, that is, all those who have the Holy
Ghost, are united to Christ, the glorified man, as members of His
l)ody. " He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit." But angels
united to God is really in itself a blasphemy — though I am quite
sure Dr. Stuart means such as little as I do. But the reality of
union with Christ is lost through this loose way of speaking.
When Dr. Stuart says, " Llany of them fall away," I thought at
first it uiiglit be a misprint for " fell away," as we read of angels
who kept not their first estate, and are reserved in chains of
darkness to the judgment of the great day. But he says the elect
angels abide, in the present tense too, as is the whole statement.
The rest of the paragraph is really one mass of confusion. Their
everlasting union to the centre of all good appears to be increased,
confirmed, and secured.

As I have already said, there is no union to God. Angels,
and principalities, and powers, are made subject to Christ, and
the whole state of things will be reconciled to God in His ful-
ness, and brought into order under Christ, when the fulness of
time has come. God has given to Him, the exalted man, to
be head over all things to the church, which is His body, the
fulness of Him who fills all in all (comp. Eph. iv. 9, 10) ; but in-
creasing, conjoining, securing of union with God, is an idea
utterly foreign to Scripture, and excludes what is in Scripture
by what is substituted for it.

I will just remark that goodwill to men is not the form of
the angels' words in Luke, but good pleasure (vjSoxia) in men.
He does not take hold of angels, but He taketh hold of the seed

G

82 SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

of Aloraliam ; and it is beautiful to see the unjealous delight of
these holy heings in the plans of God's glory, though in others
than themselves, for " His delight (Wisdom's) was in the sons
of men." But the reciprocating song of earth, when He had
finished His work, is all confusion. The babes and sucklings
spoken of in Psalm viii are celebrating Messiah according
to Psalm cxviii., a prophecy of which several verses are cited as
to the latter days by the Lord and the apostles, particularly by
Peter, the apostle of the circumcision. It is the anticipation of
that day, " the day which the Lord hath made," when hosanna
to the Son of David will resound, not from the mouths of babes
and sucklings, and the crowd that were divinely compelled to
do it, lest the stones should have to cry out, but from a j)eople
willing in the day of His power, when His heart will set Him
in the chariots of His willing people. And note here, in this
remarkable anticipation of that day, the expression " peace in
heaven." It is not till Satan and his angels are cast out thence
that the full accomplishment of this will take place. Then in
due time they shall say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name
of the Lord. Till then their house will be left unto them deso-
late, and tliey will not see Him. He meanwhile sits, not on
His own throne, but on His Father's, as He expressly states in
Eev. iii., according to the word : Sit on My right hand until I
make Thine enemies Thy footstool. Then Jehovah will send the
rod of His power out of Zion, and He will rule in the midst of
His enemies.^

The Lord had not finished His work when He entered into
Jerusalem. His course down here may be said, in a certain
sense, to have closed. His work He was just about to accom-
plish. But it is here summed up by Dr. Stuart, as God in

1 The careful reader of Scripture will see tliat, when rejected, His God and
Father took care that testimony should be rendered to Him as Son of God in tlie
resurrection of Lazarus, Sou of David in riding into tlie citj', Sou of man wlien
the Greeks came up. The last involved death. — John xi. xii.

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 83

Christ reconciling all things to Himself, whether they be things
in earth or things in heaven. There is no such passage, no such
statement in Scripture. Two passages are confounded, and
both misapplied. God, we read in the end of 2 Cor. v., was in
Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing to them
their trespasses. But the world would not have Him : and,
having accomplished the work of atoning redemption and gone
into glory, having been made sin for us. He sends out His
ambassadors to beseech men to be reconciled to God. Blessed
gospel testimony and grace ! There is another passage on quite
a different subject, in Col. i. All the fulness [rrav rb --XrisM^wa,
a word of all moment against the Gnostic heresies — compare ii.
9) was pleased to dwell in Him, and . . . by Him to
reconcile all things to itself, by Him I say, whether they be
things^n heaven or things in earth,^ and you hath He recon-
ciled, in the body of His flesh through death. Here the
reconciliation of believers through the work of the cross is
clearly distinguished from the reconciling all things. They
were reconciled. " You hath He," etc. But God was by Him to
reconcile all things. This was to be done. The duality is
maintained all through the passage. First-born of every
creature, first-born from the dead, head of the church, His body.
This is summed up at the end of Eph, i. These two passages in
2 Cor. V. and Col. i. are mingled together (by Dr. S.) and con-
nected with His going on the ass to Jerusalem, and utter
confusion is the natural result.

There is an utter confusion too in all this part, one which
lias brought in abominable error as to Christ, in the foremost of
the evangelical German divines, and in the Dutch reformed in
America through them, namely, as if man was being restored.
Adam was the image of Him that Avas to come. But all is

^ Note here, when it is declared all knees are to bow, a third class is added, ra
Karax^^via, infernal things. They are gone out of heaven and earth, and are not
put in the classes reconciled.

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

utterly fallen and ruined in the first Adam. Xow, says the
Lord, is the judgment of this world ; and again, Now once in
the end of the world (awTslsIa ruv almcov) hath He appeared to
put away sin. The head of the blessing is man in a new state,
risen and exalted. ]\Ian, as in the flesh, has seen and hated both
Him and His Father.

As a general truth Dr. Stuart would not, and does not, deny
that we all fell in Adam. But there is more than this. Mail
has been fully tested as to whether as such he could be restored.
"Without law he was so bad that the flood was needed even in this
world ; under the law his sin became exceeding sinful ; and when
God after tliis came into the world in grace, making Himself of
no reputation, to bring love to sinners, and yet showing divine
presence and power in removing every effect of sin here below,
they spat in His face and crucified Him. Now, says the Lord,
is the judgment of this world. And we shall find that, what-
ever God set up good, the Jirst thing man did was to spoil all,
though God went on in grace. Man himself fell the first thing.
Noah got drunk the first thing. The golden calf was made
before ]\Ioses was down from the mount. Strange fire was
offered the first day, and Aaron never went into the holiest in
his robes of glory and beauty. Solomon, son of David, departed
from God ; and Nebuchadnezzar put the faithful ones in the
fire and became a beast. Finally in the rejection of Christ,
after all remedial means which were at God's disposal,' it was
demonstrated that the mind of the flesh was enmity against
God. They had seen and hated both Him and His Father.
Man must be born again (ui/c>jOn>). It is a new creation when
men were dead in sins, connected with the Second IVIan rejected
by man, and now raised from the dead and exalted to the right
hand of God.

That the blessed Lord was a true real man in flesh and blood
is as essential to Christianity as that He was God. In this I trust
I have no controversy with Dr. Stuart. The "Word was made

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 85

{ly'iHTt}) flesli and dwelt among us ; and, as the children were
partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part
of the same, made a little lower than the angels for the suffering
of death. This lies at the root, and is of the esseuce of Chris-
tianity, and a blessed truth it is, unspeakably so to us human
beings, that if a sinless man He was a true man, body and soul,
and, one may add, spirit. This was called in question by heresy
as soon as His deity Avas.

I tliink Scripture is more guarded than Dr. Stuart here, but
he is more guarded than some. Scripture never says, as some
have, bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh ; and Scripture is
wiser than we are. This has been used to make union in
incarnation, which is quite unscriptural. It issued in Irvingism ;
but the seed was under the clod in Scotch Presbyterianism, and
is still cherished as a garden plant in the semi-Irvingites of that
body. Dr. Stuart only goes so far as to sa}^ flesh out of our
flesh, bone out of our bone. Still it leads him half-way into the
evil

A new creation must in its nature leave out fallen man, as
fallen, for he is not a new creation but the old one, tliat which is
put off — no doubt the same person — but he is of, and lives in a
new creation, if in Christ Jesus. And what would the new
creation have been, as to moral beings, if fallen man was left out
as the object of it ? The elect angels have not left their first
estate. Dr. Stuart is as usual very vague. " The operation was
to be in man, already existing, and defiled by sin, which sepa-
rates while it defiles. It was from our corrupted stock He drew
His holy manhood, because not merely man like us, but of us."

What has this to do with the new creation ? AVas union in
incarnation ? Dr. Stuart does not say so, but what do his words
mean ? " Was Christ a new creation," he says, " casting Him-
self into the head of the existing family, and from it deriving
His own everlasting manhood?" He does not say it was union;
that he puts differently. But he states it while admitting He

86 SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

was holy, harmless, uudefiled, so as to lead the mind to a con-
nection of Christ with man in incarnation, which, while from
its uncertainty and vagueness it almost eludes the grasp, is
perilous from the way it leads the soul to the verge of union in
incarnation.

Christ assuredly was, as born into this world, and ever, hol3%
harmless, uudefiled ; but it shows the habitual confusion of
thought as to Christ, if we remember that this is spoken of
Christ as high priest (Heb. vii.) and carefully presented as
separate from sinners, in contrast too with high priests " taken
from among men." "When Scripture speaks of His taking flesh
(a vital truth for us, as I have already said), not only is it said
" a body hast Thou prepared Me ; " but, in stating His doing so,
the language is careful not to speak as Dr. Stuart speaks.
The children y.i-A.(iivm-n%iv of flesh and blood ; of Him, lur'iayjv
'Truga'TTATiaiug is used.

Now I repeat that there may be no mistake, — I hold His
being truly a man in flesh and blood, and with a human soul as
well as a body, to be a vital truth. It is the subject of the
adoring joy of my soul, nor do I think it is half enough taught
or believed, that He was a true man, while a sinless and holy
man. What is false is connecting this with the idea of union
with us. This vagueness as to union with man is so much the
more perilous, as Dr. Stuart insists that there is a greater differ-
ence between the brutes and man, than between man and .God.
I suppose he refers here to tlie low and degraded form of infi-
delity called evolution. In his horror of this (perhaps, for my
part I should say contempt) I should heartily join Dr. Stuart.
But as to our present point he leaves out the present condition
of man. Man was created for God ; but preferring to believe
the deceiver, he did his own will. He has been driven out of
Paradise, where he had to say to God, he was without God
(ukog) in the world. His adaptation to God was eternal misery
as having lost Him, and no^v this is not all the truth. Man, as

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 87

far as liis will could do it, has turned God out of this world
when come into it in grace. The mind of the flesh is enmity
against God. In the moral sense he is infinitely farther from
God than he is from the brute. If left to himself he can follow
the brute and worse, and as regards God has no understanding^
He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and tlie
world knew Him not. Man must be born anew to have any-
thing to say to Him, save enmity, sins, and judgment. Con-
science— the knowledge of good and evil — acquired by the fall
he has. Nor does gracious invitation restore him. " Wherefore,
when I came, was there no man ? when I called, was there none
to answer ? " "What He had seen and heard, that He testified,
says John, and no man receives His testimony. The real ques-
tion is not. Did Christ come in grace to such ? but did He unite
Himself to them ? or are renewed souls united to Him when,
having- accomplished redemption. He is exalted to glory ? Scrip-
ture speaks of the latter, and positively denies the former.

As to union in life, as I have said. Dr. Stuart is vague, and
uses figurative expressions, which may mean nothing or any-
thing. But he is distinct in identifying Christ's uniting Him-
self to'us, and taking sinners into union with Himself. This
last was tlie problem, he says, and solved by His uniting Him-
self to His people in death. Now Christ's uniting Himself to
His people is unknown to Scripture. He does not unite Himself
to sinners, nor does He even to saints : they are united to Him
by the Holy Ghost, when He is in glory. They are members of
His body (not He members of them), members of it when the
Head is glorified, and they are created again. The end of Eph.
L and early part of Eph. ii. are clear as to this point, and how it
takes place, and, where this is not seen, the real truth of unity
is wholly lost. How can the Holy One be united to a sinner,
if the union be real and spiritual ? " He that is joined to the
Lord is one spirit." Is that true of a mere sinner? And Scrip-
ture is express in denying it. " Except a corn of wheat fall

SS SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

IK TO THE GKOUND AND DIE, IT ABIDETH ALONE." HeuCG in

Ephesians, where union is spoken of, He is not seen till raised
from the dead and set at God's right hand in heavenly places.
And then, we being dead in sins, He hath quickened us together
with Him and made us sit in heavenly places in Him. Then
only is Scriptural and real union ; not in Christ born into tliis
world, united to sinners in their sins ; not a Christ on the cross
and, when He was most especially alone, united to those for
whom He was substituted before their sins were cancelled by
His precious blood ; not even a Christ glorified, united to sin-
ners or to any down here. Scripture never speaks of His being
united to us, but of saints being united to Him in glory in a
totally new life by the Holy Ghost, so that they become risen
and heavenly people.

Eemark too here, that where the Lord says He abode alone
till after He had died. He is speaking of the Son of man.
Testimony to His being Son of God was given in the resurrec-
tion of Lazarus, to His being Son of David in His riding into
Jerusalem. The Greeks come up. He says, " the hour is come
that the Son of man should be glorified." But to take this title
according to the counsels of God He must die. Son of God
according to Ps. ii. He was ; King of Israel, Messiah according
to the same Psalm, He was ; and surely, as to His personal title
to it. Son of man, but the kings of the earth stood up, and the
princes took counsel together. In a word. He must be rej^^cted
to take up tlie place of Son of man according to Ps. viii. So in
John i. Nathaniel owns Him according to Ps. ii. Son of God,
King of Israel. The Lord's answer is, that he should see more
henceforth (for Israel in John is rejected in the first chapter, to
own those born of God alone), " the angels of God ascending and
descending on the Son of man."

When Christ's birth, or His so wonderfull}' associating Him-
self with the called and repentant remnant of Israel in John's
baptism, is spoken of, His title is Son of God, not Son of man.

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 89

" That holy thing that shall be born of thee shall be called the
■Son of God," and the Father's voice, when heaven was opened,
and the Holy Ghost descended on Him alone, " This is my be-,
loved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Son of Man He
delighted to call Himself, but (forbidding, when His testimony
was rejected, Himself to be announced any more as the Christ :
Matt. xvi. ; Mark ix. ; Luke ix.) the Son of man must suffer
and be rejected, put to death, and rise again the third day, that
as the risen man in a wholly new position He might take the
place revealed of the Son of man in Daniel vii. and Ps. viii.

This doctrine of union of the Son of God with sinners in their
sins falsifies the whole nature of Christianity, a new creation,
and man in a new life, united to a glorified man in heaven, by
the Holy Ghost dwelling in him, consequent on the accomplish-
ment of redemption. Dr. Stuart says, " Christ united Himself
to His^ people by taking them to Himself in His death on
Calvary." If this be so, all the vague language of Dr. Stuart,
and the plain language of bolder men, as to union in incarnation,
and also the utterly unscriptural doctrine of His bearing our
sins all His life, is M'holly set aside. But what does union here
mean ? " That He might receive us into oneness He stood in
our place." This I believe, but it contradicts what is said a few
lines higher up.

That all His people were seen as if they were there, because
He represented them, and as He -bore their sins, so also they
died with Him is, blessed be God, true. But that has nothing
to do with union. It is another great and precious truth,
substitution. He stood in our place, as Dr. Stuart most justly
says ; but that is not union but the opposite of it. He accepted
our penalty. Thank God, and blessed be the name of Him who
has loved us. He did. But that is not union, but standing there
for us alone. All that Dr. Stuart says of its effect as to our
sins I cordially say Amen to, as a poor sinner profiting by it,
though it has done far more also for us, and glorified God Him-

90 SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

self, so that man goes into His glory. But this is not union.
Union with Christ is in living saints when He is exalted as
man to the right hand of God, the work of redemption, of perfect
redemption, being accomplished when He was alone.

All that Dr. Stuart says as to His being broken in pieces is
all wrong. A bone of Him was not to be broken. In the pass-
age " This is my body which is broken for you," " broken " is
not really in the text. But on this I do not dwell farther. As
Dr. Stuart says, " He who was to be the bond of union for ever
was left alone as no other ever was, or can be." With what is
here said my heart unites, but He was then alone. Only I must
remark the customary looseness as to Scriptural truth in the
words " The Lamb of God taking away the sins of the world."
This is quite unsound, and nowhere found in Scripture. The
sins of the world are not taken away, or there could be no
judgment ; indeed all would be saved. The end of this para-
graph, in page 15, I think very objectionable, but it does not
specially bear on my subject.

All that which follows, loose and unscriptural though it
be in expression yet true in result, contradicts consequently all
the statements as to union before or on the cross. " Through
His death the Lord Jesus sends His Holy Spirit into the hearts
of His redeemed ; and by that Spirit, in the day of our effectual
calling, we are brought into a wondrously high and holy union
with Christ and with God." Now I have already said, in the
Scripture it is by the Spirit, when we have received it, we are
united to a glorified Christ, the only true and Scriptural union,
and we may add, so of all true saints with one another, is by the
same one Spirit who dwells in each of them. No doubt Christ
had to die to send the Holy Spirit down here : a plain proof if
we are brought into union with Him by it, that He was not
united to us in death ; but " sends through His death" has really
no sense. We were unfit to receive it, save as washed in His
blood and forgiven ; but sending through His death has really

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 91

no sense. " The Holy Ghost was not yet [ given] (was not as
known in the New Testament, down here, though as a divine
2:)erson of course eternal in His person, and operative in every
work of God), because Jesus was not yet glorified," is, M'hat
Scripture says, John viL If He went not away, the Comforter
would not come : showing clearly the place Christ must be in,
as man, before we could be united to Him, He the head (Eph. i.)
and we the body, "We, sons by faith in Jesus withal, and He
the Spirit of adoption, making us, being sons, cry Abba, Father,
the power, and giving the consciousness of this new relationship
with the Father, and membership of Christ. But Scripture
never says, His Holy Spirit. It is incongruous, though He bo
called the Spirit of Christ, as present in us, in Eom. viii.

Kor is union with God a thought known to Scripture : a
common one I grant it, but common to the unscriptural careless-
ness so usual among Christians. All this is loose confusion.
And let it not be supposed that these things are immaterial
The true consciousness of our relationships with God and the
Father and with Christ is the atmosphere in which our Christian
affections breathe and are developed. Communion with the
Father and with His Son Jesus Christ, and with God, Scripture
speaks of, and it is our highest blessedness, but of union with
God never. It is unintentional blasphemy. Union is with
Christ, the man in glory. Speaking of union with God only
destroys the veiy idea of union.

The statements of Dr. Stuart on the Trinity are hazardous,
going beyond Scripture ; but I suppose he means what is truth,
and it is not my present subject, so I leave it there. The his-
tory of the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Ghost, which
professedly divided the Greek and Eoman Churches, and which
was a metaphysical novelty, forbidden even at Eome in the time
of Leo the Great, ought to have taught Christians in these days
(whilst holding the doctrine of the Trinity personally, and unity
in theGodhead without wavering,) to avoid metaphysical theology

92 SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION

in such holy matters, for this question of procession is mere meta-
physics in divine things.

I now turn to " some of the great properties of this oneness."
Now in Dr. Stuart's remarks on these, I gladly recognise piety
and personal delight in Christ. But true union is lost in his
remarks. He spealcs of gathering together in one all the redeemed
in earth and heaven. Of this Scripture never does speak. It
speaks of heading up all things under Christ. And it speaks of
dying, not for the Jews only, hut to gather together in one the
children of God Avliich were scattered abroad ; so that then
they had not hitherto been gathered. The unity of God's chil-
dren down here is spoken of in a double way : the unity of
children in a familv, in their relationship with a holy Father, as
in John xvii., Christ the first-born among many brethren ; and
the unity of the body united to Christ, the head in glory. But
this Scriptural unity and oneness is lost in the vagueness of all
the redeemed in heaven and earth. That the unity of the saints
in the New Testament will not cease when they are in glory, I
surely believe ; they will then be made perfect in one. That the
body will then be complete, also, the Church of the first-born,
and the just men (the saints of the Old Testament) perfected, I
do not doubt, though God has reserved some better thine; for us.

But the unity spoken of in Scripture is by the Holy Ghost
sent down from heaven. As to the body, by one Spirit we are
all baptized into one body, Jews or Greeks, Barbarian or Scytliian.
This clearly could not be before. The Jew, on the contrary, was
strictly bound to Ireep up the middle wall of partition, and
sinned if he did not. Now by the cross it is broken down ;
and He has made both one, and reconciled both in one body to
God, having slain the enmity, and we are builded together for an
habitation of God through the Spirit. There is one body and
one Spirit. There was the unity of a nation before, the great
body of whom were not converted at all. The glorified head, the
man in glory, did not yet exist, who is head over all things, head

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 93

of the body. It is not as tlie creating life-giving Word and Son
of God that Christ is head over all things, and to the Church
His body. It is, as is evident from Epli. i., the man whom God
has raised and set at His right hand. Then only, too, the Holy
Ghost was sent down from heaven ; He could not be (John vii.)
till Jesus was glorified. And as we have seen, from 1 Cor. xii.,
then it was by tlie baptism of the Holy Ghost that the saints
were baptized into one body.

So also it is as to known sonship, and the unity connected
with it, " The heir, so long as he is a child, differs nothing from
a servant though he be lord of all. . . . But when the
fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a
woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were under
the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons ; and because
ye are^ons God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your
hearts, crying Abba, Father." Thus they are brought into
known relationship with the Father, to be fully accomplished in
glory, when they will be made perfect in one, Christ the first-born
among many brethren. There are two unities, that of the family
and of the body : one a relationship with the Father, Christ
being the first-born ; the other true union with Christ the head,
formed by the Holy Ghost come down from heaven, consequent
on His being glorified as man : — unities of which Christians
were bound to maintain the manifestation on earth, according to
John xvii. and Eph. iv. In both respects they have failed.
The wolf has caught the sheep and scattered them (thank God,
he cannot pluck (catch) them out of the good Shepherd's hand),
and he has set up the travestie of unity in Popery, and all sorts
of churches, first national, and then free, among those who could
no longer bear the corruptions of Eomanism.

Scriptural unity and union is lost, nor scarce cared for, save
that God is awakening a craving after it in these last days. It
is confounded with communion, and union of organisations, which
cannot be the unity of the body nor of the family of God. Puty

94 SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

as to it is forgotten, and men are content to leave it to be fulfilled
in another world. Let us see what Dr. Stuart makes of it in
these last pages of his sermon. The bond of children is con-
founded with the membership of the body, and this is said to be
similar to the union between the Father and the Son, a gross and
utter mistake ; as if the analogies of John xvii. could be applied
to the union of the members with the head. Apply only the
teaching of Ephesians or 1 Cor. xii. to the wondrous statements
of John xvii. and see how it offends every moral sense and
feeling.

The rest of this paragraph, describing communion, I have
not a word to say against. Only in strange confusion using an
account of tlie state of the world (habitable earth) under Christ's
reign. Dr. Stuart makes the spiritual flock to be a " mingled "
one composed of wolves and lambs together, a sentence which I
profess myself wholly unable to comprehend : if he had merely
used it as a vague statement of peace, I should, but he says, it is
a mingled flock. I first thought it meant unconverted and
converted together ; but he goes on to speak of spiritual com-
munion together, and what the mingling is I do not know.

How wholly union, in the Scriptural sense, is lost in the
thought of the state of the soul, is seen in what follows. That
Adam was the head of his fallen race no Christian denies : but
what union is to a covenant, what, " as in Adam all die " has to
do with dissolving union with his covenant, I know not. ]SJ"ext
it is union to the world in its allurements and power. "What
has this to do with the reality of union ? Then we have union
to sin, which has no sense at all Sin in the flesh we read of,
captivity to it, deliverance from it ; but union to it only bewil-
ders the mind. It is tliere always in the flesh, though we are no
longer under the law of sin and death, Christ having died to sin
once, and He being our life in the power of the Spirit. Then
we read of union to self. Self is self I do not live to self if I
know the power of redemption ; but all this has nnthing to do

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 95

with iiDion or unity. It is my personal state as having died in
Christ, and the risen Christ being now my new life.

As to crucifying being a Kngering death but a certain one, it
is all a mischievous delusion. If I am crucified with Christ, I am
dead — dead with Christ, dead to the law, ye are dead, crucified
with Christ, nevertheless alive ; but not I, but Christ living in
me : there is no lingering or gradual death spoken of in Scrip-
ture. I am to reckon myself dead, and then for practice to bear
about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus. Only when
actually dead, can it be said there is no sin in me. The w^hole
theory here is un scriptural ; but this by the by. Union is lost
in the vague use of it for the state of the soul. Union with
Christ is not simply life. As the Father raiseth up the dead and
quickeneth them, so the Son quickeneth whom He will. This
is divine work. Union is connected with Christ seen as a man
whom God has raised from the dead, and us together with Him.
In connection with union He is not seen as life-giving Son, but
as a man raised by God when He was dead. Hence in Col. it is
also connected with our having been forgiven all tres[ asses.

As to the vine Dr. Stuart is contradicting himself, for he has
recognised in this sermon that there are temporary branches
which are taken away. I believe no member of His body wiU
ever be separated from Him, but the application of the vine
does not hold good.

How we get strength from His crucifixion in weakness I
know not, save perhaps by moral experience realising it.
Scripture does not speak of it. We abide in Him, if we eat
His flesh and drink His blood, and, in this sense eating Him,
live by Him. But it is never said that Ave derive our strength
fromZTjs crucifixion. Joy and fruit are our state. Union is another
thing. Such statements deny its reality, and confound commu-
nion and union.

The last paragraph is sorrowful — sorrowful that Dr. Stuart's
heart and conscience were not affected by what he speaks of. He

96 SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

recognises that the world's admiration has been turned into a
taunt, with a saying sometimes, — " Behold how they hate one
another." Yet their mutual love is as genuine, and in the same
circumstances would prove as intense, as eighteen hundred years
ago. This is to be power for the salvation of the world. What
is ? That it would prove as intense in the same circumstances.
Does the world say now, " Behold how these Christians love one
another " ? Does it not mock at their divisions ? Is not corrupt
Christianity taunting them with it ? Is not the world turning
openly infidel ? What is this change of circumstances but the
worldliness and scattering of Christians ? Besides, how is it to
be power for the conversion of the world, when, in the loftiness
of his heart, he (the worldly man) would count it despicable in
himself to be capable of such an affection ? " It speaks as a
living witness in the hour when the Spirit moves on his heart."
No doubt, but then it is not by it he was attracted when worldly.
It is the individual already under the influence of the Spirit who
is attracted by it. " To the world," Dr. Stuart tells us, " Chris-
tian love is incomprehensible." Yet it has great power in con-
verting it. It is despicable in its eyes, but it is an attractive
spectacle, ordained for the world's conversion.

The next property or power in it is in our seen union with
Christ in heaven. What this means I know not. ]\Ien may see
the fruits of it perhaps, but, as distinct from these, where the
affections are set on heavenly things, it cannot be seen at all.
There is nothing to say to it in the passage Dr. Stuart quotes.
The chief priests, etc., took knowledge of them that they had
been with Jesus, that is, when on earth. The general effect of
communion with the Lord I surely do not question ; but this
confusion of comnnmion with union, both in its reality and in
its forming one body on earth, is one of the great evils of the
day. It really denies union and promotes disunion among saints.
If they can have communion from time to time, — shake hands
across the hedge, as has been said, — they are content.

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 97

But there is a craving, and from God. Union has therefore
been sought in other ways. Of this even the " Evangelical
Alliance " was and is a witness ; but the name betrays its true
character. For an alliance there must be two or more. They
agreed to remain sects, and to meet notwithstanding. Indeed
they confessed they had pretended to attain to too much — unity,
and they must be content with union. In America it has been
sought by interchanges of pulpits. But there error and truth
are all mingled together, and indifference to truth is cultivated.
In the English Establishment unity is sought in the same way.
The most marked effort at unity is in the Presbyterian bodies.
In Canada they have coalesced. In the United States the New
School and the Old School, that is, Arminians and Calvinists
have joined.

lU". Stuart alludes to the union of the Eeformed Presbyterians
with what is called the Free Church of Scotland. As an outward
thing one may rejoice in seeing fewer division among Protestants.
As far as my acquaintance with their state goes, the " Covenant-
ers " were, perhaps from their small numbers and adherence to
principle, as a general thing, the most godly and living of the Pres-
byterian bodies. I trust they may not lose it in being swamped
in a larger one. But it has nothing to do with the unity of the
body of Christ. Imperfect as the views of Dr. Stuart, as to unity
are, as he sees merely the building of Christians together as the
children of their heavenly Father (a blessed union surely, but
not the body of Christ, union by the Holy Ghost to the man
Christ Jesus in glory, so as to form His body) ; inadequate and
defective as is his general idea of gathering into one all the
redeemed in heaven and in earth, of which indeed Scripture
does not speak, the unity he does know is wholly inapplicable,
and indeed contrary, to these unions of ecclesiastical bodies.
They have not the pretension to be all saints.

I do not now discuss whether multitudinous bodies are right
or wrong ; but they are multitudinous bodies, not a gathering of

H

98 SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

saints, as such, to Jesus' name. They are not, cannot pretend to
be, the body of Christ, nor a part of it, nor even the true family
of God. Further, tlieir object is to impose religion on the state,
to make the state act on Christian principles. The gathering
together in one the children of God which were scattered abroad
does not enter their minds, but getting the state to act Chris-
tianly; and tliey insist on the authority and independence of the
church exactl}'- on popish grounds, not that of a little despised
flock suffering under its persecution, but pressing its own prin-
ciples on the state. That Christianity has modified men's habits
is quite true. Men do not do in the light what they do in the
dark. But making the world Christian in its ways is not
gathering together the children of God. It is a return to
Judaism,^ as indeed the " Covenanters," true-hearted people as
they were, clearly did. They took the sword, and perished with
the sword.

As to the unity of the body, it does not seem to cross their
minds, formed on earth as it was by the baptism of the Holy
Ghost. But the whole Free Church principle was a delusion.
Christ is not the King of the church. Where is such a thought
in Scripture? "King of saints" in the Bevelation is a false reading
for " King of nations," borrowed from Jeremiah. King of the Jews
Scripture and the world's mockery own Him to be. That He
will rule over the nations is clearly revealed. He will take to
Him His great power and reign when divine wrath comes.- The
kings of the cartli did rise up against the Lord and against His
anointed. They will make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb
will overcome them ; for He is King of kings, and Lord of lords.
But Christ is not now sitting on His own throne at all, but on
the Father's (Eev. iii. 21). God has said to Him, " Sit on my
right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool." And there

^ For the Amenca!i war no suitable hymns, we read, were found ; they were
obliged to use the Psalms. There is Israel ; they could sing and fight. So indeed
in Scotland.

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION. 99

the blessed One is in glory, gathering now His joint-heirs, by
the Sj^irit sent down from heaven through the gospel, joint
heirs, once all united, and the manifested body of Christ, but
whom the wickedness of man and craft of satan have long ara
scattered, — caught the sheep and scattered them — yea, made of
that which was the church the most heinous corruption under
heaven.

The union of Presbyterian or other bodies may remove par-
tially the reproach of Protestantism ; with the unity of God's
children as a family it has nothing to do, and, as to the unity
of the body of Christ by the Holy Ghost here below, wholly
ignores it.

King of the church is an utterly anti-scriptural thought.
When He will reign, we shall reign with Him. He is now
sitting at the Father's right hand awaiting that time. ]\Iean-
while, as children of one heavenly family, in relationship with
the Father, as members of one only body, the body of Christ, the
church, we should be one by the Holy Ghost. For Christians
the crucial truth now is the unity of the body formed on earth.
Where is it ? As I have often said, if Paul addressed a letter
to the Church of God which is at Edinburgh, who would get it ?
It would go to the (ZcarMetter office. Alas ! that it is so. May
our hearts and consciences feel for the ruin of the Lord's once
beautiful flock ; look with desire- for the unity of the scattered
sheep ; and the unity of His Spirit manifesting His body on earth.
The arrangements of ecclesiastical bodies cannot effect this.

That I have not misstated the link of Church and State as
desired by Free and lieformed Churches, we have only to read
Dr. Goold claiming acceptance of " Covenanters' " principles. Dr.
Eainy, and Mr. M'Dermid, where it is stated in language stronger
and more positive than that which I have used. The church
claimed to have free entrance into every chamber of the national
life. They are to bring nations, in their national capacity, into
religious subjection to God, and conformed to His will. I only

SCRIPTURAL UNITY AND UNION.

notice it now, not to controvert it as a system — a system in
which Popery has a far better chance — but to show that their
system, and their unity, have nothing whatever to do Avitli
gathering together in one the children of God which were scat-
tered abroad, or with the unity of the body. "What is called for
is the full recognition of and submission to the authority of the
Word of God, the Scriptures, the recognition of the presence of
the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven consequent on the
accomplishment of redemption, and Jesus as man being at the
right hand of God, sent down to abide with us for ever, and
dwell in believers and in the assembly, and the waiting for
God's Son from heaven. The unity of the Spirit is the only
true unity, till God heads up all things in heaven and earth in
one under Christ. He gave Himself to gather together in one
the children of God which were scattered abroad. The unity of
the body God will maintain till it be displayed in glory. The
members of Christ's body will not be separated from Him ; but
the manifestation of this on earth, by the power and grace of
the Holy Ghost, according to 1 Cor. xii., was the calling of the
saints, and, though shorn of much of its glory,. their responsi-
bility now. They have the promise of all needed grace and
gift in Eph. iv., according to His faithfulness who gave Himself
for us to redeem us from all iniquity, and to purify to Himself
a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

HAVE WE A EEVELATION FROM GOD?^

It is evidently an all-important question, Have we a revelation
from God ? a communication of His thoughts on which we can
rely ? Is there nothing certain, nothing certainly known, no-
thing which enables me to say, I have God's truth ? Have I
from God such a revelation of His mind as is authentic and
authoritative, such that I can know from Himself what God is ?

I cannot trust in man. INIan who has not had such a revela-
tion is lost in what degrades human nature. I cannot trust
the church or doctors. They too have their history, and what
a history it is ! — and in these days they are a reed which, if a
man lean on it, breaks and pierces the hand. Where am I to
turn to be able to say, Here I have the truth I can love and rest
on ? Here is what God has given me from Himself ? To have
this I must have two things — a revelation from God, if every
man is a liar, here is truth. But I must have it also communi-
cated authentically to be able to reckon it. It is a matter of fact
that men have not known God, nor His character, without a re-
velation. Universal heathenism, civilised and uncivilised, is the
witness of it. They have not liked retaining Him in their
knowledge when He was revealed to them. It is no use telling
me that the worship of Lingm and Yoni, of cats and monkeys
and fetishes, is a true knowledge of God. It may prove that man
wants a God, that he cannot help liaving one ; but, if so, that he
cannot find Him, or will not have Him.

The case then stands thus : I look all around to find God
and His truth. The heathen cannot point Him out ; I cannot
find man among them that is not degraded. He deifies his
passions and adds degradation to them.

^ Ejicyclopcedia Britannica. Ninth Edition. Article " Bible. "

T02 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

I am told perhaps, But Plato, does lie tell us nothing of
God ? Well, if I leave the universal heathenism, and enclose
myself in the narrow groves of the academy, I find one who
teaches the grossest communism, women and all, and makes men
and women a mere stock for breeding human beings for the re-
public, and holds that the supreme God can have no direct com-
munication with the creature ; but that it must be by demons,
and mediately, perhaps, the X&'yoj. He was, with the Eabbhiical
Jews, strange to say, the inventor of purgatory. The later
forms of it brought in Arianism, I cannot find it among Maho-
medans, nor their paradise of Houris above and the sword below.
The Koran, which on the face of it is a wretched imposition — re-
velations invented for the occasion that called for them — the
Koran or the sword is not a revelation of God, save as a judicial
scourge of Christendom. The Jews cannot tell me of God, cast
out from Him according to their own Scriptures. Am I to learn
it in the intrigues of the Jesuits, rendering every nation under
heaven restless ? or in the infallibility of the Pope, which no-
body, but grossly ignorant partizans, believes and history gives
the lie to? am I to worship the golden idols of the mother of God
set up on steeples and highways where there is power to do so ?
Is this to be my resting-place ?

Shall I turn to Protestants? But the mass of teachers
amongst them are infidels in most parts. Perhaps I may have
the choice of Puscyism or liberalism, or countless opinions and
heresies which contradict and destroy each other. Am I told
that there is a real consent in the evangelical creeds ? I do not
quite admit it ; Luther did not think so. They all agree in one
thing — baptismal regeneration. But if I inquire whether the
teachers believe in tlie fonnularies they sign — not one of them :
they are obsolete. What am I to do ? Say with Pilate, AYhat
is truth ? and wash my hands in despair and give up Christ to
His enemies ? But we have the word of God to rest on.

Ah, here there is something — God worthily revealed. But —

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 103

'the most Tinkindest cut of all' — it is not, I am now told, the word
of God. It is a compilation of various traditions and documents
some seven or eight centuries after it professes to be written,
drawn God knows whence (only not from Him), and by God
knows whom ; partly a law produced some seven or eight hundred
years after it professed to be written, with some of its documents
recognised as already existent, perhaps, at that date ; professed
prophecies put together by some compiler frequently under some
name they do not belong to ; a long conflict having subsisted
between the moral element and the ceremonial or priestly, but
the former got the victory in Ezra's time, but only then, though
they never had the law as it is till Josiah's time ! and yet,
strange to say, they got the victory only to fix the nation in cere-
monialism and the authority of priestly tradition which it had
never been before ! Besides the two chief documents, however,
from which the early history is compiled, and other parts suited
to them by the compiler, another author has been discovered
whose writings are intermingled with the two chief ones, and
whose object is to attach importance to the progenitors of
northern Israel. Prophets claim an intuition coming from God ;
still their great object was not future events.

Such are the Scriptures. They are, if we are to believe these
learned men, not the word of God, but an uncertain compilation
flowing from the progress of Israel's history, partly from priests,
under whom the laws grew up,- never complete till Ezra, partly
from prophets contending with their principles (not, mind, with
their sins against God or their breaches of the law, it was not
formed yet), partly from lay life in the midst of the people. These
are the factors (that is the word) of the Old Testament. As to
the New : well, four epistles may be Paul's, the expression of the
higher spiritual life in the Christian ; the rest spurious or doubt-
ful, and much of it comparatively a modern attempt to reconcile
the Pauline and Petrine factions in the Church, or a late fruit of
Alexandrian philosophy and reveries or Jewish symbolism.

I04 HAVE IV E A REVELATION FROM GOD?

It is no great wonder if a very large body of the French
Protestant clergy declared they would sign nothing, no Apostles'
Creed, nor anything else ; they supposed men would have to
believe something, but they did not know what it was yet ; and
the poor laity, not so learned, but more of babes, said, as I know
them to have done, " Pourtant, si nous sommes des Chretiens, il
nous faut un Christ quelcouque" (^Yell, but if we are Cluistians,
we must have some kind of Christ). Such is the point to which
what is called the Cliurch has brought us. Not now priestly
ceremonies and traditions combated and corrected by prophets
professing divine intuition, but priestly and ecclesiastical
ceremonies and traditions bringing weariness to the spirit
(where it does not rush to popery as a refuge), merging into
heartless and flippant infidelity, living in a speculative pseudo-
historical outside, without one spiritual apprehension of the
divine substance of what lies at their door and before their
heart — speculations which last some twenty years or so, first
Paulus' gross denial of miracles and resurrection, then Strauss
with his mythical Christ, and then Baur and the Tubingen
school, the false speculative fancies of which are already judged
and given up ;^ and now the later forms of these and De Wette
and the like, warmed up anew for Scotland ; as the English in
such things generally do when they have passed their day in
their native country.

It is admitted that Professor Smith has exacrsrerated what a
child may see in Scripture, and, I add, through ignorance of
Scripture not understood it, and that his system as to the
books of the New Testament cannot hold water. I shall be

^ That I may not be thought from sciiptural prejudice to overstate the judg-
ment formed on Baur's theory, I may refer to a laudatory article on Baur in the
columns of the Encrjdojoocdia Britannica, in which the article of Professor Smith
which has given rise to these remarks is found. " Unhappily, " so the article closes,
" his own opinions were influenced, not merely by his study of facts, but by a
great speculative system which dominated his intelligence and prevented him
from seeing," etc.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 105

told that for all that Astruc's theory and Baur's reasoning have
produced an immense effect. They have in those not taught of
God ; not in substituting any certain system, but in turning
lifeless dogmatism into speculative infidelity and scepticism.

And where is the word of God ? where it always was, as
light is in the sun. J\Ien may have found olive leaves, and
these be broken up into small patches of light, or hang over
the spots in a way not to be explained. It may be found
that the spots are coincident with auroras and magnetic distur-
bances ; but those who have eyes walk, as tliey ever did, in its
full and clear divinely-given light. It shines as it ever did, and
the entering in of the word gives light and understanding to the
simple. They have a nature that can estimate it in the true
character God gave it, which these learned men have not ; for
He hides these things from the wise and prudent, and reveals
them unto babes. " They shall be all taught of God," is the de-
claration of the Lord and the prophet for those who can hear.

That the Old Testament Scriptures were collected into their
present form a good w^hile before the Lord was on earth, no one
is interested in contesting ; indeed, far from it, for Christ owns
the divisions which now exist. Attributed to the great San-
hedrim, on (it is said) insufficient ground, or referred to Ezra,
they were at any rate so collected ; though Mr. Smith slurs it
quickly over to refer to doubts as to Esther. Josephus is
very express. There are not, he tells us, a multitude of books,
but just twenty-two : that they had histories and writings after
Artaxerxes, but they had not the same authority, they were
not tested by prophets. That the books -vvere collected, we can
thank God for. Whether the history of Paith be connected
with Judges, or the Lamentations with Jeremiah, or relegated
to the Ketubim, is of no sort of consequence. Their place in
the history is plain upon the face of them. It is not to the
believer a question who wrote Paith. He receives them as the
word of God. God is their author. It is, as Matthew expresses

io6 HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD ?

it, ■j--h Kvi'io-o bia rcu -io;pr,-ou — of the Lord by the prophet. It is
also true that, in collecting the books, short notes may have been
added, such as, There they are to this day, or other brief note of
the kind. Such there are, interesting as divinely-given history,
but in no way affecting the revelation. The book clearly shows
that as a whole it is inspired and ordered in its structure by
God ; and when all this was done to make it a whole, this
divine ordering of God's hand and wisdom may be in such notes
as elsewhere. The question is. Is this book given to us of God
as a revelation, given to us as it is ? Is what is in it revealed of
God, or man's thoughts ?

The booli professes to be an account of all God's ways from
tlie creation (and even in purpose before it) till the Lord comes,
and even to the end of time, till God can say yiyove, It is done ;
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending. It pro-
fesses further to give us a revelation of the Father in the Son.
Is this immense undertaking, a revelation of God, or a develop-
ment of national life in a little petty nation, for our learned
men can see no more ? No man hath seen God at any time : the
only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of tlie Father, lie
hath declared Him. Is that a revelation of God or not ? That
is, is the account I have of it of God, as God has given it to
us ? for otherwise it is no revelation to me or to any one else.

Serious questions these. The very undertaking proves its
source. Had man done it, what should we have liad ? AVhat
have we outside this wondrous book ? Their theory is, it is an
imposture ; for giving statements hundreds of years later than
their alleged date, as if all were written by inspiration at that
date, is an imposition, and this from a nation constantly running
into idolatry, and condemned by the book ! And further (can any
but learned men be blessed with such credulity?) persuading the
people whom the forgers were condemning by it, that they had
always had this law as a law from God Himself, when, if these
doctors and the Josiah theory be true, they never had had it at

HA VE IVE A REVELATION FROM GOD? to?

all, it was bran new, or some old traditions furbished up from
different old documents for the occasion ; and remark further—
for this we must now look into— that Christ and His apostles
either from God confirmed the delusion or deceived the people,
and all those they taught, on purpose! That an imposture,
moreover, is the holiest production that ever appeared in the
world, bearing to every one that has any moral sensibilities a
divine stamp upon it, which nothing else in the world has, crcdat
Judaciis Apellcs. As Eousseau said, it would have been a gi-eater
miracle for man to invent such a life as Christ's, than to be it.

I will touch on some of the grounds they build their theory on ;
but I first turn to the book itself. First of all, it is treated as a
whole by Christ and His apostles as having a well-known and
specific character. "The Scripture cannot be broken" (John x. 35).
" Theja opened he their understanding, that they should under-
stand the Scriptures" (Luke xxiv. 45). " Search the Scriptures"
(John V. 39). They were a recognised collection which the Lord
owned. And, yet more precisely, owned as we have them now
and the Jews had them then. All things must be fulfilled
which are written in the Law of Moses, and in the Propliets and
in the rsalms, concerning INIe. Here is the Torah, Nebiim, and
the Ketubim,— the three divisions which the Jews distinguish
by the Gradus Mosaicus, Gradus Propheticus, and the Bath Kol ;
in the two first, authorised by Num. xii. 6-8, the latter human,
in which their idea is that the ^^Titer, though inspired, expressed
the sentiments animating his own mind, not knowing that all
that was contained in it was the mind of the Holy Ghost ;
which is doubtless true often in such books as the Psalms.

Christ owned, then, what we call the Old Testament, and
owned it as we and the Jews have it. But He goes farther ;
He owns them according to their present character and authors.
" Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth
the law ?" (John vii. 19). " Moses, therefore, gave you circum-
cision, not because it is of Closes, but of the father-" (22).

108 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

" There is one that accuseth you, even Moses in whom ye trust ;
for had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed Me ; for he
wrote of Me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye
believe My words ? " (John v. 45-47). " If he called them gods,
unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be
broken " (x. 35). This alludes to the Judges being called Elohim
in Hebrew. They shall bring him to the "judges" being very
commonly Elohim, god or gods. "Abraham said unto him, They
have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them. And he said.
Nay, Father Abraham ; but if one went anto them from the dead,
they will repent. And he said unto him. If they hear not Moses
and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose
from the dead" (Luke xvi. 29-31). How true it has been with
these poor Jews and these unhappy infidels ! Christianity and
the resurrection of the Lord are of no avail if IMoses and the
prophets are not believed, and believed in their writings, for
surely they had them. " He wrote of Me. If ye believe not
his writings, how shall ye believe My words ? "

Eemark further here that Sej)tuagint translations, the " Com-
piler's" additions, and all that these speculators allege, were there
then the same as now, the same collection, the collection as we
have it ; and Christ owned and insisted on the authority of that,
and that as being Moses' writings.

But further, after His resurrection, not even when dealing with
Jews who owned them, but of and from Himself for His disciples,
the risen Lord, " beginning at Moses and all the prophets, ex-
pounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Him-
self" (Luke xxiv. 27). Think of the risen Christ expounding to his
disciples a set of ill-compiled and contradictory old documents,
pretended to be IMoses and the prophets. But this is not all ;
they will say perhaps — for what will the folly of learned infidelity
not say? — they were only the things concerning Himself which He
selected. " These are the words which I spake unto you while I
was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GODf log

written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the
Psalms, concerning Me. Then opened He their understanding
that they might understand the Scriptures, and said unto them,"
Thus it is written." Ah ! the written word is what He valued.
Only just thiuk of the risen Lord opening with divine power
His disciples' understanding to understand a spurious compila-
tion professing to be written by Moses and others ! That He
should do so that we might understand the Divine Word we can
well conceive, and, if taught of God, we know the need of it;
but to do it for an imposition, pretending to be what it is not,
an infidel speculator alone would believe. But the "unjust
knoweth no shame."

Again, the Lord recognises the prophets as we have seen,
and specifies the one most called in question, Daniel, "the
abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet."
The reading is called in question in Mark, but not in Matthew,
and the reading in Mark confirms the genuineness in Matthew,
and further recognises the commandments as given by Moses
to be spoken by God ; for God commanded, saying, Honour thy
father and thy mother (Matt. xv. 4) ; and again Isaiah (verse 7),
Well did Esaias prophesy concerning you, saying. This is in the
first part. But He takes up also the second part of the " Great
Unnamed." There was delivered to Him the book of the pro-
phet Esaias, and when He had opened the book, He found the
place where it was written (ah! that is the word), The Spirit of the

Lord is upon me And He began to say, This day is this

Scripture fulfilled in your ears. He was content to accept it as
Isaiah, and affirms, what is of far more importance, and only
really so, that it was of God Himself (Luke iv. 17-21). In the
same chapter He authenticates the books of Kings and the his-
tory of Elijah and Elisha. He indirectly authenticates again the
last part of Isaiah (Luke vii. 27) in the prophecy of John
Baptist (Is. xl. 3). I need hardly quote more passages.

The discourses, Hfe, and outgoings of the Lord's soul, though

I TO HAVE IVE A REVELATION FROM COD?

going necessarily far beyond it, and showing it was to be set
aside, as under the old covenant, for the accomplishment of
far more glorious counsels, that the law and the prophets were
until John, since then the kingdom of heaven was preached,
— the whole discourses and life of Jesus, I repeat, if the Gospels
be read in simplicity of heart, will be found interwoven with
the truth of the law and the prophets as they are presented to us
in ordinary Bibles, authenticating them as they are, so that you
must tear away all the revelation of Christ in them to remove
the authority of the law and the prophets. He did not come to
destroy but to fulfil them. Fulfil what ? A poor compilation of
Ezra's time, or fragmentary documents made up by man, gradually
grown up into a law unknown at the beginning ? or the word of
God given by inspiration to Moses and those whom Jehovah
had sent ? He was born in Bethlehem, because by God's will
the prophet had said so. He dies, because if not, how then
shall the Scriptures be fulfilled that thus it must be ? Till
heaven and earth passed, not one jot or one tittle would in
anywise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.

I may turn then to the servants of Christ when He had
been rejected, the apostles and writers of the New Testament.
The apostles, those authorised and sent by Him to announce
Christian truth, and inspired by the Holy Ghost for this service,
and the other inspired writers of the New Testament affirm, or,
which in a certain aspect is stronger, assume, everywhere that the
Old Testament, as we and the Jews (enemies of Christianity, but
in this Avitnesses with it) have it, is an inspired record, written by
those to whom it is ascribed, and given of God. I can under-
stand that the Baurs and Smiths (who, as rocks that, originating
nothing, can only repeat a sound, echo them) think themselves
more competent to tell us what Christianity and the truth is
than Christ and his apostles. I have met such, men who did
not scruple to say so, though checked somewhat by the scandal
80 speaking of Christ gave ; I have met them in Europe and the

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? in

United States; but all are not quite fit for that yet. Such
thoughts are soon sunk in the deep sea of lifeless infidelity.

Let us enquire then what the apostles or others do say. And
first I will take what are called the great epistles of Paul, what
Baur takes as the sure ground of historical Christianity. To
begin with tlie Eomans, though chronologically the last of the
four. Paul, he tells us, was separated to the gospel of God which
He had promised before by the prophets in the Holy Scriptures
concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, made of the seed of
David according to the flesh. Here holy Scriptures, holy writings
are owned ; the prophets are God's prophets ; and the whole sys-
tem announced Ijy them of the promise to the Seed of David run-
ning through the prophetic writings and Psalms, from Samuel
and all the prophets, is fully and clearly owned. Paul founds his
own teaching on them, adding of course the fact of the resurrection.
What advantage had the Jew ? Much every way, but chiefly
what ? — that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
Such were these holy writings. The special blessing, and they
had many, was that they had the oracles of God. Poor Paul ! to
be so dark, untaught, as I have heard such say, by modern
science. But what was the force of this ? — man's unbelief could
not make the faith of God of none effect. These oracles were
so thoroughly of God that His faithfulness was involved in them,
in making them good. But He shows Jews and Gentiles all
under sin. How is that ? It is written (iii. 10). The Psalms
and Lsaiah are warrant for the assertion, and as to the text, the
"Great Unnamed" has the passage. (Isa. lix.) It may be weari-
some to quote so many texts, but they show that it was not
merely a quotation to support a point, but that the apostles lived
in and based their teaching on what modern rationalists deny.

What (Pvoni. iv.) saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God,
etc. Here Genesis is authenticated as the Scripture, the word
of God. Xext David describeth the blessedness of this man.
Here the Psalms are authenticated. Again, v. 14 : it is

112 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

Genesis v. 13. Death reigned from Adam to ]\Ioses. This was
until the law. Here the whole history of Genesis as to the fall
of Adam under a law as to the forbidden fruit, no law till
jNIoses, but death reigning by Adam's fall, then the law being
given by Moses changing the ground on which man stood, not
as to sin and death but as to transgression, wdien there was (as
in the two cases of Adam and Moses) an actual law, is treated
not merely as a Jehovistic or Elohistic fragmentary compilation,
but as God's account of man's whole moral standing with Him-
self till grace was rejected, in the gospel prophesied of indeed,
but now actually meeting man's need as taught by the apostle
in this epistle, which, precious as it is, it is not my business to
enter into now.

I pass over some passages confirmatory of this use of the
Old Testament, and stop for a moment at chap. ix. Here
Israel are dear to Him as having law and promises, and even
Christ as concerning the flesh. But where was all this shown
to be so when they were a rejected people? Not as though
the word of God had taken none effect ; and then all tlie his-
tory of Genesis is treated as the word of God, and the account
in Exodus is cited, first, as declaring that God spoke to Moses,
and then as to the history of Pharaoh. And here it is as Scrip-
ture says it. This is for Paul the same as God saying it. Next
Hosea is cited as the word of God. "He saith in Osee."
Esaias also crieth, quoted as of the same authority as God
speaking in Osee; and this estimate of Scripture we shall find
uniform. If he quotes the law (x.), ]\Ioses describeth the right-
eousness which is of the law. And here note Deuteronomy is
quoted as what ]\Ioses says. Eor the learned men this is the
Deuteronomic law first recognised by Jeremiah in Josiah's time.
Perhaps from the latest hand of all, at least if we are to believe
Graf. But farther it appears that the " Great Unnamed " was
for Paul Isaiah himself For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath be-
lieved our report ? (Isa. liii.) Then Deuteronomy is again quoted

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 113

as written by Moses, and the " Great Unnamed " again as Esaias,
who is very bold (Isa. Ixv.) Then we have the book of Kings
authenticated (Eom. xi.) God has not cast away His people.
How can I know this is God's mind ? "Wot ye what the Scrip-
ture saith of Elias ? . . . But what saith the answer of God unto
him? I can reckon on the Scripture as giving me God's mind
and purpose. So if Israel be blinded for a time it is written
(xi. 8), quoting Deiit. xxix. ; " And David saith :" so the Psalms
were a true testimony of God to what was going to happen.
Again in Eom. xv. we find Deuteronomy quoted as "He ;" that
is, in the formula of quotation, the Scripture is God speaking.
The Psalms and Isaiah himself are quoted as the word of God.

In Corinthians, a book of church details, the quotations are
not so many, but it shows that it is taken for granted it is
divine. The law is the law of jMosos (ix. 9) ; and this is
God's mind, taken for granted as being so. " Doth God take care
for oxen ? " What Moses taught was what God taught. The
history of the Exodus and the wilderness was God's history
of His people, and His dealings with them recorded for our
instruction (1 Cor. x. 1-14). Again (xi, 9), the creation of Adam
and Eve (Gen. ii.) is quoted as a divine account sufficient to
build moral duties on. In chap. xv. 54, 55, Isaiah and another
of the prophets are quoted as fulfilled in resurrection. In
2 Cor. iii. the account of ]Moses veiling his face is quoted from
Exodus as showing the true character of the law, and Israel's
state.

Galatians gives us the same testimony. Take chap. iii. Tlie
Pentateuch is referred to as a sure and certain testimony for
faith, and Scripture spoken of as God Himself, being His word.
" The Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heatlien
through faith," than which nothing can be stronger as to the
inspired apostle's estimate of it. Nor is this all The teaching
of Genesis, and promises there made and confirmed (Gen. xii.
xxii.), and the history of Moimt Sinai, are taken in their order

114 HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD ?

as the basis of God's ways. A promise made unconditionally
could not be disannulled or modified by additions 430 years
after, and all this identified with its fulfilment in Christ in due
time. The place the law holds in God's ways, and the epochs of
it, are made the basis of his argument and of the true character
of Christianity. The promise was what God gave, Christ was its
fulfilment, the law came in between, 430 years after the promise,
added because of transgTessions, till the Seed should come to
whom the promise was made. "What for the rationalist is an un-
certain compilation of uncertain fragments, the development of
national life, is for the inspired apostle the orderly revelation, as
it is given in our Bibles, of God's ways, His own revelation of
them historically, so as to form the basis of the true character
of Christianity which was in question among the Galatians.
The accounts of Hau-ar and Sarah are for him sure ground to
stand upon. Nor has he ever any other thought. If he answers
to King Agrippa, he spoke none other things than those which the
prophets, and Moses in the law, did say should come. Finally,
we find in 2 Tim. iii. a formal testimony to the holy Scriptures,
when the church should have the form of godliness and deny the
power, with the direct declaration that all Scripture w^as given
by inspiration of God.

John gives us the formal testimony that the law was given
by Moses ; and John the Baptist's declaration, quoting the latter
part of Isaiah as being of him, and liimself the fulfihncnt of it,
as a sure prophecy, and of God. ]\Ioses in the law and the
prophets did write is recorded as a known and received truth ;
the Psalms equally so. In chap. ii. "the zeal of thine house
hath eaten me up." IMoses lifted up the serpent in the wilder-
ness (chap, iii.) What Moses gave (the inanna) was not the
true bread from heaven ; where Exodus and the Psalms are
alike authenticated. " It is written in the prophets " is suf-
ficient for the Lord Himself ; not a bone was broken, that
the Scripture might be fulfilled ; and His side was pierced that

HAVE WE A REVEL AT 10 X EROM GOD? H]

another Scripture might be fulfilled, quoting Isaiah. They
shall look ou Him whom they have pierced (chap, x.ix.)

Peter on the day of Pentecost rests ou the authf^rity of Joel,
of David in Psalm xvi. (Acts ii.) Moses it was who promised
the prophet like himself. Yea, Samuel and all the prophets had
spoken of those days, and all the holy prophets are "brought in de-
claring the future blessing that was to come, the heavens receiving
Jesus till then. The second Psalm was being fulfilled (iv. 25).
Peter formally declares that the Spirit of Christ was in the
prophets, who studied their own prophecies to know what He
(1 Peter i. 11) did signify in them, and quotes Isaiah, what is
contamed in the Scripture, as of sure authority, warranting what
was now going ou (ii. 6). He accepts the account of the flood in
Noah (iii. 20). The Gospel of Matthew [which specially presents
Christ to us as the Messiah of the promises, Emmanuel, and, on
His rejection, the substitution of the kingdom in mystery (xiii.),
the church (xvi.), the kingdom in glory (xvii.)] bases, I may say,
all its statements on the testimonies of the old prophets. Christ
is Son of David, Son of Abraham. So numerous are the quota-
tions that I can "only notice the formal character of them, and
one or two in particular. Tlie formal character is spoken of (i/to)
the Lord by (o/a) the prophet, a definite assertion of their true
character. He quotes some as giving the events happening, ha.
" in order that " the prophecy might be fulfilled, S-ru; " so that "
there was a fulfilment, ron " then " when it is only a case in
point. The latter part of Isaiah is " Esaias the prophet,"

I need hardly quote more from the writers of the Xew
Testament, besides a multitude of allusions in those I have re-
ferred to, to show that Christ and the apostles accepted the Bible
as we have it (I mean the collection of the books of the Old
Testament as a whole) as of divine authority, as the word of
God, inspired, and of absolute authority with them. It is that
by which the Lord overcame Satan, to which Satan resorted to
cover his guile. Man had to live by every tcord which

110 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GODf

proceeded out of the mouth of God} Such is Scripture to the
believer hj its own intrinsic authority, and the words of Christ
and the apostles carry an evidence which no cavils of infidelity
can shake, while they call themselves Christians ; and the
authority of Christ Himself and of the apostles weighs more than
tlie speculations of men, based by each on some new fancy of
his own, and, though helping on infidelity as it passed and the
ruin of man's hopes, passing away with the influence of the
mental energy which created it. I only, in addition, beg my
reader to remark that these quotations authenticate the writings
and the writers, and the writings as being those of the writer
whose name they bear, as well as the truths contained in them
as given of God, and that with the authority of Christ and His
apostles.

We are left then, according to this system, with no cer-
tainty at all as to any truth of God. Objectors have subtilly
spoken of authority, but there is no certainty. Xot even the
statements of the Lord Jesus and the apostles give us any ;
and, if not, these are uncertain and unauthoritative too, and we
are left to the dark mists of infidelity and a world which has
historically proved itself wicked and blind, without one sure com-
munication from God.

Before I turn to the more interesting and instructive
proofs of the unity of the Old Testament from internal proofs,
it may be well to consider for a little the article which gives
occasion to these comments. It seems to me slovenly both in
substance and in form. On the latter I need not dwell ; but
when a writer tells us of Jesus speaking of the new dispensa-
tion founded on His death as a New Covenant, citing 2 Cor. xi.
25, I am justified in saying it is slovenly, I thought this
niiglit be a misprint, but I really cannot make out to what he

^ This, as all the Lord's replies to Satan, is quoted from Deuteronomy, as the
word of God — words proceeding out of God's mouth, sufficieut for llira, and
sufficient to leave Satan without reply.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

refers. Xo scripture ever calls this dispensation a Xew or the,
New Covenant, though we get all the blessings of it spiritu-
ally. Christ's blood in the institution of the Lord's Supper is
called the blood of the New Covenant ; and Paul (2 Cor. iii.)
says he was a minister of the New Covenant, not of the letter
but of the Spirit. But this does not caU for protracted notice.
But, though the writer speaks of Genesis, liaviug lost sight of
the divinely-given use of the Old Testament, all resolves itself
into the development of a little nation, with a national God,
and more or less priestly superstition. But in Genesis we
have the history of the world from the creation to Israel's
going down into Egypt and his death, with all the great prin-
ciples of God's relationship with man, except what are pro-
perly dispensational. There is not the law, nor the church,
the two great subjects of God's ways afterwards for heaven
and on earth. But, leaving them aside, you have all the
great root-principles of man's state and relationship with
God, and in promise the cradle of all his hopes. Of these we
must expect no trace in these heartless systems, but Elohistic
and Jehovistic fragments, and interweaving by a compiler, one
referring to the priestly party in Israel, the other not ; why put
together by the compilers, we are not told ; but of the state
and interests of man, or the glory and purposes of God — though
both, as we have seen, are fully wrought into the New Testa-
ment as the basis of eternal truth — no hint, no trace. Man
fallen, a world judged (a story to which Christ sets His seal),
Christ promised, Israel's hopes founded, and their apostasy, and
God's deliverance of them foretold, all in vain. Grace and
judgment, and all God's ways, Christ promised and come, and
unfolding them, as did also the apostles, in all their momentous
bearings, must give way to Ewald's " Geschichte," and llx. New-
man's " Hebrew Monarchy," and Baur, and Hupfeld, and Mr.
Smith, in speculations which only show they can see nothing
where God has, in its germ, laid down everytliing that casts

-I I a HAVE IVE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

] ight upon a ruined world (for a ruined world it is), and God's
dealings in grace with it.

But it is only fair to show that the statements are slovenly :
perhaps flimsy or superficial would be a more correct word.
The theory is that there was a gradual development of the law.
From Joshua to Samuel national feeling was much weaker
than tribal jealousy. That there was a general dissolution,
through idolatry and all seeking their own, is true, and
Ephraim claimed a place hardly OAvned by others ; but this
broke out far worse afterwards even in David's time, and after
Solomon's death divided the kingdom.

During the time of the Judges, we are told, the sanctuary
and priesthood of the ark was the chief centre of mono-
theism. Of course it was at all times ; there could be no other.
There was no mercy-seat but there, there could be no day of
atonement without it. Samuel, it is said, was by education a
priest; but it was as prophet, not as priest, he accomplished his
work. He never was a priest, and could execute no priestly
office. Afterwards, to show the progress, we are told that he
fully sanctioned Exodus xx. 24, and did not act on Deut.
xxxiii. 19. All this is utter neglect of both the letter and
the mind of Scripture. There was no sanctuary at all during
Samuel's activity. A tremendous judgment had fallen on
Israel. Jeremiah refers to it (vii.) as prognostic of what would
happen to Jerusalem. There are three offices, as is often
said, through wliich God has to do with His people — propliet,
priest, and king. The priesthood, which was set to guide
even Joshua, had utterly failed. Eli died broken-hearted, his
two sons slain, and the ark of God taken. There was no
restoration of the ark till the king restored it, though God
sustained His own glory. The link of the people with God
on the ground of tlieir own responsibility, with priestly medi-
ation, was entirely broken : no day of atonement, it could not
be; Ichabod was written on it all. 0 od had " delivered His

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 119

glory into captivity; His streugth into the enemies' hand."
But a prophet is sovereign interference, and God could not be
debarred that, and He had prepared Samuel as He had pre-
pared Moses. Samuel maintained the worship of Jehovah
as an acknowledged prophet and judge. But as a system the
people failed here too, and demanded a king ; and God gave
them a king in His anger, and took him away in His wrath.
Then God by Samuel called David, who became king, and
brought back the ark, but to Zion, not to the tabernacle ; it
was no longer at Shiloh, but at Gibeon, without any ark or
mercy-seat at all ; it was not owned by David. Solomon went
there ; but David, guided as he was and taught of God, placed
singers at the ark to say " His mercy endureth for ever."

In spite of all their sins, power in gi-ace had wrouglit restora-
tion. The record is repeated in Nehemiah of the same faithful-
ness of God, and in the closing psalms, predictive of Israel's future
blessing, prepared to be sung with greater testimony to its truth
than ever, after Israel has received at the hand of the Lord
double for all her sins (Isa. xl. 2), and that in the kingly power
of Christ in grace. Hence, in Hebrews Zion is contrasted with
Sinai the place of the law and the Old Covenant. Such is the
scriptural statement of the matter. The thoughts about Samuel
and the difference of the altars overlooks the whole real history of
Israel at that time. Samuel acted with prophetic authority when
there was no ark, and the whole priestly order was judicially set
aside. The proi)hets did refer to the moral state of the people
largely, but prophesied of a Messiah to come and grace for
Israel and a New Covenant. But God owned no covenant
as the Old Covenant, but what He had made with Israel in
coming out of Egypt. This is what is expressly referred to.

There is no thought of a development of religious ordi-
nances from a relatively crude and imperfect state. The
prophets recalled Israel to a well-known system, but it will
be found that the blessings and judgments in Judah, which

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

still owned tlie temple and Jehovah, were invariaUij de-
pendent on. the conduct of the king, under whom they were
placed, and on whose conduct blessing or the contrary de-
pended. We are told, indeed, that the proof of the deve-
lopment view " cannot here be reproduced." It is a pity :
still the author does his best. I only remark that, while
there was progressive prophetic light, the kings ordered the de-
tails of priestly service, as David did, and was inspired for it.
As a system, the headship of the priest was given up in Shiloh,
though not their exclusive service. We are told that the pro-
phets, when they failed to produce immediate reformation, began
from the eighth century, if not earlier, to commit their oracles
to writing. Eeformation of what? Who were these prophets?
The eighth century was Hezekiah's reign. That was about 400
years from Samuel. There were from time to time prophets
who gave warnings ; but what reformation were they attempt-
ing? All this is fable. David set up the new system, and
" Solomon built Him a house." Ten tribes went off because of
the folly of the king, had no priests but false ones, and after-
wards tw^o most remarkable prophets, who %vrought miracles
authenticating their mission ; which the Jewish ones did not,
because Jehovah was publicly owmed, and the whole system
they recalled Israel to was fixed long ago, and owned by the
people. The reforming prophets from Samuel to the eighth
century is a fancy of the writer's. Tlie former prophets,
Samuel, and Kings, give us the history, and that was what
God meant them to do. That they were the chroniclers is
often repeated and easily shown.

But to return to inquire for the proofs of the development
of crude ordinances : — if I read Exodus and Leviticus, they may
be wise or not, but they are not crude, but elaborately detailed,
and, if true at all, framed according to a pattern shown on the
moimt. If they were not established by Moses, the whole his-
tory is a fable, utterly false from beginning to end ; for " Jehovah

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 121

said unto Moses " is the emphatic authority, save a few to
Aaron, where it was special priestly service in what was estab-
lished ; and, I ask, was the pattern shown on the mount a crude,
thing, to be developed by Moses ? But the proofs. — An altar
of earth or unhewn stone is commanded, if they made one
(Exod. XX.), and this Samuel did when there was no priestly ser-
vice and Shiloh was judged, and so did Elijah when Israel had
left the temple. It guarded against idolatrous imagery. But
we are reminded that God was to put His name in one place,
according to Deuteronomy, and so He did, and faithful kings
were constantly destroying the high places (for planting trees
was equally forbidden), thinldng to bring back things to order,
not to make progress or develop. In Exod. xx. He speaks of
recording His name in a place, and there He would meet them
— blessed promise ! But the next thing in the same book is
the history of the tabernacle, to which in the wilderness they
were bound to bring every animal they killed in the camp or
out of the camp, under pain of death ; and in the same Jeho-
vistic account, if you wiU have it so, they are to appear before
Jehovah at the three great feasts. Talking of development as
to this is really nonsense ; the earthen altar is the first ordi-
nance given — a development, I suppose, on the crude details of
the tabernacle given after, and then we jump to Samuel !

The quotation of Deut. xxxiii. is a prophecy of the last days
of Israel in the blessing of Mose&, the man of God. Even so
they call the people to the mountain. What mountain ? There
they shall offer sacrifices of righteousness. Why should it not
be the mountain of Jehovah's house established on the top of
the mountains ? This is a prophecy for the last days too. In
Deut. we have the three great feasts, and their going to the
appointed place obligatory, and images and groves forbidden,
— all Jehovistic. The full directions as to going to the place
where God had set His name are in Deut. xii., when the Lord
should have given them rest, and what they might eat at home

HAl'E WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

and wliat not. But this had been even more strictly imposecl
ill the camp, because in the land the distance might be too
great, an altar of brass being made, in the same book and place,
according to the pattern shown on the mount.

Deuteronomy is a peculiar book, penned evidently for the con-
fusion that might be found in Israel when scattered about the
land. The Levites hold a much more considerable place, and Vat
people. The Levites are not priests, as the article says, but the
priests are very rarely mentioned, and provision made for this
state of things, yet anything but development of ordinances.
It is for the land entirely. Exodus and Leviticus, with very
rare exceptions, exclusively for the wilderness. Probably,
from what Amos and Stephen say, not one sacrifice, un-
less the regular daily ones, was ever offered. The history,
though doubtless their duty then, is one of types, and written
for our instruction, on whom the ends of the world are come ;
and though this be said of their history, yet the types of the
sacrifices and the like are precious to every one that knows
Christ. He knows Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed for us ;
he knows what Pentecost prefigured ; and, if intelligent in the
things of God, what Tabernacles are too, not yet fulfilled ; but
to these things I will revert. Thank God, they were perfect
at first, and only properly so then. All was made according to
the pattern shown to Moses on the mount. Rationalists may
despise the New Testament too, and despise Alexandrian
Epistles to the Hebrews ; but we have not yet learnt that the
most wonderful display of grace, holiness, and wisdom, wrougiit
into a whole that none can rend, is only an imposture.

But the other proofs ? — Ezekiel's temple. This is instruction
for the restoration, not the historical one. Then, instead of
Jehovah-Shammah and the Prince, they were miserable cap-
tives to the kings God had set over them in His anger; at least
so Nehemiah thought. It is prophecy for a time after Gog is
destroyed, so that all the nations may know that Jehovah is

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 123

Israel's God, who had led tKem into captivity, and bronght
them out, and left none of them there at all. For there will be
such days, let rationalists think what they like. It is a pro-
phecy ; in nothing an historic proof of any development made
after the Exodus. When Ezra fixed the legal state of Israel,
he did not fix Ezekiel's temple. This is really child's-play,
fit only for rationalists. This, the writer tells us, is his " clearest
proof," unless we may suppose the unreproduced ones may be.

But there remains yet one as to which the writer makes a
pretty round assertion — Josiah's book. " The legislation of this
book does not correspond with the old law in Exodus, but with
the book of Deuteronomy." So it is stated. I must suppose he
refers to there being one place of worship ; but this was more
strictly fixed in Exodus when the tabernacle was set up, that
is at fii'st, than in Deuteronomy, only one for the land, the
other for the wilderness. But of the contents of the book there
is not one word in the Kings. I do not exclude from what
Josiah says Deuteronomy more than Exodus or Leviticus, in
which last we have the most terrible threatenings of all (see
xxvi.) Josiah heard the words of the book of the law, and
his heart was tender, but he had no idea of a new book or a
new law. It was the book of the law that was found. In the
long reign of Mauasseh it had been utterly neglected ; but he
speaks of it as no new thing. " Great is the wrath of Jeliovah
that is kindled against us, because our fathers have not heark-
ened unto the words of this book."

I have now completed the consideration of the produced
proofs of the development of crude ordinances under the
law. Eebellion, idolatry, desertion of Jehovah, gracious deal-
ings on His part, and " hewing " them by prophets there was,
and growing light as to Messiah ; a new order of the details
of service as to song and temple service by inspiration through
David ; a jjrovision for walk in the land and failure in Deuteron-
omy ; but of development from the pattern shown in the mount

124 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

not a trace. The writer tells us Ezra came with " the bohJk
of tlie law of Moses." But, according to him, it was not the
law of Moses ; but, if the Pentateuch be not all false, an im-
proved code on what God had established by Moses. How " a
nation which had attained a high degree of literary culture "
was to be enlightened "in spite of the crass and unspiritual
character of the mass of the people," I may leave to rationalists
to explain. It is grammatico-historical exegesis, I suppose.
Was I unjust in saying the article was superficial in form and
substance ?

I refer to one passage more. He alleges 1 Sam. viii. 7 as
contradicting Deut. xvii. But how God in anger, as Himself
rejected and giving the people their own way, and telling them
how it would turn out, is a contradiction of a statement of how
it ought to be done, is beyond me. If my reader is not weary
of such futilities, I am ; they are cliaracteristically rationalist.*

I may turn to Astruc's and his followers* Jehovistic and Elo-
histic documents. According to Mr. F. Xewman, they can be
separated by mechanical means — a pair of scissors, for instance.
With this I agree. It is an apposite statement. They can be
separated with nothing else. But are these learned men in-
capable of making a difference between God abstractedly as a

^ The allegation, that "there are six laws as to the passover, -which, if not
really discordant, are at least so divergent in form and conception that tliey
cannot be all from tlie same pen," is another of these careless assertions without
a shadow of foundation. In the first place, they are not all of the passover, but
some of unleavened bread, which, though connected, was a different feast, and
the difference morally important ; and in two cases specially connected with the
consecration of the first-born. As to the rest, we have the historical account in
Exodus, and reference to it when the three great feasts are particularly directed to
be kept. How these are divergent, my reader must find out ; I cannot. It will
be found that in Ex. xiii. there is a special additional direction as to the first-
bom and unleavened bread, and no law as to the passover at all. So in ch. xxxiv.
18. Moreover, they are all Jehovistic ; so that the Jehovistic and Elohistic docu-
ments, as of two delinite authors, come to nothing. But the statement is ridi-
culous, a i^roof of the folly and levity of all tliut is alleged.

