When I commenced writing, it was merely
with a view to publishing my reasons for quitting the
communion of the Church of England. Having enlarged upon my
original intention, I find it necessary to affix to this
work a few prefatory observations.
The substance of the work was delivered
in a course of lectures to the congregation which lately
assembled at St. Matthew's, in this town. This will account
for the matter of the few opening pages, which, had I known
how far I should have been obliged to exceed my prescribed
limits, would have formed of themselves the preface, instead
of having a preface written in explanation.
The volume is sent forth into the world
as a trifling contribution towards establishing what is much
needed—a sound principle of Scripture interpretation. The
truth of every statement propounded is by no means contended
for. I prefer no claim similar to that of Swedenborg,
Irving, and, in fact, all theologians who maintain that the
present is a dispensation of the Holy Ghost. I claim not to
have received any doctrine through an immediate and
miraculous revelation. So far from asserting any thing of
the kind, one position strongly taken up by me is, that
Scripture is its own interpreter, and that what I have
written is only so far valuable as that, in 'comparing
spiritual things with spiritual,' I have brought various
portions of the word of God to harmonize, and have shown
that the Scriptures are not contradictory, wherever I have
had occasion to examine them. It is probable, and more than
probable, that some errors in reasoning, and some defects of
exposition, may be detected. In the minor details, there may
be mistakes; but while making these admissions, I contend
most strenuously that there is not a shadow of a shade of
error in the conclusion at which I have arrived. I assert in
the most positive and distinct manner possible, that the
doctrine of a past second advent is proved to a
demonstration, and is unassailable. The belief of this
doctrine has seriously affected my temporal wellbeing;
though I am quite sensible that this is no evidence of its
truth, and no excuse for its advocacy if it be untrue. The
defence of the doctrine has caused me to feel most acutely
how much better I would have consulted my worldly prospects,
if I could have stifled my convictions, and sailed along
with the stream as others have done. The mere rumour of my
religious belief has exposed me to the imputation of all the
vile names which the vocabulary of a spurious Christianity
can furnish forth. But even if it have been said of me, 'he
hath spoken blasphemy,' it is nothing more than the
repetition of an old charge: and following the example of my
Divine Master, I would desire to make no complaint.
Appealing to the same testimony as that to which Christ
himself and his Apostles appealed, I would ask, Is the
charge substantiated by proof, and by facts ? I am
most anxious to bring an opponent to the book; and having
this leading object, among others, in view, I have prevailed
upon myself to hazard a public, and, under existing
circumstances, perhaps an apparently egotistical statement
of my belief. I know not, nay, I am doubtful, whether I
shall be any gainer by so doing. I do know, from a somewhat
intimate acquaintance with the religion of human nature, and
from the history of religious opinion, that my defence will
be condemned in the mass, by many who will be so much
offended at the conclusion expressed in the title page, that
they will never think of putting themselves in possession of
the premises. I do fear that prejudice—the prejudice of
creeds and catechisms—will in most quarters operate so
powerfully, that there may be few readers who will follow
the example of the noble Bereans, and search the Scriptures
whether these things are so. Most earnestly would I
deprecate a hasty condemnation, or even any judgment of the
work which is not founded upon a careful, and, as far as
possible, an unbiased perusal. After what I have stated, and
with the solemn conviction on my mind that I am in the
right, I feel that I have license to make this appeal,
and that I shall not be considered transgressing if I enter
my protest against the insane verdict of prejudice and
preconception. I feel, moreover, that if I can secure the
calm attention of enlightened minds, they will rise from the
perusal of this work with the conviction, that the head and
front of my offending is not that I have undermined any
truth of Christianity, but that I have endeavoured to set
forth a full and complete statement of its one cardinal and
central doctrine—the atonement of the Son of God.