HAVE IV E A REVELATION FROM GOD? 125

supreme and self-existing Being, and a relative name in which
He makes Himself known to men, so as to be in special rela-
tion with tliem ? My father is a man ; but, besides that, he is
my father without ceasing to be a man. Supposing I took
the New Testament and said there must be two documents
which scissors could separate because He is called God and
Father ? Bu.t Father is as much given as a relative name in
the New Testament as Jehovah in the Old.

Abstractedly I have no objection to more documents than
one, provided I have the result from " the mouth of God ; "
but in their reasonings after Astruc I see no proof of any-
thing else than the absence of moral or any sense, and that,
being empty in mind of Divine truth, this fancy of Astruc's
was one they could spin cobwebs out of. What fly but a
rationalist would be caught by Hupfeld's third author of
the northern party, and Mr. Smith's curious remark on it —
" His literary individuality is, in truth, sharply marked, though
the limits of his contributions to the Pentateuch are ob-
scure " ? That is strange ! " literary individuality sharply
marked, but the limits of the contributions obscure : " their
character very sharply marked, but obscure where they begin
and end. Wlio will explain that for me ?

But how does Scripture present the subject ? God is God,
but God has entered into relationship with men. These rela-
tionships are fourfold in Scripture, all referring to God ab-
stractedly as such : El Shaddai (God Almighty) ; Jehovah (un-
happily translated in English Lord in capitals, as a rule ; better
in French, I'Eternel) ; Father, which, save in mere figures, is en-
tirely a New Testament name ; and Elion, Most High, which,
while revealed in promise, is God's millennial name, will be dis-
played as possessor of heaven and earth, all antagonistic power
being set aside. And these are clearl)"- thus set forth in Scrip-
ture, though the last be less clearly, as being yet future.

The two first are expressly distinguished. Thus Exodus

126 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

vi. 2, 3 : " And Elohim said unto Moses, I am Jehovah ; and I
appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob by the
name of El Shaddai, but by my name Jehovah was I not
known to them." Xot that He was not Jehovah, but He did
not give Himself that name in His ways with them. See
Gen. xvii., xxviii., and xxxii. With Israel He was then
Jehovah, as the great question was settled on Mount Carmel ;
" Jehovah, He is Elohim."

With Christians, the Son Himself being come, the Father is
revealed, as the Lord Himself says (John xvii.) : " I have mani-
fested tliy name to the men thou gavcst me out of the world.

.... Holy Father, keep through thine own name And

I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it, that
the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I
in them." So Paul : " When the fulness of time was come, God
sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made imder the law, to
redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive
the adoption of sons ; and because ye are sons, God hath sent
forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba,
Father." Blessed privilege ! peculiar to those to whom, through
faith in Jesus, He has given the title to take the place of sons,
for we are all the sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

The first time we get Most High is when Melchisedek comes
out to meet Abraham. Not that God was not ever the ]\Iost
High, but He had . not taken it as a revealed name with His
people on the earth. Here was a greater than Abraham, who
blesses him after liis full victory over his enemies. And God
takes this title, not in connection with Abraham (that was El
Shaddai, though he owns Him as such and as Jehovah too),
but with the mysterious personage, figure clearly, according
to Psalm ex., as developed also in the Hebrews — of Christ,
King of Pighteousness, King of Peace, now sitting on the right
hand of tlie Father, on the Father's throne (Pev. iii. 21),
not yet on His own, a priest after the similitude of Aaron .

HAVE WE A REVELATIOX FROM GOD? 127

now, though not after his order, but Avho shall come forth at
the sounding of the seventh trumpet, when Jehovah-Elohim-
Shaddai shall take to Him His great power and reign ; the
Ancient of days who sits on His throne, but the Ancient
of Days who comes (Dan, vii.), whom the King of kings
and Lord of lords, the blessed and only Potentate, shall
show, but who is King of kings and Lord of lords ; when,
after the last confederacy against Israel (Ps. Ixxxiii.), through
the judgment of the confederate enemies, men shall know
that He whose name alone is Jehovah is the I\Iost High,
Elion, in all the earth, as the punishment of the host of
the high ones on high shall have shown Him Most High
there (Isa. xxiv. 21), the Son of God and Son of man, to
whom all judgment is committed. So when the Gentile power,
which ~^od set up when He took His throne from Jerusalem,
Nebvichadnezzar, comes to his senses, he writes, " I Nebuchad-
nezzar lifted up my eyes unto lieaven, and mine understand-
ing returned unto me, and I blessed the Most High, and I
praised and honoured Him that liveth for ever, whose dominion
is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom from generation to
generation " (Dan. iv. 34). I do not quote Dan. vii. for Most
High, save verse 25, because the word is plural and means, I
doubt not, "the high" or "heavenly places." In verse 25,
however, the beast speaks words, against Elion bringing in
judgment by them. But the kingdom of the Son of man
is then set up. The little stone will have dashed the feet
and toes of the image to pieces in judgment, and becomes
then a great mountain which fills the whole earth (Dan. ii.)

"Who then is this ]Most High ? This is the question so beauti-
fully discussed in a poetic dialogue in Ps. xci. There are two
great subjects in Scripture when personal reconciliation to God
is settled. Sovereign grace puts poor sinners in the same
glory as the Son of God, that He may be the first-born among
many brethren, which is not our subject now, — displayed in

128 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

the transfiguration.^ The other is the government of this
world (See Dent, xxxii. 8, 9), of which the Jews are the centre,
as the church is of the heavenly glory under Christ. Our pre-
sent subject is the Old Testament, the earthly part. Here then
Jehovah, the Jewish name of Elohim, is in question. "V^^o
then is the Most High ? He who has this secret will be
blessed. He who dwelleth in the secret place of the Most
Hig;h shall abide under the shadow of Abraham's God, the
Abjiighty. "Who shall say where the Most High is to be
found ? Messiah says, I will take Israel's God (Jehovah) as
the Most High ; I will say of Jehovah, He is my refuge.
Ver. 3-8 is the answer. Then Israel speaks, Because Thou hast
made the Lord (Jehovah) which is my refuge, even the Most
High, Thy habitation, there shall no evil come nigh Thy habita-
tion. Ver. 10 13 continues this. This is the passage by which
Satan sought to tempt the Lord Jesus to try Jehovah if He would
be as good as His word, acting in self-wiU out of the path of
obedience : efforts which crumbled to nothing in impoteucy
before tlie authority of that word which rationalists deny, but
which the Lord trusted and authenticated as proceeding out of
the mouth of God. In verse 14 to the end, Jehovah declares
His mind, closing grandly the dialogue, and putting His seal on
Messiah's confidence in Himself, on whom He had set His
love as having taken the form of a servant. Here Jehovah,
Israel's God, is shown to be the Almighty and Most High,
in the latter character bringing in the blessing of the earth :
Jehovah, my God, even the most High, has the blessing
promised to Abraham. " Father " is of course left out, the name
which belongs to the heavenly family when the Jews are cast
off for having rejected Jesus, a state of things coming in be-
tween tlie end of the sixty-nine and the last half of the seventy
weeks of Daniel, " the time of Jacob's trouble." (See Daniel ix.)
Hence, in the Scriptures of the Old Testament, Jehovah ia
1 Both the celestial and the terrestrial parts are revealed in Luke ix.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD f 129

the name regularly taken up by the writer, whose whole calling
was by the revelation of it (Exodue vi.), and by all the pro-
phets of the nation whose God He was. But it was of all
importance to them that He was that God who is the iTHX
n^ns "ilTN " I am that I am," God ever existing, subsisting in
Himself and creating all else. And this is one great truth of
what I may call the translation of the name in the Apocalypse ;
not " who was, and is, and is to come," but who is (0 uiv), who
was the God known of old, the promiser withal, and who is the
coming one 6 s^yj/xivog, when He will be Ancient of days, and
Most High, possessor of heaven and earth, and His name known
(even that Jehovah, and Jehovah alone is so) over all the earth.

Hence, too, it was all important that this same Jehovah
should be known as Abraham's God who had, and first had (save
Christ prophetically) the unconditional promise. (See the his-
toric basis of all this which Joshua xxiv. gives us.) Even Shem's
race had fallen into idolatry (of which there is no trace before
the flood), and Abraham's own family. Then God calls out Abra-
ham out of the order and connection He Himself had formed,
country, kindred, and father's house, to be to Himself, to a
country He would show him. Sovereign grace which chose
him, the calling of God, and the promises were the great prin-
ciples brought out when the world was not only wicked before
God, but had put demons in His place. The revelation of tlie
church was only after Pentecost : but Abraham is the root and
starting-point of the blessed race. Adam was the head of a
fallen race; individual saints we have from Abel, and the judg-
ment of wickedness in the flood, and government set up in
Noah to restrain it ; but in Abraham first the head of a race
that belonged to God in the earth, be it according to the flesh
or the Spirit, the root of the olive tree of God (Eom. xi.)

Many are the important lessons connected with this, but
[ cannot touch on them now. Jehovah, the God of Israel,
was the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. This

K

I30 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

was His name for ever, this His memorial for all generations
(Ex. iii. 15). God as God, the Being who is, not a creature
wlio begins (Ian, not y'mzai), but exists in Himself, — the
Almighty, who called the vessel of jDromise without condition,
and Jehovah the God of Israel under whom the Jews took
the promises under condition of obedience,^ must be identified.
Hence, wliile it was of all importance to keep God's essential
name of God, and God self-existent contrasted with every
creature, and to keep this essential character present before
their minds, it was equally so to show Jehovah was that God,
not a mere country god as those of the heathen. This, and
the difference of promise on condition, and unconditional, we
shall find running through the Old Testament from the Pen-
tateuch to Nehemiah ; ^ and the distinction is the basis of
Paul's reasoning in the Xew Testament.

We find then, when it was what God as God did or was,
it is God, Elohim; where it is the account given by those
who knew Jehovah, it is Jehovah; and when the solemnity

1 The whole doctrine of the " four great epistles " of Paul, particularly of
Galatians, and those foundational epistles, is based on this difference of Abraham
and Sinai respecting Christ the title to promise.

^ Thus, in Exod. xxxii. 13, Moses appeals to God's promise without condition,
to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; Solomon for the temple, and the blessing of Israel
in connection with it does not go beyond Moses and the Exodus (1 Kings viii.), on
which judgment was pronounced when the Lord cursed the fig-tree, and in fact this
was all lost and fina'lj' under that covenant. So in Lev. xxvi. , where Jehovah goes
through all His judgments as governing the people to the end, He goes back, not
only to Moses, but to the original unconditional promises to Jacob and Israel and
Abraham. Tliey will have the blessings of the promises under Moses, but throuf h
God's remembering His unconditional covenant, which comes first. Nehemiah
refers only to Abraham as a covenant, though He speaks of their deliverance by
means of Moses, for this was a deliverance by grace. We have only to read Ezra
and Nehemiah to see the utter folly of Jchovistic and Elohistic accounts. I sup-
pose Ezra and Nehemiah were not compiling tlieir own history from Jehovistic
and Elohistic fragments. The reader may also notice another title, tlie God of
heaven, as now no longer sitting between the cherubim, a distinction which will
belli hiui in understanding the book of Revelation also (see Rev. xi. 4, 13).

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM COD? Jji

of the name of God as such is to be added to God known in
relationship, it is Jehovah Elohim ; when in special bearing upon
Israel, it is Jehovah thy God, or our God. So constantly as a per-
sonal address in Deuteronomy. A spiritual-minded person -will
always feel the difference between the two. It may be the mere
state of feeling sometimes expressed in it ; sometimes it is of
real importance when God's glory, as such, is concerned in it.

An analogous difference is found in the New Testament. Not
only is it said. Come out from the world, and ye shall be my sons
and daughters, saith Jehovah Shaddai ; but in Hebrews, where
the question is how man can approach God, as such, we never
find the Father — it is always God ; nor in the Eev. (save xiv.,
where His name is written on the foreheads of the special rem-
nant there mentioned, but it is His Father). It is the throne
of th€ government of the world which is in question, and it is
Jehovah Elohim Shaddai, Lord God Almighty, as in iv., xi., xv.

In John's wTitings, while as to what concerns the nature
of God, the name God is used — as " God so loved," " God is
love," " God is light " — and the same as regards our responsi-
bility in respect of it : the moment the Divine action in grace
is spoken of, it is Father ; thus, chap, iv., God is a Spirit, and
they that worship Him must Avorship Him in spirit and in
truth, " for the Father seeketh such to worship Him." This
comes out in a striking way in the first four verses of 1 John
i., and in the rest of the chapter. So in i. 18 of the Gospel,
and it will be found to run through all his writings. Sup-
pose I were to say, Here is a Patristic and a Theistic docu-
ment, and use " the scissors " to make the difference : it
would prove nothing but alienation from God and moral in-
capacity. The principle is just the same.

In the Psalms the difference of Jehovah and Elohim is most
marked. In the first book it is always Jehovah, the remnant
is in Jerusalem, covenant blessings not lost. In xlii. they are
confessedly outside, worship in Jerusalem is remembered.

132 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

There it is God. So in Ixiii. it is God Himself. In Lxxxiv. it is
the tabernacles of Jehovah, though still of course God there.
In the second book Messiah having been brought in, in xlv. it
passes from God to Jehovah and the God of Jacob. God
Himself having interfered in their favour, and deliverance
having come. He is Jehovah Elion (Most High) and a great
King in all the earth, though (xlviii.) He reigns in Zion.

I might go through the book of Psalms (and indeed have
done it), and show the constant fitness of the names used.
There the truth that God Himself is their God, Most High,
Jehovah, is fully developed : but their Father would not be
found from i. to cL, nor the Spirit of adoption which uses it.
It is the government of the world, and that as Jehovah, great
in Zion, God Himself, their (Israel's) God. But these instances
must suffice ; the attentive reader, waiting on the Lord, will
readily", on reading the Psalms, apprehend the force of the
expressions. To make two writers is simj)ly absurd.

Mr. Smith tells us that "in a large part of the Psalter a later
hand has systematically substituted Elohim for Jehovah ; " and
the proof ? Stat 'pro ratione vohmtas. There is simply none : a
more utter incapacity for seizing the Divine side of the con-
tents of Divine writings I never saw than in the remarks on
the Psalms. The structure of tlie book, even as plainly
shown in its contents, and the different subjects of the five
books or divisions foimd in it, there is not a glimpse of,
though it lies really on tlie surface of the collection, and in-
deed shows a Divine hand in collecting them. But this
would be too large a subject to enter on here.

I only remark that to get rid of the proof of the absurdity
of the Elohistic and Jehovistic scheme, for which even the
"mechanical means" would not suffice here, he boldly asserts
they have had one name substituted for another, without an
attempt at proof, or shadow of it. They are not " reproduced."

The stupid remark as to Elihu, borrowed from Mr. F.

HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? IJ:

Newman, or perhaps by him too from " some learned German,"
recalls me to Job. lu the most perfect way Elihu comes
in, when the friends would have it that this world was an
adequate proof of God's moral government, which Job rightly
denied, though his heart rose up against God too, and as the
interpreter, one among a thousand, he shows there is a disci-
pline of the righteous, blaming the friends, yet showing how
Job was wrong too. He stands in a mediatorial character, a
kind of daysman, to explain God's way, before Jehovah comes
in in His majesty. I cannot conceive more total want of
spiritual perception than this borrowed judgment as to Elihu.
Yet I might have left this, but that I would remark that, in
the introduction and in the account given at the end, Jehovah
is found in the writer's part ; in all the intercourse of Job with
his friends, and Elihu, God and Almighty. What can the
scissors do here ? cut the head and tail off, and lose the key
to and the conclusion of the whole story.

Take another case. In the Proverbs it is always Jehovah
— (I think there is one exception) — the direction of practical
wisdom for those who had Jehovah for their God. In
Ecclesiastes it is always God, because it is the vanity of
man's path and efforts after happiness here below in contrast
with what God is as such. It is not a condition of covenant
relations but man as such, and it is not therefore Jehovah.

Now in Gen. i. and ii. to the end of verse 3 we have the
great fact that God created. It is simply this truth known to no
heathen (not that Jehovah, God known under a particular name
of relationship, but) that God created the universe, and crea-
tures, and man, and rested the seventh day. This completes
that all-important statement. We know it by faith. (Heb. xi.)
Then begins a new subject, not a new account of creation.
This is not so. It is barely and very briefly alluded to in
connection with there being no man ; and then the condition,
nature, and moral position of man is detailed, where God put

134 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

liim, under what conditions, the place of animals, and the
woman. It is not that God created, but the condition and
status of man before Jehovah Elohim. That God who was the
one true God with whom man had to do, but had revealed
Himself as Jehovah to him who told the story of all His ways
from the fall, and man without law, and a judged world, and
restraint, and promise, and law, and, indeed, the whole condi-
tion of man with God till grace came and the Father sent the
Son to be the Saviour ; though of course the historical details
up to law are given afterwards, God having taken up a people
by redemption so to try man. Every principle of the whole
history is given us in Genesis, only on the basis of promise,
not of law and redemption and God's presence on the earth,
which is in Exodus and what follows. But he who learnt this
plan at the first, connects that name Jehovah — a God of judg-
ment— with the origin of it all. The Elohim of chapter i. is
the Jehovah of Exodus vi., and the narrative of Jehovah re-
counts all the history, up to law, of the true Elohim who
now reveals Himself as testing man under law. To say that
there are two accounts of creation is utterly untrue; there is
nothing of the kind, no trace of it, but a special statement of
man's state and condition as to God and all the creation around
him ; let it be shown if there be.

In the third chapter we have the writer using the term
Jehovah Elohim. The great truth now comes out, but Satan
'saying in the same sentence, "Yea hath God said?" to Eve;
speaking in no sense of revealed relationship, God the Creator
had said, so Satan again " God doth know." But the writer
says they heard tlie voice of the Lord God (Jehovah Elohim),
and so of all that follows. To make the first verse two dis-
tinct documents .is just simply absurd. In iv. Eve, taking up
a, promise, says, though mistakenly, " I liave gotten a man from
Jehovah." Here we have always Jehovah not Jehovah Elo-
him, a simple history, not the solemn tale of man's ruin in

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 135

his relationship with God. Is this a third document ? In
verse 25 God, says Eve, has appointed me. This speaks
merely of the fact of what God, who works all things, had
given her. In chap. v. we have God again as such, nor could
you say in the likeness of Jehovah, because it is a relative
name, one specially revealed as to God, not that of the Creator?
the Divine Being. So Enoch walks with God. The earth (vi.)
was corrupt before God as such. Yet the writer always speaks
of Jehovah and His dealings, 3, 6, 7. And He deals with the
earth as so coiTupted. Again as " God " commanded him, not
Jehovah. Then in vii. Jehovah said to Noah, and as Jehovah
commanded him ; then as God commanded him, and again
as God commanded him, and Jehovah shut him in. .Here
again if you separate the verse into two, the last part refers
to and connects with nothing, for Elohim is the word used
when he went in.

In Deut. iv. 32-34 where Elohim stands by itself in its
proper force of Elohim, did God ever do such a thing as
Jehovah our God has done ? It is the force of the words, not
two different accounts. To Joshua xxiv. they presented
themselves before God as such, and Joshua said, thus saith
Jehovah, the God of Israel. That is not only I find cases
to which the fancies of Astruc cannot apply, but I find the
reason why there are the two words.

One more case remains to refer to, mentioned by the article,
that of Joseph. This is to be by Hupfeld's third author, a
northern. It agrees, we are told, with the Elohistic author in
a great part in the use of the name of God (Elohim), but is
widely divergent in other respects. But this slurs over the
facts to cover what upsets the theory. The first part of the
account is Jehovistic ; that is, the Avriter's account of Joseph
uses the name of Jehovah. He says Jehovah was with
Joseph. That is, Moses knew the faithful One who bore this
name with Israel, as he says, when God commanded Noah,

136 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

and he went into the ark, Jehovah shut him in ; when he re-
cites what passes between Joseph and the dreaming servants of
Pharaoh and Pharaoh himself, he of course says God. What
had they to do with Jehovah, or any relationship with Him?
In the rest of the recital of facts it is Elohim. But a second
account is out of the question ; they are two parts of the same
one. What brought Jehovah and God both into it ? Was it
a northern author ? Jacob in his trial turns back to the God
of promise and calls him El Shaddai. And, in Joseph's dis-
course to his brethren, it is clearly God as such in contrast
with his brethren's (man's) doings. In Jacob's blessing
Ephraim and Manasseh, while referring to God Almighty, he
naturally desires a blessing from God upon them, not covenant
blessings from Jehovah, but God's blessing on them. What the
widely divergent things are, we are left to guess.

It is well to remember that these German writers start with
the assumption that no account which relates miracles can be
historical. That is, they beg the whole question to begin witL
Inspiration is itseK a mii'acle, Creation is the greatest miracle of
all ; the intervention of God's will and power to produce that
which would not have been without it. I am quite aware of the
question of general laws, which, after all, are only the constant
operation of God's will, and cannot therefore preclude its
action. Let us remember, too, that tlie absolute denial of
action, independent of general laws, denies Christianity altogether;
for resurrection is not' a general law nor natural sequence.
Death is not a cause of resurrection. But if Christ be not
risen, our faith is vain, and, as Paul tells us, the witnesses of
Christianity are false witnesses. Let me add the remark here,
that, in a book otherwise interesting and useful, the Duke of
Argyle has slurred over this point. If miracle cannot be his-
torical, Christ is not risen, and if Christ be not risen, Christianity
is not true.

This is not the gTOund, if I understand the article in

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? i37

the Encyclopaedia Britannica, which its author takes ; but
this will come up if we go on to the New Testament : as yet
we are occupied with the Old. Now as to this, if the German
theory be true as reproduced in the article, the whole of the
Old Testament is an imposition; I mean if the law be not a
system established of God by Moses, as we find it, but a late
compilation in which crude materials were adjusted and a
system developed out of national Ufa As far as the law goes,
it all professes to be words addressed by God to man through
the mouth of Moses. Genesis has necessarily another character,
equally requiring direct inspiration ; for who among men can
give an accoimt of creation and the world's history, and a history
on which all God's dealings with men (save the church and the
law of which we have spoken) are founded in their principles,
and, as we have seen, the New Testament is based ? Nor,
indeed, can th-e beginning of Exodus be separated from the end
of Genesis. I need not quote texts to show that " Jehovah said
unto Moses," and in this way communicated His will to the
chiLdren of Israel, is the constant language of the law. It is a
clear positive revelation of God's words and will by Moses as
it stands, or it is an imposture. In Deuteronomy Moses re-
hearses it all, and speaks to the people, insisting on obedience,
and recalling aU that had passed in order to enforce it and keep
them from idolatry, adding details of civil government for the
laud. Documents may or may not have been used ; but the
whole contents are, either a liistory and the original establish-
ment of God's law for the people, with the deepest typical
instruction for us, given by Moses from God, or an impos-
ture.

The adding an account of Moses' death at the end of
Deuteronomy does not touch this question. Mr. Smith tells us
that copyists added what they liked, and did not feel them-
selves in the least bound to distinguish the old from the new ;
there was no notion of anything like coppight, they took large

ijS HAl'E WE A REVZL-lTIoy FROM CC'r

exrracrs n : '. "_ - '. ■_t:^ \ 7 inch. atiiitionsaiiilauoiticadoiLS
as tt'T" - - ry. A nice thing to rest cms Mtk on as

tl: T — : God, Sciipuiiies tnan carr.ot be broke: : ~y^^

--. .-_T'r"~' " ■'T^dem. rei cujxLs liiisolutio petiL^ __ .^ct;"
. li T!ia.t : i v_- ::cf tKe Semitic genius, the Bibi. is a strad-
1 :j.] "WLjit proof has he 0 tie Semitic

_ :. 7 T !: . r. 7V. rre 13 no other ancientHiorew

7 were cella in the teni'ii — iat of cotae not being
.to God's dnreiztiGn eitber, it "wa die Semitic

I _-r_ :l,: iij that tbe prophets openly ieclare their

i^.--":mr>/n, that "The word of JehoTah came to'-Jtem," "Thus

"dh^ xnH the TtVp ; that in the histoT) as of Kings

le, it is openly stated that they "Bsd the royal

.: ..^ .^ ; but prophets nsed than and drew tbGi up, aa we

_ i^re the example in. Ti^afah, that we might ha"v than as the
^:rd of Go«L That God is not moitioned inlidier is jnst
apposite as ahowing the secret providence of G' -' Hia

people when they were scattered and disowne - ^^ — as a

flBrtWVTI

T&aa not only the Lord and the apostles - h^e owned the
Old Testament as we possess it as God's inspird word, but it
pBiaQLts itself, as to the law as the direct fr^- ' ^ r-.- -.-• ^.q-jj^_
nnmication with God, givai fally and in d^.- ^ ^ ". and

the prophets, as the dired: eommimication of Cod's mind and
words from Himself; and aH of it — ^history, psadis, and all — as
an oT^anic whole owned of die Lord Hims'' " —'----, - -.7_

fection, as such, will be percaved by those w:. _~

He has opened, and who learn there the whoLjichem^ of God

In passing from the discussion of partic"'" ' '" and ob-
jections to a direct itiq^.:ry into more po.-. . essential

hat: u'£ a s.^

M GOD

evldinic fronite cor:t.ri.t5 of m::_ "~-- I rr-CiH ^o evrzy r-esTt

tliat the q:irtioa is — Is there a rexekrlc-n fr-C'in God ? Iliu is

:- :-■:■; -lod. I-' - —--:\--^--: ' - -^ly ^Liiii,

£^'1:^ :.. :__ ZYclatior .: -^ , ^i^? ^^

know \^]iatiaii lias come to ^^-■ " Are-f^r:: t . :: r

tlie heatiierL Uiaply ve may feei afr.er Hini '

there reallT slaw given Tdt -" ^

eome "hr JesTi^Olirist ? Wei

the -wrinngs ^ch the Jevr . 1 to l:»e the Tmnng? of

Moses, and doe so, not only to the Je^rs, but to His discii-les,

and that He opned their :; -"

the apostles thfsame — ■^■:=^ : - ' -

contents ofthei. Tc -^ -. --

this is sufficieu: To those "who ir ' -'-s-

toiy must be nhistorical, that Gou c:

all now, harin 2^ nee establish-?": -:■.

cide the qtif^nn: before it is tc - -^^

or the aj'ostlf s ire no weight I -

to call thenisetBS Christiaiis. Ii is i^-

accredit themsefes with a name while ti^y - " ..--

p-ats. "We ni5r earnestly desire their rr-^ver^ ■ .?

alL They labor on what they h

profess to be fcuawers of :

lieve that then rCest, mo j- - .jrii-.

fullest commincation of — - — - :? ^""

posture. This i-hard to thint ; but it is this

with.

But pc^^" ^.'ftre are those who believe there is a revelation,
yet no inspire A wine communication of it to others Some
allege that i: is nt even claimed. 2^ow, see how rational this
is. G-od has tbught good to give a revelation of Himsrll His
truth. His gTacei(> men at lai^e for their good: He has made
this revelatior.. bt in snch a manner that it can go no farther
in its perfecuie^s ban the person who receives it It is pvtoi

138 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

extracts and harmonised them by such additions and modifications
as they thought necessary. A nice thing to rest one's faith on as
the word of God, Scriptures that cannot be broken ! But lawyers
say, " Allegatio ejusdem rei cujus dissolutio petitur nil valet ; "
and what is the proof the Semitic genius, the Bible, is a strati-
fication, not an organism ? What proof has he of the Semitic
genius ? The Bible. There is no other ancient Hebrew book.
And the question is, Is it such an in authentic comj^ilation ?
We have nothing but his assertion about the Bible itself, except
that there were cells in the temple — that of course not being
arranged according to God's direction either, it was the Semitic
genius !

I need not say that the prophets openly declare their
inspiration, that " The word of Jehovah came to them," " Thus
.saith Jehovah," and the like; that in the history, as of Kings
for example, it is openly stated that they used the royal
chronicles ; but proj^hets used them and drew them up, as we
have tlie example in Isaiah, that we might have them as the
word of God. That God is not mentioned in Esther is just
apposite, as showing the secret providence of God keeping His
people when they were scattered and disowned of Him as a
nation.

Thus not only the Lord and the apostles have owned the
Old Testament as we possess it as God's inspired word, but it
presents itself, as to the law as the direct fruit of Moses' com-
munication with God, given fully and in detail originally, and
the prophets, as the direct communication of God's mind and
words from Himself; and all of it — history, psalms, and all — as
an organic whole owned of the Lord Himself, and whose per-
fection, as such, will be perceived l)y those whose understandings
He has opened, and who learn tl;ere the whole scheme of God
Himself.

In passing from the discussion of particular points and ob-
jections to a direct inquiry into more positive and essential

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 139

evidence from the contents of Scripture, I recall to every heart
that the question is — Is there a revelation from God ? Man is
departed from God. Is there any revelation from God by which,"
as far as the revelation of God goes, man can know Him ? We
know what man has come to without it. Are we to be left as
the heathen, if haply we may feel after Him and find Him ? or is
there really a law given by Moses, and are grace and truth
come by Jesus Christ ? We have seen that the Lord declares
the writings which the Jews received to be the writings of
Moses, and does so, not only to the Jews, but to His disciples,
and that He opened their understanding to understand them —
the apostles the same — basing their arguments on the truth and
contents of them. To one who is not audacious in incredulity
this is sufficient. To those who affirm that a miraculous his-
tory n'^ust be unhistorical, that God cannot act, or will not at
all now, having once established an order of nature, and so de-
cide the question before it is examined, the statements of Christ
or the apostles have no weight. But then it is pure impudence
to call themselves Christians. It is flagrant dishonesty to
accredit themselves with a name while they reject all it im-
ports. We may earnestly desire their conversion, but that is
all. They labour on what they hold to be an imposture, and
profess to be followers of the imposture, and Nvould have us be-
lieve that the holiest, most gracious, deepest, and yet truest and
fuUest communication of the knowledge of God is by an im-
posture. This is hard to think ; but it is this we have to do
with.

But, again, there are those who believe there is a revelation,
yet no inspired divine communication of it to others. Some
allege that it is not even claimed. ISTow, see how rational this
is. God has thought good to give a revelation of Himself, His
truth. His grace, to men at large for their good ; He has made
this revelation, but in such a manner that it can go no farther
in its perfectuess than the person who receives it. It is given

I40 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

for the good of all, and perfectly given, but it stops at the first
person who is the vessel of reception and communication, and to
the rest comes only in the imperfection of man as to apprehen-
sion and communication ; a divine communication for men, but
by divine arrangement so counnunicated that it never reaches
men as such. Nothing they can trust as divine is com-
municated to them. Can anything be more absurd ?

But Paul states the case : When it pleased God, who
separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by His
gTace' to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him
among the heathen. There was a revelation to him for this
purpose by God, but he could not do it ! though for others, it
could not reach them, actually given for them, but in such a
manner that it could not reach them. This is the theory. But
he did not handle the word of God — mark what it was — deceit-
fidly ; he did not adulterate the pure wine, but by manifestation
of the truth commended himself to every man's conscience in
the sight of God (2 Cor. iv.) So the Thessalonians received it,
not as the word of man, but, as it was in truth, the word of
God (1 Thess. ii. 3) ; so that if (2 Cor. iv.) his gospel was hid,
it was hid to them that were lost. Their minds were blinded
by the god of this world. In 1 Cor. ii. he states it formally :
"Which things also we speak, not in words which man's wisdom
teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth. . , . But the
natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God . .
they are spiritually discerned." They are revealed by the Spirit
(10-12); communicated in words which the Holy Ghost taught,
that others might have them as God revealed them to Paul (13),
and discerned by the Spirit (14). (Comp. verses 4, 5.) And such
he asserts everywhere. The things which he wrote were to be
received as (and were) the commandments of the Lord. The Old
Testament prophets and ]\Ioses declare what they communicate
is Jehovah speaking ; so does the apostle.

Xot only, then, is the Bible a revelation from God, but the

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 141

communication of it is His work too — thus saitli Jehovah, or
Jehovah said, in the Old, or in words which the Holy Ghost
taught in the New ; so that what we have is the ivorcl of God
It is " of the Lord by the prophet," or in words which the Holy
Ghost taught. God did not leave us floating about in uncer-
tainty. Only when it is presented, it is discerned spiritually,
or, if rejected, is hid to them that are lost. With this as to the
history, we find it drawn up by the prophets, and sanctioned
by the Lord and the apostles.

It may be said that there are errors, and that we have only
translations. I recognise that it was committed to the re-
sponsibility of man, just as in a certain sense man's personal
salvation is ; yet he is kept by the power of God, and it is
so too, liable to the effects of human infirmity. It is quoted,
recognised, and authenticated by the Lord and the apostles,
and the Law constantly referred to in the earliest writings of
the prophets. As to translations, no one gives any as a
criterion of truth ; they are a means of communicating it, and
the criterion remains as it was, providentially preserved of God ;
the New (as :Mr. S., I thank God admits) adequately proved to be
authentic, and, if so, the Old authenticated, as no other book in
the world is, by it, that is, by the Lord and his apostles. It is
alleged the LXX. is quoted. This is confessedly a translation,
and, as commonly known and used, is commonly quoted ; but it
is not when the writers of the New as taught of God had any
reason for doing otherwise. They authenticate it only as to
that for which they quote it.

But I turn to a pleasanter part of my attempt. I would
speak of the unity of mind in the whole Old and New Tes-
tament. Whatever controversy may be raised as to dates,
there is no question of their being writings separated by
wide distances of time. Infidels do not question that. In
some shape Jewish literature began with ]\Ioses. Jehovistic
and Elohistic documents may be compiled, but there were

142 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

such documents to compile. There were prophets many cen-
turies before Christ ; there were psalms composed by David,
the sweet psalmist of Israel, as by others contemporary or more
recent, as some assuredly were. There are different authors,
different styles, different epochs ; the grammar even became
changed in its details in the process of ages, as the use of Hu
for the feminine and Nahar marks early Hebrew. Various
authors and styles, in a word, follow each other through a series
of some 1500 years. In the New Testament there is a develop-
ment of truth and divine counsels, part of which is declared
to have never been previously revealed, and in the nature of
things could not have been so : I mean the mystery of which
Paul, and Paul only, speaks — the union of Jew and Gentile
without difference in one body for heavenly places, which it
was impossible to reveal while Judaism subsisted, as setting
it aside absolutely in its nature. For Judaism kept up, while
Christianity broke down, the middle wall of partition.

Now, if with all these authors and epochs (in the last
case setting aside the previously existing system, though fully
sanctioning it as divine), place, and time, — if through judg-
ment, promise, law, gospel, and the revelation of the church
completing the word of God, I find one plan, one mind,
through the whole, whose is it ? Unconscious of the bear-
ing of it on the whole, each occupied with the present moral
bearing of that which was confided to him, ignorant in large
measure of what others might have to say, or even setting
aside what had existed and occupied others, I yet find all
minister to one single plan. I find the clearest and strong-
est proof that one mind, one inspiring power, M-hich knew
the end from the beginning, and had this plan before it, is the
real author of what we call the Bible. I insist upon its
being a number of books (Jehovistic and Elohistic documents
if you please, employed, though 7 do not accept what is
said) of different ages and characters. Prophecy, history,

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? I41

poetry, moral lessons, man before law, man under law, a narrow
system to maintain the true unity of the Godhead when
all was idolatrous, and a large system to every creature under
heaven, which maintained the authority of the law, but set it
totally aside as a way of relationship with God, but through
all one single thread of divine purpose running, which makes
every part subservient in its place to the whole, making over
sixty books (or, taking Jewish computation of Old Testament,
forty-nine) one single book — the Bible.

I can only in such a paper as this take some special
elements as showing this, after stating from Scri]3ture what
the divine purpose is, only noticing what is of the last
moment, that it is not a mere purpose as to facts to be
accomplished, but that these involve the whole moi-al basis
of man's relationship with God : innocence, loss of it, moral
responsibility, the law given as a perfect measure of it with
divine authority, man doubly guilty by breaking it, remedial
means in the testimony of the prophets and in the coming of the
Son of God Himself, all in vain issuing in the judgment of the
world, and every mouth stopped, and all the world guilty before
God, and a perfect salvation by grace on God's part, according
to His own nature and glory, laid hold of in promise throughout
all ages, and then fully revealed ; and finally heavenly glory,
and a restored earth under the first and the new covenant, and
then eternity ; and, I may add, the church's special place in
all this, which is peculiar, all made manifest and unfolded in
the development of this purpose, and issuing in the fulness of the
divine glory, and the infinite and eternal blessing of those who
believe.

The purpose is this, as stated in Scripture (Eph. i.), that for
the administration of the fulness of times He should gather to-
gether in one {avaxKpaXaiusaadai) all thmgs in heaven and in earth
in Christ (the Son of God and Son of man), in whom we have
obtained our inheritance. In this there are two great scenes —

144 HA VE WE A RE VELA TION FROM GOD ?

heaven and earth, and as to them two great objects of revelation
Tinder Christ — the church and glorified saints in heavenly
places, and the Jews in earthly — the one reigning with Christ,
the others reigned over, as is all the world, by Him as Son of
man, raised and glorified, with the Father's house, where He is
gone, as our home — one being the expression of the sovereign
grace which has put us into the same glory as the Son of God ;
the other, the government of this world. See Eph. i. 22, 23,
and 9-11, and Deut. xxxii. 8, 9, for a brief statement of the Jewish
part, verses 8 and 43. All are under the Son of man, or
united to Him. This latter part, as peculiar to the church, I
leave aside for the moment.

God began, not of course with the Second, but with the
first Adam — not with the ]\Ian of His purpose, but with
responsible man. This responsibility, as traced and followed
out in innocence, fallen and without law ; then (passing by
promise, which was of grace and brought out in Abraham)
under law ; then in sending Christ after patient warnings and
encouragements by the prophets, saying, They will reverence my
Son ; but they cast Him out of the vineyard and slew Him.
Then, the probation of man having been thus fully gone through,
man is treated as lost : only a full salvation provided for him in
the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, in whom, the Second Adam, the
Son of man, all the promises and purposes of God are to be fulfilled.
He is the man of God's purpose, all promises in Him Yea and in
Him Amen ; taking the inheritance of all things man Avas to have
in the purpose of God, according to the redemption in which God
was perfectly and in every respect glorified. Through all we
have the great adversary revealed in all that was needed, that
we should know clearly the position of those concerned, but no
further.

The result of all this and its general principle is already
brought out in the garden of Eden ; not a promise to the
first man — there is none, but the purpose of God when the first

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 145

man had failed in responsibility. This responsibility he was
put under, tempted by the adversary, and failed. The Lord God
judged the woman for listening, but makes known the Second
Man, the last Adam. He, the Seed of the woman, was to bruise
the serpent's head, the serpent to bruise His heel — the latter in
the cross, the former when He comes in power. This is no pro-
mise to the first man, though his faith might lay hold of it, but
a revelation of the Second. Adam assuredly was not the Seed
of the woman. The history is referred to as unquestionable
truth by Paul (1 Tim. ii. 9-15), as a ground for minute details as
to woman ; as a basis of the profoundest doctrine (Rom. v. 12-
21), showing sin to have been there by this means before the
law, and when there was none ; but referring to Hosea vi. 7,^
showing that Adam was under a law (not to eat of the tree of
knowledge), but that from him to Moses man had none, con-
firmed as to the character of judgment (Eom. ii. 12), those that
have sinned (avoiiMc) without law being distinguished from those
who have sinned under it. So for watchfulness it is referred to
in 2 Cor. xi. 3. So the whole order and structure of God's plan
in Christ, connected with ruin in the first Adam, is unfolded in
1 Cor. XV., specially 20-28 and 45-49, and that in resurrec-
tion. The accomplishment in Jews, Gentiles, and the raised
saints is founded on Isa. xxv. 6-8.

But there were other and special promises made to the
seed of Abraham according to the flesh, renewed in David
and confined to Israel, though mercy was to be extended to
the Gentiles on their failure. Of this Genesis is full, and
the state of Israel under promise and failure is the whole
subject of the Psalms, besides Christ personally brouglit in
as connected with them. (See Gen. xv. xvii.) These pro-
mises, given unconditionally to Abraham, were taken up con-
ditionally at Sinai ; so that, though the promises remained, yet
under JMoses the law was introduced, and on the ground of the

^ For "meix" in text, read Adam, as in Hebrew and margin.
L

146 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

old covenant tlieir accomplishment depended as much on Israel's
fidelity as on God's. God said, If ye obey my voice ; and Israel
said, All that Jehovah hath spoken we will do.

Thus not only historically Israel stood on the ground
of the old covenant, but an immense principle was estab-
lished and question raised, Is man's righteousness the ground
of his standing before God, or is God's righteousness that on
which a sinner can be accepted ? But Israel also thus stood
on a double ground — promises made to Abraham, and right-
eousness under the law ; and yet grace, unless God were
the God of the Jews only, must reach out to the Gentiles,
and this must be in Christ, and as taking His power as head
over all things, as we have seen, as Son of man. During the
subsistence of the middle wall of partition, the blessing of
the Gentiles was not sliut out in hope, but left, as they were,
in obscurity and darkness. When the world was idolatrous,
the maintenance of the knowledge of one true God made this
necessary, and, so perverse is man, was with the utmost diffi-
culty maintained. In the promises to Abraham it is as
clearly as possible revealed in Gen. xii., and after Isaac's being
offered up as a figure, and so received as raised from the dead,
confirmed to the seed. All nations were to be blessed in Him.

When Moses and the law had come in, then it was only on tlie
judgment of Israel that this blessing came out, and that through
Christ (see Eom. xi.) So Deut. xxxii. 28, tlie judgment being
solemnly insisted on in what precedes both of Jews and Gen-
tiles, though sparing a remnant in Israel, owned in verse 43 as
His people, but the nations to rejoice with tliem. W^e have
seen these two recognised in Isaiah xxv., with the resurrection
added, and all united with Christ's reign in 1 Cor. xv., quoting
Isaiah.

The contrast of law and gospel is fully discussed by Paul, and
the promises without condition, and the law with both promiees
and gospel, in Eomans and Galatians. In Gal, iii. he insists on

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 147

the promiBe without condition, and that the law 430 years after-
wards could not be added to an unconditional promise confirmed
to the Seed, nor that promise disannulled. The law was broken,
and that, as it depended under the old covenant on Israel's obe-
dience whether the blessing was to be fulfilled, was easily dis-
posed of But the promises ? They were to be made good
through the promised Seed, the Messiah, a fact made clearer and
clearer as Israel's disobedience grew more and more manifest,
and indeed fully established in the promise to David ; but then
it must be through bruising the serpent's head and wider than
Israel. When failure under priesthood in the land in Eli, and
under prophecy in Samuel, and the direct government of God
by these means had been fully manifested, God's King, the be-
loved, was raised up ; and this double blessing of Israel and the
Gentiles and man's glory as in Christ was brought to light,
grace in power, though it was but a remnant in Israel who would
finally profit by it.

But here the difficulty of the unconditional promises came
in, and the promises to the Seed in whom they were to be
fulfilled. The law, as I have said, was clearly broken from
the days of the golden calf But the promises were to be fulfilled
in the Seed, in the Son of David. Israel rejected Him, and lost
all title whatever to any promises. God had taken away His
throne when they went captive to Babylon. The cherubim and
the glory that sat there judged the city and went up. But the
promises ? A residue was preserved and brought back, shorn
of its glory as God's people, but still having these promises ;
and Messiah came, the promised One, a minister of the circum-
cision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the
fathers, and they rejected Him, and God wrought a salvation
effectual for man. His salvation to the ends of the earth yet
will accomplish His promises to Israel, only on the ground of
pure grace, while He takes those that own the rejected One to be
His companions in glory in heaven and to reign with Him. It

148 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

is this that makes the apostle exclaim, 0 the depth of the
riches !

Now as Gal. iii. and Eom. ii. iii. iv. (and vii. yet more experi-
mentally) discuss the law and grace and promise in its moral
bearing for any, so Eom, ix,-xi. discusses it in reference to Jew
and Gentile in a dispensation al way. In ix. God must be sover-
eign, or Ishmaelites and Edomites must be let in, and all Israel
save Moses shut out, and God would use His sovereignty to let
in the Gentiles. Then Israel's rejection and stumbling at the
stumbling-stone was all foretold, and God's being found of the
Gentiles (x.) But it was not final rejection. Paul was a Jew,
so there was a remnant (Dent, xxxii.) The letting in of tlie
Gentiles was to provoke them to jealousy; but lastly, accord-
ing to infallible promise, the Deliverer would come to Zion
(Eom. xi.)

Thus in the law we have, not only a dispensation of God
with Israel, but the great question of human rigliteousness
raised for every soul. It was not an arbitrary rule, but God's
perfect rule for man, taldng up all the relationships in Mhich
He had placed man as now fallen, with Himself and each other,
and requiring man's acting up to them, and he should live ; but
the flesh, man in his Adam-nature, was not subject to the law
of God, neither indeed can be so ; then they that are in the
flesh cannot please God (no one in Adam's standing). ]\Ian's
righteousness not only does not exist in fact, but is set aside in
principle ; but, as we have seen, without law, man was lawless,
under it a transgressor, and, when God was manifested, then the
Lord could say, Now they have both seen and hated both Me
and my Father. Hence we read, Now is the judgment of this
world ; but, thank God, Now is the prince of this world cast out.
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto
me. But now once in the end of the vjorld (the consummation
of ages) He hath appeared to put aAvay sin by the sacrifice of
Himself. The heel of the Seed of the woman was bruised, but

HAVE V/E A REVELATION FROM GOD? 149

the work done gave Him a title in righteousness, a-ccording
to God, to bruise his head. The power of the enemy was, by
death, disannulled morally Qm zara^y^ari), and will be wholly set
aside in heaven and earth when the Son of man shall come in
His glory : not all enemies, it is true, subjected at once, but
He having taken to Him His great power to reign and do so.

But not only were the Gentiles left in darkness during the
narrow period of testing man under law, and the promises con-
fined in their actual application to a peculiar people, but life and
incorruptibility were brought to light only under the Gospel, and
access to God allowed. The state under the law was marked
by the veil, and the barriers which forbade it ; now the holiest
entered, God's righteousness being by faith for Gentile as well
as Jew, and all the higher glories revealed in connection with
resurxection, and a new state of man and a new creation, of
which Christ risen and glorified is the first fruits and head,
" the second Man from heaven," (0 dtvrsoog a'Jswrog 'i^ ol^avoZ)
and now gone back there as Man,

The reader who is acquainted with Scripture will have seen
that I have only made an abstract of its statements in all I have
said, and put them together so that we may see that it is one
complete plan of God, of which the moral principles and the
historical development, though distinct subjects, cannot be
separated. But let us see if we cannot, in some leading details,
trace it through the Scripture, showing them more in detail,
enchained by the plan of one mind. Indeed it begins before
the world, of course then in the thoughts of God, but revealed
to us, though mercy, not till the gospel came, not till the first
man had been fully tried and tested in his responsibility. Thus
we read (Prov. viii.), speaking of wisdom (and Christ is the
wisdom of God and the power of God) : — " I was (before the
creation, which is poetically described) daily His delight,
rejoicing always before Him, rejoicing in the habitable parts of
His (Jehovah's) earth ; and my delights were with the sons of

i^o HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

men" — here, in the nature and principle of His place, the
Son of man.

Hence, when Christ was horn, we find the angels celebrating
his birth with Glory to God in the highest, on earth peace (not
good will towards, but) good pleasure in men. He did not, as
it is written, take up angels, but He took up — here narrowing
it to grace and promise — the seed of Abraham, consequently
associating it at once with Old Testament history. So we read
in 2 Tim. i. 9 : "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy
calling, not according to our works, but 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 Saviour Jesus Christ." So Tit. i. : " In hope of eternal life,
which God, that cannot lie, promised before the worlds, but
hath in due times manifested," etc. So 1 Cor. ii. : "We speak the
wisdom of God in a mystery, which God ordained before the
world for our glory." Now, till the rejection of Christ, these
counsels of God in grace were not brought out to light as we
see stated here, because the first man, and the possibility of his
recovery, were being tried, though God, who knew what man
was, was quickening souls from the beginning. Still we shall
find full traces of all that concerns both the history of Christ,
His rejection and future glories, or, as Peter expresses it, the
sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow.

Let us take Messiah and Son of man, and the connection of
their titles with Israel and the future glory of Christ. In
Psalm i. we have the remnant carefully distinguished from the
ungodly, as Isaiah says : " Except Jehovah of hosts had left us
a very small remnant, we sliould have been as Sodom, and like
unto Gomorrah." But it is well to note, before we proceed to
the chain of texts, that the Lord expressly tells us that this
peace on earth was not to be accomplished by His first coming,
" Suppose ye," He says, " that I am come to give peace on earth ?
I teU you, Nay, but rather division : for, from henceforth, theie

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 151

shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two
against three " (Luke xii. 51, 52), practically a quotation from
Micah vii., where it is presented as the extreme of evil, evil
drawn out in its worst forms in fact, by the perfect manifesta-
tion of good, of God Himself, shown in the death of Christ, and
in hatred of those faithful to Him ; for all that will live godly in
Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

But as to Christ, He was to suffer and make atonement, sit
not yet on His own throne, but on the Father's, at the right hand
of God — expecting till His enemies were made His footstool ;
where He is now, the work perfectly accomplished which
perfectly glorifies God, gives us a perfect conscience, destroys in
title the whole power of Satan, is the sure foundation of eternal
blessedness, the new heavens and the new earth : but, througli
whieh, we are called to take up our cross and suffer, who are to
have the heavenly inheritance, and be like Him in glory, but
must wait here with Him now, and while He waits, having
the sympathy of our great High Priest, or, with Him, as to our
spirits if called away before He comes. If He is crucified, we
must suffer, not reign, till He takes to Him His great power
and reigns : till then Satan is still the god and prince of this
world, not cast down from the heavens.

From the beginning man, under his influence, has spoiled
what God set up good — spoiled it the first thing : so the first
man himself, so Noah got drunk, so tlie golden calf was
made, so Nadab and Abihu offered strange fire, and the holiest
was closed to Aaron save one special day ; so through Solo-
mon's sin the kingdom was divided ; and, under Nebuchad-
nezzar, the Gentile power became a beast ; so always, and apos-
tasy set in before the apostle's eyes were closed.

But Satan will be cast down from heaven (Rev, xii.), where
he is now the accuser of the brethren. Then we shall have, as
Luke tells us, peace in heaven, glory in the liighest ; and
" Blessed be the King that cometh in the name of the Lord" here

152 liA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD ?

below (Luke xix. 38) : though, then, it was babes and sucklings
that were found to utter His praise to still the enemy and the
avenger, or the stones would have cried out. It is when He
comes again that evil will be put down.

But to come to the citations of passages of Scripture : in
Psalm ii., after giving the character of the remnant in Psalm i.,
we have the determination of Jehovah to set His King on the
holy hill of Zion, the anointed Man, the Son of God as born
in this world, who is further to ask for dominion over the
heathen whom He will rule with a rod of iron, and break in
pieces like a potter's vessel (comp. Eev. ii. 26, 27). But for
the present He is rejected. The kings of the earth and the
rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against His
anointed (Christ or Messiah). Adonai, sitting in the heavens,
shall laugh at them. In Acts iv. 26, 27, the Holy Spirit ex-
pressly applies this to Christ's rejection and death.

In Psalms iii.-vii. we have the consequent sorrows of the
remnant, on which I do not enter. But in Psalm viii. Christ
is celebrated in another character, when the Jews can cele-
brate Jehovah's name excellent in all the earth, and as having
set His glory above the heavens, and as their Lord or Adon :
a state of things not yet accomplished in fact, M'liile the
second verse is used by the Lord in the passage first quoted
from Luke, as the testimony enforced, so to speak, by God,
when the Saviour was here and rejected, quoting also Ps.
cxviii., of which we may speak as specially referring to this
future time of Christ's return in power. Now I quote this to
show that it is identified with man's being set over the works
of God's hands. The Son of man, which the Lord constantly
applies to Himself,^ coming specifically into view, a passage as
applied to Him in its fuU import as inheriting all God's pur-
poses as to man ; used as defining the whole position in the

^ He never calls Himself the Christ save to the woman of Samaria (John iv. )
wheu He had left Judtea.

HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 153

results of divine administration more than once by the apostle
Paul, as (Eph. i. 22) " And hath put all things under His feet,
and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, which"
is His body " (comp. Col. i. 15-18) ; and again, in 1 Cor. xv.
20-28, when all things are to be put under the feet of the risen
(the second) Man, except Him who put all things under Him.
Here the whole scheme is unfolded; and again in Heb. ii. we
are told that we see not as yet all things put under Him ; but we
see Jesus made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of
death, crowned with glory and honour. Nothing can be more
precise to both the divine purpose and the measure of its accom-
plishment, than these passages.

The general fact is again brought before us, in quite another
part of Scripture, in contrast with the earthly power of evil, in
Daniel, seventh chapter. The chapter is divided by the ex-
pression " I saw in the night visions," 1-6, 7-12, to give the last
beast, the principal one, more particularly, then 13, 14 ; from
15 to the end, inquiry and explanation, bringing in both the
saints killed by the beast (and who, as is confirmed in
Eev. XX., go into heaven) and Israel. I quote 13 : "I saw in the
night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with
the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they
brought Him near before Him," etc. This was when the thrones
had been set for judgment. But afterwards we find it was the
Ancient of days who came when judgment was given (22) to
the saints of the most high (the high places). So in Psalm
Ixxx., where Israel is crying out (not merely Jews) for their
final deliverance, it is (17) : "Let thy hand be upon the man of
thy right hand, upon the Son of man whom Thou madest strong
for Thyself." Thus the rejected Messiah, cut off, and wlio
took nothing of the kingdom and glory, but cut off Him-
self, is the one who is the head over aU. things as Son of
man according to the purpose of God.

This truth runs through the Gospels where no passage perhaps

154 HAVE IVE A REVELATION FROM GOD^

is quoted. Nathanael owns Jesus to be the Clirist according to
Ps. ii. : *' Thou art the Son of God, the King of Israel." " Thou
shalt see greater things than these," says the Lord. "Henceforth
thou shalt see the angels of God ascending and descending on
the Son of man." He takes His place as Son of man in con-
trast with and beyond that of Ps. ii. In John's Gospel the Jews
are treated as rejected and reprobate from the first chapter (i,
10, 11), a remnant, born again and believing, alone owned, be-
cause Jesus is God, and Him man never received, but was
enmity against.

The three other Gospels present Him as Messiah, Emmanuel,
Jehovah, the Saviour (Matt.) ; the prophet-servant (j\Iark) ; and
Son of man in grace after the first two chapters, a lovely picture
of the remnant in Israel (Luke). Hence we have genealogy,
from Abraham and David in IMattliew, up to Adani in Luke.-^
When the Jews are utterly rejected at the end of j\Iatt. xii., so
that He no longer seeks fruit in his vineyard and fig-tree (46-
50), He goes out to sow, but He that sows the good seed is the
Son of man ; the kingdom in mystery, i.e. without a present
king (xiii.), the church (xvi.), the kingdom in glory (xvii.),
are substituted for Israel under the Old Covenant, but in
xvi. 20 they are cliargcd to tell no man that He was the
Christ : The Son of man (xvii. 12) must suffer of them ;
more immediately contrasted, in Luke ix., which ends the
chronological history (see verse 21), when Peter, taught of
God, owns Him to be the Christ, " He straitly charged them
and commanded them to tell no man that thing, saying, The
Son of INIan must suffer . . . but be raised tlic third day ;"
and then He shows tliem the glory of tlic coming king-
dom ; the Son of man would come in His own glory, in the
Fathers, and of the holy angels, as Son of Man, Son of the
Father, and as Jehovah. Put (]\Iatt. xvii. 9) this belonged to

^ I should read Luke iii. 23 : (" Being, as was supposed, sou of Joseph), of
Ileli," etc. Tov 'H\i is eouuecred with Jrsus, uut with Joseph.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? l^s

another scene, and man as a new creation. They were not to tell
it till He was risen again frora among the dead, and (Luke ix. 36)
they kept it close, M'ithal wondering what rising from among the
dead should mean^ (Mark ix. 10), and from that day began to
press upon them that the Son of man must suffer (Matt. xvi.
21, Mark ix. 31, Luke ix. 44). In John we have this under
another form, namely that of a full testimony from God, when
Israel had rejected Him, as Son of God, Son of David, and Son
of man. The first is raising Lazarus (xi. 4). " This sickness is
not unto death, but for the glory of God, and that the
Son of God should be glorified thereby."^ He is the resur-
rection and the life. Then (xii. 13) they meet Him, accord-
ing to Ps. cxviii., crying, " Hosanna ! (save now, I beseech
thee) blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of
the Lord." Then the Greeks ("exX)j«$) commg up, the wider
scene of Gentiles, the Lord says : " The hour is come that the
Son of man should be glorified. Verily, verily, I say unto you,
Except a corn of wheat fall into the gi'ound and die, it abideth
alone ; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit ;" and (32), "I, if
I be lifted up from tlie earth, will draw all men unto me." So
in His rejection, abjured by the High Priest, He owns He is the
One spoken of in Ps. ii., the Christ, the Son of God, but adds :
• " iSTevertheless, I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son
of ]\Ian sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the
clouds of heaven." Thus that which dispensationally set aside
the Jews under the Old Covenant, and ended tlidr title under
the promises, brought out the far deeper truths of the enmity of
man's heart against God in goodness — " They have both seen and
hated both me and my Father " — but the accomplishment of that
glorious work in which salvation was provided for Gentile as
well as Jew, and God perfectly glorifiod in all that He is ; the

^ All as Pharisees believed in the resurrection of the dead.
" The stupid ratioualiats cannot, of course, see why this mii-acle was brought
in here.

156 HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD ?

Christ rejected, Messiah cut off, as Daniel declared ; but that as
Son of man, not now taking the glory, but as suffering, yet
vindicated of God as such ; the whole truth of Ps. ii. and viii.,
Adam the image of Him that was to come (Dan. ix., Dan. vii.)
brought into light and accomplishment, and this not in quoted
passages, but in realising facts : and then, when the Holy Ghost
WEiiS. given, the passages applied and explained, as in Acts iv,
and Eph. i, 1 Cor. xv., Heb. ii., with no appearance of putting
together or ari6T,ngement by those who uttered these things, but
showing one mind and thought and plan behind it all, the word
and counsel of God. " I might multiply passages as to the use
of Son of man, but I have only quoted what brought the bear-
ing of Ps. ii. and viii. together. But the death of Christ closed
the earthly history of Scripture, till the Son of Man shall come
in His glory. Hence Stephen, summing up that history from
Abraham, when the promises began, ehows the law broken, the
prophets killed, the Just One betrayed and murdered, and the
Holy Ghost resisted ; and then sees the Son of man standing
at the right hand of God. He had taken His heavenly place,
though not yet set down. Now He sits at God's ^ right hand till
His enemies are made His footstool, having by one offering per-
fected for ever {ug to SiTivixh) them that are sanctified. It was the
time of the church, His body, and the habitation of God through
the Spirit. Hence the Son of man is no longer spoken of save
as giving Him His place on high (Heb. ii. 6). But as soon as I
come to the Eevelation, what Christ had declared before the
high priest, partly as seen by Stephen and taught in Heb. ii., the
accomplishment of Ps. ex. is, as to the latter part, brought out
prophetically in xiv., coming as Judge for the ripe harvest of
earth and the vintage of God's wrath (14-20). We find Him
judging the church as responsible on earth in chap. i. But from

^ Christ had interceded for them on the cross, to which Acts iii. is the
answer ; but this also, Christ glorified, is rejected ; and so all man's history closes
ill Stephen, and He sits down till Christ's enemies are made His footstool.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 157

Acts vii, to Eevelation He is never spoken of as Son of man,
save that Ps. viii. itself is quoted (Heb. ii.), to show where we are
in this history. Even then He is not called so.

I may briefly refer to some other points where this unity of
mind is developed. The three great feasts of Israel, ordinances
which pointed to the great principles and power of the gather-
ing of God's people. There were other feasts : the Sabbath, a
sign of the covenant made with them, but also tl>at His people
are in due time to enter into God's rest ; here that of the first
creation, for us of the new creation, as risen : the new moon —
a sign, I doubt not, of the restoration of Israel, as the tenth
day of the seventh month was of their future mourning, and
entering into the delivering power of the atonement ; but on
these I do not here enter. At the three other feasts, Passover
(with: unleavened bread), Pentecost, and Tabernacles, all Israel
was to go up to the place where God had put His name. FuU
of interest as they are in themselves, I must now confine myself
to them, as forming a chain of unity in the history.

Passover has an unquestionably historical character. It was
"anight much to be remembered," when, protected by the blood
from judgment, they ate their unleavened bread in haste, pre-
paring to depart out of Egypt. There is no evidence that I am
aware of that they kept it after Sinai (Numb, ix.) till they M'ere
in Canaan. Those born in the w^ilderness Avere not fitted to do
so, being uncircumcised until across Jordan ; when, under Joshua,
they were, they did so (a very instructive figure, but a little
beyond my purpose now). I only add, it is only when dead and
risen with Christ we are circumcised, knowing Miiat it is, and
"the reproach of Egypt rolled away." Patience and proving
in the wilderness does not belong to this. Hezekiah kept it,
and Josiah kept it, as it had not been kept for long years. This
criminal neglect of Israel is constantly used as an evidence by
the Germans that the law was not given.

It was clearly established, in commemoration of God's sparing

158 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

tlie people when judging Egypt and Pharaoh at the time of their
deliverance from the bondage they were in. So it was ordained
to be kept, and, as far as kept, was so. In Deut. xvi. it will be
found to have a peculiar character ; for there the three great
feasts are spoken of in connection with the state of soul under
the effect of that which they figure. In the Passover, the
unleavened bread, type of holiness and the absence of sin, is the
bread of affliction ; and they were to turn to Him in the morning
and go to tlieir tents, though the feast lasted seven days. There
is no thought of common joy, as in Pentecost and Tabernacles,
though in these in different measure. AVhen in presence of
judgment, though spared, holiness is bread of affliction, the
spirit of repentance is the form of purity, and it is necessarily
solemn and individual. But the great idea of security from
God's judgment was there in the blood of the paschal lamb :
afterwards, of course, only a memorial of it. Every Christian
knows that Christ was the true Passover. The chief priests
sought to hinder His being taken on the feast day ; but God's
purpose did not await their decision, and on the day of the Pass-
over He was sacrificed as the true paschal Lamb, " the Lamb
of God," to take away sin. Eating at table with His disciples,-^
the Lord Himself so instructs us : " With desire have I desired to
eat this passover with you before I suffer ; for I say unto you, I
will not any more eat thereof tiU it be fulfilled in the kingdom
of God" (Luke xxii. 15, 16) : So that we have a clear instance
of the intention of God in an institution formally established by
Himself, by the hand of Moses, celebrating their escape from
judgment in Egypt, yet definitely purposed to be indicative of a
better and more lasting deliverance from the bondage of sin and
Satan, and more directly from the judgment of God, by which
we were bound down under its consequences. " Christ, our pass-

^ For the Jews the same day, though not for us, and at tlie time when leaven
was put away for the feast.

HAVE IVE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 159

over, is sacrificed for us." When God sees that blood, He passes
over, where faith has believed the word.

Pentecost we know to have been connected with the
coming of the Holy Spirit. It was the feast of first-fruits (not
the first of the first-fruits, the wave-sheaf the morrow after the
Sabbath, that is Christ risen on the first day of the week, but)
when the harvest was reaped. Here, leaven was to be in the
two cakes offered (for sin is always found in man) even if
offered to God in the power of the Holy Ghost. At the same
time a sin-offering was to be offered to meet this defect, not
offered in the previous case of the wave-sheaf; but they could
not be burned themselves as a sweet savour to Jehovah. Then,
as it was connected with the Holy Ghost, they were directed, in
Deut. xvi., to rejoice together in grace, and bring a free-will
offering, according as Jehovah had helped them. All this
abides in its true force — its purport accomplished at Pentecost,
and its effect abiding to this day. Was it arranged of man for
the future in its institution ? or was its accomplished antitype,
the Holy Ghost come down from heaven, arranged by man on
that day ? We have it in Leviticus : we have it, with other
details, in Deuteronomy : one. Lev. xxiii., a history of the whole
time from Egypt till the Lord comes again at the feast of
Tabernacles ; the other, Deut. xvi., the characteristic detail of
which gives the moral import of the observance. If not
arranged by man, it is a testimony to that purpose of God which
makes the whole book one in the revelation of His mind.

We have yet the feast of Tabernacles, but without any
antitype at all, which makes it the more remarkable. This
was for the land solely. They were to dwell in booths,
a testimony that Israel had been wanderers ; but that now
the promises were fulfilled, and that they were at peace
in their land, never, as Amos says, to be plucked up
any more ; and, as Ezekiel has it, gathered back all of them.
It was to be kept after the harvest and the vintage ; in result,

lOo HA VE WE A RE VELA TION FROM GOD ?

when ingathering and judgment were accomplished. We have
seen in Eev. xiv. the Son of Man reaping the harvest of the earth,
and treading the wine-press of the wrath of God, In this char-
acter He comes, chapter xix. In this character He is prophesied
of, Isaiah Ixiii., when He comes in dyed garments from Bozrah,
when the day of vengeance is in His heart and He treads the
peoples in His anger. Compare Isaiah xxxiv., xxvi. 9, and
Zeph. iii, 8 : and in each case the promises to Israel following.

How could the Lord keep this feast? He could not. He will
appear and show Himself plainly enough to the world when He
executes judgment on the quick, and so we find it in John vii.,
" If Thou do these things," said His unbelieving brethren, " show
Thyself to the world." Then Jesus said unto them, " My time
is not yet come, but your time is always ready. Go ye up unto
this feast. I go not up^ unto this feast, for My time is not yet
full come."

But, then, there was another thing in this feast, an eighth
day, a specially solemn day ; it reached beyond the seven full
days of this world's week to the first day of another which
began afresh. On that day, " that great day of the feast, Jesus
stood and cried, saying. If any man thirst, let him come unto IVIe
and drink. He that believeth on Me (as the Scripture said) out
of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. But this spake
He of the Spirit which they that believe on Him should receive,
for the Spirit was not yet [given] because Jesus was not yet glori-
fied " (John vii). He could not associate Himself witfti Israel at
this feast, but He could tell them on that special day, jvhich went
beyond the order of this world, that the Holy Gho^t M'ould be
given consequent on His taking a heavenly and glolrious place
as man, with which that Holy Spirit associates us. \ With the
rest of Israel on earth comes in, what is yet a hope for us too,
association with Christ in heavenly glory, as shown in its
manifestation in the kingdom on the mount of transjfiguration.

^ The " jet " is not geuuiue.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD f i6\

of which the Holy Ghost is given to us as earnest while Christ
is entered as a forerunner, expecting till His enemies shall be
made His footstool. Then He shall have all things gathered
together in one in heaven and on earth, and then shall be fulfilled
in Israel, and far better for us, the declaration of Deut. xvi. 14 :
*' And thou shalt rejoice .... because Jehovah thy God shall
bless thee in all thine increase, and in all the work of thine
hands ; therefore thou shalt surely rejoice." It was a feast
hardly kept, and no wonder, in all their history ; in Solomon's
dedication, lost in the general joy, so to speak, and observed in
Nehemiah's time (chap. viii. 14), when they had learnt, though
sore smitten, to sing again David's song: "His mercy endureth
for ever." Is all this without a purpose or an order, in Leviti-
cus, Deuteronomy, and in the Lord's remarkable conduct and
words in John? while all the testimony of the Lord's judg-
ments, and of the rest of heart, far too numerous to quote here,
confirm the truth of it, and lead, as it will, to the full singing of
that lovely word so repeated in the end of the Psalms, i'npn D^iyfj,
"His mercy endureth for ever:" while we have better things in
glory with Him where He is gone ; yet all things to be gathered
into one under Him " for the administration of the fulness of
time" (Eph. i. 10).

The Sacrifices and other Types of the Old Testament con-
nect the whole Bible from Abel to Christ evidently, Moses
made the tabernacle after the pattern shown him in the Mount.
There was therefore a purpose and intention in it. Christ has
passed through^ the heavens, as Aaron entered into the most
holy place. The history is taken up, not only in the Hebre\\s
where the whole is gone into, but in 2 Cor. iii. And, as to
Hebrews, it is not a partisan confirming Jewish ceremonial ; but
while treating it as of God, putting it wholly aside, and contrast-
ing it with Christianity, the heavenly thing. The whole system
is judged; "a shadow, indeed, of good things to come," and yet

^ Not into, as in tbe English version (Heb. iv.)
M

i62 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

fully recognised ; and, observe, not the temple which they had
before their eyes, and which men would have thought of (this is
never alluded to in Hebrews), but the tabernacle in the wilder-
ness ; for there the Christian is, though with a heavenly calling.
It had a full moral and spiritual signification for us ; yet was all
contrast, a veil that closed the way to the sanctuary, not a rent
one which opened the way in ; a priest sitting down because all
His sacrifice work was finished, not standing because it never
was accomplished.

The whole history, I may say, of the wilderness is re-
corded in 1 Cor. x., and applied to Christianity. We have the
ark in Joshua; under Eli; and David; and the history of
Aaron's rod, and the manna confirmed in Solomon's temple, and
that by an allusion, as to a well-known thing, the strongest con-
firmation possible ; though having a moral force that the means
of journeying were gone when the rest was come, 2 Chron. v. 10.
The temple order, substituted by David and Solomon for the
tabernacle, is found, though slighted, and the temple defiled, all
through the Kings. Now, though fifteen centuries separated the
establishment of the two systems, the first has far more sense and
import now to them that understand, than they had then. They
were "shadows of goods things to come," but " the body is ot
Christ," Col. ii. 17. This applies to every part of the ordering
of the tabernacle, where though priests could go and others
could not, yet in contrast, as I have said ; for the veil is rent,
and the holy and holy of holies have, so to speak, become one.
What the altar, what the laver meant, details alluded to, I
doubt not, in John xiii., has its full force now. Tlie mind
Mdiich gave Moses the pattern in the mount thought of
Christianity in giving it, and Christianity, Miiile setting the
shadows aside, more than fulfilled their import.

With THE History, if less obvious, it was equally the case,
" All these things happened unto them for ensamples (ruTo/), and
they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 163

world are come" (1 Cor. x. 11). Hence we fiud them kuit, as
they are found in the Pentateuch, with the constant instructions
of the new, and the aptness seen by every intelligent Christian ;
indeed the whole history acquires its value from its present
application to everyday life, with the utmost and most instruc-
tive exactness. Historically the accounts of the Pentateuch are
referred to and used for the judgment and instruction of Israel,
as all the dates at which the Psalms may have been written, as
xviii., cxiv., Ixxviii., xcix., cv., cvi., Ixxxi. So the history of
Judges in Ps. Ixxxiii. The minuteness of the allusion in Psalm
Ixxx. shows more than any quotation how their minds were
imbued with the history, God using it by His Spirit. God is
appealed to as Shepherd of Israel, and leading Joseph like a
flock to shine forth from between the cherubim ; and, it is
added, " Before Ephraim and Benjamin and Manasseh." Why
these tribes ? They were the three next the ark at the rear of
the tabernacle. The allusions are numberless. The spirit of
the people from David to Babylon was filled — saturated — with
the history in the Pentateuch, Samuel, and the Judges. The
public neglect of Jehovah was great, and the judgments many ;
but their recollections and their desires lived in the history
(see Judges vi. 13) we learn in the Old Testament, and what
their prophets told them of the future. It was what made them
know God.

If we turn to the Sacrifices we find the same neglect of God
as in everything ; but the full intention and unity of intention is
evident, indeed plainly stated. We find it, from Abel onward,
the only legitimate ground of access to God. " Without shed-
ding of blood is no remission." " It is the blood that makes
atonement for the soul." Sacrifices were offered to God, but for
men ; worship was connected with an altar, a deep and import-
ant principle notified to us in Cain and Abel, and in the patri-
archs ; nor in the tabernacle service could any strange fire be
used to burn the incense, the neglect of \vhich cost Nadab and

i64 HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD ?

Abilm tlieir Hves, and closed the entry of the holiest to Aaron
save on the great day of atonement. Sin and death had come
in ; and death and the acknowledgment of sin mnst come in for
man to approach God ; and, when all was ordered of God, a clean
and spotless victim must be offered. Such offerings occur, and
mark the career of the godly (the Abrahams, whose earthly life
was a tent, his divine life an altar),'^ and repeated too often to call
for any individual notice. When all was ordained in connection
with the tabernacle, and detail entered into, there was the burnt-
offering which was on the ground of sin being there and atone-
ment made (though not for particular transgressions), but was
all burnt to God, an absolute sweet savour; the meat-offering, in
which was no leaven (figure of sin), but all kneaded witli oil
and anointed with oil, and that in each minutest part ; much
frankincense, but all burnt to God, fully tested by holy judg-
ment and only sweet savour. Then others feasted on what was
slain, as did the offerer, priest and priests, and God too, while
the same abiding law held good as to the blood and fat ; and,
lastly, when there had been actual sins, there were offerings for
them confessed on the victim's head ; and if the blood was carried
into the sanctuary, the body burnt without the camp. If the
efficacy of the atoning blood went into heaven, the victim was
rejected outside the camp, an earthly religion (connection of a
people with God upon earth) ceased, and was impossible. And
especially on the great- day of atonement the blood was carried
into the holiest of all — God's own presence, according to what
He was, not merely man's responsibility met by what was done
on the altar of burnt-offering without. Besides this there was a
sacrifice connected with their jouiney through the wilderness,
for any uncleanness contracted there, unfitting any, otherwise
entitled, to go up to the worship of God. This last w^as carried
out, not by tlie shedding or sprinkling blood again, but by
sprinkling with living water, into which the ashes of the burnt

^ He had none in Egypt, nor till he returned to Bethel.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD f 165

heifer had been iDut. The blood had been sprinkled seven times
where God met the people. All this had a purpose and a mean-
ing. The Prophets and Psalms refer to it as, with more or less
order, it was historically continued. The resting on the mere
outward offering with an unbroken heart is judged ; but, as in
Isaiah liii., there was One stricken for the transgression of God's
people who made His soul an offering for sin, offered to God
because sin was there ; but a whole burnt-offering of a perfect
sweet savour, God glorified in Him : as the meat-offering, pure
as man conceived of the Holy Ghost, anointed with the Holy
Ghost, and all He did by the Sphit, all sweet odour of grace
going up to and referring to God above, though priests may
scent its sweetness, fully tested by the fire of God's judgment ;
no leaven was there, all was a sweet savour to God. We feed
on this sacrifice as the peace-offering, though the life and its
energies were all offered to God — feed on it indeed, as bread
come down from heaven, and as a sacrifice in death, only that
death is become sure life to us, and what was absolute ruin be-
fore is now redemption and life, and we drink the blood too ; not
only atonement made for our sins and guilt taken away in our
believing, but God perfectly glorified in His nature and in-
trinsic righteousness, measured by what He is and not merely
by what we owe, and all our sins gone where they never can be
found again. Such was the special offering of the great day of
atonement.

There is for the believer no more conscience of sins ; he
is perfected for ever as to his conscience, while provision is
made for restoring communion if we have defiled ourselves,
the Holy Ghost by the word restoring the self-judging soid
in virtue of that which shows sins for ever put away. He
appeared once in the end of the world, to put away sin by
the sacrifice of Himself (complete in result in the new heavens
and the new earth) ; and as it is appointed unto men once
to die, and after that the judgment, so Christ was once offered

1 66 HA VE WE A REVEL A TION FROM GOD ?

to bear tlie siiis of many. God is perfectly glorified in His
nature through redemption, and the believer's sins gone for
ever, so that he has boldness to enter into the holiest. I cannot,
of course, here enlarge on so wide a subject as the sacrifices, pro-
foundly interesting as it may be. What I have here to note is,
that the word of God affords us, from Abel's time, a distinct
line of thought, brought out in detail in the law of Moses, and
prophetically applied to God's coming Servant in Isaiah^ spoken
of in the Psalms in words used by the Lord Himself on the
cross ; and then in the Gospels plainly declared " the Lamb of
God that takes away the sin of the world," the Son of man come
to give His life a ransom for many ; and reasoned on, as
every one knows, in the Epistles, showing Christ who died for
our sins, according to the Scriptures, the just for the unjust, a
Lamb without blemish and without spot. The lamb of Abel's
faith is the Lamb in the midst of the throne, whose bride the
heavenly Jerusalem is, Himself the light and glory of it — " a lamb
as it had been slain."

The same divine thought runs through Scripture from the
beginning of Genesis to the end of Eevelation ; the divine
thought, prefigured in Abel, in the Exodus, and the sacri-
fice of the tabernacle, sung in holy strains in the Psalms,
prophesied of by the prophets of God, even to the price He was
to be sold for, and accomplished in the Word made flesh, and un-
folded in the instructions of the Holy Ghost — God's precious
Lamb, whose blood cleanses us from all sin. Was it a compiler of
fragmentary documents in Ezra's time, or God, who has taught
us all this, one immense moral truth from Abel to the consum-
mation of all things, the foundation of the stability of the new
heavens and the new earth which makes grace righteousness —
the righteousness of God, and sets man at His right hand in
glory, opening heaven to us now, and in time taking us there?
It was God's thought, God's work of love, and God's revelation,

HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD ? 167

never lost sight of, as it never will be when even the kingdom
shall be given up that God may be all and all.

These may suffice as illustrations of how divine thought runs
as a continued stream of purpose through the Bible as a whole.
I insist upon its bemg many books, by many authors, collected
no man knows by whom (not the "learned Germans" more than
I or Mr. Smith), but proved to be divinely inspired, individually
and collectively, by the divine oneness which pervades their con-
tents, and the more from their being many authors in remote
ages. But I will now take two special parts of the great collec-
tion ; for collection, whoever made it, every one admits it is, the
Lord Himself setting His seal of acceptance on it as such — I
mean the Gospels and Psalms — to show the divine mind in
each.

The traditions of Mark's Gospel, composed at Eome from
Peter's testimony as its source, and Luke more or less from
Paul's, I attach no importance to. It is quite alike to me
whether a secondhand tradition (not very early either) be true
or false, if an apostolic source be true or not. The question is
whether God is the source. If so, the human instrument is of
no moment. Mark was intimate probably with Peter, and
certainly Luke with Paul ; but the latter could not have him-
self given testimony from personal knowledge to him, and
Luke attributes it to another source. This is true, that the
tone and import of Luke's Gospel falls in more with Paul's
ministry of grr.ce to all; but all the preaching in the Acts
(and we have only sermons to Jews from Peter and Paul) is
based on the commission in Luke, for they are distinct in each
Gospel.

It is very doubtful if the Epistles of Jude and James are
from apostles. This is not the real question. That the apostles
had a special mission, whether the twelve or Paul, for these
also are distinct, is sure to every Christian ; but if God inspired
others, their word was just as sure ; and if an apostle spoke or

1 68 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

wrote or acted not by the inspiration of the Spirit, this was not
the word of God. Those who believe in inspiration have, just
as these historical critics, rested on traditional circumstances or
proofs, or human evidence, strong indeed, I admit, for authen-
ticity and the letter, but which leaves the real question. Are they
inspired of God ? untouched.

The proof of Scripture in this respect is in Scripture, in the
power of the word wielded by the Holy Ghost. When in
that power it reaches the heart and conscience, its character,
its divine character, is known, not only in the particular point
in which it reaches them, but as to the true power and character
of that which has done so. The woman of Samaria does not say
when thus reached, " What you say is true," but, " Sir, I perceive
that thou art a prophet." What He said came from God. His
character and word were known to her. So it is with the Bible
when a man is taught of God. It is recognised as His word, as
Christ was recognised by those whose eyes were opened to see
what was divine. Human testimony may prove the folly of
human doubt, but no more, and so be useful; but divine
operation alone gives divine faith. "He hath opened mine
eyes." When men believed only through proofs to man, by
miracles, Jesus did not commit Himself to them ; He knew what
was in man. It was man's judgment about Him, very justly
formed, but only man's judgment, no revelation of the Son of
God to the soul : this is by the word through the operation of
God; and then a man is born of God and sees. But I must
p\irsue my inquiry.

As to the Gospels then, they carry their own testimony
with them. Men may make Harmonies or seek to prove
discrepancies, or give us Eusebius' account of traditions, or,
if we are to believe Eusebius, the foolish old man Papias'
account of his pleasure in hearing legends of what Christ
said — a good pious old man, I doubt not. One has only to
read the Apocryphal Gospels to see what they are worth, the

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 169

utter nonsense that is in them.^ But each Gospel bears its dis-
tinct character, proving itself and completing the others. For
while each can give us enough to show what the blessed Lord's
life was, yet the account would not be complete according to
divine thought without all. First, there is a characteristic dif-
ference between John's and the Synoptical Gospels. They pre-
sent Christ to be received as Son of David, Son of man, though
of course the Christ and the prophet-servant, and in all He is
rejected. In John, being God and the Son manifested in the
world, the real ground of His rejection, we read in the first
chapter that the world knew Him not, and His own received Him
not, and they, the Jews, are treated as reprobate all through, and
He is always come into the world, and sovereign and quickening
grace alone leads to His reception. And what He is in person,
and the Holy Ghost's coming, are fully treated of

But let us see briefly these characteristics, so as to show, in
some measure, the divine completeness of the whole ; and it is
not pretended there was a clever compiler of the four here. I
can only touch on a few leading heads.

In ]\Iatthew He comes as Messiah, Emmanuel, Jehovah,
to His people, yet if Messiah, of course, as Son of David.
Hence His genealogy is traced to Abraham and David, the
great vessels of the Jewish promise of the Seed. He was
Emmanuel, Jesus, that is, Jah Hoshea, Jehovah the Saviour,
for He shall save His people from their sins. Born at
Bethlehem according to prophecy, the anti-king seeks His
destruction, and He flies to Egypt, called back out from thence
to be the true Son of God here below. Then John the Baptist
executes his mission. Both here and with the Magi, while the
Jews are the immediate object, yet a remnant only is owned

^ One tells us that Jesus was as a child the death of so many who meddled with
Him, that His mother kept Him in the house at last. He was making mud birds
one Sabbath and ponds, and a big boy came and broke His ponds. The birds took
life and flew away, and the Child said, "As you have dried My ponds, you will be
dried up ;" and so he dried up and died.

I70 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

in Israel morally, judgment is at hand, and grace can make of
stones children to Abraham, and in the Magi the Gentiles are
owned but in connection with one born king of the Jews.

Tlien Christ takes His place among this remnant, and imme-
diately heaven is opened. He is anointed with the Holy Ghost, and
the Father owns Him as His Son. The whole Trinity is for the
first time fully revealed, and man's place (for us in redemption),
according to God's counsels, made good in Him when He takes
His place amongst them, Son of God there. Owned such He goes
up, led of the Spirit, to meet Satan ; for us refuses, if Son, to leave
obedience in His taken place of servant, and overcomes Satan
for us in perfectly waiting on God's will to act, overcomes his
wiles, and sends away the adversary, and then goes to Galilee to
the poor of the flock, calls disciples, and all the history of His
service in Matthew is given in verse 23 of chap. iv.

Then He describes the character of those who would have
part in the kingdom without speaking of redemption. Israel
was on the way with Ood to judgment (comp. Luke xii. 49-59),
and if they did not agree would be cast into prison, and not
come out till they had paid the last farthing. And there they
are to this day.

In viii. He is Jehovah, and the Gentiles are again noticed.
In ix. we have the character of His ministry, which is forgiveness
aiid power in grace (according to Ps. ciii.), and characterised by
grace. In x. mission exclusively to Israel in His own time, then, .
t'o the end of 15 ; after He was gone from 16, and that to the end
till the Son of man should be come. In xi. John the Baptist's
ministry and His own are both rejected by Israel, and He takes
the character of Son of God, unknown because of His person,
and alone able to reveal the Father to the comfort of the heav}'-
laden, and as the obedient man showing the yoke they must
bear to get rest. In xii. the Jews are formally judged, and He
disclaims any relationship on earth except that produced by the
word. In xiii. He seeks fruit no more in His vineyard, but as

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 171

Son of man carries out the seed which was to produce fruit ;
but the field is the world and the kingdom of heaven is de-
scribed; that is, God's kingdom when the King is in heaven,"
taking the place of His presence on earth. He will come in
judgment as Son of man, and the righteous shine forth as the
sun in the Father's kingdom.

In xiv. He still continues His ministry in grace, but Israel
and man are judged in xv., and grace to the farthest from God
according to Jewish dispensation vouchsafed to those who had
no promise in His person. In xvi. we have the church Christ
builds (founded on the title " Son of the Living God," proved in
resurrection) to replace Israel, as in xiii. the kingdom in mystery,
in xvii the kingdom in glory. The disciples are forbidden to
say any more He is the Christ, for the Son of man must suffer.
In xviiL, to the end of xx. 28, we find the principles which
were to guide the disciples and characterise their walk when
He was gone — lowliness, His presence among them, forgive-
ness, judging the inward man of the heart instead of observ-
ing the outward law, and other great principles of conduct and
service.

In aU the Synoptics, the history of the last events, another
chapter of the Lord's history. His death and not His life, be-
gins with the blind man of Jericho. And He begins by
again taking the character of Son of David, and presenting him-
self to Jerusalem as such. Then the Jews and their various
sects come up one after another and are judged. The testimony
of God in Judah till the Lord comes (xxiv. 1-31), with exhorta-
tions to 44 ; the judgment of Christendom in xxiv. 45 to xxv.
30, and 31 to the end the judgment of the Gentiles, to whom the
message of the kingdom had been sent in those last days ; in xxvi.
xxvii., the last scenes, in which He is specially the victim here,
led to the slaughter and dumb before His shearers, and every
human comfort looked for in vain, the Christ the Son of God
but henceforth Son of man in glory, the veil rent. Then His

172 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GO If

resurrection and joining the poor of the flock again in Galilee,
but no ascension : the twelve being sent out to dsciple and
baptize the Gentiles, a commission from Jesus rifsn, of the
accomplishment of which we find no history in Scripture. The
mission to them is surrendered to Paul, as recorded, ii Gal. ii.

The perpetual quotation of and reference to the ^M Testa-
ment Scriptures is evident to the most careless reade*, with ha,
when it is the object of the passage cited, otw; when it itan accom-
plishment of it, TOTi when it is only an instance of the thing. I
have only noticed of course here what shows a perfect vud syste-
matic course of teaching, all based on the essential chiracter of
the Gospel The events are not given in historical orler in the
life of the Lord, though generally following it, but art subjects
treated of. The whole history of His life and ministryis in one
verse, and then what characterised it, — the mind of Cod in it.
The rationalist may search very imperfect legends how it origin-
ated and was put together,^ conjecture or reason on a I'ebrew
original or the contrary, and the Nazarene Gospel. The Chris-
tian taught of God sees with perfect certainty the chara-ter of
the Lord as Messiah, Emmanuel, Jehovah, a Man among;t men,
but Son of God, presented to Israel with all the principBS He
brought as such, and rejected by Israel to make way for leeper
counsels and a better srdvation : stating indeed a heavenlyplace
for those rejected for His sake, but carrying on the testing (.ny,
not from heaven, but from resurrection.

The Gospel of Mark I need not dwell on. It is the miiis-
try of Christ, and is more exactly in chronological order, tie
same as Luke when he is chronological, but not calling pr
special notice for the purpose for which I comment on tie
Gospels. The reader may notice that the Lord's life closes he^e
too with Galilee, as far as the Lord's words go ; xvi. 9-2f)
giving a short summary of what is recorded in Luke and John.

I turn to Luke, but only for some brief remarks, with a vie\<

1 If any one be curious, he may read Marsh's conjectures.

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 173

to my special object. It begins with a lovely picture of the godly
remnant in Judah, and the prophetic Spirit amongst them,
hidden in the midst of the abounding iniquity of Israel ; but
where, as in the cave of AduUam, a godly priest, the true king,
and the Spirit of prophecy are found. But the Jews are under
the power of the Eoman " beast," and events are dated by his
reign. Then comes a genealogy,^ which traces Christ up to
Adam. He is Son of man come in grace, not the heir of pro-
mises to Abraham and David. At once, in chaj^ter iv., He
shows God's goodness extended to the Gentiles, so that they
were going to kiU Him. Then we have His power over demons
and diseases, — cleansing the leper and forgiving sins on earth ;
He is come to the sick. His disciples could not fast then, — the
bridegroom was there ; — nor could new wine be put into old
bottles, the truths of grace and the gift of the Spirit into
Jewish ordinances. He is found (as constantly in Luke) praying
as Son of man, and slighting their thoughts of the Sabbath ;
He was Lord of it as Son of man : it was the sign of the
covenant with Israel (Ezek. xx.) He gives then the summary of
blessings and woes, (the disciples are " ye poor,") but not the
principles on which they would enter into the kingdom. There
is more faith in a Gentile than in Israel; and then He raises the
dead. The poor multitude and publicans justified God ; the
Pharisees rejected His counsel and are rejected. But wisdom is
justified of all her children ; and the child of wisdom is shown
in the poor woman, a sinner in the city : not in the Pharisee
who, with God in his house, decided, as rationalists do, that He,
most clearly, could not be a prophet. But forgiveness, salva-
tion, and peace are the portion of the poor woman, to whose

' iii. 23 should, I have no doubt, be read " (Being, as was supposed, the son
of Joseph) [the son] of Heli ; " that is, son of Heli refers to Jesus, not Joseph ;
Ihere is no " which was " in Greek. The Talmudists make Mary the daughter of
Heli to be tormented in the other world. The vision of Isaiah (a.d. 6S), it is
said, makes JIary to be of the lineage of David. So does Tertullian according to
Kaye. But this only by the by.

174 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

heart and conscience God had revealed Himself in Christ as
light and love.

Then, in chap, viii., the sowing the word is spoken of ; hut
we have not the mysteries of the kingdom. This Gospel is not
dispensational ; hut the Lord rejects association, according to
the flesh, with Israel. We have then an account of the expul-
sion of the legion of demons in Gadara, and, as often in Luke,
moral details as to the man. He would go away out of his
home in this world with Christ, but was sent back for a testi-
mony. The world gets rid of Jesus ; and, I have no doubt, the
rushing of the herd of swine is a picture of Israel's conduct
when He was gone ; but this is a mere figure I leave to every one
to judge of. He goes to heal Jairus' daughter, but has to raise
the dead. Only whoever touches Him with faith, in the way
as He then was, is healed.

After feeding the multitude He is transfigured ; and in
the Gospel of Luke only we have the talking of His decease,
and the going into the cloud, the heavenly part of the king-
dom, a very important element. Their selfishness is detected
in every form from the grossest to the most refined ; and
Christ is to be everything. This closes the orderly historical
part of Luke. Christ's time was come for Him to be received
up, and He stedfastly sets his face to go to Jerusalem. In the
beginning of ix. He had given His last testimony to Israel, only
there was no inquiry who was worthy ; and then conies the
kingdom in glory, and entering into where the Father was, the
excellent glory, and tlie strict prohibition any more to say that
He was the Christ. We have no going through the cities of
Israel till the Son of man be come, — no prohibitory notice of
Samaritans and Gentiles ; we have the history morally, not dis-
pensationally, given : here, too, He was praying when He
was transfigured ; no replacing the ^lessiah in Israel by the
church founded on the title Son of God, but the heavenly and
earthly glory when the Christ was rejected, and the cross, in

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? '75

bearing whicli they were to follow Him. On this He insists,
while the multitude wondered at His present power. He sends
His messengers before His face on His way to Jerusalem, the
parting testimony to Israel ; but the disciples were to rejoice,
not because devils were subject to tliem, but because their
names were written in heaven, Grace is taught, independent
of Judaism, in the man that fell among thieves. Then we have
hearing His word, and prayer. He was the test of every soul.
The evil generation, as pictured in the return of the unclean
spirit, is left out. Still the nation is judged morally.

The folly of the world in its desires is taught, and the fear
of man to be conquered, and for disciples full trust in God
exercised ; while the heavenly portion of those who watch,
and the rule in the return of Christ of those that serve, is beauti-
fully brought out. The effect of His present coming in dividing
nearest friends is told, and the application of being in the way
with the adversary made clear. Judgment was on all the na-
tion, the Sabbath is set aside in the work of grace, the kingdoni
very briefly announced in its external form, but in connection
with entering in at the strait gate. He would often as Jehovah
have gathered Jerusalem, but now her day was past. The Sab-
bath again yields to doing good, and the call to the great Supper
and its result is spoken of: only the sick and the poor of the flock
is added to what is in Matthew. We have then, what is in Luke
only, grace in seeking and grace' in receiving by the Father,
God's joy in the salvation of a sinner thenceforth ; what mar-,
a steward out of place, is to do with his IMaster's goods in view
of everlasting habitations ; and the veil withdrawn from another
world, putting the outward blessings in this, promised to Israel,
in their own true place. This morally substitutes Christianity
for Judaism.

After some moral principles. He is substituted for the
temple and Judaism in the case of the healed Samaritan ; the
kingdom of God was there. Prayer is urged, but when the

176 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GODf

Son of man came where would be faith ? and self-judgment pre-
ferred to self-righteousness, and the heart searched instead of
the commandments outwardly kept. There is none good but
God. Salvation is only of Him. He approaches Jericho ; the
story of Zaccheus is added, full grace to a publican, but re-
sponsibility in service when He should be gone, and reward
according to labour. Then in approaching Jerusalem on the ass,
the remarkable expression. Peace in heaveiL Till Satan should
be cast out thence, no rest on earth could come. Jerusalem is
wept over in grace.

In the prophecy to His disciples (chap, xxi.) we have no
abomination of desolation, but the siege of Jerusalem by Titus
not mentioned in Matthew. The true secret of Peter's fall brought
out, and the entire change in Christ's position now, as being there,
not as Emmanuel, King in Israel as He had been, but as a male-
factor on the cross. In Gethsemane more deep human sorrow
than in any Gospel : on the cross none. He is the perfect man ;
not here the victim before God, true as that ever remains. He
went through the sorrow with His Father ; and there was calm-
ness itself when the sorrow was actually there. We have the
account of the converted thief, and the assurance of a blessed
intermediate state before He came into His (Christ's) kingdom :
a most instructive and important history. I should have added
that in insti'^uting the Lord's Supper He does not speak of eating
it new in che kingdom, but of the present thing, its being
fulfilled in the kingdom of God. We have the lovely history of
the disciples' journey to Emmaus ; and, passing rapidly over the
circumstance of the resurrection, no going to Galilee, but going
out to Bethany ; the ascension related, and their blessing in con-
^nection with His going to heaven. It is He himself, the same
Jesus "rhrf) is risen : He eats to show it : opens their understand-
ings to uAderstand the Scriptures : repentance and remission of
sins to be\ preached in His name ; but they were to wait for
power at Jerusalem for the promise of the Father — that is, the

HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD f i77

coming of the Holy Ghost. It is on this commission, as I have
said, that the preaching of the Gospel took place, as related in
Scripture.

The whole Gospel gives us the moral change, and intro-
duces the present and heavenly state of things, not dealing
with dispensations, though of course with the setting aside of
Judaism. It is the Son of man, and in divine grace. Wliile
Luke is especially characteristic, it is less easy to reproduce its
character in a summary, because it is many minute traits which
form that character : grace in the Son of man. Still the intro-
ductory chapters, the place and scope of the genealogy, the in-
troduction of the parables in xiv. xv. xvL, the introduction of
going into the cloud in the transfiguration, the ascension, the
thief on the cross, the woman that was a sinner, the frequent pray-
ing^of Christ, the introduction of Gentiles, aU marked grace that
reached out beyond promises to Israel, and the Son of man in
whom that grace came.

The Gospel of John, on the contrary, gives very broad lines
of truth as to the person of Christ and the coming of the Holy
Ghost. Its character is totally distinct from the other three
gospels. It is not a history to display what Christ was here. His
is rejection and death, but a statement of all that He was in
Himself The Jews are all set aside, and indeed man, in start-
ing ; but all that Christ is, save His relative characters, is found
already in the first chapter : in the third, what was revealed and
needed for Israel and man to have part in the earthly and hea-
venly blessings. We have only to follow the contents of the
Gospel to see its bearing. The sovereign operation of needed
grace is found also from the beginning. What was found by
results and experience in the first three Gospels is taught as
truth here.

The first chapter begins before Genesis, because it treats of
what was, not of what was done. As to Christ, He is God, in
nature a distinguishable person with God, not become so by

N

178 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

incarnation, but with God in the beginning. He was, when
all began. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men ;
but the light shone in darkness, that is, amongst men, bnt
the darkness comprehended not. God, in patient love, sent a
witness to draw men's attention to that light. Next, verse 14,
He became flesh, lyhiTo, became, not now r,v, was. He became
flesh, was this amongst men as man, was a Son with His own
Father, dwelt among men full of grace and truth. Christians
have all received of His fulness, and grace for grace. Grace
and truth came by Him, they were there, symro. The law
was given by Moses. Then His work : He is the Lamb of
God, the taker-away of the sin (not sins) of the world, and the
baptizer with the Holy Ghost ; He was anointed and sealed with
it Himself. Then, as John had witnessed to Him as Lamb of God,
His disciples gathered round him. He is Son of God and King
of Israel But much more : henceforth the heavens would be
seen opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending
on the Son of man. He is not the Christ for Israel in this
chapter ; nor Priest above ; nor Head of the church. John does
not own the Jews, nor has he indeed to do with the Church :
all is individual, not counsels, but God revealed in the Son
declaring His Father; and eternal life come down to be imparted
to man, the Word become flesh.

In the second chapter we have the result when the history
of the gathered remnant closes, the joy of the marriage, the
purifying water turned into wine, and the temple purged of all
that profaned it. This closes the introductory part as to all
that concerns Christ.

We have now what concerns men. But the incarnation is
the introduction of what was before the beginning of all things,
in the power of life in a Man, into the scene of the all things,
to be eternal life indeed as from everlasting in His person ; but
a wholly new thing though a true j\Ian amongst men — a new
beginning. But the mere human conviction by evidence was

HA VE WE A REVELATIOX FROM GOD ? 179

nothing, and not to be trusted. Man ninst be born again (a^w^a^)
wholly anew. Nicodenius ought to have known this as a teacliei
of Israel. The prophets (see Ezek. xxxvi.) showed it plainly that,
even for Israel to enjoy the earthly promises, there must be a
new birth ; how much more to have part in the heavenly! which
He would teach as coming thence, as no one else had to tell it,
the Son of man, who was even then divinely in heaven. But the
Son of man must be lifted up, that a people separated by faith
should have a part in these heavenly things. The need was there on
man's side, and the Son of man met it. The love of God was there
on God's side, and the Son of God was given ; but it is the world,
not Israel The condemnation now was that light was come
into the world ; and man hated it, and did not come to it. In
the rest of the chapter John the Baptist unfolds who he is, the
testimony being closed by the evangelist himself with the
Father's love to the Son, and His having put all things into His
hand : he that believed on Him had everlasting life. Man, God
in grace, Israel, the world, and the Son of God come in grace
revealing the Father, bringing eternal life, grace and truth — all
find their place here ; what Christ is, and the truth as to man,
the being born again, and the atonement on the cross.

This closes the introduction, the epoch being marked by John
being not yet cast into prison ; after which Christ began His
public ministry. In the fourth chapter the Lord leaves Judsea,
His country as come amongst the Jews, and we find grace with a
Samaritan, prerogative mercy above Jewish relationship, and con-
nected with His person and humiliation, but no understanding of
it in man ; and this prodiiced by dealing with the conscience.
Worship must be in spirit and in truth, for God is a spirit ;
but the Father, His name in grace, revealed in the Son, seeketh
such. In ch. v. we have the benefits under the law depend-
ent on the power of the person who is to use them, and there is
none ; the disease to be cured has taken away the force to use
the remedy : Christ as Son of God brings it with Him. The

i8o HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

Father raises the dead, and quickens them, so the Son quickens
whom He "will ; and he who believes has eternal life : then man's
responsibility as to it, life being come in His person, with the evi-
dence of John Baptist, His own works, the Father, their own Scrip-
tures : they would not come to Him to have it. In ch. vi. He is
Son of man, owned prophet, refusing to be king ; He ascends up
for priestly service, and the disciples go away alone; He rejoins
them, and they are immediately where they went. Our food,
meanwhile, is Christ humbled, the bread from heaven, and
His flesh and blood ; but if this last. His death, be not fed on,
there is not life ; in such case their portion is resurrection in
the last day, in a state man never was in, even innocent. In ch.
vii. tlie Holy Ghost takes the place of Tabernacles, as we have seen,
of which there is yet no antitype ; in ch. viii. His M'^ord is rejected;
in ch. ix. His work ; in ch. x. He will have His sheep at any rate
out of Israel and the Gentiles too ; in chs. xi. xii. we have the testi-
mony rendered of God, as we have seen, to Christ when rejected
as Son of God, Son of David, Son of man : but then He must die.
This closes His history, and He is now looked at as going to
His Father — this from ch. xiii. He must leave His disciples ; but if
He cannot stay with them, He must have them with Him gone
now to God. For this He abides a servant, and washes their feet ;
for being washed (converted), that is done once for all. Their walk
remains to be seen to. Further, God is perfectly glorified by Him
in His death, so man goes into God's glory. In ch. xiv. He went
to prepare a place for them above, and will come back and receive
them. Tliey knew where He was going, for He was going to
the Father, and they had seen the Father in Him, and so knew
the way too. Further, when the Comforter was come, they would
know not only that He was in the Father, but that they were in
Him and He in them. In ch. xv. Israel was not the true vine,
though a vine brought out of Egypt. He was so : and they the
branches and this on earth. Then the work of the Comforter fully
developed in ch. xvi. : sent by the Father in xiv. in His name : by

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? i8i

Him, from the Father, as the glorified Man in ch. xv., xvi. In cii.
xvii. speaking to His Father — wondrous grace that we should be
admitted to hear Him— He puts the disciples (founding it on His
work, and glorifying, and revelations of tlie Father in Himself) on
the same ground as Himself with the Father and with the world.
Then we have Gethsemane and the cross ch. xx.. His revela-
tion of Himself to Mary Magdalene and to the disciples : and this
whole period of Christian blessing characterised. The Jewish
remnant, who loved Him, could not now have Him back in bodily
presence, but they were now His brethren ; He went to His Father
and their Father, to His God and their God : He is in their midst,
communicates life in resurrection in the power of the Holy Ghost,
as God breathed into Adam, commits the administration of for-
giveness of sins on earth to them. Thomas represents the remnant
in the latter day. In ch. xxi. we are in Galilee again witli this
remnant; and the service of Peter, who is blessedly restored
through grace, and of John : one as the apostle of the circumci-
sion to find his labour in Israel come to nothing as regards the
nation, and he a martyr, as Christ ; and John to linger over the
condition of the church till He came. It is purposely given
mysteriously, and in part refers to the last days. The net is
the millennial haul, and does not break, as the gospel net did.
(Of Paul's ministry we have notliing ; it stands by itself, a dis-
pensation committed to him.) . We have no ascension in St.
John's gospel. It will be remarked that, all through, it is the
divine side and the purpose of God as to Christ, which is treated
here ; with the Holy Gliost who takes His place on earth.

I would still notice the distinction of the closing scene in the
Gospels. In Matthew Christ is the victim, perfect in calmness
and patience, with no ray to comfort Him, no heart to feel for
Him ; He is led as a lamb to the slaughter ; man's wickedness
friglitfully brought out, but a perfect victim of propitiation, told
out on the cross by the solemn words, "My God, :My God, why
hast thou forsaken Me ?" In the midst of plans of the priests

tS2 have we a revelation from god 7

and the vacillation of Pilate God's purpose is carried out in the
true passover : and Christ is, before both, condemned for His
own testimony to the truth.

In Luke you have deeper human conflict in Gethsemane,
though perfection in it : being in an agony, He prayed more
earnestly. On the cross there is none : He had gone through it
as man with His Father, and the perfect result is peacefulness
on the cross. Also, here, as man, He commends His spirit to
His Father.

In John we have the divine side — no sorrow in Gethsemane,
none on the cross. In Gethsemane they go backward and fall to
the ground, and He delivers up Himself, saying, " If ye seek Me,
let these go their way." On the cross He puts His mother under
John's care, and delivered up His own spirit when all was
finished in the work He had to do. "We have to learn in part,
and the various parts separately, that we may know all. John
was nearer Christ in His agony, but Matthew gives it, not John.
Matthew saw the people go back and fall, but says nothing of it.
The Holy Ghost gives by each what suits the whole tenor and sub-
ject of that Gospel. But our Baurs and other Germans can see no-
thing but a composition to make peace among Christian squabblers
in the end of the second century. Can there be greater poverty,
more total moral darkness ? Mr. Smith, professing for some
other reason to believe, debits out this threadbare infidelity,
without a ray of light to lighten the darkness, or say it is not
true ; or he would persiiade us that Christ sanctioned, as wiitten
by Moses, and as the word of God relative to Himself, what was
not written by Moses at all, — an imposture in which he, for-
sooth, can see no harm, and would have us believe that the
Lord and the apostles were all wrong ; and Dr. Baur and him-
self right.

I have referred to the Psalms as another illustration of unity
of purpose and mind as collected. It is well known there are
five distinct books, each ending with ascription of praise to

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 183

Jehovah — i.-xli. : xlii.-lxxii. : Ixxiii.-lxxxix. : xc.-cvi. : and thence
to the end. Each book has its own object and character. The
first two psalms, however, are an introduction, and give the key
to the whole cl. In Ps. i. there is a remnant distinguished from
the ungodly of the nation. Ps. ii. gives the counsels of Jehovah
to establish, in spite of rejection by Jews and Gentiles, Christ
(the anointed) as King on His holy hill of Zion ; also His Son, as
born into the world ; and, finally, to subdue the Gentiles with a
rod of iron.

I would now mention a principle of order which helps us
to understand the connection of many psalms. One or more
psalms give the platform on which the thoughts and feelings
of the following psalms are based.^ But, first, as to the character
of the five books. In the first the remnant is still in Jeru-
salem, and the name Jehovah is used throughout, though in
two Elohim be introduced. And here we have more prophetic
reference to Christ, though rejected.

In the second book the remnant is out of Jerusalem ;
but their state is pursued through rejection tiU the authority
of the Son of David be established. This begins with Elohim ;
but after Ps. xlv., when the King is brought in in power, we
find Jehovah, and triumph. Blood-guiltiness is owned, the
sufferings and sorrows of the people under oppression and hos-
tile power are recounted : and Elohim is largely, sometimes ex-
clusively, used in contrast with man poweiful in wickedness.
Still judgment is looked for in faith, and true rei:»entance in
Israel. But the remnant all through are cast out, though their
praise is ready (Ixv.) when restored. In Ixix. Christ associates
Himself with Israel, bearing their sins, and carrying their
sorrows in His heart, though rejected of them ; and here Jehovah
comes in again. It closes, as already said, in the Son of David
being established in glory and power.

^ It -ft-ill be found in individual psalms, tlie first verse or two giving the
tliL'sis, the rest what leads to it.

1 84 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

The tliird book goes beyond tlie Jews, and takes in all
Israel. They are to be received after the glory, and though
faith does bring in Jehovah at Ixxiii. 28, and Ixxviii. 21, Ixxx.
4, Ixxxi. 10, still Elohim is the constant cry : they are not yet
restored by the glory. Still we have this prophetically, and
all the exercises of heart and faith and hope about it furnished
to them by inspiration. Here too the old associations of Israel
as a whole are far more fully before us. In Ixxxiii. Jehovah
comes fully in again, on the judgment against the last con-
federacy being executed, and is used even in the depth of their
humiliation, their guilt under the old covenant (Ixxxviii.) la
the next psalm mercies are recounted and Christ brought in
(verse 19 called holy one wrongly. It is still Chesed, so the
same as in the first verse generally ; in verse 18 Kodesh.)
That is, Jehovah. This closes the book.

The fourth book is the bringing in the first-begotten into the
world. Jehovah has been ever Israel's dwelling-place. Of xci.
I have spoken where Jehovah is identified with the Most High,
in the accomplishment of the promises to Abraham. This is
celebrated by faith in the next psalm. Then, with xciii. as a
preface, the introduction of Jehovah Messiah into the world,
from the appeal of the suffering remnant who inquire if Jehovah
is going to reign conjointly with the power of evil, verse 20, on
to the calling up the Gentiles to worship at Jerusalem, where
the presence and glory of Jehovah are fully established, in
Psalm c. In ci. we have the principles of the earthly king-
dom ; and cii. how Christ, who was cut off, could be there. He
was Jeliovah Eternal in nature (Atta Hu), and His years, too, as
man should never fail (see Heb. i.) Psalm ciii. celebrates Christ
as Jehovah (comp. Matt, ix.) in Israel ; in Ps. civ. it is the God
of creation who is celebrated ; in cv. the God of Israel of old,
but whose judgments are now in all the earth. In cvi. Jehovah's
faithfulness is looked to in spite of all their misdeeds.

The fifth book, from cvii. to the end, is more general, but we

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 185

have them gathered out of all lands. The great revelation that
Messiah Melchisedek was to sit on Jehovah's right hand till His
enemies were made His footstool, then His power would come
out of Zion. It is fully celebrated " that Jehovah's mercy en-
dures for ever." The circumstances of deliverance are rehearsed
in the Mahaloth, the law written (cxix.) in the heart of Israel
who had gone astray like a sheep that was lost ; and finally the
great Hallelujah of now accomplished deliverance. Ps. Ixxii.
and cxlv. alone, as far as I remember, describe the millennial state
itself : the first as to Christ ; the second as to His association with
the people. The cxviii. is the full description of the return of
Israel's heart to Jehovah, recognising His ways and their own
fault, and is constantly quoted by the Lord in the Gospels, and
brought out by the power of God in the last entry into Jerusalem :
and it is quoted also in the Acts.

I return to note a few details based on the principle
referred to at the outset. Psalms i. ii. are the preface and
key as I have said ; then Ps. iii.-vii. the thoughts and feelings
Christ's rejection has given rise to in the remnant, ending in His
character as Son of man, Ps. viii. Of this I have spoken before. Ps.
ix. x.^ are the sorrows of the Jews and the delivering judgments
of God; in xi.-xvii. their thoughts and feelings, Christ's resurrec-
tion, trust and righteousness being introduced, ending in xviii.,
when Christ's sufferings are made the key to Israel's history, from
Egypt to the establishment of the kingdom in power. Ps. xLc.-
xxii. are deeply interesting, creation testimony, the testimony of
the law, of a Christ suffering from man exalted to glory and
punishing all His enemies, of a Christ suffering indeed from man,
but then crying to God and forsaken, yet perfect and making
atonement ; nothing but wider and wider blessing flowing from
it to the remnant which becomes the church, literally accom-

1 I do not understand how Mr. S. makes there an imperfect acrostic. It is
looking inexactly and superficially at the outside, and missing all the force of
the Psalms. "We have N, N, D, D to begin with in Ps. ix. ; ^, 3, 3, T in Ps. x.

i86 HA VE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD ?

plished in Joliu xx., to all Israel, to the world, and those bom
in the millennium : " He hath done this."

Ps. xxiii. forms another starting-point : Jehovah the Shepherd
who cares for His tried one ; Ps. xxiv. Clirist the Jehovah who
enters in triumph into the gates of righteousness on earth. The
exercises on this go to Ps. xxxix. Then we have the accomplish-
ment of the counsels of God, undertaken by a suffering obedient
Christ, the key to all ; and then the blessing on him (xli.) who
understands the poor, as He said, Blessed are the poor in spirit,
" ye poor ; " and we can say, This poor man cried, and Jehovah
heard him.

I need not go any farther to illustrate general principles,
which is all I can attempt to do now. The divine sequence and
connection of the Psalms is, I think, evident ; yet they are con-
fessedly isolated songs, composed at different times, even if
mostly David's : a collection, but the mind of God shines
through them as a collection ; His purposes in Christ and in
Israel, when Jehovah shall be owned as Most High in all the
earth, a suffering remnant and a Messiah who has entered into
their sorrows. Of course the Father's name is not and cannot
be found in them, nor the Spirit of adoption. It is deeply inter-
esting to see that, while His human sorrows can be viewed in
Psalm XX., His atoning sufferings can be expressed only by His
own mouth (xxii.)

I would say a few words on Petrine and Pauline teaching, as it
is greatly dwelt on by tliese "learned Germans." It is folly, as they
take it with their speculations, but most interesting, when rightly
looked at. That the Jews had the strongest prejudices against
the Gentiles is notorious, and that the Jewish Christians M'cre
not exem])t from thcni is evident upon the face of the New
Testament history. We possess in the Acts of the Apostles the
case of Cornelius, and it is plainly in point both as regards
Peter himself and those at Jerusalem. The affair between him
and Paul (Galatians ii.) tells the same tale, and reveals, as do

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 187

other passages, the effort to force circumcision on the Gentiles.
The council in Acts xv. under God decided otherwise at Jerusa-
lem itself, which was the important point. But, clear as may
have been the Christian decision, prejudices remain behind de-
cisions acquiesced in. " Certain came from James " marks this
clearly. Only in Hebrews (xiii. 10-13) are tliey summoned to
give up Judaism.

But there was much more than this. The writings of
Paul contain a doctrine unknown to all other parts of Scrip-
ture— the church as the body of Christ. It is not men-
tioned by any other New Testament writer. The word is not
used. It was a dispensation committed to him, besides the
gospel, to complete the word of God. He was the wise master-
builder who laid the foundation. It had been hidden from ages
and generations: in proof of this, see Eomans xvi. 25 ; (read
"prophetic Scriptures," not Scriptures of the prophets) Ephe-
sians iii. 1 to 10 ; Colossians i. 24-26.

John had nothing to do wdth this question : his ministry
did not reach out to it. It was the revelation of eternal
life, and the Father in the Son, and His becoming our life ; but
his ministry is always individual. If the children were to be
gathered together in one by Christ's death, as well as the nation
died for, it is individually as a family, not as the body of Christ.
And in the mysterious end of his Gospel it passes from Peter
closing his life and ministry as Christ did, and passes on to
Christ's coming : in ministry fulfilled in the Apocalypse. In this
last chapter of John, Paul does not come in at all. John speaks
of Christ's and our going to heaven but four times, as far as I
remember (vi. xiv. xvi. and xvii.) His ministry was the display
of wiiat was divine here below : hence its attractiveness.

Paul presents us in Christ before God : and this leads to union
with Christ as His body. Peter's ministry, after presenting grace,
redemption, and birth by the incorruptible seed of the word, and
speaking of Christ's bearing our sins, very clearly dwells as his

i88 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

specialty on the government of God : in the first Epistle as to the
saints, in the second as to the ungodly. I speak in all these cases
of what characterises them. But none ever touches on what con-
stitutes Paul's special ministry. I may add, John still speaks
of preachers who had gone out taking nothing of the Gentiles,
of Christ dying, not for our sins only, but for the whole world.
He puts our standing clearly in Christ (1 Johniv. 17) ; but it is
still individual.

The riatonism of John is a fable ; it is anti-Platonic in
its revelations, and expressly so. The notion even of disputes
after the destruction of Jerusalem seems to me unhistorical
— save some Nazarenes and Ebionites in Palestine, soon sunk
into insignificance — Judaism proper sunk into oblivion. The
Alexandrian corruption of Christianity issuing in Arianism was
later and connected with Neoplatonism. Justin Martyr (a.d.
140) was infected with it, and others of that school of his
time. But it was another thing. This is true that the full
doctrine of redemption as taught by Paul never took root in the
church : the church itself Judaised, and has remained in this
state to this day. The return to Paul's teaching, and partially
John's, is what is disturbing its slumbers at this day.

"What was special in Paul's doctrine was that by the descent
of the Holy Ghost believers, perfectly saved, were united in one
body to Christ, Jews or Gentiles : and the fulness of redemption
in a new creation was manifested, by the glorifying of Christ,
as man, on high. Paul's conversion connected itself with this.
He never knew Christ on earth — was a strict legal Jew.
Christ was revealed to him in glory, and Christians spoken of
by Christ as being Himself. He was delivered from the people
and from the Gentiles, and sent to these last in connection
with a glorified Christ, all disciples being one with Him : and
the apostles at Jerusalem give up to him their mission to the
Gentiles (Gal. ii.) Of course this gave a special character to his
mission, though the gospel, the basis of personal salvation, re-

HAVE IV E A REVELATION FROM GOD? 189

mained the same. It was a dispensation committed to him, a
mystery kept secret since the world began.

This is the reality of the difference between Petrine and
Pauline teaching, which is sufficiently important. But this was
too early lost, and the Pauline doctrine of redemption and the
church merged in outward forms and organisation, to have been
a ground for any great controversy. None held Paul's doc-
trine. The Pope is the successor of Peter, not of Paul, though
the last may be smuggled in to appropriate and hide him. John's
teaching had nothing to do with the question. Indeed the
Baur theory is pretty much given up, I speak of it to free
the intrinsic importance of the additional truth taught by Paul :
for it is no diff'erence of gospel, but a very much larger revela-
tion of the counsels of God, from the idle, and (they must
forgive me) low, husky, speculations of those who know nothing
of the real contents — husks half gone already ; for rationalist
speculations cannot be expected to last above twenty years.

The accusations of plagiarism I do not make much account of
But I do not see original research in the article " Bible." It is
the current speculation of the day. But that must be borrowed
somewhere. De Wette, Ewald, F. W. Newman (\vho borrowed
it from tlie Germans), Hupfeld, all give it to us : and I now see
it in Professor Kuenen, whom I have just read. It is a mere
reproduction of what these teach, and, unless there was real per-
sonal research, it could hardly be anything else. " Opinionum
commenta delet dies, naturae iudicia confirmat ; " only for
"naturae" we must substitute "aeternae veritatis."

You may consult Eichhorn's (a rationalist's) judgment : —
(1) None but ignorant and thoughtless doubters can suppose
the Okl Testament to have been forged by one deceiver ; (2)
They are not the forgery of many deceivers. . . . But how
could they forge in a way so entirely conformed to the progress
of the human understanding ; and was it possible in later times
to create the language of Moses? He "oes through other

190 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

suppositions, and says, How could a whole nation be often de-
ceived and at different periods, and by what degraded them-
selves ? The whole passage, too long to quote here, may be read :
Moses Stuart has translated it. The writers all quote, he says,
or refer to what has been written before. Profane history refers
to ]\Ioses as the lawgiver of Israel. It would be a serious diffi-
culty, if anything be a difficulty to a theorist, to see how or why
an elaborate system of tabernacle arrangement, professing to
come by direct inspiration from God, should be recorded, when a
totally different one was before their eyes. No one reading the
Old Testament for himself but must see a clear and orderly
succession of historical events, though much more — collected
afterwards, no doubt, into a volume — and that the effort to
invalidate it supposes more absurdity than any other theory.
It is bound together historically too closely. All is false
if the whole be not substantially true as it stands, for it all
hangs together and supposes itself all throughout. But faith
depends on other workings in the soul than these external
proofs. Doubts may be easily awakened, but did these
reasoners ever present us with one certain solid truth 1

As the matter has come publicly before all the world, I must
say that Mr. S.'s defence is worse than his previous acts. To dis-
seminate pure infidelity (for this it is), destroying the inspiration
of the Bible as we have it, without a hint of anything else, and
then say he believes it for other reasons, is too bad to be quali-
fied by any term I could use. It results in making it no
matter to falsify tlie real origin of the books ; and in making
Christ and the apostles put their sanction on such a course, or
declare one to be the true author when he was not. And
if it were true, where was the inspiration of the writer ?

The question is not as to Professor Smith (of whom I know
nothing but what is published) ; but. Are plain souls to have the
word of God, what " proceeds out of the mouth of God," quoted
by the Lord and His apostles as such, and Christianity com-

HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD? 191

municated in words which the Holy Ghost taught, or the fancies
of Astruc and Baur and Smith, with no real communication
from God Himself? AVhat is my soul to lean on ?

Happily when the great conflict betw^een man in the Second
Adam and Satan took place, words which proceeded out of the
mouth of God were sufficient for the Lord and for Satan, as they
ever wiU be ; and in the hour of His deep and atoning agony suf-
ficed to express what was in His heart, that which no other heart
could ever fathom or express. If there be a blessing in the
world besides the Lord Himself in grace, it is to have God's
word as He Himself has given it to us, like that Lord Himself,
what is divine and heavenly but perfectly suited and adapted
to man, in the heart of man : the Old Testament as a pipe
which brings it, partially drunk at by those who conveyed it ;
in the New the heart itself, first the vessel drinking for its own
thirst, and then the water flowing forth from the inmost man.
" 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." All of it is that word
of God which works effectually in them that believe. " If that
which was from the beginning abide in you, ye also shall abide
in the Son and in the Father."

Note for Page 28.

In order to shew tlie advantage of reading the foregoing along with the article on
which it animadverts, we give a quotation from it on alleged "Parallel Nar-
ratives " and divergent laws, in the Pentateuch : —

" This view is supported by the fact, that even as it now stands the histoiy
sometimes gi\'\'S more than one account of the same event, and that the Penta-
teuch often gives several laws on the same subject. Of the latter we have already
had one example, but for our present argument the main point is not diversity of
enactment, which may often be only apparent, but the existence witliin the
Pentateuch of distinct groups of laws partly taking up the same topics. Thus the
legislation of Exod. xx.-xxiii. is partly repeated in ch. xxxiv., and on the passover
and feast of unleavened bread we have at least six laws, which, if not really dis-
cordant, are at least so divergent in form and conception that they cannot be
all from the same pen. (Exod. xii. 1-28, xiii. 3-10, xxiii. 15, xxxiv. 18 ; Lev.
xxiii. 5-14, Deut. xvi.) Of historical duplicates the most celebrated are the two-

192 HAVE WE A REVELATION FROM GOD?

fold liistoiy of the creation and the flood, to which we must recur presently. The
same kind of thing is found in the later books ; for example, in the account of
the way in which Saul became king, where it is scarcely possible to avoid the
conclusion that 1 Sam. xi. 1-11 should attach directly to ch. x. 16 (c/. x. 7).

" The extent to which the historical books are made up of parallel narratives,
which, though they cover the same period, do not necessarily record the same
events, was first clearly seen after Astruc (1753 A.D.) observed that the respective
uses of Jehovah (Lord) and Elohim (God) as the name of the Deity afford a
criterion by which two documents can be dissected out of the book of Genesis.
That the way iu which the two names are used can only be due to difference of
authorship is now generally admitted, for the alternation corresponds with such
important duplicates as the two accounts of creation, and is regularly accompanied
through a great part of the book by uumistakeable peculiarities of language and
thought, so that it is still possible to reconstruct at least the Elohim document
with a completeness which makes its original independence and homogeneity
matter of direct observation. The character of this narrative is annalistic, and
where other material fails, blanks are supplied by genealogical lists. Great weight
is laid on orderly development, and the name Jehovah is avoided in the history
of the patriarchs in order to give proper contrast to the ilosaic period (c/. Gen,
xvii. 1 ; Exod. vi. 3) ; and, accordingly, we find that the uumistakeable secondary
marks of this author run through the whole Pentateuch and Joshua, though the
exclusive use of Elohim ceases at Exod. vi. Of course the disappearance of tliis
criterion makes it less easy to carry on an exact reconstruction of the later parts
of the document ; but on many points there can be no uncertainty, and it is
clearly made out that tlie author has strong priestly tendencies, and devotes a
very large proportion of his space to liturgical matters. The separation of this
document may justly be called the point of departure of positive criticism of the
sources of the Old Testament ; and present controversy turns mainly on its rela-
tion to other parts of the Pentateuch. Of these the most important are — 1. The
Jehovistic narrative, which also begins with the creation, and treats the early
history more in the spirit of prophetic theology and idealism, containing, for
example, the nan-ative of the fall, and the parts of the history of Abraham which
are most important for Old Testament theologj'. That this narrative is not a
mere supplement to the other, but an independant whole, appears most plainly in
the story of the flood, where two distinct accounts have certainly been interwoven
by a third hand. 2. Many of the finest stories in Genesis, especially great part'
of the history of Joseph, agree with the Elohim-document in the name of God,
but are widely divergent in other respects. Since the researches of Hupfeld, a
third author, belonging to northern Israel, and specially interested in the ances-
tors of the northern tribes, is generally postulated for these sections. His literary
individuality is in truth shari>ly marked, though the limits of his contributions
to the Pentateuch are obscure." [The reader, by turning back to p. 28, and
reading on, will be able to decide for himself whether this be sound learning and
valuable information, or rationalistic folly and utter incapacity to grasp the
mind of the Spirit in Divine Eevelation. — Ed.]

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

There is a very grave question at issue now in the professing
church of God, which branches out uniformly into many colla-
teral points, all of which, though in different degrees, affect
Christianity, that is, the true nature of Christianity itself. The
root of the whole question, however, is, Where is the bond, the
union, the living association between what is divine and men ?
It takes the form of Popery or Eomanism, Eitualism or Pusey-
ism^ so called, in the Episcopal body in England and in this
country : the Stahl and Hengstenberg school in Lutheran Ger-
many : and in what is called Mercersburg theology among the
Dutch Pteformed here.^ The last is allied to a new school in
Germany, propagating actively its views on the Person of
Christ ; but all, however various the shades of theology, are
essentially the same. They all hold union to take place in the
incarnation, to be with humanity, not consequent on redemption
of believers with a glorified Christ ; and, without in words
denying it, they put redemption entirely in the shade. Eedemp-
tion, in their view, is not really accomplished by the atonement
but by the incarnation.

Their system of union developes itself in the life-giving
power of sacraments ; and in insisting on the importance and
organic power and authority of the church : but meaning
thereby the clergy. Where the German school has infected it,
it introduces the organic and historic develoj)ment of Christ's
life in the world, and that in all arts and sciences, a kind of

' Union with God, spoken of by both Evangelicals and Eitualists, is a thing
(save, of course, iu the person of Christ) unknown to Scripture. - America.

0

194 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

Christological pantheism : in all cases, the mystical power of
the clergy, and organism of the life-giving power of the sacra-
ments, which the clergy alone can introduce into them, is its
practical character. It slights the written word and the opera-
tion of the Spirit of God ; and, while speaking much of historical
development, carefully avoids historical facts, as well as Scrip-
tural statements, and the direct authority of the word of God
over the soul as from God Himself That is, private interpret-
ation, the church, the creed, the Ecumenical Council, in result,
the clergy, are to be trusted. The church has developed the
imperfect elements of Scripture ; and theology (which is of course
in the hands of the doctors, that is, themselves) is alone full and
formal truth.

It is remarkable how God is set aside in this system, and
man, humanity, exalted and made everything of, even in Christ
and His work, as far as His work is made of any account.

I shall notice some details, but I shall take up the root-
question as concerning every one, for it is a question of what
Christianity is, — what the truth is. The consequences are de-
plorable and demoralising wherever it prevails ; but, without
denying that there are pious persons and real Christians ensnared
by it, I affirm that, as a system, it is a denial of the truth of
Christianity, of Christianity itself in its foundation and vital
truths, as revealing what man is, and bringing him savingly to
God. I add these last, words because the error, save in the
German school of the system, is not in the objective part of
Christianity (or no one could be a Christian who adopted it),
but in the application of its efficacious power, and the way in
which God has dealt with man. They do not deny that those
who oppose their system believe in the Trinity ; in the incarna-
tion ; in the true humanity of the Lord ; in the atonement ; in the
union of the two natures in one person, in the blessed Lord :
as I myself adoringly recognise all this : and the true value of
the two ordinances established by the Lord, Baptism and the

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 195

Lord's Supper — ^both, (and especially the latter as a continuous
thing in the Christian's life), precious to his soul. I may add
the exercise of ministry as given and appointed by Christ.
These are not the questions at issue ; at least I have nothing
now to do with those who call them in question. For me, as
to all the first truths, there is no Christianity without them,
nor orderly Christianity without the latter. The question is.
Where is the point of contact between God and man, these
things being true ?

But I go farther in what may be considered agreement with
the school of error. I do not deny, but assert and affirm
strongly, that the Lord established a church, that is, an assembly
on earth ; which, in one point of view, is His body, formed by
the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven ; and which, in another
character, is the habitation of God on earth by the Spirit (not
the clergy ; they are in no sense the church), this, (and the
word means nothing else,) is the assembly. But, though indi-
vidual relationship with God is always put in the first place by
the word of God (relationship with the Father in grace and
Christ, the First-born among many brethren, and in responsi-
bility conscience and faith are uniformly individual) ; yet God
did establish an assembly on earth, designated as " the body of
Christ," and as " the habitation of God by the Spirit." Further,
the Lord instituted two great ordinances in connection with it
— Baptism and the Supper of the Lord. He established also a
ministry in gifts given by Himself from on high — evangelists,
pastors, and teachers, as He founded it by apostles and prophets,
besides its being compacted by that which every joint supplies,
so that it should, in the edification of itself, increase with the
increase of God. All this is plainly stated in the word of God
itself. No history is needed to give it authority or validity.
The particular views of Eome, of Dr. Pusey, or of Dr. Nevin,
about these things, are another question. They are not inspired ;
the word of God is.

196 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

But I go farther still. The person of the blessed Lord is
the centre of all Christian affections and all Christian truth for
the believer (and God has given us eternal life in Him—" He
that hath the Son hath life") ; as, in God's time, all things will
be headed up in Him in heaven and in earth. This is
supremely dear to the believer's heart. But how and where
are men brought into living association with Him ? All
those to whom I refer say, in the incarnation and the sacra-
ments. That life is and was in His person is most true. His
person is the foundation of everything ; but where are we
brought into association with Him ? The formulary among
the Episcopalian Eitualists was, the sacraments are a continua-
tion or extension of the incarnation. German, and American
theology borrowed from the Germans, has added a principle of
historical development before as well as after the incarnation,
which the soberer Episcopalians have not adopted, as far as I
am aware, but confine themselves to the continuation of the in-
carnation of the Son of God by the sacraments in the Church,
and have not followed the reveries of the Germans ; but the
doctrine, as far as the truth I am occupied with is concerned,
is the same.

The atonement loses all its importance as a redeeming M^ork ;
at-one-ment, as Irving said, and they say, was in the Word
being made flesh and receiving humanity in His own person.
Our connection with God is restored by incarnation. Many
grave errors flow from this as to justification and the like ; but
I confine myself to the root of the matter. Tims it is stated
in this country : ^

"The Son of God .... assumed humanity and became
the universal man, standing related to the race as redeemed in
Him, as the first Adam stood related to the race as fallen in Him.
The humanity of the one is as broad, as universal, and compre-
hensive, as the humanity of the other." " The very assumption

^ America.

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 197

of that nature, in its sinless perfection, was itself the redemption
of humanity. In Him humanity stands redeemed already, as
the source and fountain of the new race which proceeds from
Him." "The church becomes, accordingly, an object of faith,
inasmuch as it is a continuation of the mystery of the incarna-
tion." " The sacrament of baptism is the divinely instituted
means by which, ordinarily, the life-communication takes
place."

How far this goes in the hands of the followers of the Ger-
mans, and how it lowers redemption to what is human, may be
seen in what follows : — " He, taking upon Himself our nature,
not simply as an individual, to stand forth as one in the teeming
race of Adam . . . but grasping the very foundation of our
human existence, appropriates it to HimseK as the generic force
and life of our race ; not a man, but tlie, man. The second
Adam, like unto the first, as the bearer of the totality of our
humanity, comprehending in His person the idhoh of our human
life." Now that He was " the last (not second) Adam " is all right,
and that He took all that constitutes a man is all true, but this
means a vast deal more. " For man is man, in the proper
sense of the term, only as his life reveals itself in the outward
forms of the institutions and relations in which it becomes
actual in the world. The family, the state, learning in all its
departments, the arts, the sciences, and all monuments besides
of the activity of the human soul, stand not apart from, but are
truly comprehended in, the constitution of our human life.
These departments, if we may so call them, and all others be-
sides, comprehended thus in the wonderful constitution of our
humanity, must come at last to a vital union with the divine.
Failure in this is failure equally deep and disastrous in the pur-
pose of its being ; it is death. But to attain to this is to attain
to life and immortality ! It was in this comprehensive sense
that the Logos apprehended our nature, and took it into union
with His divinity. These are the ' all things on earth ' which

198 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

tlie divine will would gather up in Christ, even in Him, of
which St. Paul speaks."

I give this long quotation to show how entirely man, as in
and for this world, is in the mind of those degraded, for such it
is, by this system. Not a trace of spiritual blessing in heavenly
places in Christ, to say nothing of God Himself, communion
with the Father and the Son. It is bringing Christ and the
effect of His incarnation to the sphere of the mere natural man ;
indeed this is stated in terms. Again :

" Moreover, we must bear in mind that the humanity of
Christ is, and must necessarily be, co-extensive with Adam's.
■Its remedial powers must be commensurate with the ruins of
the fall, and reveal themselves wherever these effects are to be
found. We look, therefore, for their regenerating and sanctifying
potencies in every department of human life. The family, the
state, our social relations in all their phases, art, science, learn-
ing, and all the outward revelations of human powers, are
gathered up in this supernatural constitution," etc. " There all
things in earth were gathered up and completed in the person of
Christ, and the mission of the church on earth is to carry for-
ward this germinal realisation to an actual development in the
world." Christ come in the flesh in this world, the incarnation
prolonged (to speak with them) in the church, has its object in
this world to take up human development in what are man's
natural faculties. This is " the meaning and design 'of the in-
carnation of our Lord, and the constitution and powers of His
holy body, the church." Of a citizenship in heaven, or affec-
tions on tilings above, not on things on the earth ; — not a trace,
save the denial of it. I add another short quotation to show it
is systematic teaching, not merely individual opinion.

"The gospel is emphatically a world-saving power. It
enters into the life of the world in an organic way ....
the scheme that says, ' There can be no real marriage of divine
and human powers, of the life of Christ with the life of the race,

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 199

in an abiding, historical, sacramental union, and continuing in
the world in such a way as to carry forward society in a living
process of life and growth in knowledge, and in faith, and in
hope, and in charity, and in all that belongs to the existence of
an emancipated and regenerated humanity' ... is not only
unreal and unhistorical, but it seems to run directly in the
face of the plainest teachings of the word of God. This teaches
that God is in Christ, and that Christ is the life of the world,"
etc. This writer, indeed, though making God create the world
by His omnipotence, yet, as to its present form, whether accom-
plished in six days or six long geological periods, tells us that
" all nature was made to rise, by an inherent law and tendency,
from one gradation of development to another, under the moulding
generic power of the Almighty, until, finally, the whole culmi-
nated in the creation of man," which is little less than Darwin-
ianism, and the progress from atomic cellules by " an inherent
law and tendency."

But we must now see the introduction of this life in Christ.
" Christological theology must be historical " . . . " His (Christ's)
deepest, truest, and most real coming through the Old Testa-
ment is a coming in flesh and blood, a coming in and through
generations, a coming in history ; not in the events of history
merely, but in that human life in which lay and from which ope-
rated the life of history. Yea, more, if we acknowledge, as all
Christian historians do, that the incarnation is premeditated in
heathenism, we are in like manner impelled to escape the subtle
deception into which the mind so naturally falls, that this same
prevening heathen history could have such a relation to the in-
carnation, if the eternal Logos had not such an aptitude for the
human as that His own life should also be in some kind of
underlying and underacting communion with the life of whose
activities this heathen prophetic history is the creation and the
result. If such be the relation of the life of the Logos to human
life and history, previous to His actual incarnation, how in-

200 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

finitely deeper and more certain must Le that relation after
He has actually entered the human in a personal way, and
so joined His own divine-human life with the life and history
of the race ! Let us not deceive our own minds by separating
history from life. Christian history, the history of Christianity,
is the coming of Christ," etc. " Thus Christ came in human-
ity as its genuine principle of life, before He was actually incar-
nate in the fulness of time. But the mystery was not completed
in this pervenient union of His with humanity."

Now, that the Son quickened souls, from Adam onwards, no
Christian, I suppose, would deny. That in God we live, move,
and have our being, so that we are, in a certain sense. His off-
spring, we know is Scriptural truth. But this is vastly more.
It is in heathenism, as such, communion with divine life in
Christ. The whole of this argument (and here the theologians
run completely into the same channel both here and in Europe,
with a large class of Germans whose system is infidel) con-
founds the wants and cravings of a being created for God, when
they have Him not, with the answer that grace gives to those
cravings in Christ : a very grave blunder.

But I must pursue my subject. To notice all their errors
would be endless. It is the antiscriptural, antichristian char-
acter of the system, as a whole, which occupies me. " That
His saving life exerts its redeeming and restoring power in
humanity," and " that the person of the God-man, which is con-
stituted by the real and true union of the divine and human, is
the ultimate generic principle of redemption, the generic head
of the new humanity." " He Avas the principle of that here-
ditary blessing which laid hold of human life generally."

Now, it is perfectly clear that in the counsels and wisdom of
God before the worlds (Pro v. viii.). His delight (Christ's, as wis-
dom) was in the sons of men. His incarnation, as celebrated
by angels, was the expression of good pleasure in men (Luke ii.)
They were the race of His predilection, and it was in Christ, the

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 201

"Word made flesh, that this was to be accomplished. But our
theologians use this truth as a basis to their own speculations.
Adam was only a candidate for the grace of life/ to be enjoyed
only in the event of his "predetermination admitting him into
the wonderfully mysterious sacrament of the tree of life." It is
" not, and never was, designed by the Creator that man should
have life in himself, but only as he stood in vital union with
His own being as the absolute ground and source of all life.
To be out of and separated from God is to be dead, to be in
union with Him is to have life." Note well : this denies the
immortality of the soul, and confounds permanent life with the
divine life as possessed in Christ. Either Adam, as created, had
not life in himself by creation, or he was united with God already,
and fell when he was. Nay, the very devils could not exist.
It is a theory involving ten thousand absurdities and heresies,
at once confounding death and separation from God ; spiritual
death with dying as a creature, and life, as existence, with divine
life in communion with God. As to union with God, though
used by many Christians, save as regards the person of Christ
it is a wholly false and unscriptural idea ; it is always with
Christ become a man, and risen from the dead, that we have
union.

But I continue : " In what form the reunion of the human
and divine would have taken place, had not sin entered into the
world, it is not necessary for us here to inquire. It is enough
to know that it would have taken place. . . . There was no mis-
calculation in the divine reckonings which the presence of sin
for the first time revealed." However, sin came in ; but " the
union of the human and divine was originally involved in
the plan of creation, as its ultimate design and end ; in this
union as it holds in the person of Jesus Christ, do we find the
revelation of God's will touching this precise interest." "The

^ This is reallj' the fouudation of auniliilatiouism. Would he have died if
he had not eaten of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ?

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

appearance of sin as a disturbing force, growing out of man's
free self-determining power, was confronted immediately by
this very resource for its effectual overthrow." It is not thus
denied that Christ's going down to death, and meeting the
penalty of the law, was needed ; as He took humanity, He took
it as it was, subject to its penalties, and consequently died on
the cross. But, " though finding in sin a fresh call for the in-
carnation, yet this determined not the fad., but only the form
under which it should hold." "The archetypal conception in
the divine mind, overthrown by the fraud and malice of Satan
in the first Adam, we find in this second Adam in the complete
elimination of all the abnormal forces, carried along in the bosom
of humanity, not only restored and realised, but perfected and
advanced." This is in Christ incarnate down here. He " ex-
hibited what, from the start, lay really and truly in the normal
sense of humanity." Nay, even "the church, it fully appears,
was no necessity of the fall. It existed anterior to the accident
of sin ; and, had the fall never occurred, would have continued,
though not under the subsequent form of mediatorial offices
and propitiatory agencies, but as a divine instrumentality,
answering man's normal development. It sprang necessarily
out of our moral constitution and our relation to God as the
subjects of His moral government." " True to this law of his
own moral being, he would have been advanced, M-ithout bodily
decay and decomposition, to a state of full glorification, but only
through the appearance, ultimately, of tlie Logos incarnate."
Thus sin was an accident, impotent, as is said elsewhere, to
hinder the course of God's purposes, foreseen indeed of God ; and
redemption by blood itself, an accident, a provision, a " change
of procedure," " a subsequent form," dependent on this accident.
" But it will be borne in mind that Christ was not a new
humanity, a creation dc novo ; His was Adam's humanity as
under the power of the curse." " In its commencement it was
human nature, the same as that of His virgin mother, and

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 203

therefore fallen." It is added indeed, " From the moment of the
holy conception sin was eliminated."

But this is not the doctrine of their leading theologian, and in a
discourse published by the request of the Synod he holds that "on
the divine side, that which was divine was mediated by the Divine
Spirit, and so found pure generical beginning in fallen and
depraved human nature. In this bosom of the abnormal human
the divine gradually assumed the normal human, by a steady
victory over corrupt human nature in the womb, forward to the
birth of the Holy Child." " So on through life, it is fully
and naturally human. Though as human He is tempted, truly
and really tempted, He is always victorious over defect and
corruption of that nature." Under the law "which He has
assumed, and which ever presses upon and vitally touches His
pure life at every point, thus presenting to the world the
picture ... of a sinless man. Thus in His own personal
human nature He obtained, first of all, a complete victory over
that abnormal humanity with which He had formed a union,
presenting it fully restored to its normal purity, in His own
person, especially exhausting and overcoming at every point the
virus of sin and death, till He came forth from the grave
victorious over its last power and penalty, and glorified human
nature in the heavens. All this was one continuous silently-
working, steady, victorious miracle, going forward in His own
person, a victory of sinlessness overcoming depravity by the
process of His divine human life in the womb. Though made
of tills woman . . . He was still made under the law, that
is. His human nature had to be purely developed out of the
bosom of an impure humanity." (See Eom. viii. 2 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 4.)
I add the quotations to show that they carry the principle on
to the cross.^

1 Note tlie absurdity of the sj'stem, a divine-human life which was sinless,
overcoming depravity in an impure humanity. So He had two humanities in
the womb, besides what was divine. How thoroughly mentally degi-ading the
system is !

204 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

This is pure Irvingism. A sinless effect was produced, but
by His being victorious over an evil nature within : where defect
and corruption existed, He restored it to purity, but it was
with corrupt abnormal humanity He had formed a union and
had to overcome the virus of sin. Where was it ? " This victory
was first in Himself, that it might be also for us. It had to
take place in Him, because He is the principle and fountain of
life to all. ' For their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also
might be sanctified through the truth.' Let tliese great words
be understood." They are wholly misunderstood. They were
spoken when He was going to His Father (John xvii.), as He
says in the passage, " Now, I am no more in the world." He
was setting Himself apart as the glorified Man in heaven ; not
what He had been doing all His life. He knew no sin. It was
a " holy thing " that was born of the Virgin Mary.

So, to the same purpose, is quoted by them, " He learned
obedience," and " being made perfect." " As His own divine
human life thus sanctified and perfected" (think of a divine life
needing sanctification !) " was to become the restoring and perfect-
ing life of humanity, it had to extend beyond Himself, that it
might begin and carry forward to a like victory fallen and
depraved human nature in others." " But it must lay hold also
on the fallen world beyond man." " And all the particular
miracles wrought by Him are only individual manifestations of
that same divine human miracle life." " The miracle is super-
natural because its force is the life of a higher world." Conse-
quently, dividing the Eed Sea and the Jordan was no miracle,
nor the earth opening and swallowing up Dathan and Abiram.
Christ's divine works were miracles of good : but the definition
is as false as the doctrine is.

I do not go into all this system, fully developed as it is in
Europe, and borrowed here. " Human nature in its creation
. . . free from all sin . . . was not yet perfect, but awaited process
... in order to become perfect. How much more was such a

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 205

process of development, not only possible, but also necessary, in
the fallen humanity which the Son of God assumed." " "We
assent here, with Lange, that the very idea of temptation implies
the possibility of sinning." " His triumph over the temptation
of the devil was a personal victory, a step in the process of His
own perfecting of Himself, as well as for the benefit of His
people." " This view is required by the nature of Clirist's
human will," It is then said, " if the human in the person of
Christ had been compelled by an overshadowing power to will
as it did." But this flows from their idea that the corruption
and " virus of sin," of a fallen abnormal nature was there. The
non-possibility of sinning did not even arise from a compelling
power, for then, without that power. He might. It would not
have been the holiness of His nature, but from the intrinsic
lightness of Christ's will, in His holy person, as a man. Their
darkened understandings have not been able to distinguish
between morally impossible, and here absolutely so, and im-
possibility by compulsion ; because they have a false unholy
Christ. The Christ of God had no inclination to sin. His will
was only to obey : and He was led of tlie Spirit to be tempted.
As regards the sympathy of the Lord, on the ground of
which His liability to inward temptations, and even His pecca-
bility, is insisted on, it fails altogether. For the sorrow and dis-
couragement of sincere souls do not come from the existence
of sin in, the flesh, but much more from their yielding to it.
Now, if they are to get sympathy here by Christ being in the
same state. He must have failed. But then all is lost. And if
not, the whole argument is proved false on its very base. Such
persons do not know what true deliverance is. Nor do I ask
for sympathy for sin, but the word to judge it, and deliverance
from its power by redemption and the Holy Ghost, in the know-
ledge that I have no strength. The advocacy of Christ to restore
communion if \ve do fail, when we are free from the law of sin
and death, is founded on righteousness and propitiation.

2o6 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

But as I am on this point, I add, they have no true Christ
at all. I read, " How such human nature, as body, soul, and
spirit, including a human will, could be held in personal union
with the divine, so that this humanity was complete, without
a human personality or ego, we cannot understand, but we
believe it is a mystery revealed for faith." Where ? Why does
the blessed Lord say, " Not my will but Thine ?" Why does He
say, " ]\Iy God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me ?" if there
was no ego, no human personality ? Why do the Hebrews quote,
" will I sing praise," and " will put my trust in Him," " behold
I and the children which God hath given me," if there was no
I (ego) ? Why does He say, " My God and your God, my Father
and your Father" (not our), if there was no personality?^ And
this last remark, that Christ never says " our" with His dis-
ciples, I borrow from a European minister of some note,
thoroughly imbued with the German system, where it is at
home, not borrowed, and itself spoiled, as it is at Mercersburg.
And this last statement, that Christ had no human personality,
no ego, which is really heresy (though God and man were united
in one person), and the mere folly of man attempting to fathom
the mystery of His person, when He has said, " ISTo man knoweth
the Son, but the Father," is found in the Article of one by no
means the worst of their doctors. His antecedent respect for
the blessed Lord has not been destroyed, as in others of them.
But all hold it was corrupt fallen human nature which He took
and had ; not that He took human nature from a fallen motlier,

^ I am quite aware of and accept the ordinary orthodox statement of two
natures in one person, though what was at first insisted on as orthodox as to \nro-
<TTa<ns was afterwards condemned, and the meaning of the word clianged ; but
the statements quoted in the text are really monothelite. It shows the danger of
those early discussions, for the simple faith that Jesus was God and man in one
person can be easily accepted as plain and vital truth ; but the moment you
deny personality in the man Christ Jesus you run into a thousand difficulties and
errors. What is really denied is Christ's individuality as a man, as it is in terms
elsewhere.

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 207

but without sin, miraculously, by the power of the Holy Ghost.
But he is the least bad on this point.

But my object here is to bring the system fully into the
light. Hence I quote several passages to show it is the system,
not individual opinion. Thus another says to us, " The tempta-
bility of Christ grew out of His peccability ; His peccability out
of the realness of the human side of His being. "What is less
than infinite is temptable and peccable. Christ's humanity M-as
less than infinite; therefore His humanity might have been over-
thrown." And that, note, united in one ycrson to Godhead,
without there being even an I, or human personality — a word
wrongly used really — in His human nature ! Was ever such folly
and confusion? God united to fallen humanity, with defect
and corruption and the virus of sin in it ! My hand revolts at
writing such blasphemous absurdities.

This taking the Itillen human nature, the ultimate generic
principle of redemption, " accounts for the striking analogy be-
tween the birth of the God-man^ and the new birth of every
human soul that is now born from Him. Both alike are a birth to
a true and pure human life, out of a fallen and defiled humanity,
by the operation of the Holy Ghost." " This birth is vouchsafed
to as many as receive Him." This last gross misapplication
(indeed false sense) of John i. 12 I quote, as connecting itself
with the subsequent teaching as to baptism. I add another here,
to show the strange heretical confusion of tliose teachers : " If
therefore we say that in baptism a real immanence of the nature
of Christ and of human nature, a mysterious oneness of His holy
essence and the sinful essence of man, is brought about, we also
hold fast to the idea that this is not to be regarded as an imma-
nence finished and immediate, but one endless beginning."
Think of one endless beginning, of a oneness of Christ's holy
essence and the sinful essence of man ! Is this endless oneness (!)
of holy essence and sinful essence a moral oneness, or what?
' Strange to say, this expression was utterly condemned as heresy in the early ages.

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

We have thus the Lord's incarnation, the point where (they
say) He connects Himself with human nature ; not merely per
sonally, or rather not personally (so they expressly say), but in
nature as the new head of the race (He is not a man, not a
human personality, but) with humanity, and that fallen humanity
the new head of the race. This is continued in men by a
new birth, the continuation of this divine human life, and this
last not by the word, but by baptism, through which there is a
mysterious oneness of His holy and man's sinful essence, and this
forms the body of Christ ! I must give some quotations to make
the last point evident. The general statement is thus : " The
Spirit in Christ, the Spirit having entered into the apostles in the
mystery of Pentecost extraordinarily, the Spirit, by their divinely
appointed ministrations, through holy baptism." Thus it grows
into a holy temple. " The life of Christ infuses itself through
the foundation and the entire organism of this life-building."

Further, preaching presents the claims to us : " This
preaching is the means by which the quickening energy of the
Spirit opens the blinded eye of faith to an apprehension of the
sinner's estate as dead, and the spiritual discernment of the
kingdom of life, as the power of deliverance from this ruin.
Now, this faith is the organ of the human spirit by which the
objective supernatural order is discerned, and its participation is
made possible. But this subjective power of discernment and
receptivity is by no means one with an actual entrance into it
and a participation in its life. It is only the qualification and
ability so to do." " But unless the human activity is met by
a curative response on the part of Christ, the soul still remains
under the power of death " (only it has got its eyes opened).
" The office of the apostle, preparatory preaching, is then simply
to effect the preparation on the part of the sinful subject for the
reception of the communication of gi'ace. The meeting of the
human and divine activities we have in the sacrament of
baptism."