But it is time to enquire, To whom do I
thus address myself, in the language of earnest
expostulation ? I answer, To the people, to the laity; to
the hearers, not to the preachers; not to the teachers, but
to the taught. I appeal to the pews: I make no appeal of any
kind to the pulpits, except by way of a challenge to come
forward in defence of their order. I know that all
expostulation with the 'ministry' is lost labour—a sound,
and nothing more. Charges which never can, and never will be
substantiated, will by the priesthood be repeated to those
(and, alas, their name is Legion!) who are weak enough and
deluded enough to believe them. They will be so repeated,
simply because I have endeavoured to carry out the doctrine
of the past second advent in all its important bearings,
keeping in mind the Divine law, "what God hath joined
together, let not man put asunder." This doctrine is
examined in the following pages in its consequences, and not merely as an isolated article of a religious belief,
which can make no change in the relationship of man to God,
whether it be fulfilled or no. The consequences of
the past second advent are fearful to the priesthood
; and when I say priesthood, I include, of course, the
ministers of all sects, from Romanism to Mormonism, presbyter being no other than priest
writ large. The
priesthood will be alive to this; they will see at a glance,
that if the doctrine which I advocate be true, their
occupation as a priesthood is gone, the source from which
they get their gain being cut off. Hence the unmitigated
condemnation of this view of Divine revelation: a
condemnation which could force a priest of the Church of
England to say, " Go to any dissenting chapel, rather than
to St. Matthew's," and which can now draw from a priest of
any dissenting body, " Go to any church —to a Roman
chapel—but don't go near Mr. Townley." If these things were
"done in a corner;" if this was the line of conduct pursued
when I was merely an obscure individual, addressing a
despised handful, who were likeminded with myself, what, it
may be asked, will be done to this obscure individual, who
has been presumptuous enough to commit himself and his
opinions to the press ?
In order, if possible, to save trouble, I
will mention a few things which will not serve the
purpose of the priesthood.
It will be of no avail to follow the
example of Exeter Hall, and to try to put me and my book
down by the use of opprobrious names. Hard words break no
bones. Raillery is not necessarily reason; neither
does it follow that invective is always argument.
Neither, again, will it be of any avail to endeavour to
substantiate a wholesale condemnation by the ipse dixit
of any man, or of any body of men. I take my stand as a
Protestant, on the right of private judgment. I acknowledge
only one rule of faith, the Holy Scriptures, and reject all
Mass-books, Prayer-books, Assembly's Catechisms, and such
like, as expositors of that rule. Neither, I would observe,
will it answer the ends of religious systems, to meet the
arguments of this work by that convenient resource of
ignorance—the contemptuous pleasantry which affects to
despise what it secretly fears. - This volume makes
pretensions of no ordinary kind, and must be met, if it be
opposed at all, in no ordinary way. To say that I am beneath
notice—only worthy of silent contempt—or that I am mad and
deluded, upon religious subjects, may impose upon fools and
fanatics, but upon an independent, thinking individual,
never. On the contrary, this course of procedure will be, to
the reflecting mind, the strongest of all possible evidences
that the work is unanswerable, and the doctrine not to be
overthrown.
But why do I thus trouble myself, by
anticipating a reply which may never be forthcoming, through
sheer inability on the part of those who are called upon to
render a "reason of the hope" that is in them ? If we
confine our observation to the priesthood of the Church of
England, to whom shall we look for a Scriptural refutation
of the proved statements of this work, viz., that the Bible
promises no future coming of Christ, and, consequently, no
resurrection of the body, nor any end of the world, neither
a day of judgment ? These positions may be taken up
by an avowed infidel, and urged by him against the Christianity of the day. Nay, it may be, as it has been
contended, that I am little better than an infidel in
advocating them. Be it so. I repeat, to whom, and to which
of the clergy shall we look for an exposure of their
fallacy, if they be fallacies ? So far as I am acquainted
with the Establishment, with its theology and theologians,
the search will be in vain. It is admitted even by the heads
of the Church themselves, that there is nothing less taught
in the Universities than divinity. The Bishop of St.
David's, not long ago, in his place in Parliament, made this
humiliating confession; and the reason is obvious. Of what
use, it may be asked, is it to attempt an investigation of
the Scriptures, when human creeds, and standards of
centuries gone by, are opposed as a barrier to all
investigation ? These devices of man's contrivance are
the great hindrance to the spread of Biblical knowledge;
and, without a doubt, Christianity would be an immense
gainer if they were one and all swept away into the oblivion
of the dark and superstitious ages from which they emanated.