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 209

" The question now is by which of these means specifically
does God design to effect this wondrous work ; by the word
or by the sacraments ? Not by the word, that is, as we have
defined it, the preaching of the gospel, and for this plain reason :
preaching is directed to the mind or intellect, the moving of the
affections and of tlie will is not reaching the life-centre of the
being ; the intellect or mind is not the life of man ; all the
tliinking, feeling, or willing that one can do, though assisted in
their acts by a divine power, cannot of themselves make a man
a new creature in Christ Jesus, This inward radical divine
work must be accomplished, therefore, by the only other
means — the sacraments. . . . Baptism is the ordinance of this
mysterious union. . . . Holy baptism is the means of grace
whereby the Holy Spirit ingrafts, for the first time in any sub-
stantial sense, the believer into Christ, and thus biings him into
a state of salvation."

I continue : "In that Christ as the unseen Head stands in
an inward indisputable relation to the church as His mystical
body — i.e., that total organisation of souls which has its point
of personal unity in Him, receives the power of life from Him
through it, renews and animates itself, and the members them-
selves are all its organs — He, by means of baptism, causes this
universal organic relation to become effectual in each single new
point of life wliich He appropriates to Himself and His Kingdom.
As He continues His life through the church as a whole, so He
also continues it through this particular mode of individual life,
and therefore makes Himself the true beginning of life to it."
But, faith being necessary, as they hold, " The child stands on
the warm bosom of the faith of the church, which, throu'di its
parents or sponsors, is pledged in its behalf." " Neither can we
say that the word is the specific means of grace, whereby men
are ingrafted into Christ. The word, as preached by the
apostles, was a call to Christ. This was its object, to turn the
attention of men to Him, as the true Messiah, the Son of God,

P

2IO CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

tlie Saviour of the world. When they were ready to receive
Him, they were baptized into Him, and thus made members of
Him." " Christian baptism then, we think the Scriptures teach,
is the sacrament of our incorporation into Christ." " The word
has to do with truth ; the sacrament with life. The one operates
upon the intellect and affections ; the other upon the centre of
the being. By the word men are brought mentally and morally
into contact with Christ ; by the sacrament into actual life
contact." " The theology then we speak of is churchly. It
believes in the church ... in the bosom of which only,
not on the outside of it, the gospel can be expected to work, as
the wisdom of God and the power of God unto salvation. So
far as this goes, of course, it owns and confesses that the church
is a medium of communication between Christ and His people."
(His people, then, are not the church!) "They must be in the
order of His grace, in the sphere where this objective working
of His grace is actually going forward, and not in the order of
nature, where it is not going forward at all (but where Satan
reigns and has his own way), if the work of redemption and
sanctifi cation is to be carried forward in them with full effect.
In this sense, most assuredly, salvation is of the church, and
not of the world," etc. Now that, as a general truth, sanctifi ca-
tion is to be looked for in the church, not in the world, is all
true enough. But the gospel, they say, cannot work outside of
it ; the poor heathen are in a bad way, and redemption is
carrying on, and that only inside it. Salvation is not of the
world, assuredly, but it is to the world, and could never have
been, had it not come to it as such ; nor could the churcli other-
wise have existed. The grace of God brings salvation — where ?
to those already within, or without, to bring them in ?

There are some points I shall touch on just in detail ; but I
assert now that the whole of this system is totall}'- antichristian
and antiscriptural : " Christ incarnate is the point of union, and
His divine-human life is continued by baptism ; the word is

CHRJSTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 2U

not the means of communicating it ; baptism incorporates into
Christ ; the accident of sin produced a change of procedure (that
is all) : man was to be perfected in Christ at any rate." All this
is false ; Scripture, as to the main points, teaches precisely the
contrary : and God's glory is wholly, totally left out in a most
extraordinary way. Human perfection is the only thought.

Now, that it was in the wondrous counsels of God to have
man in the same glory as His Son, is, however wonderful,
blessedly true. That Christ is life, our life who believe, is
equally so. The question is where and how life in this system,
not death, is the means of redemption. " His saving life exerts
its redeeming and restoring power in humanity, not by be-
coming an individual man among men, and then operating on
the general life of humanity, but by entering into it ; and this
entering is by birth, so that the new creation of human nature
in its organic being falls together and co-ordinate with natural
human birth. The reheading of humanity is thus effected in its
very beginning by the union of the divine-human life"— (two
human livesagain in Christ)— "with human life in a human birth,
even as man's first creation was completed by the conjunction
of the breath of God with the human lifeless form, when God
made man a living soul by breathing into him the breath of life.
From all this we cannot but see that the person of the God-man,
which is constituted by the real and true union of the divine
and human, is the ultimate generic principle of redemption."

Humanity (in its nature) is redeemed by incarnation ; and
this is carried on by baptism ! Now, all this is definitely
contrary to the revelation of God ; and, in that sense, a denial of
Christianity. It is true that conformity to the image of God's
Son is the portion of God's saints ; true that God's delight was
in the sons of men before the world, and that the Lord did not
take up angels but the seed of Abraham ; true that the incar-
nation was the expression of good pleasure in men ; true, not
that the human-divine life of Christ was the generic source of

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

the race before the incarnation, but that the Son quickened
souls from Adam onwards ; true that He is now the life of all be-
lievers ; and the Head of His body, the church. But reunion with
Christ, connection with Him, is with a glorified Christ, and with
a glorified Christ alone, after He had accomplished redemption.
As the first Adam sinned and was cast out before he began to
be the head of the race : so the perfect and divine ground of
righteousness was laid and complete before Christ, as man,
became head of a new race as man. It is with a glorified Christ
that the church is united, and with no other. There are many
errors and heresies in the system ; but, if this be so, the whole
system is fundamentally false. It is a false Christianity, " another
(a different) gospel, which is not another," for another there cannot
be. Death and redemption must come in before we can be
united to Christ. What Scripture shows us is the counsels of
God before the world, for uniting us in grace to Christ in glory ;
then God not beginning with that, but with the responsible
man, Adam. When he had failed, and, fully tested, was found
an enemy of God, there came the second Man, the Lord, to seek
and to save what was lod ; and, when He (having glorified God
as made sin) had accomplished redemption in His death, to unite
us with Himself as gone on high.

INIan failed in innocence : failed under the law : killed the
prophets sent in mercy : and, then, God said, " I have yet one
Son ; it may be they will reverence my Son." " J3ut they cast
Him out of the vineyard and slew Him." There was lawlessness
without law : transgression under law : and, M'hcn God came in
grace, absolute enmity against Him. The Son had quickened
wliom He would, no doubt, all along ; and their sins were forgiven
through Ilis blood : but man, as such, was, then, fully and finally
proved enmity against God. Flesh was not subject to the law of
God, nor could be ; and they that are in the flesh cannot please
God. Not only was man driven out from God's paradise on earth,
as a sinner ; but he had, as far as he could do so, driven God out

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 213

when He came in grace into this world, " If I had not come
and spoken unto them, they had not had sin ; but now they have
no cloak for their sin. If I had not done among them the works
which none other man did, they had not had sin ; hut now they
have both seen and hated both Me and J\Iy Father." Such was
man, guilty in fact, and lost in estate. Eedemption was needed :
not merely a communication of life : not redemption by a mystical
communication of life — a thing totally unknown to Scripture ;
but redemption through Christ's blood, propitiation : not the folly
of " oneness of a holy essence and a sinful essence :" but to be born
anew, wholly "created in Christ Jesus ;" being redeemed out of
the state he was in, and associated with the Eedeemer, but only
when the redemption was accomplished. Christ the Lord came, as
Sou of God, and King of Israel, according to the second Psalm ; a
minister of the circumcision, to fulfil the promises made to the
fathers ; but the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers took
counsel together against Jehovah and against His anointed. He
was the despised and rejected of men. He came into the world :
and the world was made by Hira : and the world knew Him
not. He came unto His own : and His own received Him not.
Those who did receive Him were born, not of the will of man,
but of God.

Still His title was good. He M'as also Son of man. But when
was He to take this ? When rejected, God gave witness to Him,
as Son of God in raising Lazarus, as Son of David in riding in on
the ass. One title yet remained ; when was He to take that up and
have others connected with Him ? The Greeks came up desiring
to see Jesus : "The hour is come," He says, "that the Son of Man
should be glorified. Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground
and die, it abideth alone ; but if it die it bringeth forth much
fruit " (John xii) The Son of man must die, that others might
be associated with Him. Without that. He abode alone. Hence
it was, that, when He had given full testimony, He charged His
disciples strictly to teU no man that He was the Christ ; saying,

214 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

*' The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected, and
put to death, and rise again the third day." Hence, as in the
former passage, in John xii., His soul was troubled, and He
said, " Father, save me from this hour, but for this cause came
I to this hour ; Father, glorify Thy name ;" and then, " I, if I
be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." It was
a dying Saviour that was this point of gathering ; one rejected
by man, but, by sovereign gi'ace, therein a Saviour. He rises
again, and is glorified to be in the place where He connects man
with Himself ; so that ' He that sanctifieth and they that are
sanctified are all of one, for which cause He is not ashamed to
call them brethren." And if He was made a little lower than
the angels, why so ? — " For the suffering of death, that He, by
the grace of God, might taste death for every man" (or ''thing").
And then we read, " It became Him for whom are all things, and
by whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make
the captain of their salvation perfect through suffering." It was
not by incarnation He sanctified any one. " By the which will
we are sanctified, by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ
once for all." And now see another aspect of it, the glory of God
and of the Son of man Himself. It became God, in bringing
many sons to glory, to make the captain of their salvation per-
fect through suffering. These doctors only see man, humanity,
aptitude for humanity : God and His glory have no place in
their system. They quote the passage, " The life was the light
of men." Let me finish the sentence for them, which they do
not : " And the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness
comprehended it not." Eejection, and increased guilt, and proof
of sin, was the only fruit in man of incarnation taken by itself
It was condemnation, not life, to others, " for this is the con-
demnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved
darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." When
the blessed Lord, being in the form of God, made Himself of no
reputation, and took upon Him the form of a servant, and was

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 215

made in the likeness of men, was it there His blessed career
of grace stopped ? No ! *' Being found in fashion as a man, He
humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death
of the cross ; whekefore also God hath highly exalted Him, and
given Him a name above every name, that at the name of Jesus
everyknee should bow " (Philip, ii.) Here it is He takes the
place of head of the new creation.

In John xiii., as soon as Judas went out to betray Him,
the Lord says, " Now is the Son of man glorified, and God
is glorified in Him ; and if God be glorified in Him, God shall
also glorify Him in Himself, and shall straightway glorify Him;"
and He has, as man, been exalted into the glory of God. So,
in John xvii., " I have finished the work which Thou gavest me
to do ; and now, Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine own self,
with the glory I had with Thee before the world was." And it
is as thus perfected in glory that He has become " the autlior of
eternal salvation to all them that obey Him."

But God was glorified in Him also. All good and evil came
to an issue on the cross, and there only perfectly. There was man's
absolute evil enmity against God come into the world in goodness,
power in grace that removed every evil brought in by sin, even
to death ; but, as that displayed God's presence, it drew out
man's enmity. The sin was not healed by it, but made fully
manifest in its absolute character. They killed the Prince of
Life. There the complete power of Satan over men was mani-
fested and exercised, — the prince of this world came. There
the perfection of man in Christ ; the prince of this world had
nothing in Him ; but there was perfect love to the Father, and per-
fect obedience displayed by Him. Perfect righteousness against
sin, in God, was displayed as nowhere else ; but perfect love to
the sinner. Nor could these both have been manifested together
in any other way. Cutting off men might be righteous, but no
love ; sparing them all without atonement, held to be love, but
no righteousness ; nor would destroying them all be God's glory

2i6 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

Lut defeat and failure. But through Christ's death God's majesty,
what became Him, His righteousness, His infinite love and truth
— all have been glorified, and the foundation of the new heavens
and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness, laid in Christ's
appearing, in the consummation of ages, to put away sin by the
sacrifice of Himself. " Through the eternal Spirit He offered
Himself without spot to God " (Heb. ix.) All this we are to
believe is through the accident of sin, which changed the mode
of procedure, humanity being the end of all ! But if the Prince
of this world was cast out by this wondrous work, then was
the judgment of this world.

"Where then, in all this, was reconciliation ? The incarnate
"Word, the Son of God, was rejected. The premediating heathen,
in whom Christ's life was germinally and prophetically, as they
tell us, were — the apostle tells us (Eph. ii.) — tvitlioiU Christ,
strangers to the covenants of promise, and without God in the
world, given up in judgment to a reprobate mind (Eom. i.),
because they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, by
nature children of wrath, walking according to the course of
this world, according to the prince of the power of the air. And
how reconciled — or where redemption ? In incarnation, and the
uniting the divine life in Christ with fallen humanity ? Not at
all. " And you, who were alienated and enemies in your minds
by wicked works, yet now hath He reconciled in the body of His
flesh through death" (Col. i.) " God vjos in Christ reconciling"'
— not He had by incarnation done so. The world would not
have Him in that character. He was occupied with that work,
but totally rejected. Satan was the prince of this world, and
the world came under judgment. The wrath of God was
revealed : and then, Christ having died, the work was committed
to His ambassadors.

There was no link formed by Christ Jesus with other men
by His incarnation. Preparation was made for it: but it issued
in the judgment of this world. If we look to life and union

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 217

in the church, the body of Christ, its fullest and highest char-
acter; is it in incarnation, or with a glorified Saviour, and (for us)
by a new creation ? No union till He is glorified ! " What is
the exceeding greatness of His power to usward who believe,
according to the worldng of His mighty power, which He
wrought in Christ, when He raised Him from the dead, and set
Him at His own right hand in heavenly places, etc., and gave
Him to be head over all things to the church, which is His
body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all," He is not in the
place of head till He is glorified. And, when we were dead in
sins, God hath quickened us together with Christ, and raised us
up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in
Christ. We are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto
good works. If any man be in Christ, it is a new creation: " old
things are passed away, all things are become new." Therefore
the apostle knew no man after the flesh ; yea, though he had
known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth he knew Him
no more. Christ had come as the Messiah of the Jews, as the
crown, if He had been received, of humanity ; but as such He
had been rejected, and now it was only through redemption by
blood, and as a glorified Christ, that man could have connection
with Him.

Does Peter, who enters less into the counsels of God
than Paul, take a different ground from tliis ? No ; " we are
begotten again to a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus
Christ from the dead." Is redemption otherwise than by blood ?
" We are redeemed, not with corruptible things, as silver and
gold, but with the precious blood of Christ ; " and we " by him
do believe in God who raised Him up from the dead and gave
Him glory, that our faith and hope might be in God." It is by
His stripes we are healed, and if He be our life, it is as risen.
In Col. as in Eph., when we were dead in sins He hath quickened
us together with him : He suffered, the just for the unjust, that
He might bring us to God. Hence in John also (chap, vi.).

2i8 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

where He speaks of the bread come down from heaven, He takes
care to add, " If ye eat not the flesh of the Son of man, and drink
His blood, ye have no life in you."

They tell us that God has gathered together all things in
Christ. Scripture does not say so ; but that God has made
known to us the mystery of His will, that in the dispensation
of the fulness of times He will do so, in whom (Christ) we
have received an inheritance, and that we are sealed with the
Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance,
till the redemption of the purchased possession to the praise of
His glory (Eph. i.) So, in Eomans, we are heirs of God and joint
heirs with Christ, if so be we suffer with Him that we may be
glorified together. Not only so, but we are assured that all things
are not put under Christ now (Heb. ii.), but He is crowned with
glory and honour, according to Ps. viii., and He is sitting, not
on His own throne yet, but on His Father's, expecting, at the
right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, till His enemies be
made His footstool. So Peter : The prophets, searching their
own prophecies, found it was not to themselves but to us they
did minister the things which are now reported, to you, by them
that have preached the gospel to you with the Holy Ghost sent
down from heaven ; and we are to be sober and hope to the end.

God will head-up all things in heaven and in earth in Christ,
but, though He was incarnate that it might be so, incarnation
did not put Him in this place. Though all power is given Him
in heaven and in earth, He is not in this headship yet. His in-
carnation brought Him into universal rejection : man saw no
beauty in Him to desire Him ; it was the time of His rejection,
not of every knee bowing to Him, nor is that time come yet.
Now He sits on the right hand of God expecting. These doctors
make it a sanctifying of arts, sciences, etc., on earth, by pene-
trating life. The Scriptures make it a bearing of the cross now,
separate from the world ; a suffering with Him, and then a glorious
Christ, under whom are reconciled all things in heaven and in

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 219

earth, as reigning in glory : and that we only are reconciled now
by His death, and He expecting till His enemies are made His
footstool; and always (e/'s rl dirivexsg), now, and, till then, sitting at
the right hand of God, while His joint-heirs are being gathered.

Through death He has glorified God, through death destroyed
him that had the power of death, that is, the devil. It is the
travail of His soul that He is Himself to see. Through death
He has reconciled us to God ; redemption is through His blood.
It is as glorifying God on the cross that He is glorified by God ;
it is by His blood He has redeemed out of every nation : hereby
know we love, in that He laid down His life for us ; He came to
give His life a ransom fd many. There He was made sin for us,
who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of
God in Him (2 Cor. v.) His incarnation drew out the enmity : by
the cross He reconciled Jew and Gentile in one body, making
peace. What He had seen and heard, that He testified, and no
man received His testimony. When He came, there was no man ;
when He called, there was none to answer. He spoke that He
knew, and He testified that He had seen, and they received not
His witness. God came out to man in Christ, and man rejected
Him, crucified the blessed One come in grace. But the veil was
rent in His death, but never till then, and men can go to God
in the Holiest. It was not by life, precious as that is, but by
death that He redeemed us and reconciled us to God,

The whole system is utterly antichristian and antiscriptural :
moreover it is, as a natural consequence, a perverted and false
system practically. It insists on the union of supernatural grace
and the order of nature in this world, and makes Christ's headship
to be in enjoyable arts and sciences in this world, instead of, as
He says, taking up the cross and following Him — setting our affec-
tion on things above, not on things on the earth, as beinf^ with
Him dead, and our life hid with Him in God. If Christianity
be true, this system is false. If it were not for the extreme
ignorance of Scripture, both textual and critical, which they

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

display, I should say the audacity of their statements would be
marvellous, but I suppose much of it may be attributed to
ignorance.

They say that the communication of life is not by the word
but by sacraments. Now what saith the Scripture ? " Of His
own will begat He us hy the word of truth, that we might be
a kind of first fruits of His creatures" (James i. 18). So Peter :
"Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible,
hy the word of God which liveth and abideth for ever." We
are all children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Now faith
Cometh by hearing (a^cojj), and hearing by the word of God :
he that heareth My word and believeth Him that sent Me hath
everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is
passed from death unto life (John v. 24). It pleased God by
the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe (1 Cor.
i. 21). Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him
for righteousness (TJom. iv. 3). For this cause thank we God
without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God
which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men,
but, as it is in truth, the word of God, wdiich worketh effectu-
ally in them that believe (1 Thess. ii. 13). Lastly, when the
church had become utterly corrupt, as bad as the heathen, so
that the times were perilous, the apostle refers to the Scriptures
as able to make wise to salvation through faith which is in
Christ Jesus (2 Tim. iii.) I shall refer to this again when I
come to speak a word of the church. I have quoted only
direct passages as to the word, of faith in it, quickening and
vivifying. There are many other passages which S23eak indi-
rectly to the same purpose.

They tell us baptism is what gives life and incorporates into
the body of Christ. First, as to life, no passage that I can call
to mind states anything of the sort. Before Christ, and during
His life, it clearly could not be. When Christ was there, the
dead heard the voice of the Son of God, and they that heard

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 221

lived. I can only take their quotations. They quote Peter's
statement in Acts ii, but nothing is said there of communicat-
ing life at all. They were to be baptized for the remission of
sins, and they would then receive the Holy Ghost. They were
baptized in Samaria when they believed ; of course they were,
but no word of life or life-contact. The case of the eunuch is
then quoted, the writer being ignorant that the verse is not
aenuine : but even with it not a word about life. Lydia and
the jailer were baptized, and their households : but no word of
receiving life. Saul was called to arise and wash away his sins
for the formal administration of forgiveness. I do not doubt
this had real force, though it is not the ground of it, but the
death of Christ whereby we are justified by faith : but not one
of them alludes to communication of life by bnptism.

0ur doctors claim the interpretation of the Scriptures
for themselves ; if any one wants to see what it is worth,
he may learn from their comment on the texts they have
quoted as to "the M'ord." They prove to us that Peter
does not use "the word" of the preaching of the gospel,
from the fact that he says that it "liveth and abideth for
ever," which cannot be affirmed of preaching : — is not that pro-
found ? They seem to be ignorant that Peter only quoted a
passage of Isaiah affirming that the gospel was a fulfilment of
it. Did they never read " the word preached " ? The word is what
is preached, and so the apostle would say, " It pleased God by
the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe." Who
does not see that it is not the act of preaching (that is the part
of the preacher), but "the word preached"? But God has chosen
by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. It
is wearisome to notice such absurdity. Supposing I were to say,
"Eating his dinner has quite set him up,"and a Mercersbiirg theo-
logian, claiming to be an interpreter of the word and refusing
" private interpretation," should say, "Eating cannot setaman up ;"
what answer can one give to such wisdom but to say, a-«%£/, All

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

right ; I quite agree ? The passage of James, ch. i. 18, is
passed over as lightly as possible — no wonder.

When Paul writes of Christ sanctifying the church "by
the washing of water by the word," they tell us it means water
and the word, an " unmistakable testimony to the importance
and force of holy baptism." What ! when the Lord says. Ye are
clean through the word which I have spoken unto you ; and note,
that if so, the word as spoken of us in Eph. v. never can be applied
to the soul again : for baptism cannot be repeated. But they
have to change the passage to make their use of it. It is alleged
that it is affirming that the " Holy Spirit has power to act in
an extraordinary way, dispensing with the ordinary organs of
communication." So indeed the Lord affirms He does as to this
very matter. The wind blows where it lists, and ye hear the
sound thereof, but cannot tell whence it cometh or whither it
goeth : so is every one that is born of the Spirit. It is curious how
they go in the teeth of the word, doubtless through ignorance.

But the word of God is the ordinary means, the divinely-
appointed means, of communicating life, as we have seen : which
baptism is never said to be. They speak of magical operation :
it is very irreverent when speaking of being born of the Spirit
who is the immediate divine agent of imparting the divine
nature. "That which is born of the Spirit is spirit ;" but what
more magical than a little clean water, and a few words spoken
by a man who pretends to have power to do it, being the means
of communicating divine life ! Far from me to despise baptism ;
I believe it to be the divinely-appointed door of admission to
the place where God has placed His peculiar blessings on the
earth. For such a place there was in Israel, and such a place
there is in Christendom, awful as its state may be : not of entrance
into the body (of this I will speak), but into that habitation which
God has set up, and where He dwells by His Spirit. But not
only is baptism not life-giving ; but it does not mean it even as a
sign. It is to the death of Christ we are baptized, unto, not into ;

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 223

we are not baptized into anything, but unto. They were not
baptized into Moses, and it is the same word : so, " Whereunto
were ye baptized ?" Here the translators, though they changed
it when they could, could not misstate it. The answer was " Unto
John's baptism." We were baptized unto {tig) Christ's death.
How ? There is no dead Christ, and you cannot be baptized inio
His death. We are identified with Him {(s'j[icp\)roi) "in the like-
ness of His death."

The only connection with life is the passage in Colossians
ii.: "Wherein also we are risen with Him;" but there it is
carefully added, "by faith in the operation of God who raised
Him from the dead:" and even there the coming up out of
baptism is resurrection with Him : not simply quickening or
life-giving, but formally distinct from it. Baptism is death,—
reception in the visible assembly, through death of that winch
we were, as alive in the first Adam, the death of Christ : as to
putting on Christ in Gal. iii., it is only the public profession of
Him, as contrasted with Jew or Gentile, Barbarian, Scythian,
bond or free, male or female. The passage itself is that wliich
declares that " we are all children of God (not by baptism but)
by faith in Christ Jesus." Nor is it incorporating into Christ.
There is positive testimony to the contrary : "For by one Spiiit
are we all baptized into one body." The Holy Ghost come down
from heaven unites to the glorified Head in heaven. That
baptism of the Spirit, we are told, took place on the day of Pente-
cost. " He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit ; " others, when
they came in amongst them, partook of the same Holy Ghost.

But perhaps the most curious effect in detail of this anti-
scriptural system is the absolute denial of all operation of the
Holy Ghost by the gospel in the world. "It (the clnirch) meets
us exactly at the right point, as setting forth the form and njan-
ner in which Christ, by the Holy Ghost, carries forward His
work of salvation in the world, li we are to hold fast the ob-
jective historical character of what this work was first, and still

224 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEIS^T.

continues to be in His own person (mark the work is first in the
person of Christ), it cannot be allowed to lose itself in the
agency of the Spirit in a general view, it must necessarily in-
volve for us the conception of a special sphere, this likewise
objective and historical, within which only (and not in the world
at large) the Holy Ghost of the gospel is to be regarded as work-
ing. This is the church." " To look for it in the world by
private spiritualistic negotiations with God ... is to look for
it where it is not to be found."

Now, I ask, in opposition to this teaching, were Paul's evan-
gelistic labours in the church or in the world ? That the chui-ch
was formed by them, where it was not before, no doubt : and
doubtless the converts were all baptized. But where was the
Holy Ghost of the gospel working ? Was it " not in the world
at large," as they say ? It is as absurd as it is evil. Let us hear
what he says. Did he preach the gospel in the church or in the
world ? He distinguishes this double ministry (Col. i.) But the
Lord Himself before Paul, "Go ye into all the world, and preach
the gospel to every creature. . . . And they went forth and
preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirm-
ing the word by signs following them. And to Paul : "The Gen-
tiles, to whom now I send thee to open their eyes," etc. So Paul :
"Whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel
which is come unto you, as it is in all the Avorld, and bringing
forth fruit, as it doth in you, since the day ye heard of it, and
knew the grace of God in truth." And what was this gospel ?
We read in Eph. i. 13, "The word of truth, the gospel of your
salvation, in whom also, after that ye believed, ye were sealed
with that Holy Spirit of promise." He does not think it worth
while to mention their baptism, though, doubtless, it took place.

I said he distinguished his gospel ministry and his church
ministry : Col. i. 23, " The gospel which ye have heard, and
which was preached to every creature which is under heaven,
whereof I Paul am made a minister." . . . Then " His body's

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

sake, the church, whereof I am made a minister, to fulfil
(complete) the word of God." I may add here, what belongs to
another point, that the reconciliation of all things, which they
affirm to be going on now, is distinguished from our reconcilia-
tion now who form the true church (see verses 20 and 21,
22). Again Paul declares himself a debtor to the Greeks
and to the Barbarians, to the wise and to the unwise ; not
ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God unto
salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first and
also to the Greek, for therein is the righteousness of God
revealed ; and in the doctrinal part of the Eomans, all is abso-
lutely individual, only in the hortatory part is there any allusion
to the church. There it comes in as a known fact. His boast
is that he preached where Christ had not been heard of (2 Cor.
X. ; ^om. i. 5). He would not have anything to do with the
church in this service (Gal. i. 16, 17). It was where Christ was
not named ; he went directly from Christ, " not of man nor by
man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father." (Comp. Eom.
XV. 15-21.) What the apostle boasts of as his glory, these theo-
logians denounce. But more, the commission in Matt, xxviii.
was never carried out ; Paul's took its place (Gal. ii. 6-9), and Paul
puts his mission in contrast on these points with theirs. They
may have gone abroad, as Mark xvi. ; but this is the only allusion
to it in Scripture : the tradition as to it being a very late one.

But; besides, Paid declares he was not sent to baptize at
all, but to preach the gospel. I know our theologians, v>'ith the
Baptists, say this was for fear of its being thought he baptized
in his own name. But this is a come-off. He positively declares
Christ did not send him to baptize but to preach the gospel : the
cross, the death of Christ — foolishness, no doubt, to a ritualist,
but to us who are saved the power of God. But is it not a
strange thing if life-contact is only in baptism, he should tell
us he was not sent to do the only thing which gives life, and to
do that which " the Holy Ghost of the gospel" does not do ?

Q

226 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

Pity he was not sent to IMercersLurg. And somehow he " Laid
the foundation " in his ministry. As regards the full revelation
of the mystery of the church, a dispensation was committed to
him. The whole testimony of Paul, both as to the gospel and
as to the church, is set aside by these ritualists ; that is, of him
to whom the mission to the Gentiles was specially committed
by Christ himself, and relinquished by the apostles at Jerusalem.
P>ut let us consider this doctrine of the church scripturally
and historically too : for these doctors avoid history to replace it
by dreams of their own fancy. We have the church or assembly
of God under three aspects in Scripture, primarily two, and then
one of the two as the effect of divine workmanship, and as the
effect of the work as entrusted to the responsibility of man:
"The body," if we speak of that which is united to Christ, the glori-
fied Head in heaven (Eph. i. and v. Comp. 1 Cor. xii.), set up
on earth, but to be complete and perfected in heaven, is not
formed by baptism. Simon Magus, for instance, was baptized,
but had neither part nor lot in the matter ; the 120 at Jerusalem
had formed the nucleus of the church, but M'ere never baptized
at all. There is no trace of it, nor anybody to do it : yet they
were the church itself at its starting. It is, we are expressly
told, " by one Spirit we are baptized into one body." This baptism,
we know from Acts i., was on the day of Pentecost. The truth
concerning this one body was more fully developed in Paul's
ministry. But Christ exalted on high was the head, those who-
had the Holy Ghost the members. He that is joined to the
Lord is one spirit. It is never connected with water-baptism, nor
are there rotten members of Christ's body. An unbeliever
not born of God is not a member of Christ's body. He is " v^■ith-
out Christ ;" nay, more, " If any man have not the Spirit of Christ,
he is none of His." " Ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit,
if so be the Spirit of God dwell in you." " There is no condem-
nation to them who are in . Christ Jesus." " The whole body
edifies itself in love ; " they are " members one of another." The

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 227

" Head is Christ, from whom the whole body fitly joined together
and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, maketh in-
crease of the body to the edifying of itself in love." So " there
is one Spirit and one body, even as we are called in one hope of
our calling ;" and then "one Lord, one faith, one baptism ;" and
then " one God and Fatlier of all :" the circle each time widening
with the Spirit : the Lord : and God the Father. The same
distinction is made in 1 Cor. l 2.

This is one aspect of the assembly of God. There is another —
it is the " habitation of God,"__and that now " by the Spirit." But
this is viewed in a double way in the word : Christ builds ; and
man builds. " On this rock /will build My church, and the gates
of hell shall not prevail against it." But here Christ is the
builder, and the building unfinished, nor can Satan hinder its
bein^ built. He can catch the sheep and scatter them, but not
pluck (catch) them out of Christ's hand. So Peter : the living
stones come and are built upon the living Stone, a spiritual
house ; no human agency is spoken of as bringing them. So Paul :
" fitly joined and compacted it groweth to a holy temple in the
Lord." This house is not yet finished, it is growing, grace is
carrying it on ; it is not that life is given by energy in a sacra-
ment: but living stones come. But when I come to 1 Cor. iii. it
is another matter. Here man's responsibility comes in and
man's agency. As a wise master-builder, Paul laid the found-
ation ; biit every one was to take heed how he builded thereon.
If he builded with gold, silver, or precious stones, he would receive
a reward ; if with wood and hay and stubble, his work would
be burnt up : in a word, the work depended on the responsibility
of man. Looked at as to the result on earth, God's temple
might be badly built : and man, as he has ever done from Adam,
has wholly failed. This I shall show. The papacy, and then
ritualists, drinking in their sweetened poison through their
utterly false views as to baptism (false in every respect), have
confounded Christ's work in building, yet unfinished, with their

228 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

own wood and hay and stubble ; or worse, they tell us that, by
an organic system of clergy and baptism, it is to restore the race
and bring in consecration of everything to God, uniting the
supernatural with the natural as it did in Christ, or grace and
nature till it culminates in glory ! Now let us see what God
tells us. First looked at as the kingdom of heaven : When Christ
had sowed the good seed, the enemy came and sowed tares, and
the evil done had to remain till the harvest ; the wheat of
Christ's sowing was not spoiled, but the crop was, here. Next
take Jude : False brethren crept in nnawares, baptized with the
organic system we must suppose, but false brethren always, no
life-contact with Christ, but spots in their feasts of charity, and
o^ these Enoch prophesied. The Lord cometh with ten thousand of
His saints to execute judgment. The evil went on to the end.
In John we have the other character of evil. They had gone
out, apostatised, were not of them though they had been among
them. The last times were already come marked by these
antichrists. Paul more fully : The mystery of iniquity did already
work ; only there was what hindered it, and when this M'as gone,
tlie man of sin would be revealed, whom the Lord will destroy
by the brightness of His coming. He could say already, All
seek their own, not the things of Jesus Christ.

In 2d Timothy we have the Holy Ghost's directions when the
church had fallen into this evil estate. God's sure foundation
remained, the Lord knew them that they were His : and who-
ever named the name of the Lord was to depart from iniquity.
In a great house (for such would the church become) there
are vessels of gold, silver, and earth, some to honour and some
to dishonour; if a man purged himself from these last, he would
be a vessel to honour and fit for the Master's use. Spiritual judg-
ment must discern what these teachers were worth in the house,
for it Avould contain all sorts. But further, so far from trusting
the church, in the last days perilous times would come, and a
description is given of Christendom, the same (save two or three

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 229

words) as that of the heathen in Rom. i., not of the world without.
There would be a form of piety denying its force ; believers were
to turn away from such. What was their resource? The
Scriptures expressly : what Paul taught, and the Scriptures given
by inspiration of God, that, when the church was gone to ruin,
the word of God remained sure : and this was to guide.

So John : If that which ye have heard from the hcginning
abide in you, ye shall continue in the Father and in the Son.
No developed and formed theology : but that which was from the
beginning. He wrote this concerning those that seduced
them. But further : In the seven churches, he that hath an car
is called upon to listen to what the Spirit said to the churches.
Christ was judging them. They therefore could be no authority.
He that had an ear for what Christ said was to listen to His
judgment of them. Thus, so far from their word being an
authority or rule, we are called on to listen to the word which
judges their state : and whence can we date the ruin ? Paul
declares that after his decease wolves from without and perverse
persons from within would arise ; John that they were already
in the last time. It was merely, alas ! what had ever happened
under man ; with Noah, with Israel under the law, with the
priesthood, with the Jewish royalty, with the Gentile ; thus,
what God had set up good, the first thing man did was to spoil
and ruin it. But we have the additional testimony from I'uul
that evil men and seducers would wax worse and wor^e,
deceiving and being deceived ; the Scriptures, and what was
taught by inspiration from the beginning being the only resource
of " the man of God," and able to make him wise unto salvation.
John tells us that the last time was already come : so Peter
that the time was come that judgment should begin at the house
of God. And mark this : when Pomanists or ritualists tell us to
listen to the church, they merely mean themselves, the clergy ;
tliey interpret the Scriptures, doling out as much as they think
proper to give us, and cooked up as they please.

230 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

Paul, tliey would have us believe, did not know how to
address the church ; what was from the beginning is not Avhat
I am to hold fast ! Let us see what ground there is for this
apostate doctrine ; this doctrine of Satan, — for such it is : he
knows the power of the inspired word of God. To whom did
the blessed Lord speak ? To the multitude. To whom did the
apostles speak and write ? First to the world ; but then in the
Epistles — all save three short ones — to the assemblies, the mass
of believers. If you choose to call them clergy, the clergy wrote
to the mass of common believers. The church or mass, really
never teaches. Those gifted, as sent, teach the assembly, but
the Scriptures generally are addressed, always addressed, to the
body of believers : God's word is addressed to them without any
interpreters. They are God's own word to them, by which I
should be called upon, if needed, to judge even apostles, with
a curse pronounced upon them if they taught anything else.

The church never teaches. The teachers are to be judged by
the word of God. Sad it is if that be needed, for gifts of teach-
ing there are ; but, if needed to be done, God has sent His
word to the saints at large. He who comes between and inter-
cepts the message meddles with God's rights, not merely with
mine. If I own this title in the clergy, I am withdrawing my-
self from God's own direct title over me as His servant ; but
I cannot from my responsibility, for He lias addressed His word
directly to me. Man cannot withdraw himself from the conse-
quences of his own moral state in reading it ; that is true, nor is
he meant to do so. If he comes presumptuously, he will reap
the fruits of his presumption. If he comes meekly, " as new
born babes desire the sincere milk of the word," he will reap
the fruits of God's grace. Those teachers who write " Bible-
worshippers," and deny what they call verbal inspiration, may
learn, at any rate the simple may, what the apostle teaches :
" We" (the apostle himself and the inspired teachers) " have
received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is of

CHRTSTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

God, that we miglit know the things which are freely given to
us of God." There is revelation. " Which things also we speak,
not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the
Holy Ghost teacheth." There is verbal inspiration. " The
natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for
they are foolishness unto him, because they are spiritually dis-
cerned." There is the intelligence of the things taught in the
word, as it is written ; and it is the distinctive character of the
time of grace : " They shall be all taught of God."

And, now, let us see how far the church is to be trusted, — the
historical development. I affirm that the history of the baptized
mass is the history of the greatest wickedness — crimes natural,
ecclesiastical, and unnatural — that ever disgraced human nature,
worse and more universal than among the heathen, bad as
tliey were. Did our theologians ever read the letter of Nicolas
Clemangis, rector of the University of Paris at the time of the
great schism, the greatest man of his age, and his description of the
state of morals ? In the middle ages, so great was the violence
and disorder- — one pope annulling as invalid all the ordinations
of another whom he had driven out — that a book had to be
Avritten to apprise the people there were still sacraments, —
unnatural crimes universal, especially among the clergy ; and
such a state of things in the papacy, that the great Eoman
Catholic historian, cardinal and Jesuit, Baronius, declares that
for a century he cannot own the popes for legitimate, but only
puts their names in for dates, set up as they were by the mis-
tresses of the marquis of Tuscany, or by their mothers, mis-
tresses of deceased popes. The pope got hold of a book written
by an honest man, denouncing the state of things, and sup-
pressed it, saying that it would be too scandalous, and that he
would punish the most flagrant cases. And the gloss of the
canon law on a decretal, speaking of degrading for licentiousness,
declares that it cannot be for simple fornication, for then it
would be universal. There is no such system of wickedness as

232 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

the organic system preached up by ritualists. I challenge them,
with their historical Christianity, to state honestly what history
states ; nor, though more decent outwardly since the Reforma-
tion, is it really very much better now. This was the baptized
organism that contained — (can I say the words?) — Christ's life !

Let us turn to an earlier date : Did our theologians ever read
Cyprian dc Pudentia, or Chrysostom's two treatises on the same
subject ? Here we go back to, say, 240 after Christ. But a cen-
tury before : what do we find — that is, forty or fifty years after
the death of the apostle John? Infamy under the form of
asceticism. Do our theologians, for I do not mvich trust their
acquaintance with history, know what subintroductae, or
'ira.oiiaaxToi, in full blow at that time were ? So common that
it had to be taken up by councils. I do not defile my
pages with what was read in the clmirches then as holy practice.

And as to doctrine, I will give a specimen from one called
an apostolic father, but who was really the brother of Pope
Pius the First : " A man had a vineyard and set his ser-
vant to stake up the vines. The servant did so, but did
more than he had been set to do — cleared the garden of weeds.
The Lord of the vineyard consulted with his son and his
friends what he should do with his faithful servant, and they
agreed he should be made heir with the son. The servant was
Christ, who was set to establish the clergy, but did a great deal
more than God had set him to do — namely, cleared away our
sins. The Holy Ghost is the Son, the angels the friends." Is
not that the church maintaining and forming sound doctrine ?

But our theologians will tell us, it is hunting up evil and find-
ing some obscure individual, and the church cannot be answer-
able. It was read in the churches, though more in the east than
in the west, is quoted by Irena3us as Scripture, and treated by
Origen as questionable, if it was not inspired. They tell us, as
proof of the value of the church forming doctrine, that it was
only after long struggle that the formal truth as to Christ's

CHRISTOLOGTCAL PAN7HETSM. 233

person was established. His divinity at the council of Nicaea,
But what does this mean ? They do not mean to deny that the
truth as to Christ's person is in Scripture. It means, therefore,
that the church had lost the truth of Christ's person. And so
it was. Scarcely one of the known teachers was sound on the
deity of the Lord ; and those who were, as Irenseus, were unsound
on other things. And Cyril of Alexandria, who set up the title of
Mother of God, was a decided Eutychian, so called afterwards in
doctrine, justified himself by the authority of Athanasius — it
seems to me, he was warranted in so doing. He was as turbulent
a ruffian as ever lived, heading the mob at Alexandria to
plunder and ruin, and drive out the Jews when Patriarch of
Alexandria, and spending all the possessions of the church of
Alexandria, which were immense, to bribe the courtiers and
empress-sister of the emperor to banish and persecute Nesto-
rius, in which he succeeded. He canonised the man who sought
to murder the governor at Alexandria who put down his rioting.
The Ecumenical Council at Ephesus was as great a scene of
iniquity and open violence as occurs in history, so that the
emperor sent troops and put the leaders in prison, from which
Cyril escaped, and they bribed the court, Nestorius' patron
having died. In the previous Council of Ephesus, the Concio
Latronum, convened by the emperor, attended by the pope's
legates, with every element of a general council, the bishops
beat old Flavianus, Patriarch of Constantinople, in such a way
that he died of it. It was quashed afterwards through shame.

This was the primitive church ; its organic progress to
sanctify the world ! They could not cure the baptized heathen
(in life-contact, we are to believe, with Christ) by their baptism
of getting drunk at the festivals (IMemories, so called, at shrines
of their relics) of the demigods : so the church allowed it, putting
saints in the place of demigods, that at least they might get
drunk in honour of saints instead of demons ! The church, that
is, the clergy, the interpreters of the Scriptures, did this. You will

234 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

say, AVhat proof is there of it ? Augustine states it, who tried
to put it down. The same state of things is mentioned in Paul-
inus of Kola ; and Gregory Thaumaturgus left only seventeen
heathen in his diocese by means of it : and it was part of the
directions of Pope Gregory the First to another Augustine, sent
to convert the Saxons. It is a curious fact that Sicily, which
had never been converted from heathenism, went over, I may
say in a body, to Christianity ; and gave up their splendid
temples for churches as soon as Mary was declared by the
Fourth Council to be " the mother of God." God has preserved
His testimony and truth in spite of the church, thus viewed : of
what ritualists call the church. He cannot fail. These things
were not exceptional, but the general state. But Avhat were saints
to do if they listened to the clergy as interpreters, when they
turned Arian with the emperors — when, as Jerome says, the
world awoke and found itself Arian ? When even Hosius and
the Pope Liberius gave way, were they to follow the clergy or the
Scriptures ? The Luciferians, a sect named by Jerome, had their
name from one Lucifer, who would not go with the world when
all the clergy turned Arians. Athanasius is justly held in
honour as to this too ; but what was the course of the whole body
of the clergy ? Have the clergy of the Church of Pome organi-
cally maintained the truth in the worship of the Virgin ]Mary, or
in transubstantiation and the offering of the mass ? Let us have
it out plainly. Ought people under their jurisdiction to follow
their interpretation, and acknowledge their authority? They
are just as much clergy as Oxford or Mercersburg. They tell
tis that God has divided His attribute of Almightiness between
Jesus and ]\Iary ; — almighty justice to Jesus, and almighty
mercy to ]\Iary. Are their parishioners to believe this ? and, as
the present pope has declared, that we must go to the heart of
Jesus through the heart of Mary ? Dr. Pacy has exposed this.
Very likely Mercersburg does not believe these horrid doc-
trines. But why am I to trust them more than their adver-

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 235

saries ; or why acknowledge their competency to interpret more
than the pope's ? Am I to believe in purgatory in Savoy, Ijecause
the clergy teach it; and cross tlie lake of Geneva, and hold that it.
is utterly false in the Canton de Vaud, because the clergy teach
so there? Am I to hold transubstantiation as vital truth in
France ; and declare it idle fables and blasphemous deceits in
England ? Am I to hold that Christ is God in one parish in
France, and deny it if I go into the next? for so I must if I
listen to the clergy and their interpretation. Were not — though,
thank God, there is a reaction — the clergy in France, Germany^
Holland, as a body infidel, and still mostly are, or indifferent ?
It is all well to talk of the church, and hearing the church : but
what church am I to hear ? The body of the Eeformed Church
was, and in a very large and major part is (particularly the clergy),
infidel. Is this the doctrine I am to receive ?

In Geneva the State has abolished ordination entirely. In
Neuchatel it has left every man to preach what he likes : and
half the national church have left and set up for themselves. In
all the principal cantons infidelity reigns among the clergy ;
the godly laity are getting tired of them and their nothing-
arianism. They have said to me in France, " But if we are
Christians we must have some kind of Christ;" and tlien not so
veiy strict either. In Paris Christianity was carried against
avowed infidelity by twelve votes of more than 2600 voters in
the Eeformed Church. I do not doubt that the Lord is graciously
acting, but it is not generally by the clergy but in spite of them.

It is vain to say things are becoming better. "What became
of souls if they listened or listen to the clergy when they are
infidels or rationalists ? When the clergy turned Arians witli
the emperors, were they or the word of God to be listened to ?
If Mercersburg or others teach false doctrine as to the person of
Christ and the sacraments, am I to be saved by listening to them ?
Can they answer for my soul " in that day" ? They insist on the
peccability of Christ : we are therefore authorised in putting the

2^6 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

case, (the Lord avert the blasphemy from every heart, that he
did sin !) putting it as a supposition, for they affirm it to have
been possible ; " God was united for ever to sinful man." Is it
not enough to revolt and repel with horror every true soul? Say
it, not to doctors, for God hides things from wise and prudent,
but to a poor uninstructed saint : he will make short work with
clergy interpretation. "What simple majesty is in the statement !
"The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the
Highest shall overshadow thee ; therefore that holy thing
that shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." For
these theologians, who pry into divine secrets and pretend to
know the Son, whom none knows, but the Father, " the divine "
(they are sometimes afraid to say what), " having taken sinful
nature up, was gradually victorious over it, purifying it." It was
the power of the Highest overshadowing the Virgin Mary for
Scripture : for the interpreters, it was " united in the womb to
sin in the foetus, and purifying the nature," (Can more offensive
folly, of which there is not a word in Scripture, be conceived ? ^
I am ashamed to speak of it, but it must be spoken to put these
pretentious men in the true light) : and that, for them, is
" redemption " !

But we have the faith of the church in the creeds : The Apostles'
Creed, for instance, universally recommended in all ages by the
church. ISTow this is a deception ; they know its history well,
they will not venture to speak of the ancient fable, for fables were
plentiful in those days (there was one Lucius with uncertain name,
a coiner of false documents), that each apostle came forward to
give one article. The Apostles' Creed is not, as we have it, as
ancient as the Nicene Creed. Some analogous formulary was
gradually established in each diocese ; the Eoman creed was
pretty much the same as what w^e have, save some important
articles. But what we have, save these, is first given by Ruffinus

1 Elsewhere it is : " The victory of sinlessness over remaining depravity by
the process of the divine-human life in the womb."

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM. 237

(published in Fell's Cyprian) in the fourth or fifth century ; but
there was no descent to hell in it, and, what is more important,
no procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son. This was added,
it is said, from Spain, when the Visigoths gave up Arianism, and
thence passed into Gaul ; but this was quite late, and Leo put
up the creed in silver tablets at Rome that nothing might be
added, the Council of Ephesus having forbidden any additions.
This article, added none knows how, is rejected by the whole
Greek Church, and is the avowed cause of division. I say
avowed, for it is pretty clear it was ambition and rivalry, I am
not insisting on rejecting nor on receiving it ; but what if tnie
must be of first-rate importance in the creed has divided the
professing church, instead of having a common faith by it.

But these professors, as one of them says, leave the poor
Greek Church out in the cold. In the recent conferences of the
archbishop of Syra with the English prelates, this article could
not be got over, and, then. Dr. Pusey, it is said, declared they were
farther off than ever from union. A priest or patriarch in Turkey
did let in an English clergyman to communion, but was severely
taken to task by the ecclesiastical authority for it. I am not
sure, but I rather think, he M'as excommunicated.

But let us take the Apostles' Creed as it stands. There is not
a trace in it that Christ is God ; an Arian, nay, a Unitarian, could
sign it as well as, nay, better than, one who held the fundamental
truth of the trinity of persons in the unity of the Godhead. Is
not this rather serious if it is to be the norm of faith ? The
Father is God and Almighty, and the Son and Holy Ghost
spoken of apart with no hint of divinity ! Creation is attril)uted
to the Father^ exclusively ; all that is said of Jesus Christ is
referable to what He was when become man.

Now Scripture leaves no shadow of doubt on such subjects.

^ It is singular enough that, while creation is, of course, ascribed to God in the
unity of His being, when the persons are distinguished, it is never ascribed to the
Father but to the Son and Spirit.

238 CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHEISM.

" The Word was with God, and was God." He became man :
" The Word was made flesh." He never became (but in the
beginning '^(jcii) God, When all tliat has a beginning began, He
was ; and was a distinct person. As far as the creed was the
expression of early faith (for it was the creed of Aquilina, and
w^e may practically say, of Eome), tlie church had so lost the
faith — at least its teachers the clergy — that it required the
council at Nice, with the emperor presiding and keeping order
among the disputing bishops, to get it on the ground of the
divinity of the Lord ; and larger assemblies unsettled it again,
and it took council upon council to set things straight. Nor,
mark, are the great branches of the baptized organism agreed
which councils are general, which not. Augustine declares
them to be no final rule ; one correcting the other by clearer
light.

I know not that I have more to add. Many errors, and
important ones, could be noticed, and ignorance of Scripture,
flowing from following men's thoughts and system. Thus, we
are told, that the Holy Ghost after He came is not called the
Spirit of the Father or of the Son. He is both : and as far as I
can trust my recollection, only after His coming. But I notice
this only to show the rashness of assertion. Their doctrine is
false as to justification by faith ; it is for them inherent or
infused, though professedly not exactly Romish doctrine.

But my only object was the ritualism, the person of the Lord,
and the church, running into this main point : Is redemption by
incarnation, or by the death of Christ ? They say, formally, by
incarnation (the Scriptures, as formall}'-, by the blood of Christ) ;
and all their system hangs on this. As to the clergy, it is
Qiiot homines, tot scntcntiac, unless we go to Rome, who treat their
doctors as outside the church altogether. Take even their
friends, the English Puseyites (from whom our Mercersburg
doctors declare they borrow their sacraments and clerical system,
not from Germany, — alas ! they have no bishops, and, if their

CHRISTOLOGICAL PANTHETS^T.

friends are to be believed, no organic succession at all, no
divine channels of grace whatever : happily in Piomanisra and
Anglicanism the clergy are not necessary to baptism, — a mid-
wife can do it, so they may be considered to have life-contact
after all !) their Christianity is just saved ! As to an inter-
preting clergy, they are absolutely without any. A goodly
system this to secure the truth for the simple ! Which am I
to believe ? Happily I am content with what Jolm, and Paul,
and Peter, and the blessed Lord Himself, tauglit "from the
beginning."

"Let that theeefore abide in you, which ye have heard

FROM THE BEGINNING. If THAT WHICH YE HAVE HEARD FROM
THE BEGINNING SHALL REMAIN IN YOU, YE ALSO SHALL CONTINUE
IN THE Son, AND IN THE FATHER. AnD THIS IS THE PROMISE
THAT He hath PROMISED US, EVEN ETERNAL LIFE. ThESE
THINGS HAVE I WRITTEN UNTO YOU CONCERNING THEM THAT
SEDUCE YOU. But the anointing AVHICH YE HAVE RECEIVED

OF Him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man

TEACH you: but AS THE SAME ANOINTING TEACHETH YOU OF
ALL THINGS, AND IS TRUTH, AND IS NO LIE, AND EVEN AS IT
HATH TAUGHT YOU, YE SHALL ABIDE IN HiM. AND NOW, LITTLE
CHILDREN, ABIDE IN HiM ; THAT, WHEN He SHALL APPEAR, WE
MAY HAVE CONFIDENCE, AND NOT BE ASHAMED BEFORE HiM AT

His COMING." (1 John ii. 24-28.)

THE CHURCH AND ITS PEIVILEGES.

Things, truths, not words, are my objects. But I had supposed
that Kuriake (Kv^ocxri) was the source of Kirche in German,
Kirh and Church. (" Kyroike"^ I never heard of. It may be
all right.) Some philologists now say that this is all wrong,
and that kirk or church comes from the Saxon. I can only say
I really do not know, nor have at this moment the means of
ascertaining : if, indeed, it be ascertainable with any certainty.
But the truth is, I have a great dislike of the word " church,"
because no man knows what it means.

What does it mean ? ]\Ir. G.'s congregation might build him
a new church. Then it means a building. Or ]\Ir. S. may be
a member of Mr. G.'S church. Then it means an assembly
under the presidency of Mr. G. In England, " he is going into
the church," means, he is going to become a clergyman : he is
gone to church, means the public service or worship : gone to the
church, means the building again.

The Ptoman Catholic Church, and the Greek Church, are
large bodies of persons professing Christianity, associated under
these designations. So of Presbyterians, and Covenanters,

' We have just received from some kind friend in America a copy of a peri-
odical of this j-car, containing an article, "The Old Testament Saints part of the
Church ;" and inside it a letter, by the author of "Have we a Revelation from
God," reviewing and refuting it ; and, as we think it likely to "be useful to our
readers, we will give them the opportunity of perusing it, and of judging whether
" the visible church is identical under both dispensations ; " and whether
" nothing more can be said of the chunli now " than could be said of Israel

- The word used by the writer of the article.

THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES. 241

Lutherans, Episcopalians. If you press the matter, the church
is the teaching authoritative part of it. This is so even among
Protestants. The Thirty-nine Articles of England tell us the
church can decree rites and ceremonies, and has authority in
matters of faith. So that we have to know Avhat a person
means by "the church" before we can reply to a question as
to it.

But I will just mention a little bit of history which refers to
this, and why it is so current a word. "When James I., or, as
we should say with Scottish Covenanters, James VI., had the
Bible translated, the translation in popular use was the Geneva
one made by the refugees in Queen Mary's time. This always
used the word " congregation." Now James had had a long
experience, or knowledge at least, of his mother's conflicts with
John Knox, and was not very fond of Scottish principles
embodied afterwards in the Covenant, and used to say, " No
bishop no king." He gave strict orders to have the word
" church" everywhere, and not " congregation." Hence the
prevalence of a word in the English Translation of the New
Testament which has really no fixed meaning.

Say " assembly," which is the meaning of V/.y.'knaia (ecclesia),
and all ambiguity disappears. Ecclesia was the assembly of
those who in the small Grecian states were citizens, and so had
right to vote ; and then it was applied to analogous bodies or
meetings. We all know what an assemlly means. Only now
we have to do with God's assembly. For example, " Take with
thee one or two more," etc. ; " if not, tell it to the church."
To whom is it to be told ? Well, the minister, or perhaps the
presbytery ! With the Roman Catholic, " if he will not hear
the church" assumes awful proportions.

Now say, as it really is, the assembly, and how simple all is.
If wronged, go yourself first alone ; if in vain, take one or two
others ; if still in vain, matters being ascertained, tlien " tell it
to the assemUy." For the present mixed state of tilings this

B

242 THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES.

may seem inconvenient : but the sense of the words is plain
enough.

Now apply this to Acts vii,, " This is he that was with the
asseiiibly in the wilderness." Can anything be simpler ? Israel
was a vast assembly in the wilderness, and assembled themselves
at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation. For though
a different word in Hebrew, the tabernacle got its name from its
being the place of meeting. But then, all possible reference
to the church, in the Christian sense, disappears. Who denies
that the six hundred thousand men who came constantly to the
entrance of the court were an assembly ? There were three words
used for it, Kahal, as is stated by the writer, from Kahal the
verb to call together, Moeed and Heeda or Gncedah, the two last
from Yaad, to appoint a place or time of meeting. Hence the
tabernacle was called Ohel Moeed, the tent or tabernacle of the
congregation.

Israel was a great assembly or congregation, as none can
dispute, but which proves simply nothing as to its being what
God's assembly is, according to the word, now. It is Ecclesia,
an assembly, in Acts vii., and the word being simply an
assembled multitude, says just no more than that. The identical
word is used when it is said, Acts xix., " having so said, he (the
town clerk) dismissed the assembly." Put " the church " there
and what nice sense you will have !

I quite understand it will be said, " Yes, but they were God's
assembly in the wilderness." Admitted ; but the whole question
remains; that is — Were God's assembly then, and God's assembly
now, constituted on the same principles, on the same basis ?
There was no question then of conversion, or faith, or anything
of the kind, or even profession. They were, as Scripture ex-
presses it, of the fountain of Jacob, descendants of Israel
according to the flesh, and under condition of being circumcised
the eighth day (which by the by none of those born in the
wilderness were at that time). That assembly was a nation.

THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES. 243

God's assembly now is not. The fact of being an assembly, or
the word, proves nothing ; the whole question remains : — Are the
Israelitish nation, and God's assembly called by grace, the same
thing, or assembled on the same principles ?

This writer makes some enormous statements : First, " The
church of Pentecost was Israel," WHiy, the Jews had openly
rejected the Lord, and Peter in his sermon says to those who
had ears to hear, " Save yourselves from this untoicard genera-
tion" and the Lord Himself had said, "Behold your house
is left unto you desolate ; for I say unto you, ye shall not see Me
henceforth until ye say, Blessed is He that cometh in the name
of the Lord." They were a judicially rejected people, though
not for ever : and they are so to this day. They were " men of
Israei :" but the assertion, inconceivable as it is, only shows how
far a false principle can carry any one. God did not say in
Joel " He would give the great outpouring of His Spirit to
Israel." He said He woidd pour out His Spirit on all flesh. In
patience with Israel He dealt with them, and began at Jeru-
salem : but it was the Holy Ghost being given to Cornelius
that opened fuUy Peter's eyes, and the eyes of the Jewish Chris-
tians.

But let us enter a little more into the heart of the matter.
This writer says of Israel, " ' To them were committed the oracles
of God :' ' To them pertained the adoption, glory, covenant,
giving of the law, service, and the promises' (Rom. ix, 4),
Nothing more can be said of the church now," Now here is
the nucleus, the heart of the question : not the introduction of
Old Testament saints into church privileges (unscriptural as that
is), but reducing God's assembly now to the measure of Jewish
privileges. The former might, alone, be treated as a mistake ;
the latter deprives God's assembly of its true divine standing,
and that is what makes it of moment. The law was given by
Moses : grace and truth came {iyinro) by Jesus Christ,

Let us see what Scripture says on the matter. In the taber

244 THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES.

nacle there was a veil, behiud which God sat between the
cherubim ; the Holy Ghost thus signifying that the way into
the holiest was not yet made manifest, while as yet the first
tabernacle had its standing. Now, by Christ's death the veil is
rent from top to bottom ; and we have boldness to enter into
the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way,
which He hath consecrated for us through the veil, that is to
say. His flesh. We can walk, and are to walk in the light, as God
is in the light. Is tliis "nothing more" to this writer? I will
not insist on God's righteousness being declared now (the right-
eousness of God being revealed, not prophesied of) because I
desire to take what is most positive and on the very surface of
Scripture. See Gal. iv. : " Now, I say, the heir, as long as he is
a child, differeth nothing from a slave, though he be lord of all ;
but is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of
the father ; even so we, when we were children, were in bondage
under the rudiments of the world. But when the fulness of the
time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made
under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we
might receive the adoption of sons ; and because ye are sons,
God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts,
crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore, thou art no more a slave, but
a son." Is it " nothing more" to be brought to be sons of God
by known and accomplished redemption, and know it ; to live
in the relationship, instead even of an heir differing nothing
from a slave ?

Will the writer allow me to ask him. Were the Jews under
the first covenant, or the second, in their relationship with God ?
Are we under that first covenant ? But more, we have the dif-
ference clearly brought out in Heb. x. 9, " He taketh away the
first that He may establish the second." It will be said that
these were ceremonies ; but what ceremonies ? The priesthood
is changed ; is that merely a ceremony, a better hope by which
we draw nigh to God. And see the difference : the sacrifices

THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES. 245

could not make the comers thereto perfect as pertaining to the
conscience. There was a remembrance of sins every year ; now,
we are perfected for ever who are sanctified ; so that Christ, when
He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand
of the Majesty in the heavens. He is seated there, because all
is done, till His enemies are made His footstool : and our sins
and iniquities are remembered no more. The worshippers once
purged are so in such sort that they should have " no more con-
science of sins," instead of a remembrance of them every year.
"We have eternal redemption, a purged conscience, because the
sins are purged once for all ; and boldness to enter into the
Holiest : " Giving thanks to the Father, who hath made us
meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light"
(Colv i. 12) : Having the knowledge of salvation given to His
people by the remission of their sins. Is all this " nothing more"
than Israel had ?

Take what is said by the Lord, and this will lead us to the
question of the Holy Ghost. Than John Baptist no greater
prophet had ever arisen, nor of those born of woman any one
greater ; " but the least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than
he." Many kings, prophets, and righteous men, had desired to
see the things which the disciples saw, and had not seen them ;
but " blessed," said the Lord, " are your eyes, for they see."
They were more blessed than their kings and prophets — they
had Messiah with them. Yet so great was the privilege and
advantage of having the Holy Ghost, that it was " expedient "
that Christ should leave them ; for, if He did not, the Comforter
would not come ; but, if He went away. He would send Him.
AVhat a thing to lose, Christ's personal presence in grace ! Yet
so great Avas to be the effect of the coming of the Holy Spirit,
that it was better He should go. Yet they woidd persuade us
that He had been there all the time of the Old Testament ! See
1 Peter i. They searched their own prophecies and found they
did not minister to themselves but to us the things now reported

246 THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES.

by tlie Holy Ghost sent clown from heaven. Was the promise to
pour out the Spirit, or His presence *' nothing" ? Clearly it was
not anything if He was there all the time as when poured out.

And now mark the foundation of this immense truth. God
never dwelt with Adam innocent, nor with Abraham or others ;
but as soon as even an external redemption was accomplished,
we read " They shall know (Exod. xxix.) that I am the Lord their
God, that brought them out of the land of Egypt that I may
dwell among them:'' and the Shechinah of glory came down
and sat between the cherubim, and led them in the wilderness.
So it was, when an eternal and full redemption had been accom-
plished, and man (though much more than a man) sat down in
virtue of it at the right hand of God, that the Holy Ghost came
down to dwell in God's people individually and collectively.

We must not confound between the divine action of the
Holy Ghost and His coming in person to make His abode with
us. I think it will be found in Scripture that all direct action
of God from the creation is by the Holy Ghost. Even Christ
could say, " If I, by the Holy Ghost, cast out devils." At any
rate. He moved on the face of the waters. By His Spirit God
garnished the heavens. He inspired the prophets, and wrought
all through tlie divine history ; but that was not His personal
coming. So the Son created all things ; but He did not come
imtil the incarnation : " I came forth from the Father, and am
come into the world ; again, I leave the world and go to the
Father" (John xvi. 28). So speaks Christ of the Holy Ghost :
" If I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you ; but
if I depart, I wiU send Him unto you ; and when He is come"
etc. (John xvi. 7, 8), And this was so distinct a thing that it is
called "the Holy Ghost," without saying came, or given, or
anything else. Thus, John vii. 39, "For the Holy Ghost was
not yet " (given, is added, it is not in the text), "because that Jesus
was not yet glorified." So, the disciples baptized by John, in

THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES. 247

Acts xix, 2, said, " We have not so much as heard whether the
Holy Ghost is."

All Jews knew there was a Holy Ghost ; but this was His
promised presence : and this is easily understood as to John's
disciples, because he had spoken of Christ's work as twofold :
He was the Lamb of God ; and He it is that baptizeth with the
Holy Ghost. It was the second great part of His work baptizing
with the Holy Ghost ; and it could not be done till He was
glorified. So He tells His disciples after His resurrection, " Ye
shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."
He Himself was anointed and sealed with the Holy Ghost when
He stood, the first man fully, perfectly, acceptable to God, who
had ever existed since evil entered, — perfect in Himself. " God
anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with
power " (Acts x. 38).

And what is the effect of the Holy Ghost's dwelling in us ?
The love of God shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost
given to us (Eom. v.) We know that we are in Christ and
Christ is in us (John xiv.) We know that we are sons and cry
Abba, Father, the Spirit bearing witness %vith our spirit (Eom.
viii.) He takes of the things of Christ, the glorified man on high,
and shows them to us (John xvi.) Our bodies are temples of
the Holy Ghost which we have of God (1 Cor. vi.) : so that God
dwells in us and we in Him, and we know it by the Holy Ghost
given to us (1 John iv. 13). What eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,
nor hath entered into the heart of man, God hath revealed unto
us by His Spirit (1 Cor. ii.) Wliere the Spirit of the Lord is,
there is liberty (2 Cor, iii.) : and Christ living thus in us, the
body is dead because of sin, the Spirit life because of righteous-
ness (Eom. viii.) 3Ian at the right hand of God in righteousness,
and the Holy Ghost dwelling in the believer as the consequence of
it, characterise Christianity.

All this is lost by this system [which tells us " that the
visible church is identical under both dispensations "J. What

248 THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES.

made it expedient for Christ to leave His disciples, we are told,
is all the same as what they had before He came ! The anointing
of the Holy Ghost is " nothing " !

Besides, " he that is joined to the Lord is one Spirit," and this
leads to the corporate difference. Till Christ ascended up on
high, there was no Man at the right hand of God, no one to
whom the believer could, as a present fact, be united ; and, con-
sequently, as we have seen, no Holy Ghost come down to unite
him to Him. But Christ ascended up on high, a Man, in
righteousness, and the Holy Ghost consequently came down : not
to the world but to believers. Let us hold fast this great truth
which is the essence of Christianity, as the cross and God's love
are the foundation of it. The Head being on high, we are
quickened together with Him, according to the power witli which
God wrought in raising Him from the dead and setting Him
there ; and raised us up, Jews and Gentiles together, and made
us sit together in heavenly places in Christ : (not with Him yet,
Eph. i. 19-23 ; ii. 1-7). Neither part of this was true before
Christ was glorified. There was no such glorified Man ; no
Holy Ghost come down from heaven. On this, Scripture is as
clear as possibly can be. There was the Son of God who could
quicken ; but no raised glorified Man, whose going to the Father
was the testimony of God's righteousness ; nor the Holy Ghost
come down, the divine witness of it. We are members of His body :
He has given Him, as so exalted, to be head over all things to the
church which is His body. Thus, " by one Spirit we are all
baptized into one body," Jews or Greeks. Israel had lost liis
place as such. There was no difference now. By the cross the
middle wall of partition was broken down, and of twain one new
man to be made ; and both reconciled to God in one body by the
cross (Eph. ii.) Now the duty and essence of Judaism was the
keeping of the wall up ; Christianity as a system on eartli is
founded on its being broken down. Were the Gentiles in the
church brought into the Jewish state as is alleged ? No, lie

THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES. 249

makes of twain one, new man and reconciles both, and came and
preached peace to those afar off and those nigh ; for neither af
them had it. The apostles and prophets (the prophets are the pro-
phets of the New Testament, see Eph. iii. 5) were the foundation
of a new edifice, " a habitation of God through the Spirit." This
had never been promised, never revealed at all, could not have
been. To say there was no difference between Jew and Gentile
would have destroyed Judaism at one stroke. It was not revealed
at all (Eph. iii. 4-11 ; Col. i. 26 ; Eom. xvi. 25, 26. In 26th verse
it is not " the scriptures of the prophets ; " but now is made
manifest by prophetic scriptures, y§apav iT^o(pnTix.wv).

But the grand point is the coming of the Holy Ghost con-
sequent on the exaltation of Christ as man in rigliteousness to
the right hand of God. So when Christ says, " I wiU build my
church " (on the revelation made by the Father to Peter), what
was the meaning of that if He had been building it all the time,
from Abel onwards ? The church, then, the body of Christ, is
formed by the baptism of the Holy Ghost, consequent on the
exaltation of Christ to the right hand of God (1 Cor. xii. 12, 13).
The Holy Gliost as so come " was not yet," when Christ was not
glorified ; and this " baptism," as is declared in Acts i., took
place a few days after, that is, on the day of Pentecost (Acts ii.)

Eomans xi has nothing to do with the church, " the body of
Christ." It is the olive tree of promise (and the church was never
promised even) ; and it is accompanied with a revelation that,
when the Jews are grafted in again, the Gentile branches would
be broken off. There were promises and prophecies at any rate,
which apply to Gentiles as, "Eejoice, ye Gentiles, with His
people ; " but if Israel be God's people, the church cannot exist
with it ; for there (that is, in the church) there is no difference of
Jew and Gentile, and blindness in part is happened unto Israel
till the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. They are enemies
as touching the gospel ; and "the casting away of them is the re-
conciling of the world." The church is "the body of Christ"

250 THE CHURCH AND ITS PRIVILEGES.

formed by the Holy Ghost on earth, while Christ sits on the
right hand of God.

I should have many things to note if I merely took up the
article. " House of the Lord," or any application of it to the
place where the people meet, is wholly withoib foundation in
Scripture. " The church of the wilderness " is also unscriptural.
" The kingdom of heaven " is not the church at all. It is really
too bad to say, " the apostles do not say a word about a nev/
organisation." " There is a disannulling of the commandment
going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof."
Did not Paul organise the church ? Were the priests and Levites,
priests and Levites of the Christian church ?

There would be another difficulty which has not been
noticed at all : — That before exodus there was no assembly of
any kind at all. Individual saints, Enochs and Noahs and
Abrahams there were, but there was no assembly ; but I do not
go beyond what is on the surface of the article.

What I press is this, that the Holy Ghost is come ; and that,
when He came, the baptism, by which the saints were made one
body, took place ; the assembly is the body of Christ and the
dwelling place of the Holy Ghost on earth : and it never existed
before that baptism, and could not ; for the Head did not exist ;
nor was the Holy Ghost, in consequence, descended to unite men
to Him so as to form His body.

He gave Himself not for that nation only, but to gather
together in one the children of God which were scattered
abroad.

THE BEAEING OF FIRST PETER 11. 24.

The true force of 1 Peter ii. 24 lias been called in question by
those who seek not only to make Christ's life vicarious, but His
sufferings during the time of His active service penal. The
thought that all the sufferings of that Blessed One have infinite
value, and that they were all for us, every Christian heart would
close in with adoringly. There may be obscurity of mind con-
nected "with it ; but the heart is right. But when intellectual
proofs are attempted to be given to sustain unsound doctrine on
this point, so as to undermine the true character and value of
atonement, and to cast a cloud on divine righteousness, it is
desirable then to maintain the truth. I do not hesitate to say
that those who speak of the appropriation of Christ's living
righteousness to us for righteousness, and hold the sufferings of
His active service to have been penal and vicarious, have in no
case a full, clear, and scriptural gospel. I am sure many, who
from the teaching they have had hold it, are as far as my own
heart could desire from the wish to weaken the tnith of atone-
ment and the value of Christ's blood-shedding, without which
there is no remission. They have not seen the deep evil lying
at the root of a doctrine which speaks of vicarious sufferings,
and bearing of sins to which no remission is attached. I am
quite ready to believe that the most violent accusers of the
doctrine which looked to the sufferings of Christ upon the cross
as the alone atonement and propitiation for sin do not wish to
enfeeble its value. But we may inquire into the justness of all
views which we do not judge to be scriptural, and press too with
confidence what we find in Scripture.

252 THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24.

I do not believe in the penal and vicarious character of
Christ's sufferings during His active service, nor do I believe in
the appropriation of His legal righteousness to me as failing in
legal righteousness myself. I am satisfied that those who hold
it have not a full, true, scriptural gospel ; by some it is used
for the maintenance of what is horribly derogatory to Christ,
I have known many valued and beloved saints who hold that
Christ, under the law, satisfied, by His active fulfilment of it,
for our daily failure under it. I believe it to be a very serious
mistake, though I may value them as His beloved people still.
I believe in His obedience to the law ; I believe that all His
moral perfectness, completed in death, was available to me as
that in which He was personally agreeable to God, and a Lamb
without spot and blemish. But these are not the appropriation
to me of legal righteousness. But I am not now purposing to
go over all this ground ; I merely maintain the ground on which
I stand, and the doctrine which I hold as scriptural, and as of
immense importance to the church just now. I would do it
meekly, patiently, that souls may be delivered from error and
bondage iuto the liberty of the truth of God, which is the
only real power of godliness ; but I would do it firmly and
constantly.

In the attempt to maintain the doctrine of Christ's bearing

sins all His life, the translation of the text I refer to has been

called in question. I am satisfied that it is perfectly correct.

As an element in this question, I would now examine it. The

English version is, *' Who his own self bare our sins in his own

body on the tree." A simple person would surely, in reading

Peter, refer to His sufferings in death. Thus, in chapter iii. I

read : "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for

the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in

tli\ flesh, but quickened by the Spirit." No one denies that

Q\^Y^\i suffered, during His life, sufferings which found their

pgj,£gjtion in His death, besides the wrath-bearing character of

THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24. 253

it ; for He was obedient unto death, even tlie death of the
cross.

But the question is, " Was there sin-bearing during His
active service, or was He kept up as the Lamb to bear sin ? "
It turns on the word " bear," d^i^vgyxE. It is alleged that if it
meant " bare," it must be yT^jvsyxe or llSaffraes or s>.a/3g. All this
is a mistake. A sacrificial word is, I do not doubt, purposely-
used ; but ava^p'iOM means " to bear, or undergo," probably because
sacrificial victims, which were offered up, were supposed to bear
sins : at any rate, it does mean " to bear, undergo, sustain."
The truth is, determining the meaning of a word by etymology,
in a cultivated language, is the most absurd thing possible. It
is interesting as philological research ; but, as determining the
usus Zoquendi, it is ridiculous. I might say " hell-fire " must
mean " covering sins " (for it is the same word as " to heal,"
used also provincially for roofing) — for the same reason, hence,
that the fire of hell was purgatorial or remissory ! It did
.originally mean a covered place, hades, and hence, gradually,
everlasting punishment. 'Afapjsw does mean to offer in sacrifice :
it means " to recreate oneself, to remember, to cough up, to
return, to cast the sin on another, to weigh or consider," etc.
The question is, does it mean to bear, to undergo the pain and
burden of ? and, when used sacrificially, can it be separated from
the altar of sacrifice ? I say it does mean " to bear, to undergo the
pain and burden of anything;" and, when used in connection with
sacrifice, it cannot be separated from actual offering up to God.