The knowledge of the volume of nature every one allows to be
progressive. The hidden mysteries of God's beautiful and
natural creation, are one by one, brought out to the
astonished gaze of his intelligent creatures. We hear on
every side propositions such as the following:—What would
our forefathers think, if they were to come among the men of
this generation, and see the wonderful progress which hath
been made by a world around us ? Who can doubt, asks
another, that the most advanced outposts of the territory
conquered by the science of this age, will have dwindled and
become scarcely perceptible to the retroverted eye of the
philosopher of 1945 ? How many great questions in physical
science, and in ethics, will then have been solved; and to
how many of the distresses of the sons of men will remedies
have then been applied ? Alas! reflects a third party, alas!
how sweetly will the wheels of the social machine, as well
as the current of individual life, then move; and why, O
why, have we been condemned to live in the early part of
this darkling century, streaked but with the dawnings of so
much glory ! How glorious the prospect for those who shall
be born to our children's children!—What have we in any
measure corresponding with this, asked of that book, which I
believe to be the perfection of science—the emanation of the
mind of Deity ? What are the facts ? For centuries of
blinded ignorance, the Church of Rome has said, "Hitherto
shalt thou go, and no farther." For nearly 300 years, the
Church of England, in close imitation of her mother, has, by
reason of her creeds, shut the volume of inspiration to her
members. The knowledge of the language in which the
Scriptures were written is ever progressing. Men the most
learned have given us improved versions of one book of the
Bible after another, without, however, venturing to impugn
the veracity of a single orthodox article of a human creed.
Grammarians, lexicographers, and critics, are putting into
our hands the key to unlock the treasures of Oriental
philology ; and it is every day more and more obvious, says
a learned writer, that philology is giving laws to theology.
Obscure places of Scripture are becoming plain, rough places
smooth, and crooked things straight. The Inquisition
absurdity, which condemned Galileo, is now the subject of
ridicule, the Romanist himself being judge. A better
acquaintance with the original Hebrew has shown that it was
the sunshine, and not the sun, which Joshua
commanded to stand still, and that therefore the Bible and
the philosopher are both agreed that the sun is fixed in the
centre of our system, while the earth and the other planets
move round it: the motion of the earth being arrested by the
word of Joshua, and consequently the apparent motion
of the sun. But of what avail is all this ? Our
Churches put a veto upon all search which would venture to
arraign the infallibility of their creeds and
confessions. The Church of England cannot be prevailed upon
even to amend her Prayer-book. She declares that if a man do
not believe every tittle of her Athanasian Creed, without
doubt he shall perish everlastingly ! The attempt to
alter this has been made, time after time, by her own
clergy, and all to no purpose. Much less is it to be
expected that she will ever issue another and a better
version of the Scriptures, or that the state will take upon
itself to do this necessary work, so long as connected with
the Church. The revision might be left with her own
University Professors : nay, with one of them, the present
Regius Professor of Hebrew at Cambridge. We would
humbly beg and pray for two slight alterations only: for the erasure of the traditionary date fixed to the
Revelation of John, and for a scholarlike rendering of the
promise, "Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the
world." The entreaty would be in vain; for the Hierarchy,
from the Archbishop to the working Curate, would easily
divine that even an alteration so trifling might prove the
ultimate downfall of the Establishment. The most learned of
all her learned men, who have commented upon the Bible, dare
not carry out their researches to their full extent—an
extent which themselves must secretly have been convinced is
just and true, viz., a declaration that the foundation of
their Church is visionary—that its fundamental position, the
doctrine of Apostolic succession, is a fallacy. But it is to
be hoped something effective may, even in existing
circumstances, be accomplished. I trust to see the day when
one of the Gospels shall be printed and circulated, as
faithfully rendered from the original, without the glosses
of priestcraft, and the false coloring of preconceived
notions, and natural religion, which now to a great extent
make void the word of God in the apprehension of the
unsuspecting English reader. I know no dearer desire than to
see the Gospel by Matthew published, with a commentary
advocating the views propounded in this work; and should be
most willing to give every assistance in my power to any who
had means and ability to undertake a labour of such
momentous importance. The commentary would live and be
valued when hundreds of the books which are now so popular
would be known and remembered no more. All that has been
hitherto written and spoken upon the doctrine of the past
second advent, would sink into absolute insignificance
before an undertaking like this. In the meanwhile, sanguine
in a cause which I believe has Omnipotence for its patron,
and believing that the past second advent will be recognised
in the land, and by the people, as universally as is now the
past first advent, I rest assured that sooner or later such
a work will appear; and, as before hinted, when it does
appear, it will be "a heavy blow and great discouragement"
to a religious system which already shows evident symptoms
of an approaching doom. The signs of the times seem to the
watchful observer to point ultimately towards an enquiry,
deep and searching, into that Book from whence all our
Churches profess to derive their existence and authority.