First, it means " to bear or undergo." I must turn to the
dictionaries for this, and the passages in which it is used. They
leave no sort of question. It is only systematising, and not the
facts in the Greek language, which can lead any one to deny it.
I turn to H. Stephanus. I find dvapipstv, ferrc, pcrferre, pati, ut
Christus dicitur, annyy.ih 2'>cccata nostra. (1 Pet. ii. 24 ; Heb.
ix. 21.) Citatur e Thucydide dvup'-snv xivB-jvov;, quod durum sit
reddere, Ferre pericula : potiusque verti debeat, Suhire pericula

/

254 THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24.

ter " to undergo," that is, than " to bear "). The general
Chi^e of " undergoing the burden and pain of " is evident ; and
thet is our point here. There is a reference in the beginning of
leg' article to Aristides (I suppose, ^Hus Aristides, the rhetori-
it n), which I cannot verify. So Pape, anfsicli nchnien, crtragen,
fob take on oneself ; " " to bear " zad-jticug, Thucydides ; (pdovovg
I h.^ial36Xo-og y.ai ■rroXiii.ov, that is, "envy, 'calumny, war," Polybius
Chri.Dionysius of Halicarnassus. He adds, New Testament,
for oul' and Scott givg " to uphold, to take on one," Latin sustinere
mistake, though^^^g (^»^j^^-^ ^nd Thucydides). It is thus perfectly
I believe lP^^[■^Q -word means " to bear the burden of anything,
moral pej^^ -j^j-^g etymological sense of " to bring up or back "
tliat ii^j.g absurdity here,

^-' We have now to examine the scriptural use of it in connec-
tion with sacrifice, and in particular the passage in Peter.
'Ai-^ji/e/xe is a sacrificial word. It is used here (if we are to take
it as it usually is taken, as referring to Isa. liii. 12) for Nbo
nasa, which means " to lift up, to bear, to forgive," and here
confessedly "to bear." It is alleged — for I have considered
diligently what is alleged against it — that it cannot mean " to
bear passively with " {bv), as would be the case with uvr^viyKi It)
TO. This is a mistake. Aaron was to bear the names of the
children upon (^J?), his heart (Exod. xxviil 29). So with the
judgment in verse 30.

It is said that Isa. liii. 4 is translated iXajSi by divine inspira-
tion, and hence it could not be avrjusyKB, in verse 12. But this
proves, if anything (for the word may be translated differently
in different places according to the sense, but if it be the Spirit's
purpose to make the difference here, it proves this), that He
would not use a sacrificial vicarious word in verse 4, but would
in verse 12 (that is, that the "bearing, in verse 4, was not
sacrificial, but is in verse 12) ; for Hebrews ix. 28, that Christ
was once offered £/'; ri toKkuv an,nyx.iTv a/jba^rlag^ are the very
words of Isa. liii. 12. So that, if this is of any value, we have

THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24. 255

not an inference that it cannot be used in one place because it
is not in another ; and that Peter, if he had quoted it, would
have used another word for " nasa " in verse 12, because Matthew
did in verse 4 (an argument, when said to be from inspiration,
which I decline characterising), but a direct proof that inspira-
tion will not use a vicarious sacrificial word as to Christ's living
sympathies and sorrows ; but that it will and does use it when
it speaks of bearing sins when offered up to God.

And now, leaving argument, which I am glad to do, what is
the scriptural use of amp^u, in connection with sins and
sacrifices, with or without It/ t61 The following instances will
show : Xum. xiv. 33, xa/ dvoieovffi r^v rropvsiav {j'luv. The use of it
in this passage is the more noticeable : save in Lev. xx. 19, the
wojd always used for bearing the consequence of our own or a
father's sin (and under the old covenant this is the same thing)
is Xa,a/Sa!/w in the Septuagint. In Lev. xx. 19, it is arro'iewzai.
In Exod. xxviii. 29, Xri-^trui to, 6v6/zara It! to Xoyi76v ; and for the
same words in verse 30, it is xa/ ohu rag y.^lang crl rou. Indeed,
the argument as to XafijSdvu may justly be carried much farther,
for >.a,a/3avw is regularly used for bearing the fruit of one's sin,
bringing sin on oneself in its consequences. It is not bearing it
vicariously, but as a consequence on oneself. The only apparent
exceptions that I £»m aware of, and they are only apparent, are
Lev. xyi. 22, the scapegoat ; and Ezekiel iv. 4, 5, 6. But the first
is \^-^crai iis yny u^arov, " He shall carry them into a land not
inhabited," and in the case of Ezekiel, it was clearly not (b)
vicarious, but representative, and the same as the ordinary
case. In a word, d'laoriav Xafj-jSavnv is not used for vicarious
bearing, but bearing the consequence of one's own fault, coming
under the effect of it oneself, pocnas lucre.

But what is important is to see the actual use of am^pioui,
when used with sacrifice. Num. xiv. 33, and Isa. liii. 11, are
plain proofs that it is used for bearing sins penally. But now,
as to sacrifice. The reader must bear in mind that the act of

256 THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24.

having the sin on the victim is not in itself the expiation. That
puts the victim in the answering place. For the other, death
and the judicial action of God must come in to put it away. It
must be slain and offered on the altar — as it is said, " by means
of death." Christ had to take our sins on Him, and therefore
to die — give His life a ransom for many. Every one, therefore,
believes He had taken them on Him before He gave up the
ghost. The question is, did He take them on Him in order to
suffer on the cross, and suffer the penal judgment of them there ;
as the victim was brought up to the altar, then the sins con-
fessed on his head, and then the victim itself, thus made sin,
slain and burnt? Or was Christ born into this penal state,
suffering it before He actually gave Himself up to be offered on
the cross ? Was He under the penal consequences of sin in the
sufferings of His active service — was that penally from God ?
or in the sufferings of the cup He took to drink upon the cross
from God ? I believe the latter — that it was after the victim
was presented as an offering to the altar (in Christ's case we
must say presented Himself as a spotless victim to the cross)
that the penal sufferings for sins were on Him, because our sins
were on Him ; and that it is to this bearing of sins alone that
the passage in Peter applies. Christ offered Himself without
spot to God. Jehovah laid then the iniquity upon Him. He
who knew no sin was then made sin. Did the Lord lay the
iniquity upon Him before He offered Himself without spot, a
proved spotless lamb ? One who knew no sin was made sin
when He had bowed to His Father's will to drink that cup.

Offering has, in Scripture, a double character. It is used for
presenting the victim, or indeed any offering, X'*3n, y''\^'\\, hcevi or
hiknv, "to cause to come nigh ;" but avapsgw It/ to is not used for
tills, though in grammar I know not why it should not be. It
is for hard causes in judgment in Deut. i. l7, avoisin aWl I-t^ ifi's,
" Ye shall bring it to me," but not for offering that I can find.
If the reader takes Lev. i., he will find for these words T^offpl^«/»

THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24. 257

or crpftffaye/v, to bring up. This was the presenting the offering
which was to be a victim. But as soon as the victim, or part of
it, is spoken of as lurnt on tlve altar (Lev. iii. 5), then it is
avciaovm ahzci l-xi rh dudia-STniiov. So in verse 9, the general idea
of offering is rrooeotaouai, Mkriv, and in verse 11, the burning of it
on the altar avoleovm h-l to. And this is the regular use of it in
Lev., and elsewhere, as Exod. xxix. 18, 25 ; xxx. 20. Lev. ii. 16 ;
iii. 16 ; iv. 10, 19, 26, 31 ; vi. 15, 35 ; vii. 21 ; viii. 16, 20, 21,
27 ; ix. 10, 19 ; xvL 25 ; xvii. 6. Kum. v. 26 ; xviii. 17. This
last hast the sam.e force, but there is not i^i rh hsiaar^^iov. That is,
avappco £■-; TO is the technical expression for consumption or
offering up to God by fire, when on the altar, in contrast with
bringing up to the altar. When Jt/ to is not used, it has
practically the same force when used of offerings— that is,
offering to God ; but maps^i/v Irri ro has the proper peculiar force
of bearing them as a victim on the altar, under the consuming
fire of God, not of bringing up to. It answers to n^uipn MJdir,
not to Jiikriv. It is impossible that the use of language can be
made plainer by the facts of that use.

There is anotlier word for which it is used, which confirms
this, Thv, hala (Gen. viii. 20 ; xxii. 2 : so Exod. xxiv. 5 ; Lev.
xiv. 19, 20) ; where the reader will remark, comparing verse 13,
that in both cases, of the sin or trespass offering and the burnt-
offering, they are killed before they are offered in this sense of
the word. In Christ both went together ; He died on the cross.
But it is of importance to remark it here, because it shows that
hala, as well as hiJdir, is not bearing the sins up to the altar,
but the being offered (in consuming fire) on the altar to God.
The word is used in some passages generally as a burnt-offering,
an offering made by fire, the sense being assumed to be known ;
but this shows the strict sense is, the ascending up to God as
a sweet savour under the proving and consuming fire, not the
bringing up sin to the altar. And this is so true that, as these
burnt-offerings were of a sweet savour, so no offering not made

s

258 THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24.

by fire was a sweet savour. Compare Leviticus ii. 9 and 12,
determining tlie use of this word in the most positive way. They
were to bring it uj) (U"'ni5n tahrivoo) as an offering, but they
w^ere not to offer it (^T yalicdoo) as a sweet savour, very justly
as to the sense translated " burnt " in the English. It was not
to be made to ascend as a sweet savour — that is, to be burnt and
mount up to God as such.

The general use may be seen in ISTum. xxviii. 2 and Deut.
xii. 13, 14 ; chapter xxvii. 6 is a proof that the notion of It/ ro,
i.e., trr'i with an accusative (see below) is not so absolute, but
proves that avoian, in any case, does not mean necessarily
bringing up to, for here it is used with the genitive. Judges xiii.
19, again, shows distinctly what dmipiPuj s-rr! t6 means (here s-l
"T/iv, because it was a rock) ; for it is added, " For it came to pass,
that when the flame went up," m>^;-ilehaaloth, "from off" the
altar. The victim was offered on the rock, and in the going up
of the flame. That was what hala refers to, not the bringing up
to the altar.

Additional cases will be found in Kings and Chronicles,
David's and Solomon's offerings ; but it is only repeating similar
. cases, which confirm, but are not needed to prove, the point.
The words for which dva<pi^iiv s'rri to OuaiacTrjoiov are used (namely,
burning or causing to ascend on the altar), and the uniform use
of them, prove distinctly that the force of the word is the bear-
ing under consuming fire on the altar, and not bringing sins up
to it. I may quote another proof, strongly confirming the use
of this word in 2 Chron. xxix. 27. Verse 24, the victim was
killed ; verse 27, Ilezekiah commands it to be offered, dnviy-KiTv
I'TTi rh dvffiuffryiiiov. I add, on this occasion, it is never used for
bringing or bearing sins up to the altar, it is used for bi-inging
victims to the house ; but this I quote because there it is not
eV/. The sins were not yet upon them ; they were the spotless
victims that were to become sin-bearers, and sweet savours of
offerings made by fire.

THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24. 259

'Avap'ssiiv l-l rh dvaiaarrjs/ov is never used for brinirincr or bear-
ing sins up to the altar ; what it is used for has been fully
shown. But the supposition that S'^/ with an accusative means
actively bringing up to, and then rest, is a mistake. There may
be grammatically the idea by implication that that which is
It! to is not always and naturally there ; but as a matter of fact,
it does mean resting on a place or thing at the time spoken of.
Thus, Matt. xiii. 2, " All the multitude stood " Jc/ rov aJyiaXov.
So Matt. xix. 28, " Ye shall sit on twelve thrones," et; 8uidsxa
6s6vo-jg. Acts X. 1/ j xi. 11, l-'-arriaav Iri rov rraXuvu, Jt/ rrjv olx/'av.
Winer's " Grammatik " (section 583) may be seen for this use
and the use of Jt/ with a genitive for motion. See a singular
example in Lev. iii. 5, the pieces of the peace-offering on the
buj^nt-offering, It/ rd — on the wood, It/ rd — on the fire, It/ rov.
This may be from the fire being always there belonging to the
altar, whereas the wood was brought there : oum will be under-
stood then before it. In many cases, I have no doubt that the
real cause of the accusative is this ; when the preposition of the
compound verb implies motion, there will be the accusative,
though the whole sense will be rest I do not think you would
ever have iJmi W! ro. With e:piarr,iMi, dva(p^s'j}, you will have the
accusative ; so i'iarrjy.s l-l r6 in contrast with Christ's sitting in a
boat on the sea ; but ]\Iark risav l-i ylf^;. But this is grammar,
and I pursue it no farther.

It remains only to adduce the cases of avucpspuv in the sense of
bearing or offering. AVe have first Heb. vii. 27, " who needeth
not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice ; for this He
did once when He offered up Himself" Now, here it is perfectly
certain that it has nothing to do with the victim bearing sins up
to the altar, but with what we have seen to be its usual and
uniform sense — the high priest's offering it on the altar, where it
was a victim. So, also, we have distinct proof that it is no
vicarious life, for He did it once when He offered up Himself,
and it was for sins. When, consequently, it may have a more

26o THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24.

general meaning of giving Himself up to be a victim, we have
the word used for that in Lev., Tr^&ffjts^ow, Heb. ix. 16. Hence we
have in verse 28, "once offered [T^offaisp^l'/s], to bear [d^a^ji^s/v]
the sins of many." Thus He was once offered, and offered to
bear sins as thus offered, of which it is said that He had not to
offer Himself often, for then He must often have suffered ; but
now He has appeared once in the consummation of the ages to
put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself— that is. His offering,
His suffering, was the sacrifice of Himself. His being born was
not His sacrifice. He offered Himself— One who was a man
though by the eternal Spirit, or there could be no offering.
That is, He was a man before He offered Himself, His own
blessed voluntary act, the perfect act of Christ, though in
obedience, and Himself already the spotless Lamb. He was
thus the Man, the spotless One, to bear the sins of many. This,
there can be no doubt, refers to Isa. liii. 12.

We have, further, James ii. 21, " When he had offered up
Isaac on the altar ; " and 1 Peter ii. 5, " Offer up spiritual sacri-
fices," which give no proof, save that the last shows this, that
it was the offering up to God ; which is very important in this
way, that it shows it was not tlie bringing up the sins when
laid on the victim's head to the altar. The offering of the
victim to God is ';rco(jp=|w. The consumption on the altar was
its offering up as a sacrifice to God ; this is a^ajcspw. The
notion of bringing up a living victim to the altar is unknown
to Scripture. The animal was slain when it liad been offered
{r:^(mviY^&iii), slain by whom it might be, and the blood sprinkled
on the altar, and the fat, or the whole victim, burnt. The altar
had to do with death and the judgment of fire, and there was
the sacrifice. A living victim bringing up sins to the altar is
a thought foreign and contrary to Scripture. When the victim
had been presented, and the hands of the offerer had been laid
upon it, it was slain at the door of the tabernacle of the congre-
gation. Death was the M-ay sin ^^•as dealt with in the victim

THE BEARING OF FIRST PETER ii. 24. 261

(we know Christ's death was on the cross, as well as the full
drinking of the cup of wrath) ; the thought of bringing sins up
livingly, as if He offered Himself and His sins, is an im-
possibility. Xo ; He offered Himself, and bare (dv^Ji-syxs) oui
sins, when offered (^rrpoeiviyjii;) as a dying victim. Death was
the wages of sin.

Thus I return to 1 Peter ii. 24 with the full evidence of
Scripture and the Greek use of the word, all the scriptural
order of sacrifice, and the language of Scripture, confirming it,
that the simple-hearted reader may rest in all confidence in
his English translation, " He bare our sins in His own body on
the tree." The word " bear " has a sacrificial character ; but that
no Christian reader ever doubted in this passage.

. I do not see, I confess, how any scriptural locution could be
made more certain. I doubt that any other could have so
ample and absolute a proof of its actual meaning, and refutation
of the meaning attempted to be put upon it, and of the desired
change in the authorised version.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

MELCHISEDEC.

Hebrews vii. 8. — There is really no solid ground for denying
that Melchisedec was a man, as simply as Abram, Lot, or any
other personage that figures in the description of Gen. xiv.

The mystery consists not in the person, but in the way in
which the Spirit of God records his appearance and action in
the scene, so as to make of him a suitable type of the Lord
Jesus. Thus not a word is said of his birth, or of his death ;
there is total silence as to his ancestors ; and no hint is given
of the lapse of his office, or of any successor. The Holy Ghost,
by Paul, argues from this silence (wliich is so much the more
striking as contrasted with the well-known pedigree and succes-
sion of Aaron), and thus illustrates Christ's priesthood, which
had really those features that are here shown to be typically
foreshadowed in ]\Ielchisedec. For instance, while verse 8 refers
to Melchisedec, all that is meant of him is that the testimony
Scripture renders is to his life, not to his death ; whereas it fre-
quently speaks of the death of Aaron and his sons. The same
principle applies to his " abiding a priest continually."

The Bible does not speak of his institution, nor of his resig-
nation. When first we hear of Melchisedec he is a priest, and
as such we leave him; no son, no successor, appears. The name,
" King of Eighteousness," the place, " King of Salem ; " his
sacerdotal office, especially in connection with so peculiar a title
of God, " priest of the Most High God" (which, in its fuU im-
port, implies the possession, de facto as well as de Jure, of

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 263

heaven and earth) ; the circumstances (" met Abram returning
from the slaughter of the kings") ; the character of his actions
(" blessed him," and not merely sacrifice and intercession), — are
all obviously and eminently typical.

There is scarcely more difficulty as to Melchisedec than as
to Jethro, priest and king of a later day ; though of course the
latter could not furnish so apt an illustration, in the circum-
stances of the case, as the former. Both were real, historical,
and not merely mystical, persons.

Two remarks may be made towards the better understand-
ing of this chapter and epistle. The first is, that, if the order is
that of Melchisedec, the exercise is that of Aaron, as is most
plain in Heb. ix. x. The second is, that in verses 18, 19 of our
chapter, we must take " for the law made nothing perfect "
parenthetically, and suppose an ellipse of ymTui (not of inXiluasv)
with ETeimyojyri. In other words, " did" ought to be left out of
the authorised version.

MATTHEW AND LEVI.

May I be permitted to express the following objections to
Dean Alford's reasons, and, above all, to his conclusion, that
IMatthew and Levi are distinct persons ? It is agreed (1), that
" the three narratives relate to the same event ;" and (2), that
" the almost general consent of all ages has supposed the two
persons to be the same." But, so far from allowing that his
third fact is almost inexplicable, I can only admire, with Euse-
bius, the humility and candour of Matthew, who gives himself
the same name at the receipt of custom by which he was after-
wards known as an apostle. The other two Evangelists call
him Levi as a publican, and Matthew as an apostle, which is
surely a very intelligible thing on the supposition that he bore
both names. Thomas is called Didymus by John only ; and
Thaddeus (or Lebbeus, as in Matthew and :\rark) is called

264 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

Judas by Luke and John, not to speak of his own epistle, with
scarcely a note of identification. As to the fourth point, or
" early tradition," that which separates the two persons is as
minute as it is suspicious. Clement of Alexandria quotes the
heretic Heracleon to the effect that Matthew, Philip, Thomas,
Levi, and many others, had not suffered martyrdom. Is this
most vague statement of a Gnostic — even if it were clear and
certain, ^^'llicll it is not, that he means by this Levi the Levi of
Mark and Luke — to M-eigh against the plain and strong pre-
sumptions of 1 and 2? As to (5) Origen's testimony [contra
Gels, i.), it seems in this passage to distinguish between Matthew
and, not Levi, but Aj/S?;?. It is notorious that, elsewhere, Origen
identifies Matthew with LevL So that I am wholly amazed at the
Dean's No. (G) : " It certaiidy would hence appear as if the pre-
ponderance of testimony were in favour of the distinctness of the
two persons." His notions of evidence must be strange indeed,
to set the assertion of Heracleon, even if precise instead of being
loose, and the statement of Origen, if confirmatory instead of
being adverse elsewhere, and, as I think, even here, above his
own first two arguments ; especially as he is compelled to own
liow inexplicable on this supposition it is that Matthew should,
in his account, omit all mention of Levi. In fact, such a theory,
if true, would turn the seeming modesty of Matthew into a
scarcely honest concealment of him who really gave the great
feast. I have no doubt therefore, that the common view which
identifies jMatthew with Levi, as two names of the same indi-
vidual, is perfectly sound, and the only tenable one.

THE CLOSE OF MARK AUTHENTIC AND GENUINE.

]\Iark xvi. 9, ct seqq. — Having long since protested against
those who treat this passage and the beginning of John viii.
with sus^Dicion, I proceed to state my reasons, passing over the

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 265

disputed place in John, which has been already well defended
in another place.

Even Dean Alford, who certainly does not err on the side
of credulity, admits that the authority of the close of Mark
is hardly to be doubted. Eusebius, and the Yat. and Sin. MSS.,
omit it ; and several others note its absence in certain copies,
but generally add, that it appears in the oldest and best. All
else of the Greek MSS., all the Evangelistaria, all the Versions
(except the Eoman edition of the Arabic), and a large pro-
portion of the earliest and most trustworthy Fathers, are
allowed to be in its favour. Lachmann, in spite of his noto-
rious tendency to follow the very slips of the most ancient
copies, edits the entire section without hesitation.

In his notes the Dean urges that the passage is irreconcilable
with the other Gospels, and is disconnected with what goes
before ; that no less than seventeen words and expressions occur
in it (some of them repeatedly) which are never elsewhere used
by jNIark, whose adherence to his own phrases is remarkable,
and that, consequently, the internal evidence is very weighty
against his authorship ; that is, he believes it to be an authentic
addition by another hand.

Before examining these criticisms, I must object to a reason-
ing which affirms or allows that to be scripture which is irre-
concilable with other scriptures- If its authority be clear, every
believer will feel that, with or without difficulties, aU must be
really harmonioua

But, it is said, the diction and construction differ from the
rest of the Gospel Did the Dean or those who think with him
adequately weigh the new and extraordinary circumstances
which had to be recorded ? In such a case strange words and
phrases would be natural if Mark wrote (nor does he by any
means Avant aVag "kiydiiim elsewhere) ; whereas, another hand,
adding to Mark, would as probably have copied the language
and manner of the Evangelist.

266 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

Uouirri ffa/S. (ver. 9) is alleged to be imusnal. Doubtless ;
yet, of the two, it is less Hebraistic than rrig /xiag g. (ver. 2), and
each might help the other to a Gentile or a Eoman ear. And,
so far from being stumbled by the way Mary Magdalene is men-
tioned here, there seems to me much force in Jesus appearing
first to her out of whom He had cast seven devils. "Who so
suitable first to see Him and hear from Himself the tidings of
His resurrection, who through death annuls him who had the
power of death, that is, the devil ? As to the absolute use of
the pronoun in 10, 11, is it not enough that the occasion here
required what was needless elsewhere ? — If croirj. is found only
in 10, 12, and 15, it is because the simple word best expressed
what the Holy Ghost designed to say, whereas elsewhere the
evangelist employed its compounds in order to convey the more
graphically wliat was there wanted. Thus, he uses e/Vtos. eight
times, while Matthew, in his much larger account, has it but
once. Is this the least ground for questioning Matt. xv. 17 ?
So, again, Mark has Ta^a-ro^. in four different chapters, IMatthew
once only (xxvii.39),Luke and John not at all. — Leaving these
trivial points, the phrase roTg /xst' airoD is to me an argument for
rather than against INIark's authorship. Compare with it chap,
i. 36 ; iii. 14 ; and v. 40. As to idsddri 6t' aurl^g and its differ-
ence from roTg 6. aWov, the answer is, that the word is most
appropriate here and uncalled for in other places, and if the
difference prove anything it would show two hands instead of
one supplementing IMark's narrative ! Thus, for instance, the
same verb occurs but once in all the epistles of Paul : are we,
therefore, to suspect Rom. xv.? Matthew has Qiuissu only twice ;
are we for a score of such reasons as these to speculate that
" another hand" added Matt, xxvii. and xxviii. ?

As reiterated mention of unbelief, and tlie Lord's upbraiding

the eleven with it, what more instructive, or in better keeping

with the scope of the context and of the Gospel ? It was whole-

• some for those who were about to preach to others to learn what

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 267

their own hearts were, and the Lord in His own ministry sets
them right before announcing their great commission. Even if we
only look at the word americi, it occurs in ]\Iark vi. 6 ; ix. 24
If the verb is found only in ch. xvi. 11, 16, what more marvel-
lous than Luke's having it only in his last chapter (ver. 11, 41),
and never once using the substantive eitlier in the Gospel or
in the Acts of the Apostles ? — It is true that iura r, and leriiw
are found in no other passage of Mark, but his customary pre-
cision may be one reason why the former is not more common ;
and the latter occurs once only in Luke and John. — It is con-
fessed that 70 ihaj. IT. rQ ytricsi is in Mark's style. The fact is,
neither of the later Gospels contains the noun iliay. and Matthew
always qualifies it as " the gospel of the kingdom," or " this
gospek; '■ whereas, whether or not Mark has the qualified
phrases in i. 14 and xiv. 9 (for ]\[SS. etc. differ), he repeatedly
has " the Gospel" elsewhere, as chap. i. 15 ; viii. 35 ; x. 29 ;
xiii. 10. This, then, affords no slight presumption that the
passage is the genuine production of Mark, as well as authentic.

TloLoaxoX. in 17, and WaxoX. in 20, occur nowhere else in Mark,
and that for the best of reasons ; the accuracy which the com-
pounded forms impart was demanded here, and not before, where
the simple form sufficed. And this is the less surprising, inas-
much as the former appears only in Luke's preface, the latter
nowhere else as far as the four evangelists are concerned.

As to the singularity of xaXSj 'i^oxjaiv, what simpler, seeing that
this promise (as well as that about the new tongues, serpents, etc.)
is revealed here only, and was unquestionably verified in the
subsequent history ? It is the natural converse of a common
Scriptural designation for the sick, oi xaxu; \yj>vTi^, and if the
occurrence of aiiuoTog should be here objected to, the reader may
find it twice already in Llark vi., while Matthew and Paul use
it each only once.

Only one further objection remains worth noticing, the use
of y.jsiog in 19, 20. In Mark xi. 3, I suppose it is equivalent to

268 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

Jehovah, and at any rate I would not press this as in point.
But the absence of such a title before seems to me a beauty, not
a blemish, in Mark, whose business was to exhibit the service
of Jesus. But now that God had vindicated His rejected Ser-
vant by the resurrection, now that He had made Him both
" Lord" and Christ, what more natural, or even necessary, than
that the same Gospel which had hitherto traced Him as the
Servant, Son of God, should make Him now known as " the
Lord" ? But this is not all. The Lord had uttered His charcje
to those who were, at His bidding, to replace Him as servants,
and in a world-wide sphere ; He was received up to heaven, and
sat on the right hand of God. Xow it was Mark's place, and only
Mark's, to add that, while they went forth and preached eveiy-
where, the Lord was working with them. Jesus, even as the
Lord, is, if I may so say, servant stilL Glorious truth ! And
whose hand so suited to record it as his who proved by sad
experience how hard it is to be a faithful servant ; but who
proved also that the grace of the Lord is sufficient to restore
and strengthen the feeblest ? (Compare Acts xiii. 13 ; xv. 38 ;
Cob iv. 10 ; 2 Tim. iv. 11.)

DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE STATE IN THE
PENTATEUCIL

The Apostle Paul tells us that life and immortality
{i.e. incorruptibility, d^dape!a) were brought to light by tlie
Gospel. These truths were but dimly made known before,
though there had ever been sufficient for faith to lay hold of
Thus, the very first book of the Bible shows us the care and
solemnity which the wandering patriarchs attached to their
burial (Gen. xxiii., xxv., xxxv., xlvii., xlix., 1.) ; and the Apostle,
in writing to the Hebrew Christians, affirms that it was by
faith (not fasting, customs, or superstition) Joseph gave com-
mandment concerning his bones. He believed in a God that

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIOXS. 269

raiseth the dead, in a God who will surely raise them by and by,
and give them a glorious link with the promised land, as well
as with the city which hath foundations — the better and hea-
venly country. Again, our Lord convicted the Sadducees of
not knowing the Scriptures, or the power of God as to a future
resurrection state, and a present living to God, of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob ; and this from God's words to that ]\Ioses
M'ho is said by Gibbon to have omitted the doctrine, but who,
on the contrary, records this revelation in the same book of
Exodus which contains the law of Sinai. (Comp. Luke xx.)

I fully admit that there was a considerable measure of
obscurity on this, as on many other truths, till He came who
was the brightness of the glory of God, and the express image
of His substance. But this was in perfect harmony with the
Levitical or Jewish system, in which the veil was not yet rent,
and God was governing a nation on earth as the vessel of His
presence and testimony among the Gentiles. TJie faith of His
elect, 6f course, penetrated much further, as may be seen in Job
xix. ; Ps. xvi., etc. But I am now explaining one simple and
satisfactory reason why we should not expect a fuller statement
of a future existence in the Pentateuch. It is because the main
question there is of a people called to know the manifest exer-
cise of righteous government on the part of a God who dwelt,
and that even visibly, in their inidst. Individual saints saw
nnich more all through ; but God's government of Israel on the
earth is the grand topic of the Old Testament, and the true
solution of this seeming difficulty, which is really in perfect
keeping with the times, place, people, and circumstances where
it occurs.

THE WOED Wiu^vioi.

Before treating of the force and usage of this adjective, it is
well to examine briefly into ai<Jjv, from which it is formed. The

270 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

earliest application of the substantive in Greek writers (as
Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, the tragic poets, and Herodotus) is in
the sense of a man's life, or lifetime. In the later history of
the language (not to speak of its medical application to " the
spinal marrow ") it denoted a long period of time (Aeschin.
Axioch. 17), M'hile the pliilosophers employed it in contradis-
tinction to x,ioMog to express the duration, a/wc of eternal and
unchangeable objects, yj,<'mg of such as are transient and cor-
poreal. Hence a/wv was used in the ancient philosophy as = the
infinite and immutable eternity of God, and by an obvious me-
tonymy = God himself, and subordinate spiritual beings who
were supposed to proceed from Him, the term of duration being
also extended to those invisible agents or entities themselves.

Thus Philo JudaeuSSays, h aluvi hi otrz <^a^iX^Xv6iv oudiv o'jT-c /xiXXii

dXXa /j,6m vparnzs. This is important, as showing that in Hel-
lenistic Greek authors of the same age as those of the New
Testament the M'ord was used properly and specifically to set
forth eternity. " In eternity nothing is past or future, but only
subsists." Equally plain is its application to the invisible beings
or aeo7is of Oriental philosophy, as may be seen from the fol-
lowing extract, cited by Mosheim, from Arrian : — ou yao i}/x,i Aloov
aXX avdou'-rog, f/^soo; tuv rrdvruv ug w^a ri,u,i^ag, IvffTrivai (li OiT u; Tr,v
u)Pav xal rra^iXOiiv ug ci'suK Excluding the imaginary personal
force, nothing can be clearer than its use in the time and lan-
guage of the New Testament inspired writers to represent what
is immutable and eternal. Aristotle, I may add, derives it from
uJiv uiv (Dc Coclo, i. 11).

Besides, Avhen qualified by words M'liich modify its sense, it
is used in Scripture for the continuous course of a given system
ruled by certain principles, as in Matt, xii, 32 ; xiii. 39, 40 ;
xxiv. 3 ; xxviii. 20 ; or, again, in a moral rather than in a dis-
pensation al sense, as in Gal. i. 4 ; Ephes. ii. 2.

I conclude, then, that while aiuDi may be so used as to express
the continuous existence of a thing which from its nature does

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. rji

not last for ever (as Imman life, an unbroken age or dispensation,
or the general course of this world), its proper sense, taken by it-
self, is to express eternity. And the same thing is true of alumg.
It is used in certain special connections, as in Piom. xvi. 25 ; 2
Tim. i. 9 ; and Tit. i. 2, where XS''^^' modifies its force, and gives
a relative rather than an absolute sense ; but its natural mean-
ing, unless positively restricted, is eternal in contrast with tem-
porary. It occurs seventy-one times in tlie received text of the
New Testament, the examination of which need leave no doubt
on the believer's mind. Donnegan gives Philemon 15 as excep-
tional ; but he is, in my opinion, mistaken.

A DISPUTED PASSAGE.

1 John V. 8. — It is plain that " the Spirit " {rh ~n\i[j,a) means
the Holy Ghost. He only is truth (ver. 6). Allow me to take this
opportunity of expressing my regret that Prof Gaussen {Plenary
Inspiration, pp. 192, 193) should venture to defend the text. rec.
of the two preceding verses, and in doing so to misstate, of course
through inadvertence, the evidence, lie ought to have known
that the alleged testimonies of some early Latin fathers are very
questionable, and that the most ancient MSS. of the Latin Vulgate
are against the insertion of the disputed clause, not to dwell on
the fact that the three Greek ]\ISS. containing it, against near
150 which omit it, are not older than tlie fifteenth or sixteenth
century ; at least, if the Cod. Xeapol. belong to the eleventh
century, the reading here is a correction made 500 years later.

As to the two grammatical considerations which he borrows
from Bishop Middleton, I would briefly reply : —

1. That the words r^e/"; &/ txaor-jsoZ\/ric^ and o'l Ti-iT; (verses 7, 8)
are no insuperable difficulty. They are masculine, it is true,
while the words to which they relate are neuter ; but the diffi-
culty is nearly if not altogether the same, if the passage
remained entire, as in the common text. If in that ca.se the

272 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

principle of attaction is used to justify this irregiilanty, the
principle of rational concord applies to the correct text ; and
the more especially, as t-o cn-sJ/ia, that well-known personal
object whose power wrought in the saints, is the first of the
three witnesses who are specified immediately after. They are,
as it were, personified as witnesses, and the gender is accommo-
dated to the sense rather than in strict grammatical form.

2. The next objection is founded on the article being coupled
with h, as if it necessarily supposed a previous mention, which
only occurs in the retrenched clause. But this is so far from
being necessary that, even if h were rightly read in verse 7, the
object and force of t-o h in verse 8 is wholly different. In other
words, supposing the passage in question to be spurious, the
anarthrous form would be an error, and the article is required
{i.e. TO h) in verse 8 ; for the idea intended is not the nume-
rical unity, but the uniform testimony of the Spirit, the water,
and the blood.

It may be added, that all three, I believe, of these MSS.
which contain the passage, omit the article before crar^s, Xrj^oc,
and ■n-y. cly., which I venture to say is not even correct Greek,
but just such phraseology as might come from an unlearned
forger translating from the Latin. It was Erasmus who supplied
the article to each of these words, with no other warrant than
his own erudition.

THE OUT-EESUERECTION EST PHILIP. III. H.

I think that the just inference from a comparison of the
various texts cited from the Peshito-Syriac is, that this venerable
version is lax in representing the true force of diflerent phrases
in the Greek New Testament on the subject of the resurrection ;
not only confounding things which are distinct, but adding, in
most or all cases, an idea not suggested by the original.

As to the Greek, there are the strongest reasons for doubting

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 273

that i^a\a.(sra(5iz ruv vsx^Sv is an inspired expression — I scarcely
tliink that it is a correct one. But it is certain that A B (C is
here defective) D E read, in Phil. iii. 11, rr,v l^amsrasiv r^v £x
vsxpujv (F and G giving ruv h., ^-hich seems to be a slip for
TTtv 6z), while only two uncial MSS. of the ninth century, viz.
J K, read ruv without tx. Accordingly, critics, with wholly
different systems of recension, like Scholz, Lachmann, and
Tishchendorf, reject the received text in spite of Griesbach's
adoption of it, though he marked the right reading as probable.
It is not surprising that J. H. has failed to seize the exact
point of s^avasraGiu; Hx^'SJv. The phrase is purely characteristic,
and hence is anarthrous. The preposition is not omitted before
vsx^ojv for the sake of euphony, as Mr. Birks supposes in a recent
volume ; but s^avaaraGsu; in Acts xxvi. 23 and Bom. i. 4 indicates
the mode or condition in which Jesus should show light to Jew
and Gentile, and be defined as Son of God in power ; wliile
vsxfuiv was added, it seems to me, as a complement, to denote that
it was a resurrection in a proper or strict sense (not figuratively,
as in Luke ii. and elsewhere).

It is a mistake to suppose the presence or absence of the
preposition immaterial. The truth is that, while the resurrection
of Christ, or of the just {i.e. those who are Christ's), like that of
all others, is or may be styled dvda-aei; vsksmv, never is the resur-
rection, of the unjust designated cadcraa/g ix vsxbmv — a phrase
restricted to those who rise before the wicked. In other words,
" the resurrection /ro7)i the dead" (which it ought to be in Philip,
iii. 11, as it is in Luke xx. 35, where the expression in Greek
is rather the weaker of the two) is, « fortiori, " of the dead " —
but the converse does not hold ; and this suffices to prove their
distinctness. I believe that the reader who is familiar with the
Scriptures will the most readily acquiesce in this statement.

Bev. XX. — I am glad to perceive that a too common misapplica-
tion of 1 Thess. iv. 16 is disclaimed. The truth of two distinct

T

274 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

resurrections does not require such pressure of texts into
its service. The question of the length of the interval M'as of
minor importance comparatively, but it is answered in that
book v^hich admirably and appropriately treats of it — the
Apocalypse. May I be allowed to add that 1 Cor. xv. 23 has just
as little to say to the resurrection of the wicked as the passage
in 1 Thess. iv. Nor has any person the slightest authority from
Scripture to connect what he calls the " trumpet blast " with
any save the righteous. None else are considered in either
Scripture. " The end," in 1 Cor. xv. does not mean the wicked
who are supposed to rise then, but the close of all God's dis-
pensational dealings, even of " the kingdom," viewed from that
point, which has been given up ; and tlmt clearly supposes all
judgment of quick and dead to be over. In other words, " the
end" is after the wicked dead have been raised and judged.

As to the alleged distinction between wga In and h fi, I do
not think it has been applied aright in setting it against the plain
statement in Eev, xx. of the period that transpires between the
resurrection of the blessed and that of the rest of the dead. It
was as uncalled for in the Gospel as it was in harmony with the
Revelation of John, to enter into chronological times and
seasons. Yet the Lord carefully guards against our inferring a
common or general resurrection. All are to hear His voice and
to rise ; but we have as distinctly as possible a resurrection of
life and a resurrection of judgment, as in Eev. xx. They were
not to marvel if He quickened souls ; for, at another epoch. He
would be in such manifestation of power that He would raise
bodies ; but the Gospel decides nothing as to the particular
points in the ^pa when good and bad should rise, the Apocalypse
does. It seems to me not unlikely that the true reason why
not on but h ^ is used in John v. 28, is to distinguish an epoch
wdiere the action is immediate (as in John iv. 52, 53 also) from
one wherein it is continuous or sustained (as in John iv. 21, 23,
and xvi. 25). This, however, in no way clashes with the fact ot

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 275

there being two distinct and contrasted resurrections, nor forbids
our believing that one act is at the beginning, the other at the
end of this wf a, while both are immediate, not prolonged.

THE GENERAL DESIGN OF THE GOSPELS.

It admits of the clearest possible internal proof — of course
of an accumulative kind — that the Spirit of God employed
Matthew to present the Lord Jesus as " the Son of David, the
Son of Abraham," i.e. in descent from the two leading points of
Jewish glory and promise. Mark is occupied with the " begin-
ning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God," and thus
naturally details the ministry, in all its varied circumstances,
of OQC who was the ready, patient, and withal powerful servant
of all the need that surrounded Him — of one whose dignity as
the Son of God " could not be hid" in his least work here below.
Next, the genealogy of Luke traces Jesus up to Adam, that is,
as connected with the whole race. Gentiles no less than Jews,
as Son of man and not merely tlie Messiah. These observations
help to explain the comparatively large use of the Jewish
prophets by the first of the Evangelists, while Luke, with equal
propriety, depicts " that holy thing," born of the Virgin, who
increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and
man ; and Mark, just as admirably, omits all notice of Christ's
parentage, His birth, His childhood, etc., and commences at
once with the ministry of His forerunner and of Himself. Last
of all, John gives a portrait of the Lord, in a point of view
higher than the others, as the "Word made flesh, who in the
beginning was with God and was God, the true light, full of
grace and truth. For this reason, as well as because the Jews
are here regarded as merged in the universal darkness and
death, no genealogy is given : His person and Divine relation-
ship, not His human one, is the subject. It is not that the
same truths are not recognised everywhere ; for Jesus is owned

276 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

as Son of God in Matthew, and as Son of David in John.
Enough is afforded by every Evangelist to show an unbiassed
soul, that He, whom they all described, was God manifested in
the flesh. Nevertheless it remains true, that each has his own
proper and peculiar line ; that what has been already stated is
the grand characteristic testimony of those inspired writers ;
and that in this lies the real key, not only to the differences of
language in what are called parallel passages, but also, as I
believe, to whatever is inserted or omitted in the several Gos-
pels. The Holy Ghost may allude to other glories of the Lord,
in a biography which is specially devoted to trace Him in one
very prominent character ; and with perfect wisdom He has
thereby cut off the objection that the writers differed in their
comparative estimate of the Lord. Not one of the Gospels, for
instance, fails to notice His inflexible obedience, whatever the
office sustained, whatever the light in which He was regarded.
He could not but shine in this moral perfectness ; yet even here
the attentive reader may perceive that it is pre-eminently Luke,
whose business it was to illustrate His real and untainted
humanity, as the obedient " Second Man," the Lord from heaven,
in contrast with the first man, rebellious Adam : in a word, as
the woman's Seed, rather than, as in ]\Iatthew, the true Messiah
and rejected Emmanuel.

It is familiarly known that Matthew and Luke furnish t^vo
distinct pedigrees from David, the latter Nathan's line, the for-
mer Solomon's, which was the elder, and of course, Jewishly,
the more important branch. As was usual in legal genealogies,
the line of the husband is given by ]\Iattliew, who for the same
reason records tlie supernatural dreams of Joseph ; whereas in
Luke ]\Liry is everywhere the more prominent personage of
the two, and accordingly, as showing the source of His human
nature, the genealogy here given is that of His mother. Hence,
it is said by Luke, w vi6c, u; ivofj,i^iTo, raZ 'luar,!p, x. r. X., that is,
reputedly, or in the eye of the law, He was son of Joseph, but

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. rn

in fact, Mary's, as had been carefully shown in the preceding
chapters. Thus, it is plain that there is nothing contradictory
in these various accounts ; nay, that each is as and where it
ought to be, and is found in that Gospel whose character
demands it, and there only. The Messianic descent of ]\Iatthew
would be out of place in Luke, as the last Adam genealogy of
Luke would not suit the historian who speaks emphatically of
the Messiah, His relation to the Jews, His rejection, and con-
sequently the transition to a new dispensation, which was to go
on in mystery and patience, before the Son of man returns to
establish it in manifestation and power ; of which last phase the
prophets had treated. Luke, on the other hand, was inspired
to develope the great principles of God's grace towards man, and
the broader moral grounds which they assume ; and this is so
true that, in the body of his Gospel, events are grouped in their
moral connections, not in their chronological sequence, save
where this is required for the truth of the narrative.

BAPTIZED FOR THE DEAD.

1 Corinthians xv. 29. — Some find great difficulty in un-
derstanding this scripture. But I rather see no reason for
doubting that an old and common interpretation is the best, as
it certainly flows from the obvious construction, and a very
ordinary meaning of the words employed. After the positive
revelation in verses 20-28, the apostle resumes his argument
with £/' o/.w; Mixgo] oux. \y. which he had pressed in verse IG, with
its consequences as to Christ, themselves, and the dead. Here
the apostle repeats the phrase of that verse, in view, first, of
those who take the place of those who were fallen asleep in
Christ ; and, secondly, of a lot in this life most miserable, if hope
be there only. Compare 29 with 18 and 30 with 19. To enter
the company of such, if the dead rise not, would be folly indeed.
Every proper lexicon or grammar w^ill show to those who may

278 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

not be aware already, that t/-jf has regularly and not infrequently
the sense " in the place or stead of," which here, in my opinion,
accords best with the previous context, the general reasoning,
and the actual phraseology of this particular verse, hhrm is of
course to be read at the end rather than rm vv/.ouv, as having the
largest support of the best authorities, MSS. versions and fathers,
A question might arise, as it has arisen, whether the first note of
interrogation ought to follow /Sacrr. or I7. ; but the substantial
sense remains tlie same.

PERFECT, NOT SINLESS.

Matthew v. 48 ; 1 John iii. 9.— The first of tliese texts has
no bearing whatever on the question of perfection in the flesh.
It is the revelation of the name of our Father which is in
heaven, and the character practically which suits the kingdom
of heaven. The mere Jew was responsible to render testimony
to the righteousness of Jehovah ; the believer now is responsible
to show forth the grace of " our Father." Vengeance on the
Canaanites was then a righteous thing ; now " if, when ye do
well and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with
God." The children are bound to sustain the family character,
" that ye may be the children of your father which is in heaven,
for He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and
sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. . . . Be ye therefore
perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."
Other Scriptures prove, if proof were needed, that sin still abides
in the saint here below, however bound he is to disallow and
mortify it. This text simply exhorts us to imitate our Father's
grace, even to tliose who deserve His judgment.

The other Scripture (1 John iii. 9) regards the child of God
in that point which distinguishes him from the world, in the
possession of a life from God which is absolutely sinless. No
intelligent Christian \yi]l therefore forget that the flesh is still
in us, though we are no louger in the flesh, but in tlie Spirit.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 279

MY BRETHREN.

Matthew xxv. 40. — I think that it is clear and certain that
those whom " the King " designates as His brethren here, are
a distinct class from the sheep. It is not denied that all God's
saints are, or may be, viewed as " sheep." All that is now con-
tended for is, that in this scene we have certain godly Gentiles
blessed and inheriting the kingdom prepared for them from the
foundation of the world, but at the same time distinguished
from others styled the King's brethren, who had previously put
these sheep to the test, and been the occasion of showing tlieir
difference from the goats, or the unbelieving Gentiles, who had
dishonoured the King in His messengers. I add that the scene
is a,^ millennial one ; not the gathering of tlie saints risen or
changed before the millennium ; not the judgment of the dead
after it, but a scene on earth of living nations dealt with accord-
ing to their reception or rejection of the King's brethren just
before this judgment (Matt. xxiv. 14).

THE MOUNT OF OLIVES CLEFT.

Zechariah xiv. 5. — It is evident, I think, that Azal is the
name of a place, joined, as its origin indicates, or near, to the
Mount of Olives. As it never occurs elsewhere in the Bible as
a proper name, save of a person, it is not surprising that com-
mentators have differed as to its exact locality, some placing it
at the eastern, others, as Henderson, at the western extremity,
very close to one of the gates on the east side of Jerusalem.

The meaning I believe to be that Jehovah, standing in that day
on the mount (which is most precisely described, as if to cut off
the idea of mere "beautiful poetical imagery") shall cleave it
in twain from west to east, half receding towards the north, and
half towards the south ; and that, if He fights with the nations
which shall be then gathered against Jerusalem to battle, the

28o BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

Jews are to flee to the valley of His mountains (so called
because thus wonderfully cloven), for the valley reaches to
Azal, whether it be considered as the terminus a quo or ad quem.
The earthquake referred to is the same signal one from which
Amos dates his prophecy. The Vulgate, it may be observed,
takes !?V? as an appellative, and gives us " usque ad proximum ;"
the Septuagint agrees with the authorised and most other ver-
sions as to this, but apparently follows the erroneous reading
CDripjl (which is actually that of four of De Eossi's MSS. not to
speak of other authorities), instead of DripJl, ie, the Septuagint
gives (p^ayj'hairai n pagay'^, x. r. X. (the valley shall be stopped up,
etc.) in verse 5, which is evidently contrary to the best readings,
and to the plain force of the context. It is scarcely needful to
say that this prophecy has never been fulfilled. Even suppos-
ing that the Eoman army under Titus could be meant, as Dr.
Henderson affirms, by " all the nations," it seems extraordinary
indeed that so sensible a person could see the rest of verse 2
accomplished there. I should have supposed that the im-
pression leit on the mind by the accounts of Josephus or any
one else was rather that the city was taken, and that if half the
people went into captivity, the rest were cut off from the city.

But if there could be reasonable doubt as to that verse, can
it be pretended that at that time (and it is all closely linked in
the prophecy; Jehovah fought with those nations, and that His
feet stood in that day on Olivet, and that the mount was split
in the midst ? It is a weak and impotent conclusion that the
flight to Pella, long before the city was taken by the Eomans,
is what is here so sublimely but withal most graphically pre-
dicted. When we take the latter part of the chapter into the
account, the hypothesis is beyond measure harsh and contrary
'■0 facts.

ILi.

It is only needful to add that the sense seems to require us
. |, v,one paragraph with " the days of Uzziah, King of Judah,"

in us

° Tin a new one with " And Jehovah my God shall come
I, thou^ . *'

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 281

[and] all the holy ones "o-ith thee." The prophet suddenly
addresses the Lord, and then proceeds with that day from a
point of view which differs altogether from the preceding
section, because it introduces His relationship permanently
established with the whole earth, consequent on His vengeance
upon the nations.

GREATER THAX JOHN THE BAPTIST.

Matthew xL 2, 3. — I apprehend that one reason which has
hindered many from seeing the failure of John Baptist is, that
we are all slow in learning and owning our own weakness. The
heart that has proved its own faltering in devotedness and
testimony for Christ, will readily understand how John, as
well as his disciples, may have been cast down, when the herald
of Messiah was himself bound and gone to prison in sorrow,
instead of the ransomed of the Lord coming to Zion with songs
and everlasting joy upon their heads. But if the Lord notices
indirectly, in verse 6, the stumbUng of His tried servant (or
certainly the blessedness of him who is not stumbled). He turns
round to the multitude and graciously indicates the more than
prophet place of John. I do not believe that verse 11 contains
the least reflection on the Baptist, any more than verse 13 does
on all the prophets. On the contraiy, the former verse asserts
for him the most distinguished place possible in the old
economy ; while it discloses at the same time th^ surpassing
glory which attaches to the least in the kingdom of heaven {i.e.
the new dispensation, which was then preached, but only set
up when the Lord, rejected by the earth, took his seat in heaven).

I am aware that some shrink from what appears such strange
and undue exaltation of the Xew Testament saints ; but our
wisdom is to accept whatever God gives in sovereign love. It
is His to order all for the glory of His Son, while Satan would
cheat us of His blessings through a spurious humility, which is
really unbelief; especially as the privileges given are the

282 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

measure of responsibility. If we lose sight of what God in-
tends, we shall proportionately fail in our walk and worship.

HE THAT LETTETH.

2 Thessalonians ii. 6-8. — It appears to me that the Spirit
here treats of the restraining influence and person with a certain
studied obscurity, and that, if wise, we should not too hastily
form conclusions. It must be borne in mind that the epistle
was an early one, written to young converts who had enjoyed
the apostle's oral teaching on the subject of the kingdom of
the Lord Jesus (cf. Acts xvii. 7, with 2 Thess. i.), as well as on
the matter in question (ver. 5). Further, if we attach any value
to the idea, so prevalent in the early church, that the Eoman
empire was " the letter," or " what withheld," it is natural that
the intimation should be but dim, especially if previously taught
by the apostle. If the hindrance consisted in the presence and
power of the Holy Ghost, whether personally in the church or
governmentally in the world, one can understand how nothing
more is here given than the assurance of a restraint up to a
certain point. Thus, while the powers that be (whatever the
form) are ordained of God, there is a time coming, as we know
from Eev. xi.-xiii., when this shall cease, and the beast shall rise
out of the bottomless pit {i.e. be resuscitated by diabolic agency
in an exceptional and frightful way), when the dragon {i.e. Satan)
gives him his power and his throne and great authority. The
withholder will have then disappeared, or at least cease to act
as such. The apostasy will have come, and the man of sin be
revealed in the fullest way : for I do not deny a partial applica-
tion of the prophecy to the papacy, while looking for a far more
complete development of the evil. The revelation of tlie law-
less one, who is clearly, I think, " the king " of Daniel xi. 36-
40, will be characterised by an unprecedented energy of Satan
" with all power, and signs, and lying wonders," similar language

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 283

as St. Peter uses of Jesus, " a man approved of God " by miracles,
and wonders, and signs which God did by him. It is quite
a mistake to suppose that verse 6 will bear "and ye know
what is now restraining ;" for vZv is here a particle of transition,
and fairly enough given in the English version. No more is
implied than their general knowledge that there was a some one
or thing which restrained ; but 6 xarj;)^wi' a^r/ in verse 7 does
mean that he restrains now. Next, 1% iiUm is correctly rendered
" out of the way." It is its regular known force in sacred and
profane authors, whether connected or not with verbs implying
separation, as any good lexicon may satisfy any one. Thus, in
l-K Tou iMsaou xadi^sgdai (Herod, iii. 83) the verb has nothing to do
with that sense, which the phrase does carry. See also Dem.
323, 327 (Eeiske). Accordingly the authorised version rightly
connects lug !■/. /m. y. with 0 xar£;!(;;wi/, while the beginning of verse
8 answers to the beginning of the 7th. If the phrase 'i^g l-/. /x. 7.
applied to " the wicked one," and meant " till he appears," the
force of Ka) TOTS dmx. would be weakened and useless.

FULL ASSURANCE.

Allow me to suggest that the common thought as to this
phrase in Scripture is incorrect. It is not true that " full assur-
ance of understanding " is the first of the three mentioned
by St. Paul, but the last and highest. "Full assurance of
faith " is the first : it rests upon the blessed work and sacrifice
of Christ as a finished and accepted thing (Heb. x.) The next
is "full assurance of hope," which looks for and anticipates with
joy the time of glory and the inheritance of the promises (Heb.
vi.) "Full assurance of understanding" supposes intelligence
of God's ways in their height and depth, as developed in the
mystery of Christ's heavenly glory, or, as it is said, "to the
acknowledgment of the mystery of God." How many there are
who are perfectly clear as to their acceptance, and who enjoy

284 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

the hope of Christ's return and reign, and yet are most in-
distinct and iininstructed in "the mystery," as taught in
Ephesians and Colossians. So utterly false is it that "the full
assurance of understanding," spoken of in CoL ii. gives birth to
the other two.

CITY OF EEFUGE.

Joshua XX. 6. — The true application of the type is, I believe,
not to departed spirits, but to the Jews, who are providentially
kept of God, but kept withal out of their inheritance, until the
close of the High-priesthood which Christ is now exercising in
heaven. He will then come out and bless the people of Israel,
to whom the glory of the Lord shall appear. They knew not
what they did when they smote and killed the Prince of Life.
In the city of refuge they remain till the close of Christ's
(heavenly) priesthood, after which they are to return to the
land of their possession. See Numb. xxxv. 25, 28.

THE SAVIOUE OF ALL MEK

The apostle had been showing how little profit there is in
bodily exercise, whereas godliness is valuable for all things,
having the promise of the life that now is, and of that which is
to come. This he pronounces a faithful word, and worthy of all
acceptation : the reason appears in our verse. For therefore we
both labour and suffer reproach (painful as it may be for the
present), because our settled hope is in the living God, who is
the preserver of all men, specially of the faithful. The question
here is of His preserving care, and not of salvation only ; and
this the apostle shows to be most true of those who are most
tried by reason of their faithfulness. 1 Tim. iv.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIOXS. 285

DEATH ABOLISHED.

2 Timothy i. 10.— In this scripture our Saviour is repre-
sented as having abolished death (here personified, as is sin in
Piom. vii.) Of course this does not mean that men no lon<Ter
die a3 a fact, but that He has annulled the title of death as
regards His own ; as in Heb. ii. it is declared He took part of
flesh and blood, "that, through death, he might destroy
{7.aTaoyi]6ri, the Same word as here) him that had the power of
death, that is, the devil." But He has done more : He has
brought to light life and incorruption (the body being in ques-
tion, and not the soul only) through the gospel. It is not said
nor meant that either was absolutely hidden, for enough was
suggested for the faith of God's elect to show that resurrection
and heaven were in His mind, and not earthly blessing only,
as Matt. xxii. 23-33, and Heb. xi. abundantly prove. Never-
theless, under the law, these were obscure subjects, because the
ordinary and normal application of the law was found in pre-
sent visible rewards or punishments from a God who dwelt
between the cherubim on earth. The gospel does not speak of
life and incorruptibility as utterly unknown before : on the
contrary, it supposes them to have been partially seen gleaming
here and there through the darkness ; whereas now they stand
out in bold relief, the grand theme of evangelic testimony, as
viewed in the person of the Lord Jesus. " Which thing," as St.
John says, " is true in Him and in you, because the darkness is
passing, and tlie true light now shineth."

THE DAY OF THE LORD.

2 Peter iii. 10.— I think it will be found that, while all three
Scriptures are equally inspired, and tlierefore certainly and
unmixedly true, our text takes a middle place, as to measure of
light given, between the prophecy of Isaiah (Ixv. Ixvi., to which

286 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

the reference is clear) and the Apocalypse. And this exactly
accords with its season historically. The Apostle of the Cir-
cumcision adds to the light we might have gathered from the
Jewish prophet ; for he discloses new heavens and new earth,
not merely in a moral and incipient way, which finds its centre
if not its scope, in the millennial condition of Jerusalem and
her people, but in a full, physical sense, consequent upon the
day of the Lord wherein the heavens pass away and the earth
is burned up. But it was not the business of Peter but of John
to lay down the positive landmarks of time, though he does not
give us certain elements with more precision than the Old Tes-
tament promise he refers to. Accordingly it is in the Apoca-
lypse that we meet the unambiguous statement that the reign
of Christ and the glorified saints for 1000 years, besides a brief
space after that, takes place after the partial accomplishment of
Isa. Ixv. and before the fulfilment of Eev. xxi. 1. It appears to
me that 2 Peter iii. embraces both these thoughts within the
compass of " the day of the Lord," which is used in the largest
application of the term, so as to include the acorn of Isaiah and
the full-grown oak of St. John, who alone was given to see, or
at least to make known, the exact times and seasons and years
connected with the entire scheme. If we bear in mind that the
millennium is styled " the regeneration " in Matt, xix., it may
help us to see that the difficulty is not insuperable. " If any
man be in Christ he is a new creature," or there is a new crea-
tion. That work done in the soul, one can take up the language
of faith and say, " Old things are passed away ; behold, all
things are become new : " while yet it is evident that, as to fact,
the full change does not pass over the man until the coming of
the Lord.

Just so is it with the earth : — the millennium is " the re-
generation," and so, even then, Isaiah can speak those rapturous
words which, nevertheless, will not have their actual physical
completion till that dispensation is closed. Besides, if the latter

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 287

is to be insisted on, Mr. B. has no right to include the millen-
nial Palestine, or M'hat he calls " the earthly paradise," among
" all these things " that shall be dissolved : for Peter is speaking
solely of present things, or things of a like nature, whereas the
hypothesis Mr. B. combats supposes a vast and essential differ-
ence, at least as to Palestine, commenced at the beginning and
complete at the end of the day of the Lord ; not as regards that
land only, but the earth and the heavens as a whole. Now it
is of the last or perfect change that Pev. xxi. 1 speaks, as it is
there that we get the fullest light which revelation affords on
this subject. And I must remind him of Bengal's wholesome
words, " Antiqui et ea autem et involutiora dicta ex novissimis
quibusque et distinctissimis interpretari, non illis ad hsec ener-
vanda et eludenda abuti debemus." Isaiah Ixv. and 2 Peter iii.
give no countenance to, while Pev. xx. xxi. positively excludes
the wild fancy which has been revived, after a long slumber,
that tlie nations, Gog and Magog, are the wicked dead resusci-
tated. And this is only one of the many absurdities into M'hich
a departure from the plain drift of these chapters reduces the
wanderer.

THE MILLENNIUM.

2 Peter iii. 12. — 1. The Millennium does not precede, nor is
it subsequent to, but rather included in, "the day of God," as
used here by St. Peter. That day means, as I suppose, the entire
course of divine intervention, from the appearing of Christ in
glory till the new heavens and earth. The millennial reign is a
part of that grand scheme. Nor is there any serious difficulty
in accounting for the existence of Gog and Magog (Eev. xx.),
and of sin and death, up to the close of that reign ; because,
even supposing none left alive in their natural bodies on earth
at its beginning, save the righteous, it does not follow tliat their
children must be. So that one can readily see how, during so

288 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

long a period of unbroken peace and blessing, there might be
hosts of unconverted Gentiles, on whom Satan, when loosed,
immediately acts in deceit, mustering them for the last rebellion
against God. I must be excused if I think the solution which
Dr. Gumming endorses contrary to Scripture. I see no ingenuity,
but painful confusion, in viewing these nations, which are in
the four quarters of the earth, as similar to the dead in their
graves. Not the devil, but God, raises them, after all rebellion
is over.

2. I think some will find that the main root of their diffi-
culty lies in confounding the coming with the day of the Lord.
The early Church was taught to expect the coming of Christ as
that which might be at any moment ; while, on the other hand,
events were revealed as antecedent to the day of the Lord (not
the '^aDouala merely, but the sV/pai/g/a t^s 'zaoovala; a-jrou'), which
must necessarily occupy some years at least.

CONSCIENCE.

Scripture shows, I think, that conscience has a twofold
character, which is rarely distinguished : 1. Sense of responsi-
bility to God ; and 2, Knowledge of things as good or evil in
themselves. It is evident that Adam had the first character of
conscience in Eden as well as out of it ; but the second he had
not till the fall gave him a bad conscience. Previously he was
innocent, — not holy, but ignorant of evil, as an unfallen crea-
ture in the midst of what was very good. Before the fall he
did not know what lust was, nor anytliing else of what we call
moral evil. For the eating of the apple was evil, not in itself,
but by God's command to abstain.

EVERY FAMILY.

Ephesians iii. 15. — I humbly think that it is wrong to speak

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 289

of what we lose by giving up a wrong translation for a right
one ; and it is confessed that " every family " is here required.
Sure I am that the true rendering suggests not merely views
equally valuable, but much more so than tlie false one, which
has really confused and prejudiced the minds of Christians
against that which otherwise might have been apprehended and
enjoyed. I do not doubt that the phrase embraces the sum of
God's intelligent creation, at least what is blest, whether in the
heavens or on earth, angelic or human.

NATIONAL RESUERECTIOX.

Daniel xii. 2. — Many Christians, whose judgment is to be
respected, apply this passage to a literal resurrection. But they
are involved in difficulties, from which ingenuity essays in vain,
as I think, to extricate them. Instead of commenting on what
appear to me mistakes, let me state my firm conviction that a
national resuscitation of Daniel's people, i. e. Israel, is in question
here, as in Isa. xxvi. and Ezek. xxxvii. This being understood,
the entire context is plain. It is at the time of their deepest
distress that jNIichael stands up, and not merely are all those
elect Jews delivered who have been glanced at in the previous
parts of this prophecy, but many who are dispersed, as it were
buried, or at least slumbering, among the Gentiles, aM'ake, some
to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
(Compare Isa. Ixvi. suh Jincm.) Then follows the peculiar
blessedness of the " Maschilim," i.e. tlie understanding ones,
that instruct the mass in righteousness, who, instead of going
out like the moon, though it may appear again, shine as the
stars for ever and ever. This figurative application of a resur-
rection to Israel's circumstances at the close of the age is of
course perfectly consistent with a real bodily resurrection of
saints before, and of the wicked after, the millennium, as in Eov.
XX. 4-12.

u

290 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

I am aware of the assertion that the phrase n>)xi-n^s is never
used elsewhere in Hebrew as distributive of a general class
previously mentioned. But I believe it to be unfounded. The
reader has only to examine Joshua viii. 22, and he wiU see that
the pronoun is used in a similar way, Israel being the general
class, and the same expression as here taking it up distributively.
Accordingly, our English Bible in both cases, and in my
judgment rightly, translates " some . . . and some." Of course
it is not denied that in certain circumstances " these " and
" those " would well represent the meaning. My opinion is that
the other is an equally legitimate rendering wherever required
by the context, as I conceive it to be in both the texts cited.
And such, I find, is the view of the Vulgate and Luther as to
Dan. xiL 2.

Again, I have no sympathy with those who apply this verse to
mere temporal deliverance. But it is not a necessary inference,
on the other hand, that the words " everlasting life " imply a
resurrection-state. People forget that the saved Israelites in
question are supposed to possess eternal life, which certainly
may be before any change as to the body. It may help some
readers to notice a somewhat parallel case, both in good and
evil, as respects the Gentiles in Matt. xxv. 46. Plainly they are
the nations at the beginning of the millennium discriminated
as sheep and goats, and dealt with by the King without delay.
" And these shall go away into everlasting punishment ; but the
righteous into life eternal." So, when Israel reappears in that
day, sad examples are to be there, whose " worm shall not die,
neither shall their fire be quenched, and they shall be an
abhorring to all flesh ;" while others are to be brought an offer-
ing to the Lord, who shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for
trouble ; for they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and
their offspring with them. These awake to everlasting life ; the
others are abandoned to shame and everlasting contempt, apart
from the question of resurrection. It will be a time, not of

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 291

national deliverance merely, but of signal mercy and judgment
from God ; and this for Israel after their long sleep among the
Gentiles, as well as for such Jews as will have figured more in
the previous crisis in the land. The Maschilim seem to be a
special class still more distinguished (ver 3).

THE BIETH OF CHRIST MISTIMED.

In " The Phoenix," " a collection of manuscripts and printed
tracts, nowhere to be found but in the closets of the curious
(1707)," there is a paper with the above title, " proving that
Christ was not born in December." The book is not very
scarce, so I need not transcribe the article. The following is
the substance of it, which may prove interesting : —

" David divided the year's service of the priests into twenty-four
courses, and the eighth course fell to Abijah (1 Chron. xxiv. 10).

" The Jewish ecclesiastical year, commencing with the month Abib or
Nisan, nearlj' corresponding to our March, O.S., the eighth course would
occur at the end of June or at the beginning of July in our computation.

" Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, was of the course of Abia,
and as he was ministering, * in the order of his course ' (that is, in June
or July), when the angel appeared to him, and that immediately on his
return home his wife Elizabeth conceived, it follows that the conception
of John the Baptist was about Midsummer, where we place his birth.

" In the sixth month of Elizabeth's pregnancy (Luke i. 26-36), i.e.. in
December, where we place Christ's birth, the angel Gabriel announced to
the Virgin Mary that she should be the mother of the Christ ; and, counting
onward for nine months, we come to the month of September, and to the
Feast of Tabernacles, which was a type of the incarnation of the Son of
God, as the period of the Saviour's birth.

" In which feast-time of eight days, Christ pitched in the tabernacle
of His flesh amongst us, as appears, John i. 14 : ' And the Word was
made flesh (xa/ ictltivmgdi sv rj/j^Tv), and pitched his tabernacle amongst
us : ' He became a Sctenite. Thus (we) behold the sweet harmony
between the type and the thing typified, for Christ came not to break the
law, but to fulfil it."

292 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

The error appears to have arisen from supposing that Zacha-
rias was the high priest, in which case his ministry would have
occurred in September. [Is there any other thought of this
subject ?]

THE SUITABILITY OF THE EVANGELISTS.

As a preliminary to any detailed observations on the Gospels,
allow me briefly to notice the wisdom of the Spirit in the
choice of each workman for his work.

" Matthew, the publican," was not one whom man would
have selected as the apostle and biographer of the Messiah. At
first sight he might seem the least eligible for presenting the
Lord to the Jews, for, as a class, none were in such disrepute as
those Jews who consented to gather the taxes which the Eomans
imposed on their nation. But, regarded more closely, nothing
could have been in more admirable keeping with the line of
things which the Holy Ghost traces in his Gospel, for Jesus
there is not the Messiah only, but the rejected Messiah. His
rejection, with its grave and fruitful results, is just as much the
theme as His intrinsic claims, with all God's external attesta-
tions. And who so fit a witness oi the grace which would seek
the least worthy, if those " that were bidden" would not come,
as he who was called from the odious receipt of customs ?

In the second Gospel the Spirit is evidently developing the
perfectnoss of the Lord's ministry in word and deed. Now
" John, whose surname was Marlv," was just the right person for
such a task, always bearing in mind that none was fit unless
immediately inspired to write. But, among those who were so
empowered of God, John Mark was precisely the one fitted by
personal experience to appreciate, when the Spirit gave him to
indite that Divine account of the gospel-service of Jesus ; for he
had bitterly known what it was to put his liand to the plough
and look back, with its painful consequences on all sides (Acts
xiii.-xv.) But he had also learned, to his joy, and the blessing

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 293

of others, that the Lord can restore aud strengthen, giving us,
tlirough His grace, to overcome wherein we have most broken
down. This very Mark subsequently became a fellow-worker of
St. Paul, and a comfort to him, as much as earlier he had been
a sorrow (Col. iv.) " Take Mark," says he, in his last letter to
Timothy, " and bring him with thee ; for he is profitable to me
for the ministry."

For the writing of the third Gospel, again, Luke was mani-
festly the most appropriate instrument. From Col. iv. it would
seem that he was a Gentile, and by profession a physician, both
which particulars, as well as its dedication to Theophilus, won-
derfully harmonise with the way in which our Lord is there
depicted ; not so much the Messiah, nor the Servant, but " the
]\Lin, Christ Jesus," the Son of God born of the Virgin, in His
largest human relations, in His obedience and prayerfulness, in
llis social sympathies, in miracles of healing aud cleansing, in
parables of special tenderness towards the lost. It is this pro-
minence of our Lord's manhood, as brought out in Luke, which
to me accounts for the emphatic statements of grace to Gentiles,
as it falls in with the special form of his preface, which has
been so frightfully abused by rationalists in general, English or
foreign. He lets us know his motives, and seeks to draw Theo-
philus by the cords of a man ; but if there be thus a human side
of the picture, there is another as divine as in the other Gospels,
where the thoughts and feelings of the heart are not so laid bare.
The notion that such an opening, touchingiy suited as it is to
the way in which our Lord is throughout presented in this
Gospel, should induce us to regard the writer as a mere faithfid
and honest compiler, without supernatural guidance in the
arrangement of his subject-matter, etc., is worthy only of an
infidel. And it is only to cheat oneself or others with vain
words to affirm that the occurrence of demonstrable mistakes in
the Gospels does not in any M^ay affect the inspiration of the
Evangelists. The profanity of these statements scarcely exceeds

294 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

their folly, nor should I have taken this opportunity to de-
nounce them if they were not at this moment finding extensive
acceptance, especially among young students, not, alas ! without
the sanction of those who ought to know better.

Lastly, that St. John was eminently the right instrument for
his task is most apparent. Who could so fitly, if so it pleased
the Holy Ghost, set before us " the only begotten Son, which is
in the bosom of the Father," as he who leaned on Jesus' bosom,
— the disciple whom Jesus loved ?

CHOICE OF SCENE.

It is the difference of design, which, to me, solves the difficulty
stated by one objector or another. Matthew and Mark, in the
body of their Gospels, are occupied with the Lord's sojourn and
ministry in Galilee ; Luke with not that only, but His gradual
journey to Jerusalem (ix. 51 ; xiii. 22 ; xvii. 11 ; xviii. 31 ;
xix. 28) ; and John with His ways and words in or near Jerusalem
itself yet more than elsewhere, though Galilee and Samaria were
assuredly not left out. "What Matthew describes is the accom-
plishment of Jewish prophecy and the witness of Jerusalem's
unbelief ; while Mark's dwelling on the same arose, I think,
from the fact that Galilee was the actual scene of our Lord's
service, to which theme his Gospel is emphatically devoted.
Luke, on the other hand, brings out the lingering of our Lord's
love and pity ; His face is steadfastly set on the place where
He should accomplish His decease ; but His slow steps attest
the reluctance and the sorrow with which He visits Jerusalem
for the last time, and affords the crowning proof of man's total
ruin, in His blood and cross. John, finally, regards every place
and being in the light of His personal Divine glory. Jerusalem,
therefore, is no longer, as in Matthew, styled " the holy city."
He was the light, the true light ; all outside, and everywhere
else, was but darkness, and Jerusalem needed the Son of God
as much as Galilee, and was no more to Him, in that point of

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 2^^

view, than any other spot. He could, so far as Himself was
concerned, freely speak and work there or anywhere. What
was " this mountain," nay, what Jerusalem, to the Son of the
Father ? If there was nothing to attract, there was nothing in
one sense which could repel. He who was full of grace and
truth accepted His entire humiliation, and found objects on
which to expend His love wherever He might move — in the
boastful city of holiness no less than in the barren wilderness.
It is the design impressed by God upon the several Gospels
which thus simply explains a fact which is seen by, but useless
to, him who denies that design.

THE STRAIT GATE.

V Luke xiii. 24. — Strive to enter in at the strait gate : for many, I say
unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.

The true solution I believe to lie not in the difference of
striving and seeking, on which some have rested unduly, and
others so mistakenly as in effect to make men their own
saviours, but rather in this, that, while many will seek to enter
in, it is not at the strait gate but by some method of human
device. The natural heart dislikes God and God's way, and it
easily deceives itself into a vague reliance on mercy without
righteousness, which is an infidel thought, or into a vain con-
fidence in religious ordinances, which is a superstitious one : in
either way, man is lost. People might like to enter the king-
dom, but not by regeneration through faith in Christ.

THEY SHALL RECEIVE YOU.

Luke xvi. 9. — Dean Alford's note is most objectionable in
point of doctrine, as betraying no little ignorance of the true
grace of God, whilst it displays also lamentable lack of acquaint-
ance with the style of St. Luke. If one examine Luke vl 38,

296 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

44 ; xii. 20 ; xiv. 35, etc., he will perceive tliat Dean A.'s over-
siglit of the urns loquendi has opened the door for the wild notion
that poor and needy friends, who have been helped here, are to
receive ns into the, or their, everlasting tabernacles with joy.
It is clear that the difficulty is no greater as to "they shall
receive," in Luke xvi. 9, than in " they require " (a'xaiTtiZetv), in
chap. xii. 20. The meaning is simply " ye shall be received,"
" thy soul is required : " if more be meant, it is God, not man,
who receives and requires. The grand point is the sacrifice of
the present, in view of what is future and eternal. The question
is not the means or title to enter the everlasting habitations, but
the character of those who shall be received there.

PRIYATE INTERPRETATION.

2 Peter i. 20. — Permit me briefly to show why I consider the
common view to be erroneous. In the first place it gives no
reason for taking T^o^^jrg/a as equivalent to an inspired declara-
tion, predictive or not. Indeed, I am not aware that the word
in the New Testament ever has this loose meaning, and I am
quite clear that the verb from which it is derived countenances
nothing of the sort in 1 Cor. xiv. 3, but simply contrasts pro-
phesying with speaking in a tongue. In other words, that verse
in no wa}'- defines prophesying, but compares its character with
the gift of tongues. But, even if it were ever so used beyond a
doubt in the New Testament, I am of opinion that the context
here decidedly restricts ToofYirsia to the revelation of future
events.

It is agreed that l-riXusig means interpretation, or the act of
interpreting, though some, as Calvin and Grotius, have been rash
enough to venture on the conjecture iTrik-jomi, and many more
have given the force of " movement " to W/Xutr/?, while it would
really require i'^rriX-jai; ( = approach), or some such word.