The Churches themselves are helping on to this conclusion,
as they are now confessedly the great disturbers of the
national peace, and the chief obstacle in the way of the
Government of the country: yea, so much so, that, by their
incessant agitation, they have forced the Ministry
(doubtless much against its will) to propose an educational
scheme for Ireland, wherein there is no religious provision
whatever. If the nation is to be thus everlastingly
embroiled—if the people are to be thus kept in a continual
turmoil—they will begin surely to enquire more narrowly into a matter which concerns them so nearly
as a revelation of God. As the beautiful harmony and order
of the material universe is more and more laid bare before
them, they will surely at length arouse themselves (for the
matter rests with them, not with their rulers, whether
political or religious,) to ask, Are we for ever to be
harassed with two exhibitions of the Deity, the one in
direct antagonism to the other, and can these discordant and
quarrelsome sects be truly derived from the Bible ? When
this enquiry is really entertained, not one of the existing
caricatures of Christianity will escape it. Religious
systems of every description may be as the Garden of Eden
before it, but behind they will be a desolate wilderness:
and here we echo the aspiration of the philosopher—"How
enviable will be the position of that man, who shall witness
what may with truth be called, the regeneration of a world."
The question is, What is truth ? There is no fear but
the answer is recorded in the Bible to the full, and that it
is, like its author, "holy, and just, and good." "Let no
man," writes the father of philosophy, "taking the credit
of a sobriety and moderation ill applied, think or maintain
that men can search too far in the book of God's word; but
rather let them excite themselves to the search, and boldly
advance in the pursuit of an endless progress in it; only
taking heed lest they apply their knowledge to arrogance,
and not to charity —to ostentation, and not to use."—Bacon.
R. T.
- Liverpool, June, 1845
THE SECOND ADVENT.
IN submitting
to you our reasons for seceding from the Church of England,
I will at once
introduce these reasons by stating, that they differ
entirely from anything which has ever been offered by any
secession previous to our own.
I do not intend to offer, in apology for
our present position, that such position is in consequence
of conscientious objections to certain matters connected
with the Church of England.
Such a course of objection may very well
suit the purpose, and be adapted to the consciences, of a
numerous class of persons (sincere, I
do not doubt,) who quit the communion
of one religious system for another, or who, finding fault
with existing systems, devise one of their own, which
contains, in principle, all the evils of the one they may
have left.
To object to certain portions of a system
to flagrant
outrages on common sense-to doctrines which would disgrace
the Heathenism to reform which such system sends out
missions-to object to services, to catechisms, and
confirmations, to absolution, baptismal regeneration,
burial services, and such like, appears to me to be labour
in vain ; inasmuch as such objection might well consist with
an application to the objector of the reproach of Christ,
"Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a
camel."
I think
I may venture to say, for you as well as
myself, that we object; neither to this nor that particular
of this or that party, but to the whole - believing that, in
their existing constitution, they are contrary to the Word
of God ; that even the very name of party, sect, or society
is unscriptural.
We object to the entire constitution of
the various religious establishments of the day, because
we believe that they are nothing more nor other than
Judaism, in divers forms and fashions, some, doubtless, more
disguised than others, but all maintaining the great
foundation principle of Judaism, viz., an outward and
visible church; indeed, a church, and, by consequence, a
ministry of divine authority, and therefore, by
consequence again, maintaining Apostolic succession; or if
not, in so many
words, maintaining these things, then inconsistent with
themselves, and attempting the impossible service of
worshipping God and Mammon, pretending to hold out one hand
to the truth, and refusing the other.
Having thus briefly stated the nature,
I will now
proceed to explain the grounds, of our objections; and in so
doing, prove that it was no rash declaration with which
I opened this
address. For this end I would call to your remembrance the closing
words of the last discourse which I
delivered as a minister of the Church
of England.
It will be in the recollection of many of
my late congregation, that the discourse I alluded to was a
statement and accompanying refutation of sundry objections
which had been urged against our view of divine revelation.
The conclusion of that discourse was in the form of a question -"Is the
second coming of Christ a past or still future event
? Until, it was
observed - until that question be settled, and unless the
second coming is past, all attempt at expounding the Scriptures is, so
far as I am concerned, lost labour, and
must go for nothing. I search the Scriptures (it was
further observed,) exercising the Protestant right of private
judgment, upon which principle the Reformation professed to
be founded, I
search the Scriptures, 'comparing spiritual things with
spiritual,' and not, as is the almost universal fashion
of the day, comparing spiritual things with natural. And
with what result ? it was further asked. Even this. I behold in every part
of the book of revealed truth, a testimony
to this effect -'That
which is perfect is come, so then that which was in part is done
away.' I behold evidence upon evidence of the fulfilment of
the whole of God's mind, as he has revealed it to man, in
his dispensations in connexion with a chosen people. I see the religion of
Heaven stripped of the unhallowed garments which priestcraft
has wrapt around it, and appearing in its own native
simplicity, beauty, and majesty. I believe the Bible to be
one continuous, harmonious display of love, not
contradictory, but one part beautifully agreeing with
another ; when properly understood, and explained by itself;
one star or dispensation (if we may be allowed to apply a
Scripture figure,) differing from another in glory, and each
moving in its own proper orbit."
Such was the conclusion of my last
discourse, and here we find the sum and substance of our
objections to the Church of England ; here we find the
circumstance of our present position explained. It is the
firm, well-grounded, scriptural belief of the past second
coming of Christ, which has placed us in our present
situation ; not, be it observed, the belief of this as an
isolated event, but one which comprehended the fulfilment of
all prophecy, the unsealing of every mystery, and the
revelation of all knowledge, according to the scripture
testimony, "These be the days of vengeance, that all things
which are written may be fulfilled;" or again, "Verily I say
unto you, there be some standing here which shall not taste
of death till they see the Son of Man coming in his
kingdom;" and coming, as the verse immediately preceding
declares, "to reward every man according to his works;" and
therefore, we conceive, coming at "the end of the world," to
''the judgment
of the great day," and "the resurrection of the dead;" or, to
take another view, coming "to
the revelation of the perfect state," and the "establishment of the
eternal kingdom ;" in short, and in full, to the fulness of the
blessing of all the counsels of God, which he purposed in
Christ Jesus before the foundation of the ages.
We were persuaded that the New Testament
teaches the above as past events, and being so persuaded,
there was no alternative but that of acting as we have
acted, in
seceding from the Establishment, or laying ourselves open to
the charge of "dishonesty and duplicity."
The second coming of Christ being
satisfactorily proved to be past, we were aware of the
conseqence long before that consequence was developed, as we witness this day. This
doctrine was powerful to effect what none other was able;
and if it be asked why we continued so long within the
Establishment, contradicting in the pulpit, what we affirmed
in the desk, I might, if the question needed an answer,
reply, that we have an excuse for such a course of conduct
in that when I was ordained, I solemnly promised that I
would be ready to banish and drive away all erroneous and
strange doctrine contrary to God's Word." If
I thought that
this was laid upon me in the discharge of my office, I must
then, as an honest man, begin at home; and, as a minister of
the Church of England, I must banish and drive away the erroneous and
strange doctrine which I had formerly preached. That
doctrine is commonly known by the name of Calvinism. You and I have tried Calvinism, and
believe that it is no better than any other "ism" now in
fashion ; we know
that it clashes with every chapter of the Bible; we know
that it reduces the Bible to a very small revelation, to be
at all consistent; "the
bed is shorter than a man can stretch himself on it, and the coveling narrower than a man may wrap himself in it;"
moreover, we are persuaded that as Calvinism is opposed to Arminianism, there are two Bibles, and therefore no Bible.