The main question remains as to the force and reference of

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 297

'ihoi. One critic reasons from its frequent opposition to xmog.
But this is too narrow a foundation, because each of these words
possesses significations not thus opposed. The fact is that, be-
side tlie elliptical xar' /'o/av, "m:, occurs near a hundred times in
the New Testament, and always means " own " (his, her, its, etc.,
according to the case). I have little doubt, both from geneml
usage and from the verses before and after the passage under
debate, that /^/as here refers to the subject of the sentence,
•^riofrireia, and that the meaning is, " No prophecy of Scripture is
(or is made) of its own interpretation." Taken by itself, it is
not its own interpreter, but must be viewed as part of a grand
whole, whereof Christ's glory is the centre. I must be excused,
therefore, if I believe the idea of some to be as thorough a perver-
sion of the text as the Romish one. One contends for the general
right^of man, they for the exclusive prerogative of the church
so-called — both, in my judgment, dangerous errors, however con-
cealed or explained. The Holy Ghost leads us to connect facts
with God's purposes in Christ, and thus to understand and ex-
pound prophecy, which taken by itself is never rightly known.
Even Eosenmuller, "\Yahl, etc., seem to agree with the view here
contended for.

THE VINE OF THE EARTH.

Rev. xiv, 19. — " The vine of the earth " is the symbol of
earthly religion in its last apostate state. Christ, the Lord from
heaven, is the true vine ; this is the false vine, the scene of
whose judgment appears to be Jerusalem (cf. verse 20). Where
Christ suffered, where the church of God first saw the light, it
would seem that Satan will at the close completely triumph. It
is important to note that it is a distinct and subsequent scene to
the fall of Babylon, given already in the same chapter. If Rome
be, as I believe, the centre of one picture, Jerusalem is, I think,
of the other, the metropolis respectively of Gentilism and
Judaism in their antagonism to God at the end of the age.

298 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

THE SPIRIT AND THE BRIDE SAY, COME.

Revelation xxii, 17. — I do not wonder that there are
difficulties felt in accepting the interpretation of those who
apply this verse exclusively to the Lord or to sinners. The
truth is that the former portion refers to the one, and the latter
to the other. Nothing can be sweeter nor clearer when seen.
Jesus had just announced Himself as not merely the root and
the offspring of David, but the bright and morning star. Im-
mediately the church, with the bridal affections, says, Come. It
is the Bridegroom that thus awakens her desires that He should
come. He is the first object of the heart, and lest it should be
thought to be a mere human, unsanctioned longing, it is added,
" The Spirit and the bride say, Come."

But there are many who have heard His voice and been
washed in His blood who yet feebl}^ know their privileges in
Him ; they little if at all appreciate what He is as the Bride-
groom, what they are as His bride. Are these to be silent ?
Nay, " let him that heareth say, Come." They may know his
love but imperfectly : still let them not fear to say, Come.

But does not such a hope, such a waiting of the heart,
hinder one's yearning after poor souls ? Enemies have said so,
mistaken friends may have thought so ; but God links the two
most blessedly together. If the bride, if the individual saint,
owe the first love of the heart to Him who is coming to meet
us in the air, so much the more can we turn round to the needy
world and invite him that is athirst to come (not to say, Come,
which to him, indeed, were but judgment). Nay, even if I meet
a soul who perhaps has not yet known real soul-thirst, yet is
willing, I can bid him freely welcome : " whosoever will, let him
take the water of life freely." It is a perfectly beautiful scene,
which the Lord grant us better to know and enjoy by the Holy
Ghost !

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 299

ZECHARTAH XII.

One asks : 1. What will determine, even approximately, the
date of this prophecy ? It is evident that the date assigned in
some Bibles (b. c. 587) is a mistake ; probably b. c. 517 was
meant, which would better accord with the previous dates 520-
518 B. c. The Edinburgh Bible of Blair and Bruce, like that of
the London Tract Society, gives the date according to your cor-
respondent. On the other hand, the Oxford Bible (4to, 1845)
gives a century nearer Christ, i. e. 487, both of which seem to
me highly improbable ; while Bagster's Bible, after dating
several of the preceding chapters B. c. 518, suddenly fixes chap,
xiv. at B. c. 587 ; and Collins's Bible (1855) is equally strange,
putting B. c. 587 to the preceding chapters, and E. c. 5l7 to chap,
xiv. ! For myself, I see no reason to doubt that Zech. ix.-xiv.
form a part of the great prophecy which commences with chap,
vii. ; and I conceive that they may have been given in or not
long after the fourth year of Darius Hystaspes. (Compare Ezra
V.) To put this prophecy as far back as the reign of Nebuchad-
nezzar is, in my opinion, of all hypotheses the least reasonable.

2. The " idol shepherd " is Antichrist, whom retributive
judgment is to raise up in the land of Judea in the last times.
" If another shall come in his own name, him ye Nvill receive."
He shall in the end suffer the sternest vengeance of God. This
is no modern opinion.

Pastor stultus, et imperitus (says Jerome, Comment, in Zech. lib. iii.
cap. xi,), baud dubium quia Anticliristus sit, qui in consummatione muudi

dicitur esse venturus et qiialis ventunis sit, indicatur Iste pastor

ideo resurgat in Israel, quia verus pastor dixerat : Jam non pascam vos.
Qui alio nomine et in Daniele propheta (cap. ix.) et in Evangelio (Marc,
xiii.) et in epistola Pauli ad Thessalonienses (2 Thess. ii.), dbominatio
desolationis, sessurus in templo Domini, et se facturus ut Deum, qui et per

Isaaiam magnus sensus dicitur (Isai. xxxii.) Tam sceleratus est

pastor, ut non idolorum cultor, sed ipse idolum nominetur, dum se appellat
Deum, et vult ab omnibus adorari.

30O BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

3. There is no reason that I see for identifying the stone in
Zech. xii. 3 with that in Matt. xxi. 44 Tiie former evidently
means Jerusalem itself, the latter the Lord Himself in two
positions, answering to the two advents. First in His humilia-
tion, He is a stone as it were in the ground, and " whosoever shall
fall on it shall be broken," verified in all unbelievers, but
especially in the Jews ; next, He is exalted to heaven, and
coming again in power and great glory. He will execute de-
structive judgment — " on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind
him to j)owder." (Cf. Dan. ii. vii. ; Eev. xix.) " A burdensome
stone " is another idea, and will be true of Jerusalem in the
latter day, when the Assyrian heads a grand Geutile confederacy
after the Antichrist is disposed of, which is the subject of Zech.
xii. 2-6, xiv. 1-3 : also Isaiah, Micah, Daniel, and other
prophets, treat of this closing king of the North.

4. There is no intermingling of the church or Christian
body with the subjects of this prophecy. There may have been
some partial application in the past, as there will assuredly be
a complete fulfilment in the future ; but it is Judali and
Jerusalem that are in question, whatever profit the church
or Christian may and ought to draw from this as from all
Scripture.

5. The double reference of John xix. 36, and Eev. i. 7, is
s?imply to link both advents into the prophecy, which mainly
bears on the second, but presupposes the first. " They shall look
upon Me whom they have pierced." Bat Eev. i. 7 is so far
from intimating a general conversion of mankind previous to the
return of the Lord, that it plainly enough insinuates their then
unbelief, for " all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of
him." He will be unwelcome to them.

6. The mourning of godly awakened consciences, when
Jehovah-Jesus is seen, to the final deliverance of Jerusalem and
the total overthrow of all their Gentile foes, is most strikingly
described in verses 10-14, but it is in terms which exclude the

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

revival in Ezra's time, save as being a feeble earnest. Each felt
alone with the Lord ; and those families are specially named
who represent prominent classes in Israel from the beginning,
and throughout their history.

THE RESUREECTION OF THE BODY.

The doctrine of the future state was taught in the Pentateuch,
as well as in later parts of the Old Testament. It is absurd to
pretend that Psa. xvi. 9, 10 ; xvii. 14, 15 ; xlix. 14, 15, were
written after the Captivity ; or to deny that they reveal or
imply the resurrection. There is no sort of difficulty in sup-
posing that Zoroaster borrowed what he knew of this truth from
Holy Writ, which was certainly more or less known to him. I
am not at all disposed to give up Job xix. 26, 27 ; for I think
it a decisive testimony to this precious truth, and the more
striking as proving it to be held by saints outside the fathers, or
the children of Israel : so that this again would readily account
for traces of its traditional existence in the East long before the
Captivity. In spite of all the assaults of critics, I am satisfied
that, in all that is needed for bringing out a true bodily revival
wherein the patriarch expected to see the Piedeemer stand on the
earth, the English Bible gives the substantial truth. So does
the Septuagint, in spite of inaccuracies — alha ya^ on dswaor. hnv

6 ixXvsiv [li fJbsXXuv iTi yrig dvaar^aai rb Bsg/xa fiou to dvavrXoZv raZra.
So Jerome, in his interlinear exposition of the book, gives a
version which is identical with his Vulgate save in the addition
of one word, though I allow that his Latin is far more distant
from the sense of the Hebrew than our authorised English. His
comment is plain enough : —

Ego, inquam,jam corruptus ulceribus, in hac came mortali incorniptus,
per resurrectionem futuram glorificatus viclebo Deiim. Certus atque in-
commutabilis in hoc fundamento fidei ista loquebatur.

De Wette, it is true, gives a very different turn, adopting a

io?. BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

sense of the last clause of ver. 26, suggested in our margin ; but
I unequivocally prefer the authorised text, for though jD often
occurs in the sense " out of," " without," " from," the meaning
is not that he should see God apart from the flesh, or having no
body, but that from out of the flesh he should see Him, or sub-
stantially " in his flesh." This is confirmed by the next verse,
" Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and
not another : " a real resurrection of the body, and nothing else.
I believe that Isa. xxvi. 19, like Dan. xii. 2, refers to the
national resuscitation of Israel, converted and restored by the
power of God. The terms are of course borrowed from, and
presuppose the known truth of, a bodily resurrection. See also
Ezek. xxxvii. and Hosea vi. 2, xiii. 14, which, in my opinion,
entirely relieve this interpretation from the charge of halting.
The omission of the words inserted by our translators may help
to make the meaning of Isaiah plainer.

THE INTERCESSION OF JESUS ON THE CROSS.

Luke xxiii. 34. — I am persuaded that it is perfectly true
that Christ is here presented as interceding for the guilty people
who took, and by wicked hands crucified and slew Him. The
grand design in this part of Luke is to bring out the iniquity of
Israel and the grace of Christ in spite of all. I say nothing of
" Pontius Pilate," who, indeed, would have released Him but for
fearing the Jews and CfEsar ; but it is evident to me that the
Holy Ghost by Peter expressly refers, in Acts iii. 17, to this
intercession of Jesus, and proves tliat the people of the Jews
and their rulers were intended. Further, the intercession did
prevail partially as to sphere then, as it will by and by triumph,
when " all Israel shall be saved." To lower the Lord's interces-
sion to the mere pattern of various eminent persons forgiving
their executioner, ought to be, in my opinion, repulsive to a
spiritual mind. It needs little argument to refute the notion.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 303

THE LAST DAY.

John vi. — It may help some of your readers to bear in mind
that " the last day " has a broad moral force, like " the day of the
Lord " in 2 Peter iii., save that it applies yet more extensively,
taking in the resurrection of the saints, which "the day of the
Lord " is nowhere said to embrace. Between John vi. 39, 40, and
John xii. 48, the Millennium (Rev. xx. 4, 5) intervenes, "the last
day " beginning a little before, and ending a little after it. It
is a vague, or general expression of the entire closing scene,
when man's day is over and God acts in power, whether in
blessing or judgment.

V THE DEPENDENT ONE.

Psalm xvi. 2, 3. — I am of opinion that the main idea of the
Psalm is the perfectness of Messiah's dependence on Jehovah,
shown in His humiliation here below (Heb. ii.), and vindicated
in His resurrection (Acts ii.) Hence it is that, while a divine
person, yet taking the place of a servant, His soul (for it is
feminine) said to Jehovah, " Thou art my Lord ; my goodness is
not to Thee." It is the expression of his self-renunciation as
man, which was in truth His moral glory. (Compare Mark x.
17-27 ; Luke xviii. 18, etc.)

On the other hand. He said, " To the saints who are in the
earth, and the excellent, All my delight is in them." This latter
was acted out in His baptism, when He thus fulfilled all right-
eousness and identified Himself in grace M'ith the godly in Israel.
As man. He did not exalt himself, but gave the entire glory to
God ; and this not in austere distance from the despised remnant
who bowed to the testimony of John the Baptist, but graciously
entering into and sympathising with their true place before
God. " He that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified, are all
of one."

304 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

THE FAITH.

Galatians iii. 23. — " Faith " is not here put for its object, I
think, but is contrasted with the law when fully declared to be
the sole means of justification, as it was after the cross of Jesus,
when all pretension to stand before God on the law was mani-
festly at an end. Faith was always that whereby saints were
justified really, even while the Levitical system had its place,
and, if I may so say, obscured the faith which wa's within :
then all that was outward fell, and the faith stood revealed.

THE SEPTUAGINT.

There can be no doubt of the fact that the Septuagint was
generally used by our Lord and the inspired writers of the New
Testament. But this fact ought not to be abused to the denial
of what is equally certain — that it contains numerous mistrans-
lations throughout, and is in no way to be compared for accuracy
with the authorised version. Nevertheless the Holy Ghost con-
descended to use it freely, adopting its language, where true,
even if it differed from the meaning of the Hebrew : just as
occasionally He gives a paraphrase which differs from both. It
was a most important witness already extant among the Gentiles,
and God employed it in grace without in any way guaranteeing
the inspiration of the LXX, or of their work. "What would be
thought of the argument that the works of Menander or Epi-
menides were inspired because the Holy Ghost cited them in the
Epistles of St. Paul? It was not an unnatural thing that the
early fathers, Greek and Latin, should attach an exaggerated
value to the version chiefly in use among them. Not even
Augustine knoM^ the Hebrew original, and of the Latins scarce
any save Jerome. It is much to be regretted that the idea
should be revived by a respectable scholar of our own day.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 305

WHO ARE "THESE KINGS?"

Daniel ii. 44. — The meaning is not the four kingdoms in
reference to the fourfold succession in the metallic image, but
rather, as it seems to me, an incidental allusion to the peculiar
and complex constitution of the fourth, last empire of man.
" The kingdom shall be divided," speaking of the feet and
toes (ver. 41), and to this we must refer, as I consider, " the
days of these kings " (ver. 44). The consequence is important ;
for thereby is excluded Mede's scheme of the regnum lapidis,
first ; and the regnum montis, by and by. I can understand this
in a certain sense ; but it is not the teaching, in my oj)inion, of
this chapter. God's kingdom, here described and symbolised
by the stone, is raised up not in the days of Augustus or
Tiberius, much less in those of Constantine, but in the days of
the decem-regal division of the Eoman Empire. (Compare Dan.
vii. 7-14, 23-26 ; Eev. xvii. 7-14.) The first exercise of its
power is to break in pieces and consume all existing empire ;
all, at least included in the prefigurations of the statue. There
is no such idea as the gradual action of the stone upon the statue ;
but a sudden and decisive judgment, which crumbles the statue
into dust ; after which, the stone which smote the image became
a great mountain, and filled the whole earth. Evidently this
is not the gospel which wins souls to Christ, and saves them ;
it is not a revolution, moral or material, which man brinjis about.
It is nothing less than the power of God administered by the
Lord Jesus ; the stone cut without hands, dealing with the
powers of the world, and judging their final antichristianism, in
order to make way for His own manifest and immediate domi-
nion. " And the Lord shall be King over all the earth : in that
day shall there be pne Lord, and His name one." I would add
my opinion, that " these kings," symbolically set forth, by the
toes here, and by the ten horns in Dan. vii., pertain exclusively
to the West or European part of the Eoman Empire. For we

X

3o6 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

must leave room for the destruction of what is represented by
the gold, silver, and brass, no less than for the portion of iron
and clay.

"THERE IS ONE BODY."

Ephesians iv. 4.

If our readers will dispassionately inquire into the testimony
of God's word, I am persuaded that they will distinguish, as
Scripture does, between the saints of the old Testament and those
who are now being baptized by the Holy Ghost into one body.
The question of the one body really turns on that baptism. For
those only who are baptized of the Spirit constitute that body
(1 Cor. xii. 13) ; and it is certain that this baptism did not exist
before the day of Pentecost. (Compare Acts i. and ii.) No one
denies that the Old Testament saints were born of the Spirit,
that they were justified by faith, or that we are to sit with them
in the kingdom of heaven.

But the New Testament shows that a corporate unity, over
and beyond their common privileges, was formed by the descent
of the Holy Ghost consequent on the accomplishment of redemp-
tion by the Lord Jesus Christ ; and this solely is called the " one
body." Ephesians ii. iii. iv. are most explicit as to this.

None are contemplated as members of this one new man,
save those in whom the Holy Ghost dwells, and so unites to a
glorified Head in heaven. Eor the union here spoken of is an
actual subsisting fact, and therefore incapable of being predi-
cated, as it never is in Scripture, of saints previously. They
had righteousness imputed to them, as it is to us ; but the Holy
Ghost was not then sent down, as he is now, to baptize Jews
and Gentiles that believe into one body.

Further, I am of opinion that Hob. xii. distinguishes in the
most positive way between " the spirits of just men made per-
fect" {i.e. the Old Testament saints) and the " church of the first

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 307

born, which are written in heaven." So that this text, with 1
Cor. xii. and Ephes. il-iv,, contradicts the ordinary confusion on
the subject.

PAEABLE OF THE VIRGINS.

Matthew xxv. 1-13. — Whether the lamps had gone, or
were only going out, makes no real difference as to the grand
teaching of the parable ; and, as far as this goes, either the
one or the other is quite compatible with the absence of oil.
The statement that the foolish "have some oil" is most
objectionable: not a word implies it; nay, what is said both
by the wise virgins and the Lord would imply the reverse,
even if we had not the plain and positive declaration that
the foolish "took their lamps and took no oil with them."
Why might not wicks be lit, and relit, without oil ? I agree
that " are going out " is a more correct rendering than the
ordinary version ; but it in no way shows that the virgins had
oil, or that they were more than professors without the Holy
Ghost, though responsible for and designated according to the
position they assumed.

As to the unconverted being called " virgins," there is no
more difficulty there than in the " servant " of the preceding par-
able. In either case they took that place, and were judged ac-
cordingly. There are Christians who love Christ's appearing in
the midst of much ignorance as to its details. There are pro-
fessors who talk much of the Second Advent, and hold it to be
premillenniaL But I assuredly believe that the former, if they
are alive and remain till the coming of the Lord, will be caught
up to meet Him, and that the latter, if they abide unregenerate,
must have their portion outside, where shall be weeping and
gnashing of teeth.

As unfounded is the idea that ray/iar/ in 1 Cor. xv. 23,

3o8 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

means "company," "band," "regiment," while fully admitting
of course that such is a frequent signification in profane authors.
But here the context is decidedly adverse, whether rl rsXog be
applied to the wicked dead, or to Christians uninstructed in the
Lord's second commgj and kingdom. All or most of the versions
at all known and accurate (as the Syriac, Vulgate, Beza, Luther,
De Wette, Diodati, Martin, Ostervald, the Lausanne, etc.) seem
to agree with the authorised version in giving " order." Indeed,
the way in which our Lord's resurrection is introduced appears
to me of itself to exclude such a translation ; for His resurrec-
tion is the first step, which perfectly agrees with " order," but
not with " company." Again, such a view necessitates the harsh-
est possible construction of " the end " {rh riXog)^ which, by a
figure, must be tortured to mean the good (or bad) who are raised
then ; whereas, in truth, it is most plain that " the end" is really
after the kingdom is given up, and, h fortiori, subsequent to all
judgment. The white-throne judgment of the dead is one of
the closing acts of the kingdom, after which cometh " the end."
Lastly, it would be incongruous to suppose that after " they that
are Christ's " rise, another regiment of Christ's should remain to
rise. Not a class, but an epoch, is meant by " the end ; " an
epoch subsequent to the resurrection of the wicked and their
judgment.

• " FOR EVER."

I am of opinion that e/'s Th dirivsxsg, " for ever," ought to be
construed in this verse, not with T^oasviyxai dvsiav, but with
ixdOissv x.T.X. (i.e. with "sat down"). It is not exactly a ques-
tion of the general sense, for there is good sense either way ; and
still less does it turn upon Greek construction, for the words
might be taken before or after the verb or participle, as it seems
to me. The real point is the special contrast of vers. 11, 12.
Instead of offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, Christ has

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 309

offered once : instead of standing daily ministering for man,
He has for ever sat down at the right of God. Of course this
expression, " for ever," is not absolute, but relative to the work
of atonement. He is seated in perpetuity before God, because
His sacrificial work is done perfectly for man. As to the abuse,
justly objected to, the aorist cuts off the force which Papists,
and those who think with them, might give it, for where con-
tinuous offering is intended the present tense is employed, as in
verse 1.

TEXTS MISAPPLIED OR MISQUOTED.

FALLEN FROM GRACE.

"Galatians v. 4. — Often quoted to prove that Christians may,
by falling into sin, jeopard the life which they have got in
Christ. But the text speaks of those who had appeared to
receive the Gospel letting slip the grand foundation of God's
grace for ordinances, or, in other words, abandoning the ground
oi faith for religiousness.

THE HOPE OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Galatians v. 5.— We through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteous-
ness by faith.

Not the hope of being justified ; for by Christ all that
believe are justified from all things. We are not waiting for
righteousness, for we are made the righteousness of God in
Christ ; but we wait for the hope which is suited to such a
righteousness, for a glorious resurrection or change, which is
the only adequate complement of what we have already in
Christ.

Ephesians i. 10. — The " dispensation of the fulness of times"
is often applied to God's present work in gathering the church,

3IO BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

and connected with Gal. iv. 4. But the bearing of the two texts
is totally different. Gal. iv. 4 refers to Christ sent here below ;
Ephes. i. 10 to the administration which will be in His hands
during the Millennium ; the one a past fact, the other future, and
both entirely distinct from the gathering of Jews and Gentiles,
who believe in one body, which is now going on between these
two points.

i. 23.—" The fulness of Him which filleth all in all ;" not of
God the Father, which the church is not nor can be, but the
fulness or complement of Christ, viewed as the glorified heavenly
man, whose body we are.

ii. 20. — Not Old Testament " prophets" and New Testament
" apostles," but " apostles and prophets" of the New Testament,
as is put beyond all doubt in chap. iii. 5, " as it is now revealed
unto His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit." It is a new
work built on a new foundation, Jew and Gentile being now
builded together for a habitation of God through the Spirit,
which was not the case in Old Testament times.

iii. 15. — Not the whole family, as in the English Bible, but
every family in heaven and earth, -^racra Trare/a, x.r.X., including,
I suppose, all the varieties of intelligent creation in heaven and
earth.

iv. 3. — " The unity of the Spirit," meaning of the Holy
Ghost, and not merely of our spirit.

V. 14. — The Scriptures alluded to seem to be Isa, Iii. and Ix.,
but the application here is clearly to believers slumbering
among dead men or things, from which they are called to arise,
that Christ may give them light, not life, which would be their
first need as unbelievers. Let me add, that in the parenthetical
ver. 9 the true idea and word is " the fruit of light is in all
goodness," etc.

vi. 2, 3. — St. Paul is not of course neutralising the grand
truth that we are not under law, but under grace. He is
simply showing how specially God owned obedience to parents

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 311

among those commandments which were addressed to the Jews,
and which held forth earthly blessing as their reward.

1 Corinthians ix. 27. — Often used to show that no believer
ought to be or can be sure of ultimate salvation : hence, as is
alleged, St. Paul was not. But it is clear that the question here
is not of life, righteousness, or salvation, but of services in the
Gospel and its rewards. Paul did not make himself servant
unto all, under law to the Jew, without law to the Gentile, to
save himself, but to save them. It was for the Gospel's sake,
not for his own ; and to this end serve the figures of a prize and
a crown. The word ah6-A.iiJ.oc, here translated a " castaway," and
elsewhere 'reprobate," "rejected," is I think limited by the
subject-matter. A servant might by carelessness lose a reward,
who nevertheless as a believer had everlasting life. See 1 Cor.
iii. 10-15.

1 Cor. xi. 28 ; 2 Cor. xiii. 5. — Tliese texts are sometimes
quoted to show that a Christian ought not to be sure, or, as
men say, too sure of his acceptance with God. But it is evi-
dent that tlie first was intended to lead the Corinthians to probe
their hearts, when disposed to deal lightly with the supper of
the Lord. No such thought occurs as an exhortation to duubt
God's grace, or their own security thereby. To eat the bread
or drink the cup lightly without consideration of what that
solemn feast sets forth was to deal unworthily : if one dis-
cerned not the body, it was to eat and drink judgment to one-
self, as was shown in many cases of judicial sickness and death
among them. For if Christians discerned themselves, i.e. the
hidden springs of their hearts and ways, they should not be thus
judged ; yet even where they were, it was the Lord's chasten-
ing, that they should not be condemned with the world. Even
where thus negligent and chastened, neither does the Lord con-
found the Christian, nor ought the Christian to confound him-
self, with the world. If he does, the true power of self-judg-
ment is gone. Still more explicit is 2 Cor. xiii. 5, however

312 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

familiarly used in the school of doubt. For let the context be
read, and it will be plain that Paul is proving his apostolate to
the Corinthians, who were seeking a proof of Christ speaking in
him. "Why, says he, examine yourselves : your own selves are
the best proof. If you are in the faith, I must be an apostle —
at least to you. (Cf. 1 Cor. ix. 2, 3.) The very last thing which
these high-minded questioners meant to do was to distrust their
own Christianity. Well, but, argues St. Paul, if you want a
proof about me, know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus
Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates ? Paul had no wish
to prove them reprobates ; but his argument leaves them no
escape. If they were in the faith, which neither they nor he
doubted, they proved his apostlesliip : if they were not, who
were they to examine him ? If verse 4 be taken parenthetically,
the sense is clearer.

2 Cor. vi. 1-i. — Be ye not unequally yoked together with
unbelievers — often applied to marriage with unbelievers. But
this is an error, though it is true that marriage ought to be
" only in the Lord," as is exhorted in 1 Cor. vii. The subject
is the ministry or service of Christ. In service and worsliip,
fellowship is forbidden with unbelievers, or unfaithful men. If
I, a servant of Christ, am among such, I am to come out. What
confirms it is — \sl, That a yoke is a scriptural badge of service,
not of marriage. 2f/, That the believing wife is not to be sepa-
rate from her unbelieving husband (1 Cor. vii. 10-16). On the
other hand, the true inference from 2 Cor. vi. is that all com-
munion between the Christian and the world, in the service and
worship of God, is interdicted in every form and measure.

THE WORK OF THE SPIEIT.

The injunctions in Ephes. iv. 30, and Tliess. v. 19, do not
apply to all men, but are addressed to believers only. The

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 313

former warns those who are sealed by the Holy Ghost unto the
day of redemption not to grieve Him ; the latter exhorts the'
brethren to " quench not the Spirit ;" to " despise not pro-
phesyings." It is clear that the one regards the saint in-
dividually as to his own walk with God ; the other guards him
against hindering the action of the Holy Ghost in those whom
He makes His mouthpiece. The striving of God's Spirit in
Gen. vi. evidently refers to the testimony given to the ante-
diluvians, and especially Noah's preaching for 120 years.
Eesisting the Holy Ghost is said of the Jews : " as your fathers
did, so do ye." It M-as shown in their persecution and slaughter
of the prophets, and crowned by their treachery against and
murder of the Just One. With all their boast about the law,
the land, and the temple, they had rejected in every age God's
testimony : "Ye do always resist the Holy Ghost." "What man
had done before the deluge, was the dreary history of Israel, till
they stumbled upon their own Messiah, refused Stephen's
declaration of His heavenly glory as peremptorily as they had
scorned his own personal humiliation, and thus turned that
which ought to have been a foundation into a stone of stumblinf'
and rock of offence. But it was not the Jew only who was
guilty. " He was in the world, and the world knew Him not."
"Now is the judgment of this world : now shall the prince of
this world be cast out." The personal coming of the Holy
Ghost testifies of this. His very presence in the church on
earth convicts the world of sin, etc. i or He came down, as sent
by Him whom the world had rejected instead of believing in.
Of other sins no doubt the world was guilty, but this was the
great sin in God's sight. He had sent His Son, and the world
hated His Son. They had now no cloak for their sin. Christ,
rejected by man, glorified by God, sends down the Comforter to
be in His own, and thus convicts all outside of sin ; because if
they believed in Him, they too would have the Holy Ghost.
The passage does not speak of what the Spirit produces in the

314 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

heart of every one who comes to a saving knowledge of God and
His Son. It is rather the truth that the presence of the Holy
Ghost in the church proves all without to be under sin and
judgment, because of the rejection of Jesus, whom God proclaims
to be the Eighteous One, by receiving Him to His own right
hand. May I recommend " a well-digested and full reply on
this subject," in a little book entitled " Operations of the
Spirit of God " ? More details still may be found in " Lectures
on the New Testament Doctrine of the Holy Spirit."

THE TWO MINISTRIES.

Exodus xxxiv. 7. — The Gospel plan of salvation is not in
tlie text, it is really the proclamation of the name of Jehovah in
His government of Israel. Indeed it is rather a j)art of that
which is contrasted in 2 Cor. iii. with the ministration of the
Spirit now. There was a precious manifestation of God's
goodness and long suffering, no doubt ; but it was in connection
with His people still under the law. Hence, in spite of all the
mercy displayed, it could only be in result a ministration of con-
demnation and death. Whereas the essence of the Gospel is,
that it comes to the sinner on the very ground that he is lost,
and most expressly justifies the ungodly : it is a ministration of
righteousness already accomplished on earth and accepted on
high. So that, if the Holy Ghost reveal to any soul Christ in
glory, that soul is entitled to look up and say, " There is my life
and my righteousness." He is accepted in the Beloved. " If
that which was done away was glorious, much more that -VA-hich
remaineth is glorious." The two things are so distinct tliat to
harmonise is to spoil them both.

LIFE IN CHRIST RISEN.

Eomans viii. 1. — It may help the reader to bear in mind the

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 315

observation of another, that the apostle, iu the beginning of this
ch.apter, is alluding to and summing up his previous reasoning.
Thus, verse 1 answers to chap. v. ; verse 2 to chap. vi. ; and
verse three to chap, vii ; as a moderate degree of attention and
spirituality may easily discern.

" Justification of life " is what the first verse supposes, the
possession of a new and risen life in Christ, to which sin is not
and cannot be imputed. "When God sent forth His Son he was
made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem, etc. But now
that redemption is accomplished and Christ raised from the dead,
it is not merely the holy life which it always was, but it is life in
resurrection after all the question of sin is settled. It is not
merely justification in view of a foreseen work, nor a standing on
the gi'ound of promise — the promise of One who could not lie.
The work is done, the promise accomplished — all the promises
of God yea and amen in Christ : according to this is our
standinij as individual saints in Christ Jesus, and of this Eom.
viii. treats. Corporate union is not discussed save in chap. xii.
But many of our individual privileges, as well as our corporate
ones, could not have been predicated of believers till Christ had
finished His work on earth and sent down the Holy Ghost from
heaven. I suppose (in spite of A D^ and some good versions
that have m xara a. t. or of D^ E I K, etc., for aXXa x. m.) that
the last clause was added to guard the full grace from verse 4,
wliere the same words rightly occur.

THE LOVE OF CHRIST TO THE CHURCH.

Ephesians v. 26. — To undertand this verse it must be taken
in connection with what precedes and follows.

] 1. Christ loved the church, and gave Himself for it. His
blessed work of redemption already accomplished.

2. That He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing
of water by the word. His present work, which the Holy Ghost

3i6 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

makes good in the church. Ei/ ^ri/Man guards and explains
rw "kovTPU}^ showing that it is the power of the word, and not a
mere rite. Compare John xv. " N'ow ye are clean through the
word which I have spoken to you."

3. The result, yet future, when He shall present to Himself
the glorious church, not having spot, etc.

MOUNT ZION".

Hebrews xii. 23. — The phrase " general assembly " (^zavr^yu^u)
is clearly, in my judgment, epexegetic of the preceding words,
"the innumerable company of angels," just as, in the clause
before, " the heavenly Jerusalem " is a further explanation of
"the city of the living God." The conjunction ?ca/ introduces
each new clause, which arrangement is destroyed in this par-
ticular instance, but observed in all the other parts of the
sentence in the English Bible. The same confusion appears in
Beza, Diodati, the Dutch, Martin, Ostervald, the Lausanne, etc.
Bengel rightly objects to this construction. " Nam et polysyn-
deton retinendum est ; et aliorum sine dubio est panegyris :
aliorum, ecclesia, quis enim conjungeret synonyma, panegyris et
ecclesia ? Ecclesia, primogenitorum est ; panegyris igitur, an-
gelorum." But then he falls into the mistake of making, not
only the angels, but the church of the first-born ones refer to the
myriads, which is equally, as it seems to me, contrary to the
linking of each separate term by the conjunction, not to speak
of other objections. The Syriac and Vulgate, with those that
follow them, Luther and the Elberfeld, avoid either error, and
give the true sense with more or less clearness.

The apostle ascends from the lowest point of millennial glory
which unites heaven and earth, the seat of royalty raised up in
pure grace (after Ichabod was written on Israel, and the king of
their choice was slain), in contrast with Sinai, which was the
place and expression of the nation's responsibility. He then

BIB Lie A L A NNO TA TIONS. 3 1 7

gives, not the earthly city, which was under judgment, but the
city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. Next is
opened out the whole assembly (cravr/uf/;-), myriads of angels.
Then follows, as a specific object, the church of heavenly heirs,
in contrast with God's earthly first-born Israel, which fully
displays grace in its heavenly character. After this the Holy
Ghost directs our eye to God in his judicial capacity— the Judge
of all. With this is beautifully connected " the spirits of just men
made perfect" {i.e. the Old Testament saints). Next, we turn
to the means of establishing the New Covenant with the two
houses of Israel, "Jesus, the Mediator of the New Covenant ;"
and lastly, we hear of " the blood of sprinkling," which cries for
grace towards the earth, not vengeance, as in Abel's case. To
this whole order of things, which will only be manifested in the
Millennium, the Hebrew Christians (and of course the same
thing is true of all saints since) are said to have come, i.e. by
faith. Not to Sinai and its associations of death and terror, but
to these blessed and eternal objects of glory they stood related,
through the known efficacy of what was accomplished to bring

all in.

1 suppose that the perfecting of just men here spoken of will
take place at their resurrection from the dead. They are now
in the condition of spirits— a condition which never will be true
of the New Testament saints as a class (for " we shall not all
sleep"), but, of course, most applicable to those before Christ.
(Compare Luke xiii. 32.)

THE ETEENAL DAY.

2 Peter iii. 18.— I apprehend that ug ia^oav al^'jog is in allusion
to and in contrast with " the day of judgment " (verse V), " the
day of the Lord" or " of God" (verses 10, 12), in the chapter
which the phrase closes, and that the idea is the eternal day,
which succeeds all previous days of sin and judgment. The

3i8 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

words in John vi. 51 (w'; rlv uima) are the commonest possible
expression of eternity, or " for ever," whether absolute or relative,
which of course depends on the context and nature of the case.
See Matt. xxi. 19 ; Mark iii. 29, xi. 14; Luke i. 55 ; John iv.
14, vi. 58, viii. 35, 51, 52, x. 28, xi. 26, xii. 34, xiii. 8, xiv. 16 ;
1 Cor. viii. 13 ; 2 Cor. ix. 9 ; Heb. vi. 20, vii. 17, 21, 24, 28 ; 1
Peter i. 23, 25 ; 1 John ii. 17 ; 2 John 2 ; which are, I think,
all the occurrences in the New Testament. E/'s alum (in 2 Peter
ii. 17) has been dropped by some editors, though even they
admit the same phrase in Jude 13. The omission of the article
implies that the phrase is characteristic, i.e. adjectival of the
sense ; and " everlasting," as " for ever," pertains to rou CMToui^
rather than to the verb. The plural form often occurs, as in
Pom. i. 25, ix. 5, xi. 36, xvi. 27 ; 2 Cor. xi. 31, etc. ; or with
-xavTug, as in Jude 25 ; or yet more emphatically iig ro-jg aluvai
7UV ataiviuv, as in Gal. i. 5, and often elsewhere. The idea here is
not so much one unbroken eternity (expressed by the singular,
simple or complex, as in Heb. i. 8), as the constant succession
of age upon age, which is pretty well given in the English " for
ever and ever." Ephes. iii. 21 is the most peculiar of all ; for
yevsds expresses ordinarily human generations, roi; ui!:,vog of itself
would convey the thought of an undivided everlasting ; and
Tuv a/uivuv closes the series with successive ages sweeping on. The
whole phrase intimates, I suppose, a future beyond the bounds
of every measure of time. The anarthrous form i!g ulumg aiuimv
occurs in Pev. xiv. 11 (where, however, C. has a/wi/a al^vog), which,
as we have seen, modifies the sense so far as to present no
positive object before the mind, as in Pev. xix. 3, and simply in
this case characterises the action of the verb.

THE SEVENTY WEEKS OF DANIEL.

Daniel ix. — I do not think tliat there need be difficulty in
supplying the Scripture authority, which has been sought in

BIB Lie A L ANNO TA TIONS. 3 ' 9

vaiu, for the break between the last week and its predecessors.
In fact, the prophecy itself distinctly furnishes the proof. For
after the details relative to the periods of seven and of sixty-two
weeks, in verses 25, 26, and the plain statement, that after these
times were completed the Messiah should be cut off and have
nothing {i.e. of His proper kingdom and rights, as far as the
nations were concerned), the prophet goes on to describe the
retributive days of vengeance which fell upon the city and the
sanctuary through the Eoman people (or "the people of the prince
that shall come"). Now, it is clear, that here we have events
which took place about forty years after the crucifixion, and yet
entirely apart from the seventy weeks, save that they necessarily
occurred after sixty-nine had run their course. But if they form
no part of the previous chain, as shown by the prophecy, with
equal certainty are they outside from and before the last or
seventieth week, which presupposes the Jewish polity re-estab-
lished in some sort, and the sanctuary not only rebuilt but in
actual use once more, though doomed again to see greater
abominations than before. I am confident, therefore, that the
Scripture authority of Dan. ix. is, beyond reasonable doubt,
against those who make the seventieth week to be in immediate
sequence with the preceding sixty-nine, and that the passage
itself, without going further, requires us to leave room for (not
merely the past Eoman destruction of Jerusalem, but) a pro-
longed series of wars and desolations of indefinite duration,
which has been thus far too truly accomplished ; subsequently
to this, in verse 27, we have the brief but vivid picture of the
last week ushered in by a compact or covenant made between
the last Roman prince ("the prince that shall come") and the
mass of the Jews ; then, in the midst of the week, a stop put to
their sacrificial worship, idols protected, and a desolator inflicted
upon them, and this till the consummation and the decreed
sentence be poured upon the desolate. Thenceforward should
the tide turn, through the presence and power of their Deliverer,

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIOXS.

once rejected but now returning in glory, not only to destroy
this antagonist Eoman sovereign with all his instruments and
followers, Jewish or Gentile, but to apj^ly to Israel, as such, all
the predicted blessings of the new covenant. For such was the
intimation of verse 24 : " Seventy weeks are determined upon
thy (Daniel's) people and upon thy holy city (the question being
about the Jews, and not the church), to finish the transgression,
and to make an end of sins," etc. Accordingly, I think it de-
monstrable that all which God has been doing for and in His
heavenly people since the cross is here entirely and advisedly
passed by ; and this is, no doubt, what is meant by " the paren-
thetical dispensation of the church." It may be added that
this view of a detached seventieth week, reserved for the horrors
of the future antichristian crisis, can in no way be objected to
on the score of novelty, save by the ignorant : it is really the
oldest interpretation that I know on record among the early
Christian writers. Thus writes St. Hippolytus in the third

century : " Twi/ yag s^^xovra Suo s^dofjbdduv 'xXrjPOjdsiaCjv xal X^/ffroD
"rapaysvo/Mif/ov, xai roD ivayyeXi'ou \v 'Trdvri t6-tu) x^^ovyS'ivrog, h/.y.ivudhrwj
rCiv KaiPCbv, i^'ia i^So/xag TipXiKpd^ffSTai r, \sya.77i \v ^ '^ra^ssrai 'HXi'ag,
x.ai ^'Ev'S)-^, zal sv rtp y)/jbiffsi aWrii avafawiiorai rh (Sd;Xvy/Ma rr,i bjj/xwffsw;,
sug b ' AvTiy^PiSTog ss^/xwff/v rw y.og/Muj xarayyiXXuv, x. r. X." For when
the sixty-two weeks have been fulfilled, and Christ has come,
and the gospel has been everywhere preached, the times having
been consummated, there shall be left one week — the last — in
which Elias shall be present, and Enoch ; and in the half of it
shall appear the abomination of desolation, etc.

THE PERSONAL REIGX.

"Without pretending to say what is meant by the expression
"human kingdom," most readers will agree that, besides the
sense in which Christ shall reign for ever, there is a definite
kingdom over all people, nations, and languages, a kingdom
heavenly in its source, earthly in its sphere (though not earthly

BIBLICAL ANNO TA TIONS. ^^ i

only), which is yet future, and to last for 1000 years. It is this
which, I presume, tlie Querist meant by Christ's " human king-
dom," to be ushered in by His personal advent. It has" a
mediatorial character, and will cease after the judgment of the
wicked dead is over. When the eternal state begins (or the new
heavens and earth in the fullest and final sense), the human
holding of this kingdom is to cease (1 Cor. xv.), tliat God
(Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) may be all in all. Christ, as
man, having held this special kingdom for purposes of subjec-
tion, and having put down all other authority, gives it up, that
the power may be God's, as such, exclusively. Our reigning in
life, reigning for ever and ever, is not to be limited to the
millennial kingdom. As possessors of eternal life and rejoicing
in hope of the glory of God, we shall reign in everlasting
blessedness, when the millennial display before this world is
past.

THE LEPROUS HOUSE.

Leviticus xiv. — AVhile unfeignedly believing that all Scripture
is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable, I may suggest
the need of a careful comparison of the fresh light of the New
Testament in lifting the veil of the Old. Thus it seems to me
that due consideration of Ephes. ii. and Heb. iii. would suggest
the idea that "the house" finds its antitype in the corporate
aspect or assembly of believers now, rather than in the millennial
condition of the earth. " Ye are builded together," etc. ; " whose
house are we," etc. Hence all is plain. A plague spot may now
show itself in the Christian assembly. There is diligent, pains-
taking, but patient inquiry. The diseased stones are removed,
the application of which is obvious. If the plague still over-
spread, after all means are used in vain, the house must be
given up ; for the deliberate sanction and maintenance of evil
deprives an assembly of its public Christian character. The

Y

322 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

mention of Canaan is no difficulty, because, in virtue of union
with Christ by the Holy Ghost, we who believe are, even now,
seated in heavenly places in Christ. Our ToX/Veu/za (citizenship)
is in heaven.

"THE KING" IN DANIEL.

Daniel. — 1. " The king," in Dan. xi. 36, is, without doubt to
my mind, the political side of the same person whom St. John
designates religiously or irreligiously as " the Antichrist." It is
clear from Daniel that his seat of power is " the Holy Land,"
the object of attacks at the close from the powers of the South
and of the North {i.e. Egypt, and Syria or Turkey of our days).
However, his destruction is reserved for the Lord Himself,
appearing from heaven (2 Thess. ii. 8 ; Eev. xix. 20). It is of
the Syrian power (whoever then may hold it) that the last verses
of Dan. xi. speak. He also falls by Divine judgment (see Dan.
viii. 25, xi. 45).

2. The relation of Daniel to the Eevelation is a wide subject;
but this I may briefly say, that, as Daniel reveals the results of
the failure of the earthly people Israel, so Eevelation presents
the consequences of the failure of the heavenly testimony
throughout Christendom and the world at large. This remark
may help to show the analogy and the difference between the
two prophecies. What the former was to the Jew, the latter is
to the church.

■ THE VINE AND THE TRUE VINE.

John XV. 4. — I do not think that living union with Christ is
here spoken of, because verse 2 speaks of branches in Him not
bearing fruit, which cannot be where Christ is the life. Compare
also verse 6, which, if living union were in question, would con-
tradict the everlasting life which the believer has. There is

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

some analogy thus far with Eom. xi., the olive-tree of testimony
on earth, as the vine is of profession. Of course, in both cases,
the saints are h'ving branches ; but there are other branches
which are broken off. Oneness with Christ, as members of His
body, depends on tlie baptism of the Spirit, which was unknown
before Pentecost.

OUR CONFLICT.

Joshua V. 9. — With the Epistles to the Colossians and the
Ephesians before us, I am of opinion that the wars, of Israel
have their answer iu our wrestling with the powers of darkness ;
that the gradual acquisition of their land corresponds with our
setting our affections on the things above, where Christ sitteth;
and that we too have our circumcision, first in Christ, in whom
the flesh has met its doom ; and, secondly, in the practical way
of mortifying our members which are upon the earth, etc. To
neglect these cross-lights of the Old and New Testaments is to
despise, unwittingly, the means of heavenly wisdom.

THE WORLD'S JUDGE.

Acts xvii. "0. — It is evident that the point of which St.
Paul avails himself in order to reach the conscience of the
Athenians is their own confessed ignorance of God (verse 23).
" The times of this ignorance God winked at." But now St.
Paul was declaring to them the God whom they knew not.
The true God shines out in the death and resurrection of Christ.
Not to receive what is proclaimed therein is to reject the
counsel of God against oneself Heathenism was essentially
wrong ; at the best it represented God as an hard master, as one
(if one) who needed all that man could muster, instead of
allowing Him the blessed place of the Giver, which even crea-
tion and providence proved Him to be, and much more redemp-
tion.

324 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

Accordingly, as the full light of God is shining the world
over like the sun, and the sound of the Gospel is published in
all the earth (in principle I mean), man is without excuse.
For his case is not merely, like Israel's, failure under legal
requirement, but the despisal of the full and free grace of God,
who is now commanding all men everywhere to repent, to turn
from their idols and their self-righteousness, from themselves in
short to Him, and what He has demonstrated Himself to be in
Christ towards the worst of sinners. To refuse is not merely to
lose His everlasting mercy, it is also to brave His righteous
judgment of this habitable world, for Christ is by Him ordained
to judge it (and not only the dead raised before the great white
throne), of which His resurrection is the proof. The world
slew Him and God raised Him up, the sure proof that it is
morally judged already, as it actually will be when Christ comes
in the clouds of heaven. Up to Christ's first advent, and espe-
cially His resurrection, the Gentiles lay hid, as it were, as to
public relations with God. Salvation was of the Jews. Christ's
resurrection is a groundwork for faith unto all, Gentile as well
as Jew, for death cuts all specialties in the flesh. Hence the
special call to repent ever since ; always obligatory, repentance
is now urgent. So as to the day for judging the habitable world :
the preached resurrection of Christ, who is about to judge it,
puts men under fresh responsibility.

GOD'S EARTHLY CENTER

Deuteronomy xxxii. 8. — The truth tauglit is plainly con-
firmed by the rest of the Old Testament, that Israel is God's
earthly centre, around whom the nations are yet to revolve,
when the Messiah takes His kingdom here below ; for the Jews
(not the church, which has higlier hopes) are the objects of
God's counsels, as regards the earth and the nations.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 325

THE AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.

There are not wanting those who reject the commonly re-
ceived opinion that St. Paul wrote this epistle. It may therefore be
interesting to look at the historic proof of Paul being the writer.

There are several particulars relating to the personal history
of the writer : —

1. He was not one of our Lord's disciples, and probably did
not know Christianity tiU after our Lord's ascension (Heb. ii. 3).
St. Paul we know was converted after the ascension of our Lord.
(Acts ix.)

2. The epistle was written from Italy (xiii. 24). Paul was
in Italy for some time.

3. The writer mentions some hindrance which prevented his
leaving Italy (xiii. 19). This agrees with what we know of Paul,
whowas in prison there (2 Tim. i. 16).

4 The writer desired the prayers of his brethren for the re-
moval of this hindrance (xiii. 19). This is conformable to the
custom of Paul in his other epistles (Rom. xv. 30 ; Ephes. vi. 19).

5. The writer knew of Timothy's release from prison. Paul
mentions this in 1 Tim. vi. 12.

6. Timothy was not with the writer in Italy, but was shortly
expected (xiii. 23). This agrees with what we know of the
situation of Paul when in prison (2 Tim. iv. 9).

7. The writer looked forward to travelling with Timothy
to visit the Hebrew Christians. Timothy was Paul's constant
companion in traveL

Here, then, are several particulars respecting the writer of the
epistle, all of which agree with what we know of the history of
St. Paul, but do not suit with what is known of any other
eminent New Testament saint. It is highly improbable there-
fore that any other New Testament writer but Paul wrote this
epistle.

Further : to none of the assigned writers do all the circum-

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

stances here noted suit, as far as we are acquainted with their
histories. We know not that ApoUos or Barnabas was ever in
Eome, or suffered imprisonment there for the truth's sake.
Luke and Clemens were in Eome, but we have no information
of their having been imprisoned there ; and further, neither
were Jews (Col. iv. 11, 14), which it is probable the writer of
this epistle was. In the absence of certainty, there is evidence
enough, from the personal remarks of the writer, to lead us to
the conclusion that Paul wrote this epistle. [2 Pet. iii. 15 seems
to me decisive that Paul wrote to the Jewish saints ; and this
of course is no other than " Hebrews." — Ed^

THE LAND SHADOWING WITH WINGS.

Isaiah xviii. 7. — 1. "The land shadowing with wings, which
(is) beyond the rivers of Cush," means, I think, a country outside
the limits of those nations which up to the prophet's time had
menaced Israel ; a country beyond Assyria and Babylon, which
were contiguous to one of these rivers and beyond Egypt, which
lay along the other. For Scripture connects Cush with these
two districts, if not with more : an Asiatic as well as an African
Ethiopia. The meaning is, then, a land which should essay to
protect the long-oppressed Jew, and that land beyond those
rivers which characterised the great powers which hitherto were
best known to and had most interfered with Israel

2. It was not only a distant but a maritime power (" sending
ambassadors by the sea "). " Vessels of bulrushes " looks more
like Egypt than anything else in the chapter, but it cannot out-
weigh the other evidence. Perhaps others may throw light on
the phrase. The burden of Egypt foUows, and is expressly
named in the succeeding chapter. Here the name is withheld.

3. It is distinguished in the plainest way from the nation in
whose behalf it employs its vessels and swift messengers. I
cannot therefore but think those commentators far astray who

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 327

interpret the land in verse 1, and the people to whom the
message is sent in verse 2, of Egypt and the Egyptians. Happily
here the question depends not on mere verbal criticisms, but on
the general bearing of the context, which the English reader is
quite capable of judging.

4 There is no doubt on either side that the same people to
whom the messengers are sent are described in the latter part of
verse 2, as well as in verse 7. The words which characterise
them are certainly open, in their force and translation, to a good
deal of dispute. Few, however, will be disposed to accept the
notion that ^'^pp = " harnessed in leather," w^hich has not the
least support from elsewhere. It is used in Pro v. xiii. 12, of
hope prolonged or deferred. Other forms of tlie same word
occur frequently in the Bible, and mean to draw (literally or
figuratively), stretch out, continue. Gesenius gives it here the
sen~se of duraturus, rohustus, which seems to me not to harmonise
with the conjoined word. The English translators may have
given the force of "scattered" from the fact that the kal parti-
ciple (poel) means "him that sowetli" (marg. draweth forth) seed
in Amos ix. 13. I rather think the term alludes to the long
trials and painful suspense of the Jews, and this seems con-
firmed by \2-\\J2\ "and peeled" or made bare, rather than
"shaven;" for, in such' an application, the word is used only
of cases where the hair w\as fallen off (Lev. xiii. 40, 41), or for-
cibly plucked off (Ezra ix. 3 j Nehem. xiii. 25 ; Isaiah 1. 6).
The sense of " peeling " the shoulder occurs in Ezek. xxix. 19,
which would yield the same figurative sense, the latter being
taken from the skin as the former from the hair. "Furbished"
or polished is the general sense when spoken of the sword,
metals, etc., and Gesenius thence derives the tropical meaning
which he assigns to the word here, " populus acer h. e. celer,
vehemens ;" a higlily improbable turn in my opinion. The
general bearing of the next clause remains undisturbed. What
follows is literally " a nation of a line, a line," which Dathe

328 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

connected, I presume, with Isaiah xxviii. 10, and our transla-
tors with chap, xxviii. 17 ; xxxiv. 11, 17 ; and Lam. ii. 8. Either
of these, and the last particularly, I consider preferable to the
far-fetched allusion to land-measuring, which, it will be observed,
causes some to change " nation " into the " country ' meted
out ;' " which is the more surprising and inconsistent, because
in the sentence before it was justly remarked that it was the
people, not the country. The same term ""la is used in both
cases. I have no doubt whatever that npupi "if?"1i5 describes not
their vast strength, trampling down all before it (as Gesenius
will have it), but rather their obnoxiousness to every form of
hostile appropriation and indignity. (Compare Isaiah xxii. 5 ;
xxviii. 4) This is confirmed and determined by the last words
of the verse, whether we adopt the textual rendering or the
margin of the English Bible, or even Gesenius's theory of
"cleaving," which he finds, though to my mind with slight
show of evidence, in the word. Still any of these seem to me
incomparably better than a fancied allusion to "inundation,"
which has really nothing to favour it, any more than the fancy
that the previous words refer to the practice of sending pigs or
goats to tread down the seed under their feet. I hope to be
pardoned for considering them both an unlawful importation
into this text. All these mistakes flow out of the first great
error of treating the people under debate as the Egyptians.
To this I may add that "i^VO ("beyond") is made to mean "on
this side," quite untenably, though at fii'st sight there might
seem more reason for it, especially in the English Bible. How-
ever, there is no space here to trace in what circumstances the
word is susceptible of that force. I can only say that " beyond,"
as it is the natural, so here seems to me the true meaning. It
is only in very special cases that we can give the other rendering,
and the reason must be shown before it can be assumed.

5. As regards the intervening verses, 3-6, all are summoned
to see and hear what befalls the people of the Lord, Israel. He,

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 329

as it were, retires, and watches. Man is active. The Jews,
brought back by human intervention, seem to flourish ; but
suddenly, " afore the harvest," all is arrested, and disappoint-
ment comes. The nations turn once more against the Jews.
" They shall be left together unto the fowls of the mountains,
and to the beasts of the earth." Compare the chapter before,
especially verses 9-14.

6. "In that time shall the present be brought unto the
Lord of Hosts of a people scattered and peeled, and from a
people terrible from their beginning hitherto ; a nation meted
out and trodden under foot, whose land the rivers have spoiled,
to the place of the name of the Lord of Hosts, the Mount Zion."
— Here, waiving the question of the terms repeated from verse
2, and already discussed, I think the English version is more
accurate than most others. For there are in verse 7 not two
peoples, but two things taught about Israel ; that a present
should be made (1) of them, and (2) from them, to Jehovah of
Hosts. The Jewish nation should be brought a present, and
they should also bring one to the Lord in Mount Zion, after
their signal deliverance from the furv of the Gentiles.

THIS GENERATION.

Matthew xvi. 28. — I am of opinion that the application of
these words to the destruction of Jerusalem is entirely un-
founded, and that their true connection is witli the scene of the
transfiguration. They are consecutive in all three of the first
evangelists ; and 2 Peter i. treats that scene, it appears to me,
as a manifestation of Christ's power and coming, — a sample of
His future glory. James and Peter did taste of death, the one
long, and the other shortly before Jerusalem was destroyed.

Dean Alford is not correct in making ^ yina aZrri = " this
I'ace," because the race of Israel is not to pass away when all
these things are fulfilled ; but, on the contrary, Israel is then

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

to reach its full blessing and glory as a people here below. The
true force is, " this" (Christ-rejecting, unbelieving) "generation
of Israel," not the mere existing generation, but such as bore the
same moral fruits as those Avho then refused the Messiah, So
they have continued, and will, till after the last delusions and
judgment of Antichrist, when " there shall come out of Sion
the deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob."
" So all Israel shall be saved," when every threat of God has
been accomplished, and grace has converted a new generation —
" the generation to come." The moral bearing of the phrase,
permit me to add, simply and satisfactorily accounts for God's
righteous judgment, in consequence of the blood shed from Abel
downwards. Dean A.'s remark is sound against the application
of it to the mere existing generation ; but it almost equally dis-
proves his own sense. Those who stood in the place of witness
for God, as did Israel, not only suffered the consequences of
despising His last testimony to them in Christ, but had required
of them all the righteous blood shed from the beginning down-
wards. The same principle applies to Babylon in the Eevela-
tion : " In her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints,
and of all that were slain upon the earth." In consequence of
the position assumed, God will hold her responsible even for
evil done before her existence. It is the principle of God's cor-
porate judgments. Individually, each bears his own judgment.

GUILT AND GRACE.

Pionians v. 15-17. — No exposition of this passage whicli I
have seen has appeared to me quite satisfactory. INIy opinion
is, that every one of these verses contains a separate thought,
which is fitted, by its position and progression, to magnify the
grace of God. The apostle is illustrating the leading truth of
the Christian system, justification by divine righteousness accom-
plished in Christ ; and, in order to establish conclusively the gra-

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 33'

tiiitous nature of it, be draws his illustration from the way in
which we became guilty, viz. by the guilt of Adam's first sin.
As we are reckoned by God, and treated, as in fact guilty per-
sons, before we do anything personally to involve us in guilt,
so we are reckoned by God as righteous persons, and are treated
as such, before we do anything to make us righteous. There is
thus a striking analogy or resemblance between guilt and grace
— the fall and the restoration. But the apostle begins to show,
at verse 15, that this analogy does not hold in all respects :
" But not as the offence so also is the free gift." This he does
by showing that the side of the parallel formed by materials
drawn from the new and gracious dispensation is the broader,
deeper, and more outstanding and noticeable. It illustrates
grace superabounding and triumphing over guilt in three parti-
culars : 1. In its provision (verse 15) ; 2. In its communication
(verse 16) ; and 3. In its consummation (verse 17).

1. The Source. — Verse 15 points us to the fountain-head or
source of sin and righteousness ; of guilt and grace. There is
evidently a comparison of stocks or stores in this verse ; and
grace gets a triumph' over guilt when we look to Jesus, in whom,
as in a storehouse, all fulness of it dwells. If we are condemned
for the sin of Adam, a mere creature like ourselves, shall we not
much more be justified by grace for the sake of the Divine One,
Jesus, who is " full of grace and truth "? If natural connection
with the creature has brought us so much evil, much more shall
spiritual connection "vvith the God-man, Jesus Christ, bring us
good.

2. Tlie Communication. — Verse 16 shows that the communi-
cation of grace far exceeds the communication of guilt. Adam
shares what is his with his race, so Christ shares what belongs
to Him with His seed ; but the righteousness which believers
enjoy in Him covers far more than the guilt they inherit
from Adam, for by Christ we are justified not only from the
guilt of this one sin, but also from the aggravated guilt which

332 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

we have contracted by our " many offences," ix. all our sins.
Besides, we were involved in Adam's guilt by generic necessity;
we are put in possession of righteousness in Christ as " a free
and gracious gift."

3, The CoTisv/fnmation. — Verse 17. Here we have the rich
excess of grace over guilt in its consummation, or in what it
will do for believers when communicated to them and possessed
by them. The point contained in this verse is this : If all
connected with Adam are made subject to death for his one
offence, much more shall all connected witli Christ (who receive
abundance of grace and of the gift of justification) not only have
their original condemnation to death removed, but also reign in
life with Him, on account of His obedience even unto death,
and his resurrection, as tlieir representative and living head,
to the enjoyment of an endless life. Their connection with
Jesus not only frees them from death, but it gives them a right
to life, not only here, but in the glorious kingdom to come :
" Being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life." He is now
possessed of an ever-during life in resurrection, and all believers
are sharers with Him in tliis life, for " He that believeth on the
Son hath everlastinf^ life." Just as death began in Adam the
moment he sinned, so life begins in believers the moment they
believe in Christ : " God hath given unto us eternal life, and
this life is in His Son." And as the time is fast approaching
when Jesus, the Son of God, who once suffered for sins, shall
return to reign, all His saints shall then reigu in life with Him:
" For as in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive."
" Thou hast redeemed us, and made us unto our God kings and
priests, and we shall reign on the earth."

The analogy being thus explained, limited, and illustrated,
the apostle resumes his argument, and sums up the whole matter
in verses 18 and 19, which contain his main position, which, in
nearly the words of these verses, may be thus stated : — " As by
one offence of one all connected with that one are condemned ;

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 333

so by the accomplished righteousness of one all connected with
Him have ' justification of life.' For as by the disobedience of
the one (the representative) the many (the represented) were con-
stituted sinners, so by the obedience of the one (the representa-
tive) will the many (the represented) be constituted righteous."
I should be glad to see the above passage in Eomans
thoroughly examined by you and your correspondents. It is
one of the most vital, seeing that it forms the keystone of the
gateway of grace. [See a paper by another writer at p. 348.
—Ed:\

LOVE AND LOVE.
John xxi. 15-17. — I do not think that the student will get much
satisfaction by reading the remarks of the late Dean Alford on this
affecting scene. There is more, perhaps, in what the Archbishop
of Dublin, Dr. Trench, has observed in his New Testament
Synonyms. But the true difference seems to me much more simple
than either of these gentlemen apprehend. 'Ayazdu is the broad,
generic term for loving. It is susceptible of all applications, of
superiors, inferiors, and equals. It is predicated of God towards
man, and of man towards God. It describes God's feeling
towards the world in giving His only begotten Son. It describes
Christ's tender and full affection towards the church. On the
other hand, ^/Xew is a narrower word. It is distinctively the
love of feeling, of endearment, and hence frequently it is used of
the outward sign of fondness, and also in a vague way of that
fondness which produces the habit of this or that action, though
this is true of aya^aw too. Both are said of God's love to His
Son. Dean A., if I remember rightly, considers that the Lord
drops the word of reverential love (dyarruu) which he had twice
used, comes down to the word of human affection, Petei-'s own
word (p/>.5w), and this third time questions, not merely his loyal
love for his master, but the very human regard of his heart.
On the contrary, it appears to me, that Mhile the Lord thoroughly

334 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

judges Peter's confidence in his own love to Him, in its so
exceeding that of others that he could stand where they fled,
He not only hears Peter's repeated declaration of his true and
near affection for Him, but Himself takes it up the third time,
and that this, flashing on Peter's threefold denial, went to his
inmost heart. The Greek concordance utterly dissolves the idea
that reverential love is the dominant thought in uya'zdu. We
are not called so to love our enemies, nor even our neighbours
(Matt. V, 43, 44 ; vi. 24). Nor was it so that Christ loved the
rich young man ; and certainly none can pretend that God reve-
rentially loved the world (John iii. 16) ; and this is not a tithe,
perhaps, of the absurdity that follows Dean A.'s distinction, if I
understand him. As little can (piXiu be reduced to the mere
human regard of the heart. It is not thus that the Father loves
the Son (John v. 20), or even us (John xvi. 27) ; nor can any-
thing be more opposed, as it appears to me, to the true scope of
1 Cor. xvi. 22 ; Titus iii 15 ; Piev. iii. 19, where (piXiu occurs.
Let the reader judge.

SHIPWRECK OF FAITH.

1 Timothy i. 19, 20. — There does not appear to be any real
difficulty in understanding how a believer might concerning
faith make shipwreck, more than in practical holiness. Surely
this was exactly what befel the late Mr. Irving, not to speak of
Tractarian or Popish perverts. There is no doubt but that godly
discipline may take its course, even to the extreme act of putting
away in the case of real Christians, if they have got under the
enemy's power in conduct or doctiine. The proper sphere of
discipline is within (i.e. in the circle of those who bear Christ's
name). Them that are without God judgeth. Those who keep
the true Feast are bound to put out leaven ; and, if leaven in
practice, still more in doctrine. For a little leaven leaveneth the
wdiole lump. (Compare 1 Cor. v. and Gal. v.)

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 335

THE LIFE, NOT JUDGMENT, OF THE RIGHTEOUS.

There would be no point gained iu supposing a universal-
judgment of all at the close ; but, on the contrary, great loss
in force of truth. In fact, the idea and expression " general
resurrection " is itself fallacious : for resurrection is of all things
the most separative. Even John v, makes out two resurrec-
tions, irreconcilably differing in character and issues, as Eev.
XX. shows them to be in time. The resurrection of life is in
contrast with the resurrection of judgment (x^/cew;), and evi-
dently, if involved in a common judgment, there would be no
room for such a contrast. Matt. xxv. 34, etc., is essentially a
millennial scene, not before nor after that epoch. Nor does it
appear tliat any rigliteous die during the millennium, Isa. Ixv.
speaking only of those judicially accursed. The Son of man's
coming as a thief is nowhere connected with the rapture of the
saints ; but I say no more now, as this latter would involve
discussion.

THE FIRST JEWISH MISSION.

It is plain that the Lord, in this chapter, sends the twelve
upon a mission specifically Jewish. " Go not into the way of
the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not :
but go rather to the lost sheep of -the house of Israel " (Matt, x.)
Afterwards, in apprising them of the persecutions and treachery
they were to expect, he bids them flee from one city to another :
" For verily I say unto you, ye shall not have gone over (or
finished) the cities of Israel till the Son of man be come." That
is, their mission should be broken off, before it was complete,
by the coming of their blaster. Doubtless, another commission,
expressly to the Gentiles, appears at the close of this Gospel,
and the development of God's counsels, the mystery of Christ
and the church, came out still later, chiefly through the ministry

336 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

and writings of the Apostle Paul. Thus the original Jewish
mission was interrupted, and what has been aptly styled " the
Gentile parenthesis " came in : this over, the Lord will, I doubt
not, raise, at a yet future day, servants destined to take up the
M'ord and work now left in abeyance, and, ere they will have
finished their proclamation of the approaching kingdom through-
out all the cities of Israel, the Son of man will come. That
work (wherever else the gospel has been carried) was not finished
in the Apostolic era, nor will it be, when once more resumed in
the latter day, before the Lord's return to establish the kingdom
over the earth in power and glory.

THE LEAST IN THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

I do not think Luke xvi. 16 and Mark i. 1-4 intimate that
John Baptist was " under the gospel dispensation." The king-
dom of God might be said to be present in the person and power
of Christ (compare Matt. xii. 28, and Luke xvii. 21) ; but, as far
as others were concerned, all that the Lord says on this head,
and after John was put in prison, is, " The time is fulfilled, and
the kingdom of God is at hand." It was not come for others to
enter in till the work of redemption was accomplished, and then
it was opened both to Jew and Gentile that believed. " Every
man presseth into it," does not imply that any were yet within.
It was being preached as nigh both by John and afterwards by
the disciples ; but, whatever the saving mercy of God might
have been in past times, and of course then also, it was still an
object of search and desire till the cross and resurrection of the
Lord. Then it was come, and every believer entered, and the
accession of spiritual blessing and privilege was such, that the
least in the kingdom was greater than the greatest before, even
than John himself, near as he was to it as just at hand. We
must bear in mind that, as to John's testimony in John i. 29-34,
iii. 29, d scq<i., it may have exceeded, more or less, his own intelli-

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 3^7

gence, as was often the case in the utterances of the Okl Testa-
ment prophets. John Baptist did not know more than they,
what it is to be purged worshippers, having no more conscience
of sins. But this is only one of tlie many blessings that attach
to all within the kingdom now.

I am aware that some, shrinking from the simple meanin"-
because it traverses their preconceived thoughts, have sought to
make 6 .a/xp&Vffoj the least prophet, others {inoli lyudort) Christ
himself ; but such notions are unwarranted and untenable.

AS ORACLES OF GOD.

One is quite right in thinking that the apostle's word goes
far beyond speaking according to the Scriptures, for a man might
say nothing but what was scriptural, and not speak wj y.oyia. ©soD.
The passage implies that one should only speak when one has
the certainty of uttering what one believes to be the mind of God.
If there is not this confidence, one ought to be silent. It may
be an artless message, possibly like that of Peter and John,
displaying the speaker to be humanly ignorant and unlearned,
and yet just the mind of God, suitable to the present need.
This is to speak as oracles of God. Another might speak a
word true in itself, but applicable to wholly different circum-
stances, warning where comfort was needed, instruction where
the Spirit was rather calling out communion, or vice tcrsd. To
speak thus is not to speak as oracles of God. Of course, there
is the other and equally imperative obligation on the part of
those who hear, of examining all by the word of God.

DELIVERED FROM THE LAW.

Romans vii. 4.— It may be allowed that, in the previous
verses which speak of the matrimonial obligation, ceremonial
and social laws are alluded to ; but in illustration of what ?

z

338 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

Clearly the Cliristian's relation to the law as a whole. Death
severs the marriage tie : after that, there is liberty to belong to
another. Just so, Christians are dead to the law by the body
of Christ, who has in life accomplished it, and in death silenced
all its claims for such as had failed under it. Our position now
is, that we belong to another, even to Christ risen from the dead.
The fifth verse is clear and positive that the moral law is meant,
for it was that especially which provoked the passions or motions
of sins in our natural state. " But now we are delivered from
the law, being dead to that wherein we were held," etc.

1 do not deny that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled
in the Christian, that he walks in the love of God and of his
neighbour, which is the fulfilling of the law ; but then it is
because he is under grace, and not under law. He is not as a
servant under this and that stipulation for so much wages ; he
is set free in Christ's death and lives in Christ's life as risen
from the dead — a condition of life which the law cannot touch,
however it may fulfil the righteousness of the law, and far more :
for we are called to be followers of God in a way which the law
never demanded. The Lord grant all his own to understand
better their own blessings in His grace, that so their communion
may be deeper and more heavenly, and their walk in the same
proportion.

THE COMING AND THE DAY.

2 Thessalonians ii. 2. — It is quite right to distinguish be-
tween " the coming " and " the day of the Lord." They are not
the same thing, though of course closely connected. Again, it is
certain that hssTrjxsv means " is actually come," or " is present,"
and not " is at hand." But it is a mistake to assume that the
Thessalonian saints then knew the relative order of these two
things ; and this ignorance on all sides gave occasion for the
false teachers to trouble them with the cry that " the day of

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 339

the Lord was there," which would have been trying enough,
even with the thought of being caught up during or after it.
Tliis the Spirit meets by intimating that the coming precedes
the day, Avhich, besides, awaits a fuller development of evU.

NOT PUT UNDER ANGELS.

Hebrews ii. 5. — There is no intimation that I can see that
the world, under the old dispensation, was subjected to angels,
but the statement that all things are put under the glorified man,
even Jesus, already crowned, though now we see not yet all
things put under Him. He is to be displayed the king of the
world to come, the future habitable earth, and not of heaven
merely. It is a negative statement, excluding angels, who were
familiar to the Hebrew mind as the most exalted creatures known
to them, from that government which pertains to the Son of
Man, who had been already (in chap, i.) shown to be, in a
special sense, Son of God, yea God himself, the adored of all
angels, the Creator.

SOUL AND SPIRIT.

Hebrews iv. 12. — I think that, where distinguished as here,
"soul" and "spirit" refer respectively to the seat of indivi-
duality and to that of capacity. Every man has both soul
and spirit, and they are so linked and close that the word of
God alone can rightly divide between their sometimes conflicting
emotions and judgments. It judges all, searches into "the
thoughts and intents of the heart." But then we have Christ as
our high priest interceding for us, and maintaining us in spite
of the sifting process, according to the value of His work.

EVERY FAAIILY.

Ephesians iii. 15. — nasa. cara/«. — Our translators were probably

34° BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

influenced by their theological views not to follow the grammatical
rule, that ^raj connected with a substantive without the article
means every, not the whole. There is no doubt that "every family"
is the right translation — embracing perhaps the various classes
named in Heb. xii. 22, 23, And I am confident that the view
thus sought to be maintained is a confusion of things that differ
— all believers under every dispensation being taken together in
the mass as " the church of God." But let scriptural proof be
shown for the application of this term to any save the Jews and
Gentiles baptized into one body between Pentecost and the
Lord's second coming. The special features of " the Church,"
union with Christ in heaven by the Holy Ghost sent down
thence consequent on His ascension — baptism of Jews and
Gentiles by " one Spirit " into " one body " — the full enjoyment
of the knowledge of God as " the Father " — are to be sought for
in vain in either the past or future relationships of God with
His earthly people Israel.

Moreover, while prizing the Psalms and other Old Testament
portions of the word of God, I cannot agree that their language
is equally applicable to our own position. " Now we know," says
St. Paul quoting (Piom. iii.) from the Psalnas, " that what things
soever the law saith, it saith to them ^yho are under the law."
St. Peter declares, " Of which salvation the prophets have
inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace
that should come unto you" — the Spirit of Christ in them testi-
fied beforehand of the sufferings of Christ and the glories that
should follow, i.&. their knowledge of the way of salvation was
only prophetic — a very different thing from tliat which is our
blessing "the Gospel preached, with the Holy Ghost sent down
from heaven" — the blessed witness to a fully accomplished
work.

Scripture contradicts the idea that " the Spirit of adoption '
indited the language of the Old Testament (see GaL iv.) ; and
the condition under the law is expressly contrasted (2 Cor. iii.)
with " the ministration of the Spirit."

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 341

Therefore the application to ourselves of many of the senti-
ments of the Old Testament saints would be most inappropriate
to the full position of grace in which the believer now stands.
The actual manifestation of the righteousness of God on behalf
of the sinner — the conscience purged by the blood of Christ
— the knowledge of justification through His resurrection, and
consequent "peace with God" and the clear sunshine of "no
condemnation " — such truths were unknown save in measure by
aniticipation under tlie age of the law, and form part of " the
ministration of the Spirit."

MERCY.

The reason for the introduction of " mercy " to Timothy and
Titus, while St. Paul simply wishes grace and peace, in addressing
churches (Philemon, because of the church in his house, coming
under the last head), is plain. The church, or corporate thing,
is viewed in its full privileges ; the individual, however favoured,
recalls the thought of need day by day : " mercy " therefore is
appropriate in the latter case ratlier than in the former.

HEAD OF HIS BODY THE CHURCH.

Colossians i. 18. — Christ only took the place of head of the
church after redemption was effected, and in heavenly glory as
its result, and the formation of what the Bible calls His body
demanded this as a basis, and tlie Holy Ghost sent down from
heaven as the power of its unity.

It must be borne in mind that, when Scripture speaks of the
'' one body," it is in reference to the earth. It is now, and on
earth, that the saints are baptized by the Holy Ghost into one
body, though I am far I'rom believing that such a relationship
will cease by and by in heaven.

It is as first-born from the dead that Christ is the beginning

342 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

even though He was from everlasting the only begotten Son,
and the Eternal Life with the Father. Hence said He to Peter
who had confessed Him to be the Son of the living God, "Upon
this rock I will build my church." It had not yet been built
or begun to be built. The foundation was not laid : it was laid
afterwards in His death and resurrection.

Then ascending to heaven, He became the head, and the
Holy Ghost came down in person to gather into union with
Him as so risen and ascended. This and this only is what the
ISTew Testament designates His body ; for, according to the
figure, there could not be a body Avithout and before the head.

The exeeedingly precious mercies of God to all saints are
unquestionable ; and to some it may seem presumptuous to
predicate peculiar privileges of those called since Pentecost.
But, evidently, the question is one not of man's reasoning, nor of
preconceived notions, but of God's word and will.

And it is plain that Ephesians and Colossians, not to speak
of other Epistles, dwell much on certain blessings now conferred
on the saints which never were enjoyed by, nor promised to, the
Old Testament saints. They are the church's blessings brought
out of God's treasury in this present dispensation, for the gloiy
of Christ, and to show the riches of His own grace. The argu-
ments of those who have assailed the point do not even touch
the question, which they do not seem even to understand.

THE GIFT OF GOD THAT IS IN THEE.

2 Timothy i. 6. — I ajDprehend that the common division of
" gifts " {yaoisiJ.a.Tu) into ordinary and extraordinary is unscrip-
tural, and calculated to mislead ; for in one sense, and that a
very real one, aU the gifts are the affects of XH'^^ " freely given
of God," and not attained by man's labour. Scripture recognises
these things as quite distinct ; first, the natural ability with its
providential training, as the vessel ; secondly, the gift of grace,

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 343

which is received in due time by the chosen vessel ; and thirdly,
the use of means (as prayer, the word, meditation, hearing, etc.),
that the gift be stirred up, and profiting appear. No doubt, the
gifts which were signs have disappeared ; but all needed for
perpetuating, nourishing, and ruling the church abide " till we
all come," etc,

I do not think that there is any difficulty in the apostolic
communication of a xapaij^a, when the Lord was so pleased.
There was an express prophecy so directing it in Timothy's case.
In general the New Testament shows that such a channel was
not necessary nor often employed, though it was sometimes in
the wisdom of God. The same remark applies not merely to
the ;i|^aff/(r,aara, but to the bwoid of the Holy Ghost {i.e. the Holy
Ghost Himself given to believers in general). Occasionally this
was associated with the imposition of apostolic hands, as in the
case of Peter and John (Acts viii.), and in Paul's case (Acts xix.)
But Acts ii. X., etc., are decisive that it would be an error to
suppose anything of the sort to be the invariable rule. Hence,
while God by times attached either the one or the other to the
apostles. He maintained His own sovereignty all the while ; and
certainly He has not failed either in giving the Holy Ghost or
in distributing such gifts as He sees fit to continue, and this
directly, now that apostles are no longer found on earth. Eom.
i. 11 does not necessarily mean a ministerial gift.

GENESIS.

This first book of the Bible is the remarkable preface, as the
Apocalypse is the equally striking conclusion, of the revelations
of God. It presents the germ, in one form or another, of nearly
all the ways of God and man, which we find separately developed
in the suceeding books of Scripture ; just as the Apocalypse is
the natural close, presenting the ripened fruits even for eternity
of all that had been sown from the first, the ultimate results of

344 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

every intervening interference of God and of His enemy. Thus,
we have in Genesis the creation of which man is chief (i.) ; the
principles of moral relationship with God and His creatures (ii.);
the temptation of Satan and his judgment by the seed of the
woman ; sin against God and man (and especially against Christ
in type), sacrifice and worship, the world and the household of
faith (iii. iv.) ; the heavenly and the earthly testimonies to
Christ's coming (v.) ; the apostasy of man (vi.) ; God's warning
by His Spirit and judgment in the deluge, with the salvation of
a spared remnant in the ark, and mercy to the creature (vii.) ;
reconciliation in its relation to the earth and not to man only
(viii.) ; God's covenant with creation (ix.) ; government and
the history of the present world in its early rise and progress
(x, xi.) ; the call and promises of God, and the history of the
called (xii.) ; the heavenly and earthly callings (xiii.) ; the
Melchizedec priesthood (xiv.) ; the Jewish portion unfolded and
confirmed, with the disclosure of long oppression previously from
those who are to be specially judged (xv.) ; the typical introduc-
tion of the law or Hagar covenant (xvi.) ; and the intervention
of God's grace sealed by circumcision, and displayed in the heir
of promise fxvii.) ; whose further announcement is linked with
the divine judgment about to fall once more, and with interces-
sion as the due place of those who, outside the evil, enjoy com-
munion with God (xviii.) ; salvation so as by fire out of the
tribulation and judgment which swallow up tlie ungodly (xix.) ;
failure of the faithful in maintaining their real relationship
before the world (xx.) ; the son of promise is born, and the child
of the law, according to the flesh, is cast out, followed by the
world's submission instead of reproof (xxi.) Then follows the
grand shadow of Christ's death, as the provision of the Father's
love, and His resurrection (xxii.) ; the covenant form of blessing
disappears (xxiii.) ; and the calling of the bride for the risen
bridegroom ensues (xxiv.) Finally is seen the sovereign call of
him, afterwards named Israel, who is identified with the sorrows,

BIBLICAL ANNOTA TIONS. 345

■wanderings, and ultimate blessing of that people (xxv.-l.) ; with
the striking episode of his son Joseph, who is first rejected by
his brethren after the flesh, and suffers yet more at the hands of-
the Gentiles ; next is exalted (as yet unknown to his natural
kindred) to the right hand of the throne ; and lastly is owned in
glory by the very brethren who had rejected him, but now owe
all to his wisdom and majesty and love. Genesis is at once a
book' of matchless simplicity to him who glides over its surface,
and of infinite depth to him who searches into the deep things
of God.

THE HOPE SET BEFORE US.

Hebrews vi. 18. — "The hope set before us" is the expecta-
tion of heavenly glory as secured and displayed in Christ exalted
on higli. Of course, the " hope " implies something yet to be
done or manifested ; though, being of God in Christ, it has not
the smallest shade of uncertainity about it like what men call
hope. This hope has present effects too " by the which w^e draw
nigh to God." (Compare Heb. x. 23, which ought to be " hope "
rather than "faith," as in the authorised version), as it ought to
fill us with joy (Heb. iii. 6). It is clearly in the future alone
that all will be realised, and therefore it is justly called "hope"
still the work being finished, and Christ having entered within
the veil, our hope is said to penetrate there too. That is, besides
being sure for us and steadfast in itself, it is heavenly as entering
into the immediate presence of God on the basis of the precious
blood of Christ. It counts upon God fulfilling all He has
promised, according to the faithfulness which has raised up
Christ from the dead (like Isaac in the type), and set Him in
the atmosphere of unchangeable blessing inside the veil. As
Abraham had his son given back as it were, and the promise
confirmed by an oath, so have we our hopes confirmed in a
yet more precious way in Christ glorified above, though still
having " need of patience."

346 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

THE TRANSITION PERIOD.

Eevelation v. 9, 10. — It is one of the special objects of the
Revelation, as I judge, to disclose the position and intelligent
worship of the heavenly saints, after they have been gathered
to the Lord in the air, and previous to His epiphany, and this
in connection with the intervening judgments set forth under
the seals, trumpets, and vials. Another design is to show that
even in those terrible days, "the end of the age," after the
church has been caught up to meet the Lord, God will not
leave Himself without a witness, but will, by His word and
Spirit, commence a new work, suited to the times of special
antichristian delusion. Daniel also (ch. vii.-xii.) makes knoAvn
to us saints involved in these same trials, but they are, I think,
Jewish saints exclusively. St. John was the appropriate in-
strument to reveal a larger company of holy sufferers, and that
from the Gentiles, " out of every kindred," etc. The countless
multitude seen in Rev. vii. 9 ct seqq. is out of all nations, but, as
to time, restricted to "the great tribulation." This transition
period, after the rapture of the church, and before the millen-
nium, is one of great moment, and very little understood.

SON OF GOD AND SON OF MAN.

I. The title " Son of God " is predicated of the Lord Jesus
Christ in three different applications.

1. In the sense of His being born in time. This Ps. ii. sets
forth : "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee" — in
connection with His kingship in Zion, presented to Israel's
responsibility at His first advent, but postponed till His second,
because of their then and present unbelief So Is. ix. 6 : " Unto
us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given." Compare Luke i.
32 : " He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the
Highest, and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 347

his father David." And further, ver. 35 : " Therefore also that
holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son
of God."

2. "Son of God" as risen from the dead. Thus, Acts xiii.
33, 34, shows Jesus in these two positions ; ver. 33, as raised
upon earth (" again " should be omitted here, as it is in ch. iii.
22, 26, the meaning both there and here being the Messiah born
in this world) ; ver. 34, as raised up from the dead. See also
Col. i., where ver. 15 seems to refer to His birth into the world,
where He necessarily was the first-born or chief of every creature,
as being the Creator ; and ver. 18, to His place of pre-eminence
as risen, " who is the beginning, the first-born from the dead."
Heb. i. 5, 6 : ver. 5 speaks of Him in the first of these two
positions ; ver. 6, probably in the second, especially if the mar-
ginal rendering (which is most likely the correct one) be taken,
which would connect His introduction into the habitable world
with His second coming. Eev. i. 5 may confirm this.

3. Heb. i. 1 , 2, 3, evidently speaks of our Lord as Son in
the highest sense, that is, as divine. So almost everywhere in
the Gospel and Epistles of St. John. " The only begotten of the
Father " does not refer to His place as born on earth or risen
from the dead, but expresses His eternal relationship as a divine
person.

II. John v. as it shows us the Son quickening whom He
will in virtue of His divine glory, so it declares that all judg-
ment is committed to Him as Son of Man. This title refers to
His assumption of that nature in which He is first rejected, and
secondly exalted as universal Lord and Judge. See Ps. viii.
compared with Heb. ii ; Dan. vii. ; the Gospels imssim. Hence
also He is seen as " the Sou of Man " in connection with the
judgment of the seven churches in Eev. i. Hence cherubim as
the witness of judgment were wrought on the veil, the tj^pe of
His flesh.

348 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

THE PARENTHESIS IN ROMANS V.

Romans v. 12-21. — Thongh I cannot but dissent from those
who consider this a difficult passage, it is plain that it is often
misunderstood, as it is certainly momentous in its bearings.

First, I am of opinion that the parenthesis is rightly marked
so as to help the sense, 13-17 inclusively being one of those
full and instructive digressions so characteristic of St. Paul.

Next, be it observed, that the apostle traces sin up to its
source, beyond the Jew or the law. " By one man sin entered
into the world, and death by sin ; and so death passed upon
all men, for that all sinned." Sin was theirs through one ;
besides, all sinned too. It was not the law of which the Jews
boasted which brought in sin ; for it existed anterior to the
Sinai covenant. And, though sin was not j)ut to account, or
imputed to man in God's government of the world before the
law, still death reigned, the proof and wages of sin, even over
those who did not transgress a known commandment like
Adam (or like the Jews after the law was given). That is,
while in the nature of things there might not be transgression
between the two points of Adam 'and Moses, there was sin,^
and God marked His sense of it, for death reigned. Now, if
Adam were confessedly typical of the ]\Iessiah who was to
come, should not the free gift be as the offence ? For if by the
offence of the one the many (the mass connected wdth him, who
in this case were all . mankind) died, much more did the grace
of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man Jesus
Christ, abound unto the many. And shall not, as by one
that sinned, be the gift? For the judgment was of one [thing]
to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences to justi-

^ In 1 John iii. 4 tlie true force bcj-oiul a doubt is, "sin is lawlessness,"
and not "transgression of tlic law," wliich is a dilfi'rent phrase and idea. Man
was corrupt and violent before the law ; under the law he despised and rebelled
against the authority of God. Transgression is always sin ; but sin embraces much
more than transgression, being the genus of which transgression is the species.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 349

fication. For if by the offence of the one, death reigned by the
one ; much more shall those who receive abundance of grace and
of the gift of righteousness, reign in life by the one, Jesus ■
Christ. This closes the parenthesis, nor could reasoning be
more compressed in itself, or more conclusive to a Jew. "For
he, of all men, could not deny the sorrowful facts of Genesis, or
the universal ruin entailed by Adam's sin. The principle then
is conceded. From the beginning God had recognised some-
thing more than mere individualism. If the first and earthy
man had sent down to all his family sin and death, why should
not the second man, the Lord from heaven, transmit to His
family righteousness and life ? Verse 15 compares the persons
or heads; verse 16 contrasts the things, or the judgment
grounded on a single act with the state of accomplished right-
eousness {hr/.a'miia) in spite of many offences ; and verse 17
presents the crowning result, the evident propriety that, if by
the offence of one death reigned, how much rather should tlie
last Adam's family reign in life through their glorious head.

Then, we have the general thread resumed with light and
force derived from the parenthesis, and this in the most abstract
way possible. " Therefore, then (in allusion to the intervening
verses, but in direct reference to verse 12), as [it was] by one
offence unto all men to condemnation ; so also [is it] by one
accomplished righteousness unto all to justification of life. For
as by the disobedience of the one man the many were con-
stituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one shall the
many be constituted righteous." That is, verse 18 gives us the
pure and simple tendency of Adam's offence on the one hand,
and of Christ's ri"hteousness on the other. The direction of the

O

one, as of the other, was towards all men. But verse 19 adds
the very important information that, whatever might be the
scope of action in either case, the actual and definitive effect
was a different matter. All men were not left in their ruin, nor
were all, in result, delivered through Christ. Hence the change

350 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

from cravrsc, to oi roVXoi, for it is mere ignorance to take them as
equipollent. In certain circumstances they may mean the
same persons, but the terms are invariably distinct in them-
selves. Thus, in verse 18, where "all" occurs, we have the
universal aspect of the act, whether of Adam or of Christ ; but
in verse 19, where the positive application is treated of, we get
" the many " who are in fact affected thereby.

But law did come : why it entered, and, as it were by the
way, the apostle answers in verse 20. It was that (not sin, but)
"the offence might abound." God forbid that anything God
gave should be said to create evil ! Sin being already there,
the law came to bring out its real character as directly violating
God's command when He gives one. " But where sin abounded,
grace superabounded, in order that, as sin reigned in death,
so also might grace reign, through righteousness, to eternal
life by Jesus Christ our Lord."

May I just say in closing, that the authorised version is
clearly wrong in twice rendering iig 'jrdvTag dvSpui-rou; "upon all
men "? In such a sentence it ought to be, " unto or towards all
men." The distinction of £/s and It/ strikingly appears in Eom.
iii. 22 ; where we have, first, the universal tendency of God's
I'ighteousness, by faith of Jesus Christ, and then, the actual
application of it to all those who believe. This is accurately
given in our Bible, " unto all," the first and general presenta-
tion, putting all under responsibility ; and then, " upon all
them that believe," the special portion of all such as believe ;
but the distinction is lost in the same version of chap. v.

THE CHURCH.

The Holy Ghost, in the Old Testament, brings before us
either individual saints or a nation as the objects of God's
favour and counsels. It is of that nation (Israel) that the Spirit

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 351

uses the term " congregatiou " in the Old Testament, which our
translators have given as the "church in the wilderness," in
Acts vii, 38. But Bishop Pearson admits, as indeed every fair
man must, that this is a quite distinct thing from what is called
" the Church of God," etc., in the New Testament. For the
Epistle to the Ephesians, with great fulness, shows that the
body of Christ, God's Church, is founded on the abolition of the
distinction between Jew and Gentile, and, therefore, could not
be till the cross broke down the middle wall of partition. Nor
could believing Jew and Gentile be builded together for an habi-
tation of God, till the Spirit came down in a fuller way than
before, as the fruit of Christ's victory and ascension on high,
where He took the new place of Head of the Church (not merely
of King in Zion). When will they understand that this was an
entirely new work of God, and that Scripture gives to this new
assembly of believing Jews and Gentiles (bonded together by
the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven in the name of Jesus)
the name of "the Church of God"? It is not merely that the
term " Church of God " is never, in the sense now spoken of,
applied to the Old Testament saints ; but the state of things
could not be before Christ's death and resurrection as the basis,
and the Holy Spirit's personal presence (not influence, gifts, etc.,
merely) as the power of this unity. It is founded on Christ
exalted in heaven, after having accomplished redemption ; and
it is formed by that operation of the Spirit which not only
quickens but unites Jewish and Gentile saints now to Christ in
heaven and to each other on earth as one body.

Now, indubitably, such was not the case in the wilderness,
nor in the promised land : Jew and Gentile, whether believing
or not, were rigorously severed by Divine command, and the
saints were sustained by a promised Messiah, instead of resting
on the accomplished work of a Saviour. Life, of course, divine
Hfe, they had through faith, else they would not have been saints.
But there was no such thiurr as union with a slorified Head in

352 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

heaven. Xay, it did not exist even when our Lord was upon
earth. The disciples had faith and life, but they were forbidden
to go to the Gentiles, instead of being united to them, till Clirist
rose from the dead. But the moment the Spirit came down,
consequent on Christ's exaltation above, the various tongues
proclaimed God's grace to the Gentiles as well as Jews ; and
for the first time we read of " the Church," in the full and proper
sense, as now subsisting on earth (see Acts ii.) Christ had now
begun to fulfil His promise, " Upon this rock I will build my
Church." How could this mean the old assembly which fell in
the wilderness ? It was a new and future building. No point is
evaded, as indeed there was no temptation ; for the truth on this
subject is clear and certain, though 1 do not expect to convince
every one. What I have remarked in this paper spares me the
need of replying to what is urged now, which is altogether be-
side the mark. The only thing of the least shadow of weight
is Acts vii. 38, which has been fully explained (1 Cor. x.), and
proves that Israel was typical of us. How does that show that
they and we form "one body"? Christ was the Lamb fore-
ordained before the foundation of the world (not slain from it).
How does this prove that believing Jew and Gentile formed one
body of old, as unquestionably they do now ?

P.S. — The author of a paper (on CoL i. 18) admits much, too
■much I think, to allow of a long or successful resistance to the rest.
He allows that the " scriptural proofs of the peculiar blessings
belonging to the Church, since " what he terms " its Pentecostal
formation," are convincing ; but he seems to conceive that the
Old Testament saints may have had those privileges extended to
chem also, though in the separate state and removed from earth
to heaven. He does not pretend to cite Scripture for this very
imaginative mode of embodying the Old Testament saints in
the Church, which I apprehend Mill satisfy those who oppose
my views as little as myself He tries to make it out by the
illustration of the French empire, established after some distant

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 353

colony was formed, and then granting its imperial advantages
to the colonists. But the answer is plain. Scripture, in pre-
senting to our faith the groups of glory, distinguishes the spirits
of just men made perfect [i.e. in resurrection) from the Church
of the first-born. There is no such thought there as merging aU
in one ; whereas a positive decree of the emperor would be need-
ful to make good the claims of the colonists. Ps. Ixviii. 18 does
not refer to departed saints, but to Christ's triumph over the
evil spirits who had previously led His people captive.

Another writer has referred to Eom. xL and Gal. iii. in proof
that the Church actually existed as such in Old Testament times.
But this is evidently to confound things that differ, because the
inheritance of the Abrahamic promises, of which their chapters
treat, is not identical with the enjoyment of the Church's pri\d-
leges j whereas their identity is assumed in the argument. It
is allowed that the New Testament saints do inherit those
promises, but that is an essentially different thing from the
blessings revealed, e.g., in the Ephesians. The olive is not the
heavenly church but the earthly tree of promise and testimony,
of which the Jews were the natural branches. Instead of the
broken-ofif unfaithful branches. Gentiles are now grafted in ;
but, on their unfaithfulness, excisiou is the sure threat of God,
and the Jews will again be brought into their own olive tree ;
i.e. for the millennial inheritance. This is the plain teaching of
Eom. xi. ; and though as Gentiles we may be grafted in, and as
individuals we may be Abraham's seed, the special position of
Christ's body, as made known in 1 Corinthians, Ephesians,
Colossians, etc., is too distinct to require argumentation. "When
" the body" is spoken of there is no cutting off nor grafting in.
There is in it neither Jew nor Gentile. All is above nature
there.

2a

354 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

WHO SHALL "CONFIRM COVENANT"?

Daniel ix. 27. — I believe that it is impossible legitimately to
connect the death of the Messiah with the covenant confirmed
with the mass, or many, for one week {i.e. 7 years) in this pass-
age, and that for several reasons : —

First, The INIessiah was already regarded as " cut off" at the
close of a previous division of the weeks, viz. after the first
7 + 62 = G9 weeks, or 483 years.

Secondly, The disastrous end of the city and the sanctuary
is supposed to have come before the seventieth week begins.
(Compare the conclusion of verse 26.) After the Messiah was
cut off and before the last week, it will be noticed by the careful
reader that there is an interval of indefinite length, filled up by
the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, and a course of war
and desolation wliich is not yet terminated.

Thirdly, After all this comes the last, or seventieth week,
which has to do with " the beast" as clearly as the first 69 weeks
bring us down to Christ's death, the interruption of the chain
being left room for, and supplied, in the latter part of verse 26.

Fourthly, It is clear that when the Messiah has been cut off,
another personage is spoken of " as the prince that shall come,"
whom it is absurd to confound with the Messiah, because it is
7iis people who ravage the Jewish city and sanctuary ; that is,
it is a IJonian prince, and not the promised Head of Israel.

Fifthly, As this future prince of the Eomans is the last
person spoken of, it ' is most natural, unless adequate reasons
appear to the contrary, to consider that verse 27 refers to him,
and not to the slain ^Messiah : " and he shall confirm covenant "
(not " the" covenant, as the margin shows).

Sixthly, This is remarkably strengthened by the time for
which the covenant is made, namely, for seven years, which has,
in my opinion, no sense if applied to anything founded on the
Lord's death, but exactly coincides with the two periods of the

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 355

earlier, and the later half- weeks, during which the Roman beast
acts variously in the Apocalypse.

Seventhly, It is yet more fortified by the additional fact, that
when half the time of this covenant expires, " He shall cause
the sacrifice and oblation to cease," just as might be gathered
from Rev. xi. and other Scriptures.

THE SEVEN PARABLES.

Matthew xiii. — The connection between these several parables
is asked. It will be observed that they are in all seven, the
number of spiritual completeness in good or evil. (See Leviticus
and the Revelation •passim) Next, it is manifest that the first
differs from the rest, inasmuch as it is not a likeness of the
kingdom of heaven, which the following six are. Further, of
these six, three were said (beside the " sower") to the multitude
outside, as well as the disciples ; the last three to the disciples
alone, within the house. All this bears upon the true interpret-
ation, not as deciding but confirming it. For the first parable
is evidently general, if it do not particularly refer to our Lord's
personal ministry on earth, before the kingdom of heaven was
introduced by His ascension. It is not here the heir sent to
receive the fruit of the vineyard ; Jesus is "a sower ;" and His
sowing is hindered and opposed by the world, the flesh, and the
devil, as we find in the explanation (verses 19-22), though a por-
tion of the seed takes root in good ground.

The three public comparisons of the kingdom of heaven
follow,— the wheat and tare field, the mustard seed, and the
leaven. The sower here is still the Son of man ; but it is His
work from heaven (just as in j\Iark xvi. 20 ; Ephes. ii. 17). It
is the kingdom of Christ when rejected by the Jews ; of Christ
absent, not present in visible power and glory. It is the king-
dom of heaven on earth, entrusted to servants, who, alas ! are
soon asleep, and the devil sows his wicked children in the midst of

336 BIBLICAL ANNO TA TIONS.

the true cTiildren of the kingdom. The general teaching then is,
that the new dispensation, as far as man's responsibility was con-
cerned, would see ruin introduced by the enemy, which nothing
could remedy but the judgment executed at the end of the age.
But this is not all. Christendom would grow from a diminutive
beginning into a " tree," emblematic of a towering earthly power,
which would even shelter the instruments of Satan (compare
verses 4 and 19 with 32). Nor this only : for a system of doctrine,
nominally at least Christian, should spread over a certain defined
mass, till the whole was leavened. Whether this mixture, this
worldly aggrandisement, this propagation of (not life or truth, but)
profession, such as it was, were of the Lord or His enemy, must be
gathered not merely from hints here, but from Scripture generally.
Then, upon the dismission of the multitude, the Lord
explains the chief of the first three similitudes of the kingdom,
and adds three more, which develope not its external appearances,
but its internal aspects to the spiritual man. Treasure hid in
the field, the pear], and the drag-net, comprehend tliese further
instructions. Christ buys the field for the sake of the treasure.
His own that He loved in the world. This, nevertheless, did
not fully tell out either His love or their beauty in His eyes.
Therefore, as it seems to me, the parable of the pearl follows, —
" one pearl of great price," the unity and the peerless charms of
that object in the Lord's eyes, for which He gave up " all that He
had," as Messiah, here below ; yea, life itself. The net evidently
presents the closing circumstances of the kingdom, as to which I
would briefly call attention to two facts often confounded, that the
fishermen gather the good into vessels, casting the bad away, while
the angels at the consummation sever the wicked from among
the just. Our part is to take forth the precious from the vile ;
theirs will be to sej)arate the vile from the precious. Grace
in man occupies itself with "the good." It will be the judicial
task of the angels to deal with the wicked, and to leave '* the
just" as the nucleus for the Lord's glory in the millennial earth.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 357

THE HEAVENLY CALLING.

Hebrews iii. — It is of no small moment to bear iu mind
that, while the "heavenly calling," as a developed system,
depends on the ascension of the Lord Jesus Christ into heaven,
the faith of Old Testament believers was far in advance of their
calling and circumstances. Thus, the Lord called Abram from
his country and kindred and father's house to a land that He
would show him ; and it was certainly by faith that he obeyed
and went out, not knowing whither he went. But Heb. xi. 9
shows us the further action of faith ; for when he got to the
land he sojourned in it as in a strange country, because a ray
of the distant heavenly glory had dawned on his soul. "He
looked for a city which hath foundations," etc. Thus he and
the other patriarchs died, as they lived, in faith, not in actual
possession. Nevertheless, such strangership as this neither
amounts to nor implies the " heavenly calling." Doubtless, the
" heavenly calling " now produces and enjoins strangership
also ; but tliis in no way proves that itself was published and
enjoyed of old.

For the " heavenly calling," brought before us in Hebrews,
grew out of the position of the Lord as having appeared, and
when He had by Himself purged our sins, as having sat down
on the right hand of the Majesty on high. Hence the earthly
tabernacle and the rest in the land, and the Levitical priesthood
and sacrifices entirely disappear, for the partakers of the
heavenly calling who are addressed in the epistle. This state
of things was not true either of the fathers or the children of
Israel. Their hope was intimately bound up with the land (no
doubt, under the Messiah and a glorified condition, but still
their land and people as the medium of blessing for all others) ;
but the " heavenly calling " was not revealed, nor could be till
He came whose rejection led to it, and whose redemption and
consequent glorification in heaven became its basis. Hence

358 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

Abram had his earthly altar. Hence he sacrificed, as did his
descendants, in due season, of the flock, or the herd, or the
appointed clean birds. Then comes the worldly sanctuary and
its most instructive furniture and rites, that spoke of better
things looming in the future. Nobody that I know disputes
that individual saints saw beyond these shadows, dimly per-
haps but really, to a coming Saviour and a heavenly country.
Still the land to which the patriarchs were called was an earthly
land, and the entire polity of Israel was that of a nation
governed under the eye of a God who displayed Himself on
earth in their midst — in contrast with " the heavenly calling,"
of which not the less it furnished striking types, mutatis
mutandis. Accordingly, in Heb. xi., after having traced the
precious individual traits of the Spirit in the Old Testament saints,
not only from Abraham but from Abel downwards, we are guarded
against the error that would merge all in one lump, by the inci-
dental statement of the last verse. (See also chap. xii. 23.)
The elders have not received the promise ; they are waiting till
the resurrection for that. Meanwhile God has provided unfore-
seen some better thing for us. He has given us not promise
only but accomplishment in Christ. He has made us worship-
pers once purged, having no more conscience of sins. He calls
us boldly to enter into the holiest by a new and living way
consecrated for us. None of these things could be so predicated
of them, and yet these things are but a part of the heavenly
calling. Truly, then, has God provided some better thing for
us, even if we only look at what is now made known through
the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. It is also true that
they without us shall not be made perfect. They and we shall
enter on our respective portion in resurrection glory at the
coming of Christ. Meanwhile we have no earthly calling,
nothing but an heavenly one.

So far is it from being true that the early ecclesiastical
writers erred by distinguishing too sharply between the dis-

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 359

pensations, that their main characteristic is Judaising the
church by denying the real differences. Jerome did this no
less than others, even to the confounding of Christ's ministiy
with Jewish priesthood.

WHAT THE CHURCH CONSISTS OF.

If certain views as to what " the church " consists of are asked
to be clearly stated, I cannot better fulfil this request than by
giving the following extracts from a writer deeply versed in
these subjects : — ■

The Word of God presents to us a charcli formed on earth, by the
power of the Holy Ghost come down from heaven when the Son of God sat
down there in glory, having accomplished the work of redemption. This
church is one with its Head ; it is the body whereof Christ, ascended on
high and seated on the right hand of God, is the Head. (Eph. i. 20-23 ;
ii. 14-22 ; iii. 5-6 ; iv. 4-16 ; 1 Cor. xii. 12, 13 ; John xii. 32, xi. 52.)

Tlie same Spirit, who, by the means of those whom God chose,

had called sinners and communicated life to them, has also united them in
one body, whose Head is the glorified Christ, and of which the Spirit
Himself is the bond with Christ, and in which He serves as the bond

between the members one with another The church, then, is a

body subsisting in unity here below, formed by the pcwer of God, who
gathers His children in union with Christ its Head ; a body which derives
its existence and unity from the work and jiresence of the Holy Ghost
come down from heaven as the consequence of the ascension of Jesus.

What is described in Epliesians, and defined as the church,

is a state of things impossible to exist before the death and resurrection of
Christ as its basis, and the presence of the Holy Ghost as its formative aud
maintaining power. Any definition we could give of it, according to
Ephesians, supposes these two things. The Spirit of God, there, tieats
Jews and Gentiles as alike children of wrath, speaks of the middle wall of
partition broken down by the cross of Jesus, the actual exaltation of Jesus
above all principality and power, and us raised and exalted with Him ;
and both Jew and Gentile reconciled in one new man, in one body by the
cross, and builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit ;
so that there is one body and one Spirit. It is declared, consequently, that
" now unto principalities and powers in heavenly places is made known by

the Church the manifold wisdom of God." There are two great

trutlis dependent on this doctrine : the church united to Christ in glory

35o BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

accomplished hereafter ; and meanwhile, as far as existing or developed on
earth, the habitation of God through the Spirit. This is its calling, of
which it is to walk worthy ; a calling clearly impossible from its very
nature, till the descent of the Holy Ghost made it such an habitation.

That the saints will all be gathered into everlasting blessedness as partak-
ing of Christ as their life, and redeemed by His blood, according to the
counsels of God, and conformed to the image of His Son, is owned. They
are all 'redeemed by blood, and all quickened by divine life. But the
doctrine insisted on is this : that, Christ having broken down the middle
wall of partition by His death, and ascended up on high, and sat down on
the right hand of God, and thus presented the full efficacy of His work in
the presence of God, the Holy Ghost has come down and united believers in
one body, thus united to Christ as one body ; which body is in Scripture
designated the Church, or assembly of God, and is His habitation through the
Spirit. In this, as founded on the risen and exalted Saviour, and united to
Him, as seen on high, by the Holy Ghost, there is neither Jew nor Greek.
Christ, as exalted, is entirely above these distinctions ; Jew or Greek are
alike brought nigh, as having been children of wrath, by the blood of that
cross by which the middle wall of partition has been broken down. Hitherto
God had saved souls. At Pentecost He gathered His children into the
assembly on earth ; He added daily to the Church such as should be
saved. It is no longer salvation merely, nor even the kingdom, God
begins to form His Church here below (Acts ii).

To make the Church a company of believing Jews, with Gentiles
added to them, and Abraham's seed their proper definition, entirely shuts
out this divine teaching, because the position given to the Church in
Ephesians entirely precludes their being looked at as Jews ; and the
character of " Abraham's seed " comes in merely to show they are true
heirs of promise, because they are Christ's, who is the seed of Abraham
and Heir of the promises. But, most clearly, this is altogether the lower
ground on which to speak of Christ, in comparison with His glorious exalta-
tion at the right hand of God, on which the Church as such is founded.
.... No one can read the Ephesians attentively without seeing that the
Church, as one body existing on earth, though heavenly in privilege and
character, takes its place consequent on the work of the cross, the exalta-
tion of Jesus to the right hand of God, and the coming down of the Holy
Ghost. Hence to give any definition of the Church which implies its
existence (other than in the counsels of God), which speaks of its existence
on earth {e.g. during the life of Christ on earth, or previous to His exalta-
tion and the descent of the Holy Ghost), denies its nature, and sets aside
its character Those who compose the Church have other relation-

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 361

ships besides. They are children of Abraham But these latter

characters do not weaken what has been stated, much less do they annul

it 1 Cor. xii. describes the Church ... .as one body on earth.

So Eph. i. iv. ; Col. i. ii While then one would sympathise with the

godly dread some may feel at anything which seems to affect the salvation
of all saints from the beginning, and the electing love of God in respect of
them, it is well, on the other hand, to call things by their right, i.e. scrip-
tural, names. The Spirit of God is infinitely wiser than man, and our
business is to see, follow, and admire His wisdom, as in other matters, so
here. He has restricted the title "Church of God," in a New Testament
sense, to those who are baptized with the Holy Ghost.

Such is a brief exposition of the views in question, which, to
my mind, carry scriptural proof along with them. But what 1
contend is, that the view which makes the church of God em-
brace believers in all dispensations is wholly devoid of such
proof. It is in vain to reason, against the plainest and fullest
testimony of God's word, that "all saints are equally and
similarly justified by faith .... alike called saints .... the
names of all written in one book, the Book of Life." These
similarities, which are not denied, are by no means inconsist-
ent with the place of the church as the body and bride of
Christ. But when it is pronounced that " the new Covenant
Church " (a term not found in Scripture) " has no higher place
assigned it than participating in the blessings of faithful
Abraham," the entire teaching of Scripture, above referred to
(in Eph., Col., etc.) is set aside. It really then becomes a question
of spiritual intelligence, if not worse. This objection is ignorance
of or opposition to Scripture.

As to Heb. xii. 22, 23, we must adopt not only with some of
the best critics, but with the most ancient versions, as the Syriac,
Vulgate, etc., the punctuation xa/ fji.vpiuffiv, ayy'ikm rravriyvpsi,
xui iXKXrjfficc, Tff. X. r. X- It is confessedly required by the struc-
ture of the whole portion of which every paragraph is commenced
by xai. So that the attempt to make this passage show " the
general assembly " and " the church " as identical is a failure.

362 BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS.

No doubt we read of " the church in the wilderness." But v/.-/,'/.rie!a.
simply means an " assembly " or " congregation." In Acts xix. 32,
39, 41, the confused meeting of the Ephesians cannot mean the
church of God, yet it is called n v/.x}.r,(sia. So " the church in the
wilderness" ought rather to have been " the assembly" there. It
means, iinquestionably, not the church of God, but the congre-
gation of Israel, almost all of whose carcases fell in the wilder-
ness, and to whom God sware that they should not enter into
His rest. It is said again : " Besides, He was slain from the found-
ation of the world." A comparison of this passage (Rev. xiii.
8) with Eev. xvii. 8, where the same persons and circumstances
are referred to, makes it evident that " from the foundation of
the world" should be connected, not with " the Lamb slain,"
but with " the names written in the book of life." It is thus
plain that the arguments, whether of one adversary or of
another, have no weight when examined. And yet they are
among the principal ones against the view which, in my opinion,
Scripture so plainly sets forth, viz. that the body of believers,
gathered from the day of Pentecost until the time wdien Christ
shall come to take His heavenly people to Himself, has, M'hile
sharing many fundamental blessings with all the redeemed, a
distinct calling and privileges of its own, and alone has the title
assigned to it of " the church of God" or Christ's bodv.

" ALL THEY THAT BE IN ASIA."
2 Timothy i. 15. — Are these all the Asian saints absolutely, or
are they only the few that had been at Eome, and had shown this
cowardice towards St. Paul, — that they had failed to identify
themselves with him, and his testimony and circumstances ?
Clearly the latter : and the way of speaking of them used by the
apostle (oi iv rfj Waiof) is likely due to the fact that these Asian
Christians were home again in Asia when Paul wrote to Timothy
about their neglect of him when tlicy were in Rome ; and that
Timothy, to whom he wrote, was then in Asia also.

BIBLICAL ANNOTATIONS. 363

It is rather too wide a conclusion to come to, that all the
Christians in Asia had turned away from Paul. The fickleness
of the Galatians would warrant us in looking for a good deal
of turning away from Paul in Asia ; but this passage gives no
countenance to the incredible notion that the whole of the
Asian saints had given up Paul, The fact of Phygellus and
Hermogenes being mentioned as two of them, shows that they
were only a few. And again, the praise of .Onesiphorus (an
Asian), in the same connection, for seeking him out very dili-
gently and finding him, and not being ashanied of his chain,
points pretty plainly to the circumstances of the apostle as the
cause of their repudiation of him, and that the scene of their so
doing had been Pome. He says in effect : The Asians all
shunned me when here ; but instead of being ashamed of me, or
repudiating me, Onesiphorus sought me out with more than
ordinary diligence, and found me. 2 Tim. i. 8 shows that this
was the purport of the apostle's meaning. " Be not thou there-
fore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His
prisoner ; but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel
according to the power of God."

" THEY DID EAT AND DRIXK."

Exodus xxiv. 11. — Does this mean, as some make it, that
they enjoyed a feast with Jehovah ? " Also they saw God, and
did eat and drink," means nothing more than this, — they lived ;
they were not struck down dead. It was expected that no one
could see God and not die. " Manoah said unto his wife, We
shall surely die, because we have seen God" (Judges xiii. 22).
"What was the origin of this thought? The conviction that man,
as he is, is so unfit for God's presence, that to see God must be
death to man. The death and resurrection of Him who became
man and died for us is meant to deliver the believer from such
a feelincr. He is indeed dead and risen with Him.

EPISTOLARY COI^IMUNICATIONS.

TABERNACLE, COVENANT, AND PUTTING AWAY SIN.

Heb. IX.
Ottawa, America, Oct. 2*7th, 1876.
]\Iy dear Brother .... I write at once as to Heb. ix. A/a
is used for a state or condition, which affects the principle on which
we act or receive anything, on which anything takes place. Thus,
Eom. iv. 11, ^/' dx^rSvaTiag ; Eom. ii. 27, dia y^d/Mfx^arog xal 'Tre^irc/iric,

So it is in Heb. ix. 11. As to 'xa^ayivofj.ivos, though it be having
come, it is not the act of coming £f%o/xa/, but being present in or
for something by coming ; coming into a certain condition, so
that He is there, or come in view of what is to be done when
arrived. The verb in the sentence is ilan'^Oiv i(pd'za^, verse 12.
He had taken the position of High Priest of coming good things ;
and this office was to be fulfilled, not in the present earthly
tabernacle, but in a greater and more perfect one. The taber-
nacle is not, therefore, I think, the incarnation, for His priesthood
(save the fact of atonement) was not on earth ; it is exercised in
connection with heavenly things, though tliere securing earthly
ones for Israel. -Tra^ayivo/uvog is entering into the condition of
priesthood, not incarnation or glory, and that is connected with
the heavenly tabernacle. The fact of His going in is in 24 as in
12 ; this referring to eternal redemption, which He had found;
that, to the fact of His abiding presence before God there for
us ; but in both tiai^xo/zai, the act of going in, not vu^aym/j^ai,
what He had come to be or do, the condition entered into or in
view. I do not consider bid al/jburoc, or rod iBlou a'i]u,a,roc as lustru-

TABERNACLE, COVENANT, ETC. 365

mental, but to be used in the sense already referred to. The end
of the ages, or consummation of the ages, are all the dealings of
God with man to test his general condition. In this general
sense the state of innocence comes in ; but the proper connec-
tion is what is after the fall, yet not looking at man as lost, but
testing his state and whether he was recoverable, or was lost and
had to be saved. Without law ; under law ; God manifested in
the flesh, were the great features of this. Hence in John xii, the
Lord says, " Now is the judgment of this world." Though there
was testimony, there were no religious institutions before the
flood, unless the fact of sacrifices. There were after : govern-
ment, promises to Abraham, showing it was grace to one sepa-
rated from an idolatrous world and head of a new race, the law,
the prophets, and at last the Son as come, not as offered. Then
God laid the foundation of His own purposes in righteousness.
The difference is that in John i. 29 it is the sin of the, world, in
Heb. ix. it is to put away sin more generally. Neither will have
full accomplishment till the new heavens and the new earth. In
this last passage we have to distinguish between it and bearing
the sins of many. The last concerns us, and purging our con-
science. I do not think it has been adequately seen how all good
and evil has been brought to an issue in the cross — in that
place of sin before God, that is, in Christ made sin (though in
the last words it is for us, 2 Cor. v. 21). We have the abso-
lute wickedness of man and enmity against God in goodness ;
' the complete power of Satan, " your hour and the power of dark-
ness ; " the prince of this world leading all men, the disciples
having fled ; man in his absolute perfection, in M-hom that
prince had nothing, but there was perfect love to the Father and
perfect obedience, man in absolute perfection, and that as made
sin before God, where it was needed for God's glory. For it was
where He was made sin that the obedience was made perfect,
obedient unto death ; God absolute in righteousness against sin,
and perfect in love to the sinner. This, therefore, is the finished

366 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

and so immutable ground of eternal perfectness. ATe cannot say
as to the result sin is actually put away, save for us (2 Cor. v.)
who by the Holy Ghost know it ; but the work is perfectly done
on the ground of which there will be a new heavens and a new
earth wherein dwelleth righteousness. We must not confound
" sin" and "sins." He has borne the sins of many (they never can
be remembered against us) ; loved and washed from them in His
own blood : our conscience, once purged, is made clean for ever.
But sin is that alienation of all things, and first of all of our hearts,
from God, which requires reconciliation of things in heaven
and earth, which is not yet, and of ourselves which is ; see Col.
i. 20, 21, and many confirmatory passages. Christ then has been
manifested for the total abolition of sin out of heaven and earth,
defilement and alienation gone, besides our guilt being atoned
for and our sins remitted ; but both are by His sacrifice, in
which God withal has been perfectly glorified in all that He is.
The result is not yet wholly accomplished, nor will be fully till
the new heavens and the new earth. The yMTayJivia of Phil, are
another thing ; they bow but are not reconciled, I say this to
avoid mistakes. The burnt-offering alone took the ground of sin,
the sin-offering of sins. Eomans also, i. 17-v. 11, treats of sins ;
V, 12-end of viii. of sin only, here only as to man on the earth.
(pi^iiv is as to sins, 6 a7^wi/ goes on to sin. Sins are borne, sin put
away. Of course our sins are wholly taken away, but tliat is
" our." He is never said to have borne the sins of all or of the
world, or taken them away, but our sins, or tbose of many ; but
He is the 6 ahm of sin out of the universe, the taker-away of it,
the result being not yet accomplished, ug adirr/aiv is the result
proposed, rid'iTTias is not said. The work is done, the full result
not yet brouglit about ; but it is all in virtue of that, though
power comes in to make it good, just as it does in the micro-
cosm of ourselves, even as to the body in due time.

As to the question of "covenant" or " testament": "cove-
nant" is always right, save in Heb. ix. 16, 17. Even here it

THE RANSOM MONEY. 367

has been- contested; but it seems more simple to take it as
" testament," an observation or allusion by the by, haOr^-Kni being
in Greek covenant or testament or disposition. The voice of
roD biadiij.ho\} has been the great bone of contention where it lias
been discussed ; translated, if covenant, " the appointed " [sacri-
fice]. But this has seemed to me forced. Some have even made
Gal. iii. 15, 16 "testament," but this, I judge, is entirely wrong.

THE RANSOM MONEY.

Boston, U.S., January 1877.
]\Iy dear Brother — I have read the Losepenningen of Dr. Wal-
denstrom. I had previously read his Latin thesis on the Lutheran
symbolical books. There he was all right in combating the
common error that Christ's work changed God's mind, and that
God was then but a Judge, and practically that love was in Christ,
and only judgment in God, as if the work of Christ procured
His love. I have very often insisted on the truth as to this.
You have both sides in John iii. 14, 15. But he drops out " the
Son of MAN must," and holds only that " God gave His Son." And
thus it is a very wrong production. Still the error that is in it
arises from having got hold of the love, and so getting onesided.
The interpretation of the passage is all wrong, but that is not so
material ; but he confounds purchasing and redemption. If what
he says means anything, all sins of all men are put away.

Dr. W. is also careless in his use of Scripture. He contradicts
himself; for though sins are blotted out the curse abides on
sinners continually. Wrath and the curse remain for those who
are sinners, yet there was no wrath in God ! The justified are
taken from under the curse ; but they had been under it then
it appears, and, in their sins, were under the wrath of God and
condemnation. He mixes up all this confusion and contradiction
with just refutation of errors. And note. What did Christ suffer
and be forsaken of God for ? It is all well to say God's love gave

368 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

Him, and that was the source of all. No doubt. But why did
Christ suffer as He did ? why had He the stripes ? He is a pro-
pitiation, an iXae/Mog, He suffered iXdcKsffdai. God had not to be
reconciled, but His righteous holy nature required the sin to be
put away. Then he uses "we" and "us" in the mouth of believers,
as if it was all the world. His doctrine as to not living under
law and experience is dangerous. I resist looking to experience
as much as he does ; but, in citing the lost sheep and the father
of the prodigal, he has dropped the return of the prodigal, so
carefully brought out in detail by the Lord to make the
difference between conversion and salvation clear. I reject
utterly self-examination for peace ; but a soul will have to know
itself — not merely its sins forgiven, but that " in me, that is in
my flesh, dwelleth no good thing." He resists reconciling God, in
which he is right. But he has neglected one side of Scripture
truth ; has quoted Scripture without heed ; and contradicts him-
self It is confusion of redemption and purchase that has made
all his doctrine wrong. Christ is an dvrlXvr^ov hmo iravruv. but
that which is the strongest statement is very different from
dmXvT^cueig. It is a pity he could not be set straight, for the
point of departure of his mind is just : but he has followed it
out hastily, not weighing Scripture. He has lost the /Xaa/xog side
of the work, and this is dangerous. It has not gone to denying
that the sins had to be put away, and therefore has thrown all
his teaching into confusion. The blood of the goat was pre-
sented to God on the' mercy-seat, and Christ is entered in not
without blood ; why if it M'ere not needed to }Xda-/.iadai rdg
dfj^a^riag rou Xaou 1 Why was it presented to God ? Not surely to
change His mind or make Him love (a horrid thought), but
needed for His righteousness and holy nature. It became Him
in bringing many sons to glory. So He says to Israel, When /
see the blood, I will pass over. There is wrath and the curse
he admits — why? and what met it so that it should not be
executed on us? Hence He always confounds God and the

THE RANSOM MONEY. 369

Father, makinfj us all His children, " God so loved the world." It
is never said " the Father " loved the world. The Father is a name
of relationship with His children, not with the world. Dr. W.
admits they are not all saved. The question is not, Did Christ
undertake a partial restoration? but. Did He undertake the
restoration of all? He died for all, I believe, but that is a
very different thing. Here you have purchase and redemption
as the same, and their perfect restoration the same as He under-
took. All this is confusion and mist. He is wrong even in
saying purchase is always spoken of all. In 1 Cor. vi. 20 and
vii. 23 it is not so ; and 2 Peter ii. 1 is quite another thought,
and so is Matt. xiii. 44, where the field is clearly bought to
have the treasure. There are two other cases in Eev. where
it is distinctly not all, and rrsBiTroiov/ubai, where the same is true.
I cannot find one passage where it is all. To state that it is
so always is not careful.

FOUR CHAEACTEPtlSTIC FEATURES OF A CHRISTIAN.
Dear Brother — I have been interested just lately by what
is written in Eph. iv. 30, v. 1-3, and send you a few thoughts
on it. A Christian in apostolic days was sealed by the Holy
Spirit of God, and he knew it. He was forgiven of God, and
he was conscious of it. He shared in the love of Christ, and
was sensible of it. He was a saint of God, and was reminded
of it. Very great were these favours, and for the most part
very wonderful ; yet each of them could furnish ground on which
to base most practical exhortations for every-day life. Sealed
by the Holy Spirit of God, the Christian was not to grieve Him.
Forgiven of God in Christ, they were to forgive one another.
Loved by Christ, they were to walk in love. As saints, they
were to refrain even from the naming among themselves of
those unclean ways by which men are so often defiled. Their be-
ing thus exhorted showed into what, unless watcliful, they might
fall. The terms, however, in which they were addressed, proved

2b

370 EPIS TOLA R V COMMUNICA TIONS.

that they never could be lost. For God had forgiven them, and
they were sealed by the Spirit unto the day of redemption.

THE FIRST-BORN OF EVERY CREATURE.

What is the exact meaning of " first-born of every creature,"

rrpuroToxog craffTjj xriciug Col. i. 15?

In a new translation it is said, " it is not each individual as
such, but of everything called xTieig in its nature (compare Heb.
ix. 11). 'Creature' individually is xr/V/ia." This settles it as
against the querist if that passage had been in his mind.

But Meyer says [on T^uroroxo; -Trasra xr/asug] after the relation
of Christ to God, now follows His relation to ivhat is created, in an
apologetic interest of opposition to the Gnostic false teachers. . .
The false teachers denied to Christ the supreme unique rank in
the order of spirits. But He is first-horn of every creature, that
is, born before every creature — having come to personal existence,
entered upon subsistent being, ere yet anything created was extant
(Rom. i. 25, viii. 39 ; Heb. iv. 13). Analogous, but not equi-
valent, is Prov. viii. 22,/.

In a note as against Hoffmann he says that this expression
"posits the origin of Christ (as Xoyog Tr^opoomoi) in His temporal
relation to the creature ; and this point is tlie more purely to
be adhered to, seeing that Christ Himself does not belong to the
category of the xrlaig.".

Then, in the text, he proceeds — " It is to be observed that
this predicate [first-born] also belongs to the eiitire Christ,
inasmuch as by His exaltation His entire person is raised to that
state in which He, as to His divine nature, liad already existed
before the creation of tlie world," etc. " The mode in which he
(Paul) conceived of the personal pre-existence of Christ before
the world, as regards (timeless) origin, is not defined by the
figurative ^^or&Voxos more precisely than as procession from the

THE FIRST-BORN OF E VER V CREA TURE. 37 1

Divine- nature, whereby the pre-mundane Christ became sub-
sistent, h ^o^f ^ ©sou and lea ©sp (Phil. ii. 6).

The genitive 'xaam ^rioiujg, moreover, is not the partitive
genitive (although De Wette stiU, with Usteri, Reuss, and Baur,
holds this to be indubitable), because the anarthrous ^a<ra xrisig
does not mean the whole creation, or everything ivhich is created
(Hoffmann), and consequently cannot affirm the category or
collective ichole to which Christ belongs as its first-born in-
dividual (it means every creature: compare on frasa oly.ohoM,
Eph. ii. 21) ; but it is the genitive of comparison, corresponding
to the superlative expression, 'Hhe first-lorn in comparison with
every creature" that is, horn earlier than every creature.

In a note he says against Hoffmann—" The interpretation
of H. is incorrect, because there would thereby be necessarily
affirmed a homogeneous relation of origin for Christ and all the
xr/V/s." " H. opines that cracrjjg xr/ffjw; is simply genitive of, ' of
the definition of relation ' {e.g., ' in relation to aU that is created,
Christ occupies the position which a first-born has towards the
household of his father ')•" " But this " (continues Meyer) " ex-
plains nothing, because the question remains. What relation is
meant to be defined by the genitive? The T^ororoKog 'xaem
xrieiug is not at all to be got over so easily as it is by Hoffmann,
namely, with a grammatically erroneous explanation of the
anarthrous ^a(ra xrlsig, and with appeal to Ps. Ixxxix. 27 (where
in fact, cr^soroVoxos stands without genitive, and 1133 in the sense of
the first rank."

" The genitive here is to be taken quite as the comparative
genitive with -TPurog (see on John i. 15, etc.) The element of
comparison is the relation of time {'^r^h roD rhv xoe/iov vvai, Jolm
xvii. 5), and that in respect of origin. But because the latter in
the case of every xrla,; is different from what it is in the case of
Christ .... the term rrpurCroxog is chosen, wliich, in com-
parison as to the time of origin, points to the peculiar nature of
the origmation in the case of Christ, namely, that He was not

372 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

created by God like the other beings in whom this is implied in
the designation -/.Tioii, but &or?i, having come forth homogeneous
from the nature of God.

" And by this is expressed, not a relation homogeneous with
the xr/rf/s (Holtzmann), a relation kindred to the world, but that
which is absolutely exalted above the world, and unique. . . .

"At variance, therefore, with the words is the Arian interpret-
ation that Christ is designated as the first creature. With this
view the sequel also conflicts, which describes Christ as the
accomplisher and aim of creation ; hence in His case a mode of
origin higher and different from the heing created must be pre-sup-
posed, which is, in fact, characteristically indicated in the pur-
posely-chosen word ■-^uTorcy.o;. ... If the creation of all things
took place in Christ, it is evident that He must stand Icfore the
series of created things, and be rr^uroroxog •TrdoTi; xrlasug."

So far Meyer, the best of all*the German critics of the Greek
text. What say you to it ?

Do you think E/V-cof and -Trouroroxos refer to Christ in His
divine nature, or in incarnation ?

See also Dr. J. B. Lightfoot's " Colossians," pp. 210-21G, for
an historical sketch of the interpretation. Augustine and
Pelagius, he says, held both to be expressions of the Incarnate
Christ. The " Fathers " did so generally to meet the Arians.
And Marcellus went into error, making it all the moral crea-
tion, and applying the term to the whole context.

Dr. Lightfoot's notes are copious, and his discussion contains
much valuable information ; but he does not very distinctly tell
us what he thinks, though I gather that he regards both expres-
sions of Christ's divine nature.

Olsiiausen says : " In verses 15-17 Christ is delineated
without reference to His incarnation." Again : " He (the Son
of God) must have been born of the substance of the Father
before all the creation, /o?- all things are created in Him."

Bp. Ellicott will have it everything that is created, not the

THE FIRST- nORN OF EVERY CREATURE. 373

whole creation, " begotten, and that antecedently to everything
that was created." " He disdains not to institute a temporal
comparison between His own generation from eternity and their
creation in time." He admits in a very secondary and inferential
sense priority in dignity, " the genitive of the point of view"

Alford suggests that the safe method is to combine the two
ideas of priority and dignity — " that Christ was not only first-
born of His mother in the world, but first-begotten of His
Father before the worlds, and that He holds the rank, as com-
pared with every created thing, of first-born in dignity. For,
etc., V. 16, where this assertion is justified."

TnEODORET : " Not as having creation for a sister, but as
begotten before all creation."

Chrysostom : " Not significant of glory and honour, but
only of time."

Braune : " Since Taff?)? denotes every kind of creature, angels
and. men, Christ existed before all. He does not begin the series
of a category as ' first-begotten of the dead ' (Eev. i. 5) ' among
many brethren ' (Eom. viii. 29), but He is antecedent, condition-
ing the creation."

This is the reply which the sending of the foregoing has
elicited from a friend : —

" I believe that Meyer errs in making tawi-oVoxo; expressive
of priority in time, and is inconsistent in applying it to the Lord
before He became a man. His language that He came to
personal existence before creation, what does it mean ? Put it
back as far as you like, His hecoming a person is to me a strange
proof of Meyer's own soundness in the faith ; but it proves the
false interpretation. The man he most opposes, Hoffmann, seems
nearer the truth in this matter.

' John L is perfectly clear that the Word was God, and had
a personal existence as the Word with God before time began,
that is, from all eternity. In time He became man ; in time

374 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

He was to be (as I understand it) both first-born of all creation
{i.e. of everything to be designated creature), and first-born from
the dead, but the former as incarnate, and the latter as risen.

" Hoffmann is right in designating the genitive as expressive of
relation or in an objective point of view. It is, indeed, still more
common than either of its special applications to ablation or
partition ; so that no objection can be valid on that score. It
is notoriously comprehensive, so as to take in that which ex-
presses comparison, value, etc., and is the objective rather than
the subjective genitive. The Lord then is shown to be, not
only the image of the invisible God, but first-born of all creation,
meaning not priority of time, which would then be contrary to
fact, but pre-eminence of dignity, no matter when He was born
in time ; and this because He created all. I, too, do not
deny that it is a genitive of comparison ; only it is supremacy,
and not merely earliest in time, which is not true, and, if ap-
plied to His divine existence, would simply deny and destroy
its reality. D-id He hecome a Divine person, no matter how
early in time ? It is a very narrow partition, if any, which
divides this idea from Arianism. Ps. Ixxxix. explains very
clearly the case. For Solomon, though in fact late as being
David's tenth son, became by God's will and sovereign choice
first-born, that is, chief; so with Christ as man, though on the
infinitely deeper ground of His own divine glory and right as
Creator of all.

" Hence, we must' of course reject such forced efforts as that
founded on the very different phrases in John i. 15 or in Johu
xvii. 5. Origin is not the point, but relation of comparison.
' Begotten ' or ' born,' in relation to the Son in the Godhead,
cannot be allowed to mean a point of time, or subsequence, as I
understand JMeyer to mean, but simply the nearest relationship,
or community of nature, between the Son and the Father. Was
He or was He not Son from all eternity, as the Father was Father
from all eternity ? or are we to reason from manhood, and infer

THE FIRST-BORN OF EVERY CREATURE. 375

that, because a father precedes his son, so it is in the Godhead ?
This I believe to be Arianism, and as baseless in Scripture as in
sound reasoning, if we reason from the revealed nature of God-
head.

*' In words, no doubt, Meyer avoids bald Arianism ; but what
does he mean if not the same thing in substance ? Applied to
Christ as man and in time, all is plain and certainly true ; and
His divine glory is left untouched ; whereas these speculations
do sully and lower and deny it in effect. For, as I understand
the opening paragraph, it is taught by ^leyer that Christ is
first-born of every creature, as born before all, as having cortie
to personal existence, or entered on subsistent being before
creation, citing Rom. i. 25, viii. 39, and Heb. iv. 13, not one of
which touches the question, and saying that Prov. viii. 22 is
analogous, though not equivalent. Is it the old Alexandrian
idea of the Xoyog Ivdidhrog becoming crgofo^/xo's? Is this sound
doctrine ? In Scripture I see the Word God, and with God eter-
nally, not the Word coming to personal existence ; I see the Son
in the bosom of the Father, not entering on subsistent being, be
the point ever so early so as to create all that is created.

" But, further, where is the consistency of teaching that, if
vp. rr. XT. means such priority as this, Christ's temporal relation
to the creature, it also belongs to the entire Christ. Certainly
the entire Christ was late in the history of human kind. When
the fulness of time was come,- God sent forth His Son, Now,
once in the end or consummation of the ages has He been
manifested for putting away of sin by His sacrifice. Nay, stress
is laid on the language of the apostle, that it is what Christ is,
not what He was, that is on His exaltation as risen to heaven.
How then, if it be so, are we to put this interpretation of tp. t. xr.
into harmony with what we have already heard ? How can this
predicate, first-born of every creature, belong to the entire Christ,
and Christ exalted after the assumption of humanity and His
work on earth, in the sense of born ere yet anything created

376 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

was extant? If I do not mistake, the idea is that He who
"became personally pre-existent before the world, hecame also man,
and in due time risen from the dead and exalted in heaven ;
but that Christ is -r^. w. xr. in both senses seems to be Meyer's
notion. It appears to me that the Lord is t^. t. xr. in neither
sense, and that it is as incarnate He is so designated. For in
becoming man His glory might have been obscured and for-
gotten. Taking part in blood and flesh, as the apostle says
elsewhere, He might have been viewed in a way derogatory to
His person and His higher nature. Therefore, He is carefully
shown to be ' first-born of all creation,' and this because in the
power of His person all the universe was created, invisible no
less than visible ; and this in strong contradistinction from
His being ' first-born from among the dead,' which He is as
exalted to heaven and head of the church. Alone, and always,
and perfectly representing the invisible God, as His image, He
had the headship of all creation when incarnate, the headship
of the church when risen from the dead.

" And how absurd the mysticism of the Germans, who limit ev
to a local sphere, as I understand, and will have it to mean that
'the creation of all things took place in Christ'! "What a
dreamland is all this pretension to superior accuracy, which is
really but the pseudo-literalism of a schoolboy tacked on to the
balloon of some wild philosophy ! Had it been -Tr^cLroi; or t^o t. x.,
there might have been some grammatical reason, though poor
and feeble doctrinally ; whereas it is a great truth that, born
when He might be, the Creator, if He deigned so to be, was
necessarily, when He hylnro cd^^, 'x^uroroxog two-jj? XTiGm;. Of
course h here means ' in virtue 'or 'in the power of,' as distin-
guished from bid, ' through ' or by ' means of,' as an instrument.
For the universe to be created in Him seems to me sheer non-
sense.

" In the others I see little or nothing but what is wrong. If
saints are not often scholars, scholars prove themselves almost

THE PHILANTHROPY OF GOD. 377

always poor saints. If they do not speak ill of Christ, they
do not hold fast or confess aright His glory, through their desire
to please men."

THE PHILANTHEOPY OF GOD.

We have received a letter from a friend on the Continent telling
us of the intemperate denunciation of all ranks and classes in
the country whence it comes by a temperance lecturer from
another land, who had -written to the newspapers in his own
country that the land " was a land of drunkards ; our Bible a
drunkard's Bible in order to serve the liquor trafiic, our clergy-
men drunkards, and our archbishop a swearing drunkard." " This
unhappy and bad letter has now been translated and republished
in the most of our newspapers and periodicals, and the result is
that very many people have become enemies to the temperance
works and movements in our land."

Our correspondent then relates the special denunciation
with which he had been favoured by this man, though he is, as
we know, the most prominent promoter of the cause of temper-
ance in his native land, because he did not come up to the
mark of the lecturer. He is an earnest and a reforming philan-
thropist, and also a Christian worker, who, while (as he thinks)
promoting the best interests of his country in Parliament, is also
giving temperance lectures and preaching the gospel in cathe-
drals, churches, and other places. In our reply to him we try
to show that though the joining in philanthropic works may do
good for this world and time, the right thing for Christians is to
confine themselves to work for the Lord in making known the
gospel, and seek thus to be in the mind and current of the
Holy Ghost by urging God's philanthropy on sinners ; not to
join ourselves to them to be w^orked up into the philanthropic
schemes of men for the mere improvement of man in this
world. Believing that the principles it contains are divine,

37^ EP 1ST OLA R Y COMMUNICA TIONS.

scriptural, and of universal application, we now publish that por-
tion of our letter which is of public interest to believers.

With better times and the increase of wages there has been
much more drinking for some time amongst the working classes
than in former years. The result of young people receiving
wages that make them independent of their parents, for sup-
port, is that the family institution, the source of national
strength, has become a wreck, and young men and women, in
too many instances, have become lawless. Hence there are
habits indulged iu by them which strike us as in sad contrast
with those of former years. The working men are seen crowd-
ing our public-houses after the hours of labour, and tens of
thousands of young men and women are to be found prome-
nading our streets on the evenings of the Lord's day. A few
years ago this was not the practice in the city where we write.
Along with this we might mention the building of three or four
new theatres, at a cost of more than £100,000, as a proof that
the people arc becoming " lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of
God." All this too on the back of " an awakening " ! It is no
wonder that Christian men should feel intensely about these
significant signs of social deterioration, and catch at any scheme
likely to lessen or remove these clamant and increasing evils.

There is a growing feeling at the present hour among social
reformers and politicians that some repressive measure must be
employed in order to keep down the rising tide of intemperance
that is threatening the moral destruction of our people. Hence
there is likely to be a great movement set on foot at once to
carry out such instalments of social reformation, in opposition
to the drink traffic, as may be most easily obtained. Then
there will be great pressure put on Christians everywhere to join
in this great philanthropic movement for social amelioiation, and
it will be hard for them to keep out of it if they are not aware
of their heavenly calling, the heavenly character of Christianity,
the separateness of the Christian's path of life and service from

THE PHILANTHROPY OF GOD. 379

that of the men of the world, and that as promoters of " the
philanthropy of God " they cannot join themselves with the
ungodly and become the promoters of the philanthropy of men.
We hope that our letter may be of some use in helping brethren
in Christ who may not have thought much on the subject, and
give them scriptural reasons why they should keep themselves
aloof from all human confederacies, and work from God's centre
alone, and with the gospel of God, as being the exclusive
" philanthropy of God " for the blessing of men, and this has
induced us to publish it. There are two kinds of Christians :
the spiritual and the carnal, as 1 Cor. ii iii. indicate. The
carnal will flout what we write as transcendental and chimeri-
cal ; the spiritual will accept it as scriptural, and act upon it ;
but we will be happy to endure the contempt of the former if we
ensjire the profiting of the latter. " I sjjeak as unto wise men ;
judge ye what I say."

But first let us read the only passage of Scripture where the
word Philanthropy occurs in connection with God. *' But after
that the kindness and love of G^d our Saviour toward man
(Philanthropy) appeared, not by works of righteousness which we
have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the wash-
ing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost ; which He
shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour ; that
being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs accord-
ing to the hope of eternal life. This is a faithful saying, and
these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which
have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works.
These things are good and profitable unto men " (Titus iiL 4-8).

" I see you have had a sad time from the visit of the
foreign temperance lecturer you refer to. He was here the
very day your letter came, and lectured in one of the churches
the next day. I was not out of the house, and did not see
him, for I was not well ; but I did not see any report of his
address in the newspapers.

38o EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

" There is no doubt great need to try to repress drinking in
3^our country as well as in ours, and Christians ought only to
allow the Scriptural use of it (1 Tim. v. 23).

" I was once very fully in the advocacy of the abolition of
the liquor traffic ; but while I have the same opinion of its
banefulness, I have been giving myself to the work of the gospel
alone for the last seventeen years : for I now think it is properly
and particularly a Christian's work. A man of property and
position, or an extensive employer of labour, feels on being con-
verted that he could, by means of the influence he possesses,
secure for liis less favoured citizens many social benefits. He
becomes a member of the local municipality ; and he labours
for the social and moral good of the community, while he may
look beyond to a higher sphere of usefulness as a member of his
country's Parliament. If Christianity were intended for the
improvement of man in the flesh, instead of being the standing
proof of his moral incorrigibleness and condemnation, then there
would be sense enough in his pursuing such a course. He has a
first-class education ; his social position is superior ; his influence
is great ; he has time, ability, and money ; why not devote him-
self to the moral, social, and political amelioration of his less
fortunate fellow-men ? The soaking of society in drink he sees
to be the bane of his country; why should he not give his help
to the removing or restriction of this most baneful traffic ?
There seems to be nothing more natural than for one who is
uninstructed in the nature and objects of Christianity to reason
thus and act accordingly. But when one knows Christianity,
he sees that it points out ' a more excellent way.' I should like
to call your special attention to this, if you woidd allow me.

" Meantime I will send you by post the only copy I have of
a book of mine, called the ' Antichrist of England^ meaning by
that the liquor traffic, that you may see how I used to labour
in this cause twenty years ago. I have no doubt you will find
in it congenial sentiments to your own ; from page Q% to the

THE PHILANTHROPY OF GOD. 381

end I depict the miscliief done to the professing church hy the
liquor traffic. I was comparatively young then, and there are
hot-headed expressions and opinions in it which I would now
modify or omit — (in fact I would let it alone entirely) ; but I
do not abandon my conviction that it is one of the greatest
barriers to the success of the evangelisation of the people ; and
even morality : only I would not now seek its subversion either
by political or philanthropic means, but leave that to moral men,
while I would give myself to the Word of God and prayer, as
said the apostles of our Lord (Acts vi.) And I would advise
you to ' do likewise.' I hear my Lord now saying to me — ' Let
the dead bury their dead' (it may be the most pious thing and
right and natural to bury one's father), but 'go tliou and •preach
the kingdom of God ' (Luke ix. 60).

" Besides, I could not any longer feel it right to be joined
with all sorts of people in the total abstinence or temperance
society, Infidels, Atheists, Deists, Jews, Mormons, and Mahome-
dans ! for my Lord says — ' He that is not with me is against me : '
also, ' Be not unequally yoked together with unhclicvcrs ' (see 2
Cor. vi. 14-18). This is a most important portion of Scripture,
and tells Christians that they are not to be ' diversely yoked
with unbelievers' because they are ' the temple of God,' and
holy, dwelt in and walked among by God ; and nothing but
separation from unbelievers will ensure being acknowledged
openly as ' sons and daughters by the Lord Almighty ; '
' Wherefore eome out from the midst of them, and he sepca^ated,
saith the Lord, and touch not what is unclean, and I will receive
you ; and I will be to you a Father, and ye shall be to me for
sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.' This makes it
plain that we cannot as Christians be joined with unhelievers in
societies, whetlier philanthropic and social, or religious and
political. Christianity allows us to do good to all men as we
have opportunity in our individual capacity ; but not to join
others in it who are unbelievers, so as to compromise what we

382 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

owe to Christ Himself. Christianity, practically, is the reproduc-
tion of Christ in His members ; and, consequently, we dare do
nothing on earth which our blessed Lord would not have done ;
and He worked all His works 'by the finger of God,' and not by
philanthropic societies or political action, but by the power of the
indwelling Holy Spirit ; and thus only are His saints to serve
God. ' I have strength for all things, through Him who giveth
me power,' said St. Paul (Phil. iv. 13). 'Be strong in the Lord
and in the power of His might ' (Eph. vi.)

" I have thought it right to give you this explanation while I
send you a reading of my book, written at the level of the current
Christianity of 1857, but below that of the spiritual Christianity
of the New Testament, which actuated the holy apostles of our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and has now been widely re-
covered. But I admit that it was written with a true-hearted
desire to promote both the glory of God and the welfare of man.
And though I would now seek to accomplish these ends with the
same devout earnestness, I would not employ quite the same
methods and means of reaching them. I frankly acknowledge
your true-heartedness to Christ in your labours for the sobriety
of your country, though I wish to show you that it is not the
proper work for a Christian to occupy his mind and time with.
I would like to keep the book as a milestone with ' 1857 ' on it
marking progress, as I have not another copy ; so please keep it
for me till I see you again in Stockholm — if it please God that
we should meet there. .

" My object in forwarding the book is to let you see that I
have once been as enthusiastic as yourself against the liquor
traffic ; but I am now convinced that the Lord Jesus Christ
demands of me occupation with and for His name alone.

" As to the other book, I have a conviction that it might be
blessed to your people, linking as it does the souls of believers
with Christ in the heavens, through the Holy Gliost, and engag-
ii,o <bp renewed affections with Himself. I have just received

THE PHILANTHROPY OF GOD. 383

two letters from your country, speaking of much blessing
received through the perusal of it.

" It is of all-importance that the heavenly character, as well as
the church character, of the Christian calling should be known
by believers, in order that tliey may be kept from wasting their
precious time in working works for which they M^ere not created
in Christ Jesus, and wliich God had not before prepared that
they should walk in them (Eph. ii. 10). Christianity, as a
divine system, is a living connection with a risen and glorified
Christ in the heavens by the Holy Ghost come down ; and prac-
tical and experimental Christianity is a realisation of the blessed-
ness of being justified from all things from which we could not
be justified by the law of Moses, and the knowledge of Clirist,
and of our place in Christ before God the Father, and our place of
witness for Christ before men in this world, the place of Christ's
rejection. Those who have a knowledge of it are like St. Paul
in Phil. iii. ; for Christianity is grateful love to Christ, and
supreme attachment to Him and constant occupation witli Him,
for His own excellency, for what He is Himself, and not only for
what He has suffered for us and given us.

" It takes much divine forming to fit saints who are naturally
benevolent and philanthropic for being true Christians, for
Christianity is on its negative side the renunciation of all the
principles which would naturally actuate us, were we only men,
and expected to ' walk as men.' . Men were made for this earth :
our bodies were formed from it, and this earth was fitted up in
its present cosmical condition for man ; and there is nothing
more natural than for Christians, after knowing the benefits
of Christianity tliemselves, to feel for the miseries of their fellow-
men and set to work to use Christianity for the improvement of
the world. But this were an entire mistaking of the nature and
aim of Christianity ; for it would suppose our being in the
millennium, when Christ shall be reigning, not rejected as He is
now, and when all nations shall be blessed in Him, evil shall be

384 EPISTOLAR Y COMMUNICA TIONS.

subdued and righteousness become triumphant, instead of being,
as we are, in a world of which Satan is said to be ' the prince '
and ' the god ' — a world morally ended at the Cross, and now
under the doom of heaven, and going on to be dashed in pieces
on the rock of eternal judgment and perdition of ungodly men,
as the Apocalypse of Jesus Christ clearly reveals. God is not
to improve this present world, but to save believers out of it and
then to judge it ; and He gives Christians intelligence of His
doings in the present and of His purposes for the future, in order
to keep them in their proper place — the place of men 'risen
with Christ ;' also to keep them at their proper work and from
embarking in social and philanthropic works for the ameliora-
tion of the world, which He has not set them to do. God has
raised up from the dead His Son Jesus, whom men had cast out
and killed ; set Him at His right hand in the heavens ; and sent
down the Holy Ghost to unite believers to Him there outside
the world. And such are the children of God by faith in Christ
Jesus — members of His body and ' members one of another ;' a
risen company, a new creation, a people whose citizenship is in
heaven, whose Father, Lord, and home are there, and they
momentarily expecting the return of their glorified Master, to
take them thither in glorified bodies like His own ; a people
who by natural birth were men of earth, but by new and spiritual
birth have become children of God, and are henceforth linked
livingly by the Holy Spirit with the risen Man of glory in the
heavens. I grant you the Christian's position is entirely abnor-
mal, for he who was by nature formed for earth is by grace cut
out of it, and formed by the Holy Ghost for the fellowship ol
the Father and the Son in the heavens.

" The heart must be formed by means 0/ Christ /or Christ in
heaven ; and the kind of divine truth that helps Christians to
the true knowledge of Christ is truth of the greatest sanctify-
ing power. The heavenly side of divine truth, or separation
by the Holy Ghost in a new creation to Christ in tlie heavens,

THE PHILANTHROPY OF GOD. 385

is little known either in Stockholm or in Edinburgh ; hence
saints of God are found in all sorts of doubtful circumstances
and associations. They do not see that they have died out of Adam
and are united to Christ, risen and glorified, by the Holy Ghost
come down from Him for that purpose : and hence they think they
are formed anew merely to be better citizens of this world and
to improve the world : and thus their being ' created in Christ
Jesus,* and ' having their citizenship in heaven ' (Philip, iii. 20),
are ignored or forgotten ; and hence the heavenly life of Christ
is not lived by them, but only the better life of a man of the
earth ! But we are ' in Christ ' risen, not in Adam fallen and
dead in sin : ' and if any one he in Christ, there is a neio creation.'
Christ is 'the Beginning' and 'Head' of it (Col. i. 18), as
well as of ' His body the assembly,' ' that He might have the
first place in all things.' Being saved people, we have ceased
our existence as men ' in the flesh,' connected with Adam, fallen
and dead in trespasses and sins, and have got a new life in Christ,
' the last Adam,' the ' Second Man ' (1 Cor. xv.), and our sphere
of existence is ' in the Spirit^ for ' ye are not in the flesh, but in
the Spirit,' if so be Spirit of God dwell in you (Rom. viii. 9). Our
life and walk through the world must therefore be in keeping
with our birth, rank, standing, relationship, and world ; and the
ends of the New Testament epistles go very minutely into divine
rules and regulations for this ' walk in newness of life ' (Eom.
vi. 4). ' They are not of the icorld, even as I am not of the
world,' as our Lord said (John xvii. 14). What a responsible
thing for believers in Christ to be left here ' in one body ' to
live Christ; for '/ no lonyer live, but Christ liveth in me,' as St.
Paul said (Gal. ii. 20). I have gone out of my sin-state by the
Cross of Christ and death with Him there, and come into a new
life in resurrection in and with Christ : ' I am crucified with
Christ;' that was an end of me as a son of Adam (Gal. ii. 20) :
' And no longer live I ' (said the apostle, say I and all believers),
' but God who is rich in mercy . . . hath quickened us together

2 c

386 EPISTOLAR V COMMUNICA TIONS.

with Christ (by grace are ye saved), and hath raised us up together,
and made us sit together in the heavenlies in Christ ' (Eph. ii.
4-6). That is the beginning of my existence as a child of God ;
for, once dead in sins, I get life in living association with Christ,
* who is our life,' and my future in this ' new creation ' in this
world and in heaven is linked with His.