When I entered
upon the discharge of my office in Liverpool, I would have been
called a Calvinist; and now it is my firm conviction,
however humiliating, however self-renouncing the confession
may be, that at that time, and for months after, I was not able to give
one scriptural view of my one scripture doctrine ;that I was
totally unable for such a work, until I could read the Bible as a new book,
in the light of the past second coming of Christ. The
interpretation of scripture which we now hold being correct,
such preaching as mine, when I entered on the charge of St. Matthew's,
and till within the last few months, would leave, and did
leave, you and me as ignorant of the Scriptures as the
Arminian Methodist, from whom we professed so much to
differ, and whose ignorance we professed so much to pity. As
to any opening
up of the Word of God, that which goes under the name of
Calvinism is now, to you and me, no better than the "old
wives' fables" which our view of divine revelation is
charged to be. We know that Calvinism talks about a finished
salvation, and the unconditionality of eternal life ; and we
know also, that a finished salvation is a mighty expression,
to which Calvinism can attach no meaning ; and "unconditionality
"is a glorious
something, which none who are ignorant of a past second
coming can in any measure comprehend.
But it is not my purpose to speak of
ourselves. This is irksome, to one who has such glorious
things to unfold, as we are persuaded the Bible contains. To
the short explanation of the nature and ground of our
objections, which I have just offered, I
may be allowed perhaps to add a few
words upon the origin of these objections. If it be any
advantage, either to myself or to our objectors, I beg to
say, that I did not arrive on the threshold of the views of
scripture which I now entertain, from reading any author
holding similar sentiments. No publication advocating the
second coming of Christ fell into my hands until some time
after I had
seen, and reached upon, the important position which the
destruction of Jerusalem
occupied in the Scriptures. Neither, I
beg to say, was it from conversation
with others that I was led into a glimmering of that grand
event, which is passed by in total silence by the systems of the day. It was
by searching the Scriptures, it was purely from the only
sure and solid process of comparing spiritual things with
spiritual, comparing the Old Testament with the New, and
especially the Book of Psalms, with the history of Christ as
given by the Evangelists, and that of the Apostles, as
recorded in the Acts and in their Epistles, - it was from this
source that I
derived the views which I am now so diligently and earnestly
advocating, because I believe them to be truth. I was, from this
comparison of the Old Testament and the New, convinced
somewhat of the meaning of that great and comprehensive
scripture, '' The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of
prophecy." It was in and through the Psalms that I learned somewhat of
the importance of the apostolic ministry. The Psalms
appeared to me to be full of prophecy concerning that
miraculous dispensation, long before I had anything like a clear
comprehension of those prophecies. It was through the same
medium that I was led to investigate the meaning of an
expression which has changed the Bible, and made it a new
book. I allude to the words, "the end of the world." I
discovered that the end of the world was the end of the
Jewish economy. I found that the passage which is taken as a
basis for the pretended apostolic succession of religious
systems, was the scripture which
of all others most flatly contradicted that pretended
succession. The passage to which I allude is Christ's
promise to his apostles, when he entrusted to them their
commission, "Lo, I am with you alway, even to the consummation
of the age;" and not, as it is (it may be designedly)
rendered, "to the end of the world." The discovery of the
true meaning of this phrase was to me a treasure indeed
; it was a key
wherewith to unlock the glorious Book which priestcraft of
every age has exhibited as "confusion worse confounded." I
brought the true interpretation of "the end of the world" to bear
upon many a verse and many a doctrine; and now it is my firm
conviction, that if these words had been literally rendered from
the original Greek, in the one single sentence I have
quoted, this alone would have sufficed to put an end to the
religious establishments of the day.
With this short explanation of matters
immediately connected with ourselves, I will leave all that
is merely of a personal nature, and address myself to the
investigation of the vast subject before us.
I am fully alive to
the suspicion, if not more than suspicion, which what I have now stated to
you will excite in the minds of many who may read this
address when it is published, as I
intend it shall be. I am not insensible to
the fact, that the grand doctrine of the past second coming
of Christ, is a complete revolution in religion -that it scatters to
the four winds of heaven, doctrines which have been imbibed
from earliest infancy, which have "grown with our growth,
and strengthened with our strength;" that it brings proud
man into the depths of humility, unlearning all that he has
previously learned, and crying, as
it were, "Abba,
Father, what I
know not, teach thou me." I am not insensible to all this,
because it is the record of my own experience, and I know
that you will bear a like testimony.