" Thus ' for me to live is Christ' — not philanthropy, social
reformation, or even the salvation of souls : no ! but * for me to
live is Christ.' As the ancient tale goes of a noble Eoman, that
if after death his heart were examined they would find ' Eome '
enstamped on it ; so might St. Paul have said of Christ — ' For
me to live is Christ, and to die is gain ; ' for then he would be
' with Cliristl which he said ' is very much better.' He was a
man of one governing idea, and this he thus expresses : ' Christ
shall be magnified in my body, whether by life or by death '
(Philip, i. 20).

" The body is the sphere of Christ's power, and it is with the
body that we give expression to practical Christianity ; for it is
the Spirit's vessel and agent : ' wherefore glorify God in your
hody,^ says St. Paul (1 Cor. vi.) Where our bodies are, there is
our fellowship. ' Do ye not know that your hodies are members
of Christ ? ' Again, ' Do ye not know that your body is the
temple of the Holy Spirit, which is in you, which ye have of
God ; and ye are not your own ? for ye have been bought with a
price : glorify now then God in your body.' [There the verse
ends in the Greek : it is all about the body.] It is very solemn
to be told our bodies are ' members of Christ ' and ' temjjlcs of the
Holy Ghost ' Mho is in us.

" This makes Christianity at once eminently spiritual and
practical We have the Holy Spirit in us as our power to repro-
duce Christ, and our bodies his redeemed or price-bought mem-
bers to enable us to give expression outwardly to the life of
Christ on earth. By the Holy Spirit the life of Christ in heaven
is communicated and energised, and through the members of

THE PHILANl HROPY OF GOD. jS?

our bodies we may express practically this new and divine life.
For ' old things have passed away, and all tilings have become
new ' (2 Cor. v. 17), 'and all things ' in the new creation ' are of
God' — not anything of 'the old man' renovated or renewed and
sublimated, but positively new. ' That which is born of the
Spirit is spirit! ' For in Christ Jesus neither is circumcision
anything nor uncircumcision ; but new creation' (Gal. vi. 16).
Not a particle of the old creation goes into the new. It is not
old Adam rehabilitated ; ' hut new creation ; ' ' 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' (Eom. vi. 6).
' Now if we have died with CJirist ' (verse 7), (the end of man
in this world is by death, so that, by faith, we see an end of our-
selves in the death of Christ ;) ' we have died with Christ '
out of the sin-sphere where we were under sin's dominion,
who like a tyrant lorded it over us. Not only has Christ
died for my sins — the bad things that have come out of me
— but I have ' died with Christ to sin,' the nature that pro-
duces bad things, and * sin is condemned,' judged, and annulled
in the cross, the sinner's self, 'the old man,' gets his doom
also in Christ's death (Rom. viii. 3) ; 'So also reckon your-
selves dead to sin ; but alive to God in Christ Jesus ' (Eom.
vi. 11). ' Christ liveth unto God ; ' and we, being * alive
unto God in Christ Jesus,' can now also live unto God :
'Yield yourselves unto God as alive from among the dead,
and your members instruments of righteousness unto God.
For sin shall not have dominion over you ; for ye are not under
law, but under grace ' (Eom. vi. 13, 14.) ' Ye also have been
made dead to the law by the body of Christ, that ye might be to
another, who has been raised up from among the dead in order
that ye might \iQQ.v fruit to God, ' so that ' we should serve in new-
ness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter ' (Eom. vii. 4-6).
' Dead to sin and alive unto God, we walk in newness of life, and
sin shall not have dominion over us;' 'dead to the law by the

388 EPISTOLAR V COMMUNICA TIONS.

body of Christ,' we ' bring forth fruit to God ' and ' serve in new-
ness of spirit.'

" Our life then is life in Christ risen — life to God ; and we are
to let it go up as an offering and a sacrifice, well pleasing to God
for a sweet-smelling savour, as Christ's offering of Himself unto
God was (Eph. v. 2). ' As is the Heavenly One, such also are the
heavenly ones ' (1 Cor. xv. 48). With what power the Spirit's
exhortation comes to us — ' If therefore ye be risen with Christ,
seek the things which are above, where the Christ is sitting at
the right hand of God. Have your mind on the things above, not
on the things that are on the earth ; for ye have died, and your life
is hid with the Christ in God. When the Christ appears, who
is our life, then shall ye also appear with him in glory ' (Col. iii.
1-4.) ' Having put off the old man with his deeds (in tlie death
of Christ) and having put on the new ' (in Him risen from the
dead) the exhortations of the Spirit to express this 'new man'
through means of the body are very minute and practical (Col. iii.) ;
' but Christ is everything, and in all ' (Col. iv. 11). He is before
all as an object ; ' in all ' as a life. Hence all are responsible for
living the heavenly risen life of Jesus in their bodies in all
the relationships of time and in all the intercourse of their daily
life.

" I have written a very long letter ; but seeing that I
mentioned to you that I had seen into the meaning of
Christianity so as no- longer to be able to go on with the mere
improvement of man, as he is in the old creation, I felt it neces-
sary to justify my new position by the word of God : and that
has led me to show where we are now, as believers in Christ,
and that we are expected to fall in with 'the philanthropy of
our Saviour-God,' as those who are ' alive unto God ' in Christ —
'risen with Christ' — 'created in Christ Jesus unto good ivories,
which God has before prepared that we should walk in them' (Eph.
ii. 10). The cross of Christ tells its sad tale that ' the world ' is

THE PHILANTHROPY OF GOD. 389

enmity against God, and unimprovable. It was ' the judgment
of this world ' — ' the end of the world,' morally when it rejected
and crucified Christ, for it thereby proved itself incorrigible ; fbr
not only did it refuse to be reconciled by God in Christ in
person bestowing all manner of blessings, but it murdered the
Reconciler. Wherefore God is not any longer trying to improve
it : but He is calling out men from it by the gospel of His grace,
and associating them in a living and divine way with His Son
in the heavens ; for the whole question is now about the worth
and glory of His exalted Son whom the world has cast out.
The Spirit has come for this object : ' He shall glorify me, for
He shall take of mine, and show it unto you ' (John xvi.) ' Ye
shall be witnesses unto mc! He is sitting on the Father's
throne now (Eev. iii. 21), and He will come in manifested glory
soon, and sit upon the throne of His glory (Matt, xxv.), and He
will subdue all things to Himself, and reign to the glory of God
the Father. (1 Cor. xv.)

" This present evil world will end in a time of judgment
among the nations, and terrible tribulation, such as has not been
from the foundation of the world. God's word tells us that the
sun of this dispensation will set in blood when the book of Revela-
tion will have its great and awful fulfilment. It is blessed to
think that God's word tells of a happy and holy time beyond
the flood of fire and judgment of ungodly men, when earth shall
celebrate its Sabbath of holy rest for a thousand years (Rev. xx.)
Then the world will be divinely changed : and righteousness
shall reign over all its nations, who shall walk by the light of
the heavenly city, whose light is the Lamb. The sentence of
this world is passed : its doom and punishment are certain, and
cannot be far off. God, by the Holy Ghost, is gathering a body
and a bride for Christ His Son out of it, and giving such His
life, place, relationship, and work, walk, and prospects : and He
is not touching the world at all so as to make it better, but
He is doing this one work of calling out and preparing a bride

390 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

foL- the glory of his Son, our heavenly Bridegroom ; and this is
the work that should engross all the children of God, whom He
has called out of the world in its every shape and form to stand
outside of it in the place it gave His well-beloved Son when
they rejected and crucified Him. We have God's mind ex-
pressly given in His Word respecting this, that we may not
throw away our time, means, and energies, on objects of our own :
for it teaches that while human philanthropy relieves man where
he is, and leaves him there, God's Philanthropy completely
saves him, and brings him to Himself in glory to have ' Christ
as gain ' in the Father's house, where His glory is fully seen,
and His saints are conformed to His image.

"What then makes a practical Christian ? That a man should
be completely absorbed, and continually occupied with Christ,
so that he seems to the world to be as one 'beside himself for
Christ ; like as Paul seemed to Festus, when he tells of Christ
appearing to him ; and ' Festus says, with a loud voice, Tliou art
mad, Paul.' (Acts xxvi.) ' But he said, I am not mad, most ex-
cellent Festus, but utter words of truth and soberness.' Again, in
Pliilip. iii. he seems to be 'beside himself;' for, having given up
all for Christ on earth, he presses on towards the goal to win Christ
and have Plim in the glory of God in the heavens. * For whether
we be beside ourselves, it is to God ; or are sober, it is for you.
For the love of Christ constraineth us ; having judged this, that if
one died for all, then all died ; and he died for all, that they
who live should no longer live to themselves, but to Him who
died for them and rose again ' (2 Cor. v. 13, 14).

" If we have the excellency of the knowledge of Christ —
if He Himself be our exclusive object, as He was St. Paul's —
we will live such a life of practical separation from the world
and devotedness to Christ, and of occupation with his objects,
as to make the world say. These men are either mad, or, they
are in possession of a divine secret of which we know nothing."

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 391

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH.

A:pril 10, 1877.
I MIGHT as well have replied to your last letter at once, and
said that I had no desire to wade through the " Westminster
Confession of Faith," or whatever else it may he called, with
any purpose of writing ahout the hook itself, in detail

Personally there was nothing in it wliicli could have pro-
fited me, either for " communion in the truth " with Christ, or
in service for Him, as gathering souls to Him where He now is!

Controversially, it presented a temptation, but this I refused ;
so that the whole matter has been authoritatively ordered (as
they say elsewhere) " to lie on the table."

It caught my eye this morning, and upon looking it through
again, I am more confirmed in the futility, and one might add
i\\e fatality, of creeds from Scripture; and of confessions of faith
from creeds ; as well as of catechisms (large or small) from con-
fessions ; were it only for the simple but obvious reason that
God in His wi.sdom and grace has given us exactly the revela-
tion of Himself and of His Son that most suits His own glory
and our blessing, botli now and hereafter ; and this is contained
in what we rightly call " the word of God."

There is, however, another- reason, and of great importance,
as regards "this book," which comprises "the Westminster
Confession of Faith " — that, even supposing it drawn from the
whole word of God by " the assembly of divines," however learned
and godly they may have been, yet it could only in result be
the minimum of what would satisfy them to agree upon (that is,
if they were expected to be unanimous) ; and this came out at
last, as the fruit of their labours, in " a creed published and
proclaimed by authority." The word of God was in this way set
aside, and conscience as well as faith interfered with, in their

392 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

distinct and direct exercise before God, upon the revelation He
has made of Himself to us as a whole.

A very serious question arises out of this, viz. that if the
truth of God's own word is reduced to the minimum of what
will satisfy an " assembly of divines and others," what becomes
of the maximum upon which they could not agree together ?
Evidently this maximum is in the word of God itself, and the
minimum, both in quality and quantity, is only what suited the
spiritual perceptions or the moral mind of the assembly. Nor
is this " assembly of divines " fair to itself and its own reputa-
tion, for the few (upon this graduated scale of theological inves-
tigation) who would rise higher than the many, must necessarily
compromise their own convictions, and yield their judgment to
the, lowest, if unanimity is demanded. Or, if a majority is
allowed to be decisive, still the question remains, decisive of
what ? It is a very solemn alternative, in all such assemblies
thus convened, that the maximum (which is God's) is the pre-
cious thing sacrificed ; or, if not yielded up, ivho gets it ? Cer-
tainly none of the churches represented by this convocation in
England, Scotland, or Ireland, for they accept the Confession of
Faith, and "the minimum" of what the divines could agree
upon. My question is again repeated on behalf of the truth and
of God and His word — Where is " the maximum " gone ? and
who is he that has craftily got it away from the members of
Convocation, and cunningly substituted "the shields of brass"
for the golden shields of Parvaim which adorned the temple in
the days of Solomon, when "the glory of God " dwelt therein ?

It will be melancholy to pursue this subject farther, and to
speak to you of " the covenants — the national and solemn league
— ^the engagement of duties — directories for jouhlic worship —
form of church government — with the Acts of Assembly and
Parliament relative to and approbative of the same," which all
lead men back into the wrong world, upon the fatal principle of
reducing a thing by its lowest term to its lowest quantity !

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 393

In continuance, let me ask you, or any Christian who knows
the maximum, and maintains it by separation from these convo-
cations (with all else who hy grace tvilV), What are the terms
" agreed upon by this assembly of divines at Westminster, with
the assistance of commissioners from the Church of Scotland"?
One of their title-pages expresses these terms, " as a part of the
covenanted uniformity in religion betwixt the churches of
Christ, in the kingdoms of Scotland, England, and Ireland ; "
and, moreover, "ratified and established by Acts of Parlia-
ment," etc.

Upon this showing, and according to tliis rule, these churches
cannot be " the body of Christ ;" it is openly a worldly system,
and for man as a citizen of tlie earth. God's maximum is lost.
That is to say, a believer in Christ, in union with " the Last
Adam " in life and righteousness, as Head of the new creation of
God, is dropped out ; so also is the Lord in heaven, as " Head
over all things to the church, which is His body, the fulness of
Him which filleth all in all ; " as likewise the abiding presence
of the Holy Ghost, come down from the glorified Christ at
Pentecost, to dwell in and baptize the members into this unity
upon earth. Endeavouring to keep " the unity of the Spirit "
in the bond of peace is not even in their miiiiiuuni, to say no-
thing of " the bride," and " the marriage of the I-amb." As for
the blessed hope of the Lord's coming, and " tlie taking-up of
the saints to meet Him in tlie- air," it is outside this vaunted
Confession of Faith and its catechisms, as well as " the sum of
saving knowledge," etc.

In vain do you look for the coming of "the Son of man in
glory," when He shall take to Himself His great power and
reign over this world, and order it in righteousness and uni-
versal blessing for every creature ; till finally " He will deliver
up the kingdom to God, even the Father, that God may be
all in all." Indeed, most of what concerns the purposes and
counsels of "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,"

394 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

both as to the heavens and the earth, whether now or hereafter,
are left behind in the maximum of divine revelation.

We may well say to each other, How could &ucli disclosures
come out, under "an ordinance of the Lords and Commons
assembled in Parliament, for the calling of an assembly of
learned and godly divines and others for the settling" of the
government and liturgy of these national churches of England
and Scotland; as also "to establish, ratify, and confirm the
Presbyterian Church government and discipline by kirk sessions,
presbyteries, provincial synods, and general assemblies" ?

The order of God for the earth in the millennium, by the
restoration and conversion of Israel under the rule and reign
of the Lord the Messiah, as well as the future blessing of the
Gentiles through them, when gathered to " Jerusalem, the city
of the great King," and the deliverance of creation from its
groaning into "the glorious liberty of the sons of God," might
also be adduced in proof that what most concerns the mani-
fested glory of God and of Christ, in the midst of His earthly
people on this earth (and the binding of Satan, and casting him
into the bottomless pit), have no place in this compendium
" done at Westminster and in Edinburgh."

It is lamentable to see that in this conclave " of divines and
commissioners assembled in the chapel called King Henry the
VII.'s Chapel, aided by committees deputed by both the Houses
of Parliament," the new order of manhood set up in the risen
and glorified " Second Man," at the right hand of God in heaven,
as the beginning and Head of a new race of men, " whose bodies
are the temples of the Holy Ghost " on earth, has been entirely
overlooked. The new order of God in a heavenly sphere' and
by a new system, of which the ascended Son of man is become
now the centre and Lord, passes into the same oblivion, as a
matter of course, or rather as a necessary consequence of the
former. All that is set apart and called out by God in grace to
form and distinguish this new order of creation, in heaven above

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 395

and the earth beneath, 'presently with Christ in manifested glory
and blessing, is in eclipse. The necessities which required our
being " born again " as men, to see what the natural eye had not
seen, or to understand what the heart had never conceived, in
this new order of things " which God has prepared for them
that love Him" for present enjoyment and communion with
Christ, are, alas! overlooked, because the objects themselves are
out of mind, and catechetical examinations substituted.

How could it be otherwise 1 They follow as naturally as
cause and effect ; nor is this all the mischief, for " the anoint-
ing and unction of the Holy Ghost," whereby a saint is compe-
tent " to understand the things that are freely given to us of
Ciod," slips away with the new birth. Earth takes the place of
heaven, and the first man becomes the object of interest, instead
of the Second Man " in the glory of God " on high. As a conse-
quence, Christ is reduced to these sacraments and ordinances,
or else connected with forms of worship and ceremonial observ-
ances authorised by divines, and established by houses of Par-
liament, for the populations of England and Scotland and
Ireland, and for "man in the flesh" coming from anywhere else.

Thus " the fine gold is become " not merely " dim," but turned
into dross and corrupted, and Christianity proper is dragged
down to the very level of Judaism, as regards God and man,
upon the footing of the Decalogue ; as though this standing
remained an unsolved problem, and Christ had not accomplished
redemption from under its curse, and its xery p'incijjle, hundreds
of years ago. I need secarcely remind you that a Christian's
charter runs thus : " Sin shall not have dominion over you, for
ye are not under lata but under grace."

In fact, these churches recognise man as under the law and
covenant ; and yet put his offspring into sacramental grace by
baptism. It is true the minister only declares this rite " to be
the admission of the party baptized " into outward privileges,
against which I have nothing to say. But he then affirms

396 E PIS TO LA R Y COMMUNICA TIONS.

" it to be a sign ^ and seal of the covenant of grace ; of his in-
grafting into Christ ; of regeneration ; of remission of sins," etc.
He thus openly takes the blesshigs, which belong only to a
Christian hy faith in Jesus Christ, as born of the Spirit ; and
confers them upon one who is as yet merely in the flesh.
Surely this is not in our " confession of faith," but a sorry
departure from the "grace and truth" of the gospel. Thus, all
that God has done to redeem man by blood, and lift him up to
His own glory with " the Son of His love," who is already there
as the forerunner, has been so obscured by this combination of
human wisdom and legislative authority as to lie "a maxi-
mum " wrapt up in the word of God, for those who make it
their confession of faith and hope.

Practically I repeat that this " covenanted uniformity " finds
its starting point and gets its motive power from the little
babe, an infant of days, born of the flesh ; with its parents, and
godfathers and godmothers, its sponsors, etc., on the one side ;
and on the other, there stands the Ecclesiastic to declare " the
remission of sins, and an ingrafting into Christ," by the
assumed efficacy of sacerdotal and sacramental grace, as ad-
ministered to a sucking child ! Only stop the nurse and the
infant at the church door, and the minister's hands are empty ;
yea, all this imposing machinery would be at a stand-still." If
there were no infants brought to be baptized, there would be no
proper boys and girls for " the Shorter Catechism," nor recognised
adults for " the Larger."- In vain would they look for men and
women, religously educated, to bring under the obligations and
covenants suited to riper years " and greater capacity."

But enough. I have merely sought to show tliat what was
*' approved by the General Assembly, and ratified and established
by Acts of Parliament, as the publick and avowed confession of
the Church of Scotland, with the proofs from the Scripture " (see

1 See " The Confession of Faith," chapter xxviii.

* Our correspondent is not what is called a IJajitist, though writing thus.

WESTMINSTER CONFESSION OF FAITH. 397

the title-page to the Confession of Faith), does not recognise a
believer as " a citizen of heaven " tww, and one with the Son of
man in glory — " not of this world, even as Christ was not of the
world." On the contrary, this book and its contents, from cover
to cover, recognises " man in the flesh," from his very infancy,
and makes provision for his advancement by the means and
appliances we have examined : and by giving him " the law as
a rule of life " (which life ?) he is encouraged and stimulated
by vows, covenants, and solemn leagues, to prove the strength
of this life in the flesh, and what the man is worth who goes
through it to despair, and the cry " 0 wretched man that I am !"

It is the opposite of the Christian who begins as a dead man
in this world — alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord
— and one with the risen Lord in heaven the Second Man ;
having his citizenship and his affections where Christ sits.

There are two classes or companies noto, as there were when
Paul wrote to the Colossians. To the one he said, " Ye are
dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God. . . . Mortify
therefore your members which are upon the earth," etc. ; and
this is surely Christian position and unearthly practice still.
To the other Paul says, " If ye be dead with Christ from the
rudiments of this world, why, as though living in the world, are
ye subject to ordinances (touch not, taste not, handle not, which
all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and
doctrines of men ? " and this is' as surely " ritualism."

The heavenly system of God's new order, with the Second
Adam at its head on high, and the old earthly system, " with
its worldly sanctuary " and man in the flesh alive upon the earth,
mistaking death and life too, as kaown in Christ, and therefore
subject to ordinances, are tlie two subjects brought before us by
all these considerations. May the Lord open the eyes and ears
of His beloved ones, that they may take their places with the
departed Lord and find their present position where He has
found His, in the Father's love ; ow^livc out "the life of Christ"
on earth, the little while we wait for Him '

398 E PIS TO LA R V COMMUNICA TIONS.

The Holy Ghost came down from heaven at Pentecost to
bear witness to the glorified Son of man on higli ; and to gather
out and quicken the members of Christ into life and union with
the Last Adam, the head and beginning of God's new order of
manhood, and of another creation in the heavens.

" Outside the camp to Jesus, bearing. His reproach," is our
present opportunity, and the refusal of this "covenanted
uniformity in religion" affords a fine occasion to any exercised
conscience for getting out of forms, into the truth of the Church.

Any one who, by faith and communion with Christ through
the truth, sees what the nature and calling by the Holy Ghost
of the "church of the living God " really is, upon this earth,
lia& got the liglit by which to contrast this " covenanted uniformity
in religion " with our real unity in Christ by divine revelation
from the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and to put himself right.

What a mercy when one discovers this difference, and gets
out of the old order of God for the earth into His new order in
Christ for the heavens ! One step, and a bold one, clears the
distance by simple obedience to His revealed mind and will.

Uniformity in religion for Scotland or England must needs
be accompanied by a Public Confession of belief ; sustained by
its appointed ordinances, and an ordained clergy in ministry,
on behalf of the people.

Moreover, such a religion requires to have its " worldly
sanctuary, as by law established," for the performance of all its
offices and functions ; and goes upon the arithmetical principle
of church-extension, to meet the requirements of an increasing
population ! But where, in all this, is " the faith once delivered
to the saints " ? And, what is become of " the faith of God's
elect, and the truth which is after godliness " ? Yea, who are
" God's elect," and where may they be found ? What in these
last days is " the faith " for which we are to contend ? are ques-
tions for grave and individual consideration before the Lord !

THE QUESTION AND THE CRISIS. 399

THE QUESTION AND THE CRISIS.

Halifax, Nova Scotia, Ajml 19 th.
My dear Brother — I send you some details on the statements
made in the papers you sent me. Mr. Smith says, Ezra ix. 11.
proves that Deuteronomy vii. must be from the prophets ; but we
have exactly the same statement in Exodus xxxiv. 11-17 ; so
that his proof proves nothing, unless Exodus be from the
prophets too. But prophet is a mere word for those who spoke
the word of God, as Abraham is called a prophet, and i\Ioses.

Besides, the argument is an absurdity. It is an absurdity to
pretend that Ezra, a ready scribe in the law of IMoses, who, it is
alleged, compiled it in its last form, should speak as if it was
not given by Moses at all, and say it was the prophets, and yet
say in the same sentence, Israel was going i]ito the land to
possess it when the commandment was given, as he does. Only
a rationalist, who can believe anything but the simple truth, but
no one of sound sense, could swallow such a fancy as this. If
Ezra referred to Deuteronomy (which is very likely, as he speaks
of going in to possess the land, which characterises that book),
then he assuredly refers to it as given before the Israelites
entered into the land. None but those accustomed to assume,
and justify too, forgery in documents which pretend to be divine,
could allege that Ezra attributes to prophets of the seventh or
eighth century a statement of the law which he was teaching as
the law of Closes ; and, in the deep grief of his heart about
their sins before God, accredit and state the forgery in speaking
to God. Upon the face of it, to apply "thy servants the
prophets," saying, " the land into which ye go to possess it" to
prophets hundreds of years after they possessed it, is a gross
absurdity. The defilement of the land is not particularly

400 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

spoken of in Deut. vii. ; it is much more in other chapters, and
more especially in Lev. xviii.

I must add a few words on the prudent, wise speech reported
in your Scotch journals as that of Dr. Eainy. I can only take
it as it appears, "wary and well considered." Supposing,
speaking of course as a mere natural man, that some one had
given my mother a box on the ear, instead of knocking him
down or thrusting him away, I say, Well, but I must see if the
fingers reached to the ear ; otherwise this is not a box on the
ear ; if it only struck the cheek, the accusation is not correct.
With what feelings should one view such a son ? With profound
contempt. Here I must add indignation, because the faith of
thousands is in question. The speech would insist that it
should not be felt there was a crisis. There is a crisis, and the
crisis is this : Whether the Free Church of Scotland in its public
profession be, however many may object to its tenets or forms,
a body maintaining the faith of Christianity as based on the
word of God, or not. It is not Professor Smith who is on trial ;
it is the Free Church. I have no interest in either save as a
Christian ought to be interested in all men and all good ; but
in the authority of the word of God every one who is loyal to
Christ must be. ]\Iembers of commissions may laugh if it be
asked, Are we to have a Bible or no ? but this is the question.
Germans may hold, still pretending to be Christians, that the
allegation of miracles at once renders a book unhistorical ; but
the proofs by which they convince others that it cannot be are
the proofs by which Mr. Smith would prove that the Pentateuch,
and especially Deuteronomy, are unhistorical, and these are with
heartless indifference, on the ground of legal technicalities, to
be allowed to be valid on the plea that ]\Ir. Smith on other
grounds holds them trustworthy. And what grounds are these ?
That, because these Shemitic historians, like Thucydides or Livy
giving speeches they invent as spoken by the persons they
wrote about, do not think it fraud to put the words in their

THE QUESTION AND THE CRISIS, 401

heroes' mouths, we must take them as they gave them, and
they were received at the time ; and this is divine inspiration !
Does he mean, or does the speech mean, that this fabled Shemitic
system was held at the time for divine inspiration ? That they
received what was known to be put into Moses' mouth by a
modern author to polish crude legislation, as the Word of God
by the mouth of ]\Ioses, saying, " Jehovah spake unto Moses
saying," when they knew and received it as Mr. S. does now,
(namely, that it was not so given), though some few portions
might be true traditions of what Moses taught ? Let us see
what the " wary and well-considered " compromise speech in the
journal amounts to. Mr. Smith is guarded enough. We have
this account of Scripture from him : The written record of the
revelation of God's will which is necessary unto salvation makes
use of certain forms of literary presentation which have always
been thought legitimate in ordinary composition, but which
were not always understood to be used in the Bible. Used by
whom? How carefully the inspiration of the writings is
avoided ! Mr. S. does not call this fraud as Dr. Kuenen honestly
does ; (" pious fraud ") : that is his opinion, but not the question.
In classical authors no one is troubled about it ; men did the
best they could, or what they would, to present matters as
they saw them, or would please their readers. Did the Holy
Ghost do so ? The record uses the fraud of literary compositions
which I do not call fraud ! But where is God in the matter ?
How carefully He is left out ! What more can an infidel want ?
"What does an extreme infidel as Dr. Kuenen, or a violent-
tempered but more sober-minded infidel as Ewald, or one in
borrowed plumes as Mr. Newman, desire than to reduce the
Scriptures to this level ? This is what the system of ]\Ir. S. does.
He now tells us that for other reasons (which he withheld in
what went out to all the world, and till this was called in
question) he believes in the authority of these books ; but the
proofs he gives to all the world, and which are unrecalled, are

2d

402 EPISTOLAR V COMMUNICA TIONS.

proofs, not (mind) of a date, but that the books are not what they
pretend to be. Does he believe that the composers and com-
pilers and polishers were inspired to say that their work was
God speaking by Moses ? Nothing can be clearer than that it
was so given, and sanctioned by the Lord's authority as such.
Their nature, their authority, their contents, depended on these
contents being inspired. They had no other, they have no
other ; the very circumstances are identified with the truth of
their being by Moses and from God, for that is inseparably
interwoven with the history they contain. On this I shall
speak again in touching on the reported speech. But the
Scriptures, even in his defence, are not spoken of by Mr. S. when
defined as inspired. When he justifies the statement by quota-
tion of the Confession, they are a record of the revelation of
God's will but formed after the pattern of literary compositions
which ascribe to orators or the like speeches invented for them.
This is not inspiration of the Scriptures. It may lead us to
distrust " Confessions " as no better than a sieve, as a means of
securing truth, and saving those who hold the opposite of what
their authors held, but that is all. But I turn to the reported
speech and the wary defence of Mr. S. The speech saves the
credit of the speaker. ' On reading the article it was with the
greatest possible feeling of apprehension and pain. Not only he
did not agree, but it would not meet with general approbation ;
he had a very strong impression that they were fitted in the
greatest degree to create bewilderment, anxiety, and misappre-
hension in the mind of members of the church.' What about ?
Was it not as to the authority and inspiration of the Scriptures?
Yet such a question, we are told, cannot possibly arise, or might
be soon settled. Now, I do ask what was the bewilderment and
anxiety about ? Mr. S. accepts and gives the proofs of infidels
that the Scriptures were the development of crude legislation
and national life, large portions professing to be what they w^ere
not, nor of the age nor of the j)erson who was stated to have re-

THE QUESTIOA AND THE CRISIS. 403

ceived them from God as God's law — gives these proofs as general
satisfactory proofs that the case was thus, without a hint that he
thought otherwise. He propagates infidelity, for everybody
knows it is infidelity and the elaborately wrought out theory of
infidels ; which we are now to understand he does not believe,
though he believes all the proofs of it. As to the Canon, one
book was really a love-song about the purity of northern Israel
contrasted with Solomon, which we should have lost but for a
false theory about its being an allegory ; but the bewilderment
and anxiety was not about the inspiration or Canon of Scripture,
nor whether we are to have the whole Bible ! But Mr. S. and all
agree, we are told, that the Bible is inspired. What then was his
article about ? The escape from the difficulty is : The question
is not about inspiration, but whether certain positions brought
in, in connection with the explanation of Professor Smith's
vieVs on the Bible, are really inconsistent with this position. A
queer roundabout sentence ; but have we no views of Mr. S. on
the Bible, or parts of it ? Nothing but positions in connection
with the explanation of his views? And is what every one
knows to be characteristic of modern infidelity in the theological
sphere to be spread broadcast by professors of theology, without
a hint of anything else ? Nay, accepting really as desirable
progress, views that are to every honest mind totally destructive
of the inspiration of Scripture, and then to be told there is no
question about inspiration? And how is it excused in a com-
promising way ? We are not, we are told, to deal with it as if
some party were rising up to unsettle and undermine these
great doctrines. But a party has arisen up, and, as every one
occupied with these subjects knows, unsettling and under-
mining these great doctrines ; and all that Mr. Smith has done
is to popularise them in a well-known book of general science,
the Encyclopaedia Britannica, wherever the English language is
spoken in the two continents. He has reproduced and dissemi-
nated for all English readers, and as valid, the well-known

404 EPISTOLAR V COMMUNICA TIONS.

modern grounds of infidelity as to these great truths. Scotland
and the Free Church have been the source, or, if not the source,
the instrument, of spreading over the world modern infidelity
as to inspiration and the canon of Scripture as a part of the more
accurate knowledge of modern science in a popular publication.
That is the broad fact, and no special pleading in church courts
and committees in Scotland will alter it ; nor, it is to be feared,
if the Free Church clear itself, undo it.

The speech defends the position of the committee as far as it
dares ; it does not agree with Mr. S., but defends its " deliverances"
on the substantive merits, mark, not on the competency of the
committee. " You will not succeed in laying a libel for heresy
in connection with this view of Deuteronomy." I should not
call it heresy : infidelity is its true character. However, the
published speech declares that to hold that a book purporting
to be spoken by Moses immediately before Israel's entrance
into the land, and directly from Jehovah as words from His
mouth in reference to their conduct as so entering, was not
so spoken but written some hundreds of years after, proving
this by passages alleged to be in contradiction with what was
ordained by Jehovah originally, is not heresy as to the inspira-
tion of the books. Such false statement, it is alleged, was a
generally allowed license of literary composition. Were these
late modifiers of the old law moved by the Holy Ghost to say
that Jehovah spake it all by Moses before Israel's going in to
possess the land ? " It is," we are told, " a different case where
there is a general disposition in certain quarters, or in any
quarter, to move off from these fundamental doctrines." Is
there none such ? Every one knows that large masses of Pro-
testants, and Protestant teachers, have moved off from these
fundamental doctrines both in Germany and in England ; that
their works are translated into English, and have largely affected
t]ie public mind ; that this attack on the inspiration of the
Scriptures is one of the chief characteristics of modern infi-

THE QUESTION AND THE CRISIS. 405

delity ; that the " Deuteronomist " is one of their chief points
along with the " Great Unnamed," Zechariah, and the Song of
Songs as a northern pastoral Now, I will suppose that as yet
this hacking up of Scripture has not penetrated into the Free
Church, at least in " any quarter," The speech assures that an.
attempt to make heresy of these views will not succeed. A
man is "not particularly wise who is particularly sure about
them ; " that is about the usual orthodox view of the inspiration
of Deuteronomy, etc. True, " a man is not particularly wise who
is particularly ready to raise questions about them." The ques-
tions on many points as to authorship, date, and so on, are
" awkward questions." " They are really not matters of faith at
all." How calculated to relieve "bewilderment, anxiety, and
misapprehension, in the minds of members of the church " !
Mr, S. had done something to relieve this feeling in his answer
to 1;he sub-committee. He tells us of a " persuasion of the
divine authority of the book (of Deuteronomy), which rests on
the witness of our Lord, the testimonium Spiritus Sancti. It
-would be possible to adjust the result thus. But this the
speech cuts away from under our feet. As to the j\Iosaic
authorship of the Pentateuch, it " does not believe that Jesus
and His apostles ever said anything on that subject." But kirk
commissioners will hardly make sober men think that it is
declared by inspiration that " Jehovah spake unto Moses, say-
ing," when it was not Moses at all ; and that when the Lord says
' Moses' writings," " He never said anything on that subject."

It is trifling to talk of who wrote down the words ; the question
is, Is it a divinely given, and therefore perfect, account of what
God spake and did by ^Moses, and was really uttered by Him,
interwoven as it is with all the details of the history of God's
people ? We know that, save that to the Galatiaus, Paul wrote
none of his epistles. In one case we know who did it for him :
" I, Tertius, who wrote this epistle," He signed each, saluting in
grace, that it might be authentic. Does any one think because

4o6 EPISTOLAR Y COMMUNICA TIONS.

Tertius adds tliat, sanctioned as it is by the Pauline salutation,
we have not Paul's inspired writings ? All this is child's play,
and worse. The speech does " not see how a very conclusive
argument could be raised against any one maintaining that the
book of Deuteronomy was written after the promised land was
occupied, and therefore by some one living in the promised
land, though he was directed and enabled to embody in that
book the authentic declarations and speeches of Moses." This
will tacitly, seemingly at least, screen the infidel system which
insists on its being written afterwards in the laud and not by
Moses. But save in one fatal word it does not touch the ques-
tion. It is perfectly immaterial when and where it was written,
as in Tertius's writing the Epistle to the Eomans, provided I
have a divinely given and therefore divinely authentic word and
reproduction of what Moses said before Israel entered into the land,
as the book professes to be. We have no statement that jVIoses
textually wrote anything but the song in xxxii. and the law put
beside the ark of the covenant, but there is no " embodying "
what Moses said in some other record. It professes to give what
Moses said by God's conmiand and with God's authority to the
people before their entry into the land, stating where it was
spoken ; and all through the book it is almost chapter by chap-
ter repeated, " the land which ye go in to possess." Now who
wrote it is no more important than Tertius in Eomans ; but if it
be not Moses who spoke the things before Israel's crossing the
Jordan, and really the directions for Israel in the laud when
actually going in to possess it, the book is a false book, not an
inspired one — an imposition of some later hand, not a revelation
of God. And this is what the system in fact alleges.

It does not " embody " what Moses spoke. It gives, and
states that it gives, what he spake and where. And if this be
not true, the book is not true. But the statement of the speech,
while screening the statement of Mr. S., does not touch it. That
statement, as of all the infidel school who hold this, is that the

THE QUESTION AND THE CRISIS. 407

Deuteronomist put Moses' name in as a license of literary composi-
tion ; that it was written centuries afterwards — some Mosaic reve-
lations and modifications and adaptations of later development
thrown into the form of a declaration and testimony by Moses.
A crude legislation — such is the theory — was developed and per-
fected by the priests and the national life of the people. Let
any one read Deuteronomy and see what it professes to be, and
say if such be its character ; — whether it " embodies " sayings
of Moses, or whether it be not, save the last chapter which has
nothing to do with the question, the directions of God by Moses
to Israel before going into the land. I deny the alleged addi-
tions and contradictions. That there are provisions for a state
of things which did not exist in the wilderness is quite true, a
considerable part consists of civil enactments adaj)ted to their
condition in the land when the kingly government did not
exist. There are two probable interpolations, like " there it is
unto this day" (ii. 10-12, 20-23), and possibly one other passage
besides (iii. 9), which may or may not be ; that is, one or two
small parentheses evidently such, which do not affect the sub-
stance of the book, nor have anything to do with a later date.

And let it be here remarked, the question is not about dates
or writers where Scripture does not state who speaks or writes,
but about inspiration. People may discuss who MTote the
Hebrews as no author is named ; it may be wise or unwise ; but
that the Spirit of God dictated it, that it is inspired, is another
question. I hold the tradition as to Luke and Mark wholly
irrelevant. The question is. Are they inspired accounts of the
Lord's life ? Learning from Peter is nothhig to the purpose if
they are not inspired ; from Paul as an eye-witness Luke could
not : indeed his own statement leaves no ground for it. The
question is this : When Deuteronomy says. These are the words
which Moses spake, are they really such ? or something concocted,
centuries after, out of a crude legislation given under Moses
through the development of national life, by priests or prophets

4o8 EPISTOLAR V CO MM UNICA TIONS.

■who contended against tliem ? Though, indeed, we are called
on to believe that the law which was the priest's work, at least
the Deuteronomic or more advanced form of it, was concocted
by a prophet, one of the class opposed to the priests ; for we are
to believe anything provided it be not inspiration and the truth
of God. I have notliing to do with Mr. S. or commissions of the
Free Church. The question is far wider than that ; it is of the
propagation of an infidel view of Scripture all over the English-
speaking world in a popular book of science. The Free Church is
indeed on its trial as to faithfulness, but the evil has to be com-
bated on its own merits. It may be sorrowful to see every
professing body of Christians more or less giving up the truth ;
but the question is there, and we cannot avoid it. The word of
God, the Scrij)tures, are what we are taught to rely on, and
those who are taught of God will rely on them. The enemies'
attacks are especially directed against them. Cavils and special
pleading will not do in this conflict ; it must be the faith of God's
elect, or spiritual "traditores" on whom no reliance can be placed
in the conflict.

I have had some doubt as to sending you this, because I
believe, as I have said above, the question must be treated on
its merits, and this is (save the first paragraph, as to Ezra) on
the kirk commission, and what is reported as Dr. Eainy's speech,
to me far more painful than Mr. S.'s article. It is a question of
the Free Cliurch about inspiration as well as about inspiration
itself It is only a bye-battle, and it ought to be treated for
God on its own merits. But if you think it may be useful /o?*
souls, you may use it. But the question is raised, and will have
to be discussed, not as a local but as a fundamental question.
As I have told you before, it has long pressed upon me as an
impending conflict

NON EADEM IMAGO. 409

NON EADEM IMAGO

Optime, CARissniE ! — Literas tuas accepi Vides inter

me et te nonnihil discriminis esse. Tibi non placuit, quod
prioribus Uteris scripsi. Interrogas, cur loh. xiv. 9 in hunc
locum adhibuerim ac non talem locum, qui esset de ipsa re de
qua ageretur. Imo satis est respondere, ilium locum ad banc
"rem pertinere. Certissima sunt haec duo : 1°, qui Eilium videt
Patrem videt ; 2°, ex fide non ex operibus est iustificatio.
Quae si certissima sunt, haec aeque certa sequuntur : (1°),
falsa est omnis theologia, quae aliam facit Patris imaginem
aliam Pilii ; (2°), falsa est omnis theologia, quae ex operibus
pendit iustificationem. Qui vero docet, Patrem postulasse,
Pilium solvisse, pretium quoddam Patri postulanti, is aliam
facit Patris imaginem aliam Filii, imo aliam facit Patris aliam
Pilii iustitiam. Quod si haec, quae in Patre est iustitia
pretium postulans, bona qualitas est, Pilius non Deus est
neque Dei similis ; invenitur enim bona qualjias, qua caret
Pilius ; qui vero bona quadam qualitate caret, Deus non est.
Si vero haec iustitia pretium postulans etiam in Filio est, necesse
est alius Pilio pretium quod debeatur solvat ; quod si ita est, in
Eomanum cultuni incidimus et ex operibus pendet iustificatio.
Optime frater, multa dicta sunt «t multa dicuntur et laudantur,
ut liaec quae maxime est simplex res obscuretur, atque scio et
apud vos et apud nos theologum maxime profundus haberi et
vocari, qui maxima subtilitate possit oculos et aures legentium
et audientium obturare, ne videant quam immensum sit inter-
vallum inter S. Scripturam et Anselmi theologiam, quam
sequuntur. Kulla vero subtilitas efficere poterit, ne certum sit
in loh. xiv. 9 frangi omnem theologiam, quae aliam faciat
Patris aliam Filii imaginem. Xeque est locus, imo ne unus
quidem, ubi doceat S. Scriptura pretium quoddam Filium Patri

4IO E PISTOL A R V COM^MUNICA TIONS.

solvisse, Dum in villa mea versabaris, ostendi tibi permultos
locos, et ex N. Test, et ex LXX. sumptos, qui liberationem, sal-
vationem, arnXuT^usiv, vocant et x-jroov illud, per quod fit salvatio
(Luc. ii. 38, xxi. 28 ; Eom. viii. 23 ; 1 Cor. i. 30 ; Epbes. i. 14,
iv. 30 ; Ebr. xi. 35 ; Psalm, cxix. 154, Ixix. 19, cxi. 9, etc.)
Atque prorsus eodem modo ea salvatio quae est per lesum
oc^roXuT^uaig vocatur et illud XuTPov quod nos salvavit. Si rex
sanguinem et vitam prof Lindens exercitum suiim salvat et
praeclaram victoriam vincit, dicitur etiani nostra et vestra (credo)
lingua inafjno prdio victoriam peperisse ; quod si quis interro-
gat, cui illud pretium solvens victoriam exercitui pepererit sive
emerit, nemo respondebit. Atque scio, si missam feceris illam,
qua imbutus es, Anselmi theologiam et S. .Scripturam perscru-
teris, te facile illud inventurum esse. Quamdiu vero ilia theo-
logia oculos obscurat, fieri non potest ut quis S. Scripturam
intelligere possit. Ubicumque enim videt veritatem gratiae
descriptam tamquam subiiciet ei illam pretii-solvendi-doc-
trinam. Haec vera est Scripturae ratio : 1°, Deus amavit muu-
dum ; 2°, propterea quod Deus amavit mundum, Filium misit,
non ut sibi solveret quod deberet mundus, sed ut mundum
salvaret; 3°, ut illud opus efiicere posset Filius, Pater ei omnem
potentiam in coelis et in terra tradidit ; 4°, Filius Patri obediens
venit, mortuus est, etc. ; 5°, iam in dextra Patris sedens regnat,
donee substrati sint hostes ; 6°, postrema quum ei situs erit
extremus bostis (i.e. mors), regnum Patri reddet et ipse se Patri
subiiciet (1 Cor. xv). •

DE PROPITIATIONE. 4''

DE PROPITIATIONE.

Frater carissime! — Filius certe Patrem ostendit, quod dicit
loh. xiv. 9 ; atque hoc, ut verissimum, ita gravissimura, qiiicun-
que Deo credit libentur accipiet ; quicunque autem spreverit,
illius gloriam, qui hue devenit ut efficeret propitiationem, sine
dubio negahit, imo ipsam propitiationem suhvertet. Personae
enim dignitas divinam ad opus faciendum facultatem dedit, per-
fecto autem operi efficaciam infinitam. ^

Verum ad propitiationem efficiendam opus est longe pluribus

quam jure Domini diviuo aut peccatoris fide quae illius opus et

ipsum sine operibus suis sibi postulat. Ex quo fit ut si hisce

Domini verbis, quae banc rem non attingunt, usus ratiocineris,

necesse sit fallaris. Quid enim de propitiatione loquitur Scrip-

tura ? Nonne eam de cruce Christi, de sanguine illius in remis-

sionem peccatorum effuso, de hoc quod semel pro peccatis passus

sit iustus pro iuiustis ut nos ad Deum perduceret pendere dicit ?

Quae quidem plenius confirmant haec e Novo Testament© petita,

Eom. iii. 25, iv. 25, v. 9, 10 ; 1 Cor. xv. 3 ; 2 Cor. v. 21 ; Gal.

i. 4, iii. 16 ; Eph. i. 7, 14, iv. 30, v. 2 ; Col. i. 14, 20 ; 1 Tim.

i.l5; Tit. ii. 14; Ebr. i. 3, ii. 9, 14, ix. 12, 14, 15, 24-28, x.

5-10, 12-19, xii. 24, xiii. 12, 20 ; 1 Pet. i. 2, 18-21, ii. 24, iii.

18 ; 1 loh. i. 7, ii. 2, iv. 10 ;-Apoc. i. 5, v. 9, vii. 14; alia.

Num debemus ilia adiicere quae in Evangeliis praemissa erant

qualia Matt. xx. 28, xxvi. 28 ; loh. i. 29 ; multa alia ? Taraen

idoneum fuerit nonnulla e Vetere Testamento, quae typorum

ordinem baud dubie tenent, paucis attingere. Primum ergo,

sanguis agni nocte paschae caesi extra, non intra, domum sparge-

batirr, in superliminari et super postes, non ut Israel verum ut

Deus aspiceret ; quod ipse ita dicit, " Et videbo sanguinem, et

transibo vos." In sacrificiis etiam sanguis in cornibus Dei arae

effusus ipsi Deo, uunquam autem homini offerebatur. In non-

412 EPISTOLAR V COMMUNICA TIONS.

nullis etiam homines, scilicet leprosi, sacerdotes, alii, sanguine
spargebantur ut mundarentur, ut coram Deo praecipue mundi
essent. In summis autem omnium, propitiationis die, templo
inferebatur et super propitiatorio et coram ponebatur. Hoc
autem quid vult nisi illud vel plenius demonstrare sanguinem
pro hominibus coram Deo esse, non tantum amoris Dei erga
homines documentum ? Quibus ita utitur Novum Testamentum
ut affirmet Christum per proprium sanguinem introiisse. Nam
illud quidem, devenisse eum et mortuum esse prae amore erga
homines non minus verum, diversum autem esse videtur. Atque
hie quidem, aperto loquente Scriptura, nulla de amore Dei
amplius quam Christi dubitatio esse potest. Misit Pater
Filium, porro sic dilexit mundum Deus ut Filium suum unigeni-
tum daret. Pariter autem constat Filium exaltari oportuisse,
oportebat autem non tantum ob malum hominum, verum ob
Dei verba, iustitiam, sanctam naturam, maiestatem, "quae vin-
dicari debebant ut hominibus iure ignosceretur. Quae omnia,
imo longe plus, efficit crux ChristL Propter peccata ille a Deo
derelictus est, Psal. xxii. ; neque hie de ludaeis aut Geutilibus, de
Herode aut Pontio Pilato, nisi ut de improbis persecutoribus,
agebatur. Etiam Deus ad crucem adfuit, qui Christum pro nobis
peccatum effecerit, ut in eo nos fieremus iustitia Dei. Prius ille
pro iustitia, sanctitate, gratia passus erat, pro peccatis tum
passus est. Haec est propitiatio quae sola credentis peccata
expiare potest, neque huius exspectatio nova exstitit, quamquam
novum erat factum. Nam, quod dicit princeps prophetarum ; —
" Vulneratus est propter iniquitates nostras, attritus est propter
scelera nostra : disciplina pacis nostrae super eum, et livore ejus
sanati sumus." " Posuit Dominus in eo iniquitatem omnium
nostrum." " Propter scelus populi mei percussi cum." " Et
Dominus voluit conterere eum in infirmitate ; si posuerit pro
peccato animam suam, videbit semen longaevum," etc. " Iniqui-
tates eorum ipse portabit." " Ipse peccata multorum tulit."
Cousentiunt Lex, Psalmi, Prophetae ; pariter Yetus Novum-

DE PROPITIATIONE. 4^3

que Testamentum a Deo et coram Deo propter peccata nostra

passum fiiisse Christum affirmant. Nuntiavit Dominus,

apostoli (Paulus imprimis) iterant, nee minime earns ille

discipulus qui maxime laudat Dei amorem, auctum revera

hoc cognito, quippe vires et profunditatem suam tum demum

ostendentem quum poculum hoc a Patre acceptum hibisse

Christum intellexeris. Non totam efficiunt veritatem Dei

amor, odia hominum, Satanae potentia, imo haec omnia pro-

funditate superat illud, Christum pro peccatis hostiam se

obtulisse Deo. Sane amorem Dei infinite imminuerit is qui

Christum peccatorum nostrorum indicium a Deo factum

passum fuisse non viderit. Is enim de hominum peccatis

negligentiam, contemptimi Dei sanctitatis, maiestatis, mom-

torum qualia leguntur Dent, xxvii. 26, Eom. ii. 9, Ebr. x.

31, ^esse eum effecerit. Contra demonstrant laudata fidei

Dei vindicandae necessariam fuisse expiationem, si nocentes

etiamsi crederent, salvos facere vellet. Indicium passus est

Christus ut ad peccatorem manaret gratia. Ergo iustitiam

non minus quam gratiam nunc monstrat Deus.

Qui ergo contendunt falsam esse omnem theologiam quae
aliam faciat Patris imaginem aliam Filii, negabuntne Deum
contrivisse Christum, hunc a Deo derelictum mortuum fuisse
crimen nostrum expiantem coram Deo qui suscitavit eum a
mortuis ? Quae si faciunt aliud hand dubie verum pervertunt,
ut aliud aeque verum et gravi'ssimum negent. Sane ex fide
non ex operibus iustificatur homo : verum perfecitne Christus
illud opus cui sacrificia propitiationis die peracta velut typi
praemittebantur ? Vaticinatur Isaia, cap. liii., narrant Matt,
et Marc. Domini passionem, ut ipse loquitur, Deo derebn-
quente, quod inter poenas nostrorum peccatorum vel miser-
rimrmi erat. Num Dei vindictae, passionis Christi, eadem est
imago? Mihi quidem inter haec summum fuisse discrimen
videtur, et tamen pacis consilium ambobus adfuit. Quae ergo
obiecta sunt, e falsa pendent interpretatione eorum quae

414 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

leguntur loli. xiv. 9, haec enim de Christi persona, non de
opere eius, revera dicta sunt. Qui haec de cruce dicta
accipiunt, ita ut Dominum pro peccatis nostris a Deo punitum
fuisse negent, ii proj)itiationis doctriuam quae in Scriptura
continetur, eiusque in Christo fundamenta interpretande
summovent. Quid enim, nisi hoc, efficere vult controversia ?

Porro illud postulant, iustitiam Dei eandem esse debere
atqiie Christi iustitiam, qui autem affirmet Patri esse bonam
qualitatem qua careat Pilius, eum revera negare hunc esse
Deum aut Dei similem. In quo vehementer errant ; est enim
iustitia, ut alibi, ita hie, mores idonei relationi in qua stat
quisque. Patet ergo, quomodo inter homines alia est servi
alia domini iustitia, parique modo alia filii alia parentis,
uxoris alia quam quae mariti, denique alia civis alia regis, ita
esse iustitiam in illo "qui quum in forma Dei esset, non
rapinam arbitratus est esse se aequalem Deo : sed semetipsum
exinanivit, formam servi accipiens, in similitudinem hominum
factus et habitu inventus ut homo humiliavit semetipsum,
factus obediens usque ad mortem, mortem autem crucis.
Propter quod et Deus exaltavit ilium ;" — Filius ergo ut non
caret qualitatibus illis quas habet Pater, ita illas habet, qua
homo est, quas non habet Pater, neque habere posset, quippe
qui carnem nunquam sumpserit. Eius enim qui dirigit sive
imperat iustitia alia est, alia eius qui paret. " Propterea me
diligit Pater ; quia ego pono animam meam, ut iterum sumam
earn." Pactum quidem ipsius, ex obedientia tamen Patris sui
erat loh. x, 17, 18. Personae Christi mysterium simile aliud
in morte sequitur, si ergo alterum tantum in ea, sive id
quod ad Deum sive id quod ad hominem pertinebat respicias,
personam divides, opus evacuabis, veritatem amittes. "Nemo
novit Pilium, nisi Pater." Verbo quidem illius debemus
parere, imiverso autem, non parti tantum. Filius est lesus,
qui non modo similis est Dei, nam vere Deus est, et pleue
Deus, aeque ac Pater et Spiritus Sanctus. Porro in ipso

DE PROPITIATIONE. 415

complaciiit omnem plenitudinem inhaljitare," et inhabitat
corporaliter ; tit tamen divinitatis personae non modo unam
naturam, verum etiam unam mentem, consilium, voluutatem
habeut, ita in his manifestandis diverse agunt, quod apparet, e.g..
Matt. iii. 16, 17, nam tres sunt non minus quam unum. Et
quidem Christus quum esset Filius Dei, didicit ex iis quae
passus est obedientiam. Itaque fieri non potuit quin in ipso
qualitates inessent perfectae in suo genere, quae a Patre aberant,
atque etiam ab ipso, donee servi locum sumeret, factus bomo in
terris. Etiam planius hoc in cruce videtur, illic enim novum
incepit opus suo in genere unicum, quod sequebantur gratia
et gloria infinita, aeterna ; et in passione per quam factum est.
Quae omnia Christi divinitatem nihilo plus imminuere volunt
quam negare eum Patrem manifestare aut Deum ostendere.
Qui autem dubitant Patrem et Filium, dum hie in terra versatur,
diverse egisse ac praecipue apud crucem, ii non in Piomanum
quidem cultum verum in Sabellianorum doctrinam, quae nequi-
tia longe superat Eomanam, incidunt, et longe plus pugnant cum
sancta Scriptura quam cum Anselmi theologia, quam ipsam
parvi equidem pendo.

Neque tamen cum theologis debemus emptionem cum re-
demptione confundere. Totus mundus, omnes mortales, etiam
mali sanguine Christi empti sunt ; nulli vero nisi credentes
habent redemptionem (a-oX'J-swff/i/) per sanguinem ejus, remis-
sionem peccatorum, quam vis h--\i rravruv sit to d^iTiXu-POK Per
emptionem quidem omnes eius possessio sive servi efficiuntur ;
per redemptionem vero potestate Satanae liberamur, Christi
liberti, ut Deo liberi pareamus. Ilia autem regis morientis
inter vincendum pro exercitu similitudo, illudne serio agitur
ut neget sanguinem Christi effusum pro peccatis sacrificium
non pro hominibus tantum sed Deo pretium solutum esse ?
Nihil est iUud quidem affirmare Deum diligere mundum atque
ita diligere vit Filium suum miserit qui credentibus vitam
aeternam det, hoc enim diversum est ab illo, acque vero, quod

4i6 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

" ipse ad destitutionem peccati per hostiam suam appaniit."
Hostia vero secundum Scripturam Deo sacrificatur, nuuquam
autem creaturae, quod est idoloruin servitus, ut est contra re
motio sacrificii infidelitas. Ac certissime redemptionis opus,
remissio peccatorum, per sanguinem fit, per passionem quae fuit
propitiationis causa in cruce, non per omnem potestatem in coelo
et in terra datam a Deo homini quern a mortuis suscitavit. Neque
oblivisci debemus, cum Christo subiecta fuerint omnia et ille
tradiderit regnum, fieri hoc non ut Pater, verum ut Deus, scilicet
Pater, Filius, Spiritus sanctus, sit omnia in omnibus.

"FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL." 417

"FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL."

Wig avoKoy'lav rou ivayytXiou KsT/xai — Phil. i. 1 7.

Are the foundations destroyed ? Is there any longer a Christ
or Christianity, the Word or the Church of God ? Such is
the question raised by the writings of the present-day theo-
logical speculators and modern critics. It becomes now indeed
(sad to say it !) an urgent question whether there be a Bible
as a revelation from God, in words which God inspired, and
whether there be such a thing as Christianity or the Church
of God on earth. Certainly no creed or confession formulates
the Christianity of the Scriptures, and no Church in Christen-
doni now holds to the unity of the Spirit, or acknowledges His
personal presence on earth. If otherwise, which is it ?

The authority of the Bible having been very specially
assailed in our land as well as in every country in the world,
most of its leading doctrines having been either ignored, im-
pugned, or rejected, it behoves individual Christians, who still
value the Holy Scriptures as the Word of God, and who rea,lise
the awful crisis of un-faith into which the w'hole professing Church
is drifting, to look to the Lord to maintain the standard of His
own glory, and give them grace to " witness a good confession "
of the truth by re-asserting the original testimony of God as
given by the Holy Ghost. When the Cliurch corporate has
manifestly ceased to be " the pillar and ground of the truth,"
it devolves on every soul who values the Holy Scriptures and
has fciith in the living God, to cling to the person of the Christ
of God, who reveals Himself to the faithful as the Holy and
the True, " He that openeth, and no man shutteth," holding fast
His Word, and not denying His name (Ptcv. iii. 7, 8).

2 E

4i8 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

With all humility and self-judgment, yet with firmness and
faith confiding in the grace of God, as one who loves the truth
and confesses the name of Christ, the writer ventures to recall
the faithful and loyal disciples of Christ to faith in the Holy
Scriptures as the inspired revelation of God, to union with the
glorified Christ by the Holy Ghost, to the fact of the Holy
Spirit's presence on earth, and to the privileges and responsi-
bilities of membership of the body of Christ, by the publication
of The Bible Witness and Eeview, which has these very
specially for its objects. It will seek to uphold the inspiration
and authority of the written Word of God, and, by the direct
presentation of the revelation of God contained in the Holy
Scriptures, to expose and refute, as far as allowed of God, the
deadly errors which now pervade the whole of Christendom
alike Eomish and Protestant.

The questions now raised everywhere are vital and funda-
mental ; and they are just such as we care to handle, for Scrip-
ture principles are catholic, not sectarian, and our periodical
exists for no party, but for the edification of the saints of God in
every place, and the maintenance of divine truth as revealed.
All who are dear to Christ are dear to us ; and one would hope
that a crisis like the present may draw the children of God
together in closer fellowship, that they may " stand fast in one
spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel"

We rejoice that a few have given " together " their renewed
testimony to Christ and Christianity and the inspiration of the
Holy Scriptures, and we look to the Lord to own the truth
presented, and increase the number of those who love it and are able
to use it in testimony to Him. Blind is the man who does not
see a more intense and widespread power of Satan put forth of
late against the Scriptures and the testimony of God, and more
especially through pseudo-criticism and theological speculation ;
and this necessitates the presentation of such papers as the
Christian reader will find, it is believed, in the opening volume

"FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL." 419

of our testimony, giving as they do the Scripture doctrine, and
thus confronting and refuting error with trutli. The front
is changed. The conflict is for the very existence of a revelation
from God and of Christianity ; and the specific aim must be to
keep this in the forefront as that in which the real dignity and
moral elevation of man consist. The rights of the Creator and
the creature to have to do with each other are the real question
with the enemy. We shall thus " contend earnestly for the
faith once delivered to the saints," bringing men face to face
with the living God speaking in the Holy Scriptures. The
written Word of God is our supreme authority and our only
standard. " Let God he true, hut every man a liar."

Those who fight the Lord's battles must make up their
minds to be scorned and little accounted of on earth ; but it
is enough that the Lord Jesus approves of any faithful
testimony rendered to His name. " Thou hast kept j\Iy word,
and hast not denied My name," is no little praise in a day when
the word of testimony for Christ is being sacrificed to a tem-
porising and worldly expediency, and when Christ's name seems
no longer to have commanding authority even amongst His own
servants. There never was a time when there was more general
knoMdedgc about Him in the professing church, with more
indifference to Himself, — a saying of " Lord, Lord," and yet
not doing the things which He so plainly enjoins. " I will
spue thee out of My mouth,", is the end of this heartless and
unconscionable indifferentism (Eev. iii. 14-21).

It is very sad that the majority of the theological professors of
the day are more or less touched with rationalism, or not inclined to
denounce it as incipient infidelity. A great number especially
of the younger ministers are reading approvingly the popular
literature of the day — which is at the best but theistic, not
Christian — and making their sermons on the literary models
of Anglican and American preachers of high intellect but more
than questionable soundness, the pabulum for which is mainly

420 EPISTOLAR Y COMMUNICA TIONS.

drawn from German divines and commentators, not one of "wliose
writings is fully orthodox. Thus, straining to become intellec-
tual, they vitiate the truth instead of letting it judge themselves
and their hearers. There is no longer, M'ith such, a distinct
preaching of Christ Himself as our living Head, and of His
cross, the Spirit's cure for worldliness in Christianity (1 Cor.
i. ii. iii. iv. ; Gal. vi, 12-14). There is thus a letting down
of the testimony of our Lord, an avoidance of the offence
of the cross, and a mixing up of church and world in every
conceivable way ; as if it had been the church's mission
to attach the world to itself in all its worldliness, denying all
real difference between them, and as if no such word as that
uttered by our Lord, " Ye cannot serve God and mammon,"
had ever been spoken. The preaching being lowered, the prac-
tice is correspondingly low, and professing Christians try to
think it right to countenance all sorts of semi-worldly shows
and demonstrations, and the scandal occasioned is terrible !
But these are merely the fruits of unfaithfulness to Christ.
The root is a more serious thing, and will be found to exist in
the colourless, non-christian, yea antichristian, teaching to which
we have already alluded. Would that it were uncharitable to
suppose that there are professors training the future ministers of
all the modern churches, who seem themselves never to have
lain before a just and holy God in the judgment of their sins
by the death of Christ, known by faith and in the living grace
of the Holy Ghost. But surely, judged by their writings, some
have merely an intellectual knowledge of the Scriptures, just as
they would, by their general ability, have become proficients in
any other science ; and hence they teach their subjects as
scientists in theology, not as lost sinners saved by the absolute
grace of God. Their writings show that althougli they may
be acquainted M'ith critical and theological works, they are
in darkness regarding the drift of Divine revelation, and
cannot tell out, as men who have an unction from the Holy One,

"FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL:' 421

the testimony of the Holy Ghost iu the holy Scriptures to tlie
glory of God's Son. There is not such a thing as the truth in
their teaching, for they do not know it. They cannot lielp glean-
ing many true things from their multifarious reading ; but, as it
was to the theologians of His day that our Lord said, " Ye shall
know the truth, and the truth shall make you free ;" and again,
" Because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not ;" so these
scientific theologians know a variety of truths, but not the tndh ;
and hence, not having it, they cannot communicate it. It is not
found apart from living contact with the Person of Christ, and
the living grace of the Holy Ghost, and the true sayings of God
in the holy Scriptures. Tlie truth being the God-thought in
Christ, could these professors tell you scripturalhj the truth of
the nature, person, life, death, intercession, priesthood, headship,
kingship, church or kingdom, — present life in heaven, future
glory there or reign on earth, of the Christ of God ? If not,
would it not demonstrate that the truth is not in them ? "Where-
fore Christ, who is " the Truth," being unknown — His person
and sacrifice, grace and gloiy, being misapprehended — they can-
not do otherwise than make a sorry business of their professional
work, and pour into the youths they misteach principles and
doctrines entirely alien from the plan of God for the glory of
Christ revealed in the holy Scriptures, as indeed is the whole
system of their theology from its foundation to its copestone.
And a human system of theology being taught in the colleges,
it is in due time transferred to the churches ; and if one were
going into the churches or chapels over the land, would he not find
the homogeneity of the erroneous teaching persistently adhered
to ? The country is full of this theology : but where is Christ ?
He is all but unknown as the Holy Ghost has revealed Him in
the word of God. And what deliverance can tliere be since
Christ, who delivers us from this present evil workl, is un-
known? This modern theology and preaching never contem-
plate separation to God in the knowledge and enjoyment of the

422 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATmNS.

Father's love as new creatures in Christ ; but rather a patron-
ising of modern literature and worldly amusements, and an annex-
ing of the ambitious pursuits of time and sense, veneering them
with religion. Hence men practically come to the conclusion
that the Saviour's words, " Ye cannot serve God and mammon,"
no longer carry with them their former grave meaning of moral
impossibility, and they seek to " make the best of both worlds."

The godly are at their wits' end : for their falling in with the
recent rage for young unproved professors, because of their alleged
intellectual powers, irrespective of divine knowledge of Christ
and soul-consuming love to Him and zeal for His glory, has
brought them the present harvest of heresy, and the sorrowful
impossibility of rooting it out. Every such sowing yields its
inevitable harvest. " Be not deceived ; God is not mocked ;
for ivhatsocvcr a man soweth, that shall he also reap " (GaL vi. 7).

But many will ask in amazement, Are the professors really
imsound ? The godly in Scotland and elsewhere have been
disquieted in vain if Professor Smith's article in the Encyclo-
paedia Britannica on " The Bible " be an orthodox production.

And it is not Professor Smith only who is unsound. Are
there not other professors in the same ecclesiastical sphere who
are gravely suspected of unsoundness in the faith ? Of even the
lately published course of Cunningham Lectures a review comes
from the United States which does not hesitate to characterise
the book as " a convenient index to all the follies of half-heathen
'fathers,' as well as themodern and semi-heathen dreams of self-
satisfied Germans ; and an occasion of displaying all its author
had read of both. But the writer's own statements are really
painful, so that it is hard to think he has ever realised in
truth what Christ is. He talks of ' the curriculum of Christ's
sufferings ;' of * a good understanding between the Father and
the Son ' ! (on the cross, I think) ; of Son of man being ' a pet
name ' of Christ's. How can one who uses such language have
any sense of what is divine and gracious ? It is offensive and

« FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL." 423

revolting to every right feeling. He is, though nominally ortho-
dox, really imbued with the poison of German infidelity, and in
some of its worst shapes : his system of doctrine is not the
truth, but the restoration of humanity, and connection of Christ,
or rather union of Christ, with man in the flesh, in contrast with
a risen Christ, the Head of the new creation, to whom we are
united by the Holy Ghost. In the Mercersburg theology this
is run to seed ; but it is the great point in question, a grave and
"weighty one which lies at the basis of tlie nature of Christianity,
and on which your theological writers are wholly away from
Scripture and truth : as are Irving, and 'Mercersburg,' and the like.
The only consistent representatives, the old pious minds, may
have been kept, by the conclusion it led to, from falling grossly
into it. No man could treat Beyschlag and others as the lecturer
does, with any proper reverence for Christ in his heart ; but it is
the effect of not drawing from Scripture, and losing faith l.)y
theological speculations substituted for it. It is at the root of
much error in this day, and is undermining the Presbyterian
cliurches everywhere, where they are not infidel and Socinian."

Let it not be supposed that any one body is singled out for
assault. Alas ! the powers of evil now at work are legion ;
heterodoxy and scepticism in a religious as well as a profane
garb are to be found everywhere. But it is no liglit sign of the
times that a church once assumed to be careful of doctrine and
discipline seems now lapsing- into suicidal compromise on the
part of her representative men counted godly and orthodox.

We gladly own that there are gracious men and godly
ministers of Christ in all the ecclesiastical systems, whose hearts
beat true to Christ, and whose preaching of the gospel is in the
living power of the Holy Ghost ; but such faithful men are few,
and they are daily vexing their righteous souls, like Lot in
Sodom, with the uuscriptural doctrine and worldly practices
with which they are unhappily connected. It is a living martyr-
dom for a man who knows and preaches the testimony of God

424 EPISTOLARY COMMUNICATIONS.

in any measure of fulness to be in any of ' the churclies/ for he
will be constantly regarded with suspicion, and treated by his
brethren as a speckled bird. This demonstrates the accuracy of
our sorrowful affirmation that the truth of Christianity and the
faithful confessors of it are now looked upon as intruders and
exotics within the entire range of the churches of Christendom.
A record of facts such as these, and their consequences,
warrant, yea demand, such a periodical as Tlie Bible Witness and
Revieio, that we may bear witness to the truth, and give what
help we may be enabled to impart to the saints of God at this
solemn crisis.

On the one hand, it must continue to be a painful occupa-
tion to watch and warn against an every-day departure from the
truth and from God. On the other, it will prove a happy
employment to point out and invite attention to publications
that grasp the grand idea of " the faith of God's elect," and what
it is, and the acknowledging of "the truth which is after godli-
ness," and where it is ! These were the original peculiarities of
Cliristianity, as charged upon Titus (when endangered) by the
apostle Paul. They Avere embodied and ministered first by
Christ when on earth, and established with Him in heaven ; but
are now carried out by the Holy Ghost, as the witness from Him
to us, come down to dwell with us, as the "other Paraclete."
They are therefore essentially divine in their formation and dis-
play, in the midst of God's elect below, till Christ's shout bids
them rise up to meet Him in the air. This circle of truth, which
includes " the testimony of our Lord " to Timothy, and " the
faith once delivered to the saints " as by Jude, stands forth in
other and new relations towards God and the elect ; in contrast
with what was old in the former economy of Judaism.

For example, ought a Christian now to allow it to be said
tliat "the faith of God's elect," or "the truth wliich is after
godliness" by Paul, formed any part in the ministry of Moses?
Grace, and the calling by grace into oneness with the Second

''FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GO SPEW 425

Man ia glory above, cannot in their nature be confounded with
the recoguition " of man in the flesh," placed under the law and
covenants, and a worshipper in the " worldly sanctuary " !

These and other distinctions must be maintained, to see the
order of God in relation to the place of Israel on earth, and the
present order of God as regards the church, both as to her place
and portion with Christ above. She also is become the vessel
of testimony to the world, but on behalf of the rejected Lord and
King, till as the bride she is caught up when the marriage of
the Lamb is come.

The Bible thus, in its two parts, embraces the earth and the
heavens, and unites both with Christ in present purpose and
final blessing. It also gives the history and destiny of " the
families in heaven and earth," as redeemed to God by faith in
the precious blood shed on the cross. Held and maintained in
its " grace and truth " by the power of the Holy Ghost, it pre-
sents the only remedy for a guilty conscience and the heart it
has broken in upon in grace and love. It opens out its bound-
less resources, in the fulness of Christ, to us as believers, so that
" the Ufe we live in the flesh we live by the faith of the Son of
God, who loved us and gave Himself for us." As ministered on
the journey of life, by the grace of Christ, it is the balm for
every wound. Jesus sees us, and comes to us where we are,
pouring in oil and wine, and takes care of us, for He has tra-
velled over the road that leads from Jerusalem to Jericho for
Himself ! How we need such a heart as His in a day like this !
And is this the foul work that the enemy puts men to do against
themselves, not merely to cavil at God because He is so good,
but corrupt the Bible, and deny the genuineness of the records
which make Him known to us, in the Son of His bosom ?

The devil can only repeat himself in his history with man —
for sin must be against love and light to reach its enormity ;
and so it was not till after Jesus had dipped the sop and handed
it to Judas " that Satan entered into him." " Contend earnestly

2f

426 EPISTOLAR V COMMUNICA TIOXS.

for the faith once delivered to the saints " is a word in season —
for what is " the faith of God's elect," or " the truth which is
after godliness," if we are robbed of the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Ghost in known relationships ? Beyond the sorrows
and cares of human life, and whilst in the midst of this evil
world, where sin, and death, and Satan reign, the Bible gives us
the blessed hope of the Lord's coming to receive us to Himself,
that where He is, there we may be also. The enemy's malice
is to take away this bright hope from the heart that cannot do
without it, and to steal from the purged conscience its present
peace with God, and to deprive the soul of its comfort in the
Holy Ghost amidst the wear and tear of every-day life. Where
is succour to come from, or the hand that can wipe away the
tears, or else put them into His bottle, but in the sympathy of
the living love of the living Lord above, who is touched with
the feeling of our infirmities ? Eude and rough is the hand that
would turn any away from the sources of life and strength, out-
side ourselves, in the Father's love. In the wilderness our
springs are in " the Ptock that is higher than we," and daily the
manna comes down to us, around our tent, before even the sun
is up. God's first care is for his own, and He will be first !
]\'^ss we over the Jordan to Gilgal (as having done with works
" in the flesh " and with the wilderness), it is but to know Him
better, and ourselves brought nearer. "We are upon His OM'n
ground there as heavenly men, and eat the corn of the land.
The grapes of Eshcol are ours, and we gather them where they
grow. May the land, and the corn and the fruit that grow
therein, be the attractive power that keeps the heart and its
affections true to Christ, and so satisfied with what satisfies Him
at the right hand of God, that our dwelling-j)lace may be far up
above the camp and its confusions !

True, we shall the more clearly see and understand the
shame of the calf and the dancing below, and the outrage of the

"FOR THE DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL." 42;

captain, in the midst of a hesitating people, who propose a
return to Egypt, instead of a closer walk with God.

In these last days, the deception by "the angel of light,"
throughout the length and breadth of Christendom, is much in
advance and far more dangerous than the "calf" and the " cap-
tain " of a visible and material economy. Satan knows how " to
transform himself" to suit the character of a spiritual dispensa-
tion while the Holy Ghost is in the house. After the church
is gone, he will not scruple to come on lower ground, and as
" the dragon " of the Apocalypse " give power to the beast " whom
the world will worship, saying, " Who is like unto the beast?"

" But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy
faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, keep yourselves in the love of
God, looking for the mercy of the Lord Jesus Christ unto eter-
nal life. And of some have compassion making a difference, and
others save with fear, pulling them out of tlie fire, hating even
the garment spotted with the flesh."

What a comfort, with unhesitating confidence, and in the
calm repose of faith and hope, which admit of neither doubt nor
question, to join in the doxology — " Noiv unto Him that is able
to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the
presence of His glory with exceeding joy, to the only v:ise God our
Saviour, he glory and majesty, dominion and poicer, now and for
ever. Amen.

FINIS.

Printed by R. & R. Clark, Edinhirg/t.

Ptmfwn II1eolo91c.1l Sfminary-Speei

1 1012 01129 7860

i

>'':%■*

: -^T— :

»v; -? .{. nv '

>cl'.