If there should be one individual present
to whom these things, being entirely strange, sound like a
most fearful heresy, let me entreat that person, as I would
entreat every objector, to hear what I have to say in defence of my
opinions, before he condemns them. I
will promise him that my defence shall be
drawn from the Bible, and the Bible alone.
While thus deprecating a senseless
condemnation of our views of divine truth, I am not, neither
I trust are you,
unprepared for that which we deprecate. I well know that there
are those who were determined to abide by the opinions which
we oppose, independent of all reason, whether those opinions
be error or truth; and if we, who have forsaken the
religious systems of the day, in seceding from the
Establishment, were to expect that these parties should
hereafter look favourably and hopefully on our proceedings,
we should conclude contrary to the nature of thing, and
the issue could be nothing but disappointment. It is
therefore well to be prepared to hear anything, however
false or ridiculous, advanced against us, for I doubt not we shall
have frequent opportunities of practically illustrating the
Christianity in which we are believers. I do not doubt but we
shall be, as we have ben already, called upon to prove, that
if our interpretation of the Bible be, as asserted, "
the vilest of heresies," it is a heresy which
is attended with at least one peculiar characteristic - it
settles and sobers a mind naturally impetuous; and in
proportion as it
is seen and embraced, it corrects any tendency to travel out
of the way for the mere purpose of self-gratification; and
it effects this, because it is accompanied with the
possession of perfect scriptural peace, in the face of all
opposition, and under every opprobrium leading the mind, as
nought beside can, indeed, up to God, crying, "Whom have I
in heaven but thee, and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee."
In short, ours is an interpretation of truth, which exhibits
a religion of all-glorious love - that "charity" which hopeth all things, and endureth all things, while yet it
rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth.
I have urged a word
of entreaty to objectors, and a word of caution to
ourselves. I
would linger a moment for the sake of proving that neither
entreaty nor warning is made for nothing. Suppose to yourselves - no uncommon case - one who thinks, and speaks, and acts as though he
were so wise in the knowledge of the Scriptures that he can
be taught nothing more, and has no more to learn - one who
condemns you in a moment, and without hesitation, if you
venture to believe aught contrary to what he has
received - one who imagines himself, to all appearance, to be
gifted with the apostolic, miraculous power of trying the
spirits whether they be of God;" such an one objects, it may be, to matters which are
advanced; suppose, for instance, the doctrine of the
resurrection, in connexion with a past second coming, -and
interposes with his " It cannot be; it is impossible ; it
contradicts the evidence of my senses;" "it is preposterous ;" you might as well
tell me that black is white, and white is black; or that two
and two make five, and not four." Now, on the threshold of
our investigation of the objected doctrine, I must be allowed to
observe, with all earnestness of conviction, that an
objector of this class is almost a hopeless case. I am reminded thereby
of the flippant yet confident saying, "Are ye blind also ?" and also of the
solemn but quiet answer, If ye were blind, ye should have no
sin ; but ye say ye see, therefore your sin remaineth." On
the threshold of our great undertaking, may I not, with all
reasonableness, expostulate, and ask, if it would not be well for an objector
to reflect awhile before exhibiting an opposition which
seems determined to listen neither to reason nor revelation
? Would it not be well to ponder over the scripture of the
prophet, "My
thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my
ways, saith the Lord" - and would it not startle the same
determined opponent to be told, that in the chapter where
the prophet is thus beautifully expressing the opposition
between God and man, it is in reference to the covenant of
grace, to a spiritual and superhuman law ? nay, moreover,
that we have the testimony of the Apostle James, in Acts
xiii., that the truth, - "My thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways," respects the very doctrine
of the resurrection in question; "And as concerning that he
raised him up from the dead, no more to return to
corruption, he said on this wise, I
will give you the sure mercies of
David." (Compare Isaiah 1s. 3, with Acts xiii. 34.)
And to examine more closely the value of
such assertions as "It cannot be," "it is impossible,"
let us ask for one moment of any of the contenders for the
present authority of the exhortation, "
Go ye into all the world, and preach the
gospel to every
creature;" how do you reconcile your opinion of the
non-fulfilment of that scripture, with Paul's express
writing to the Colossians, The gospel which ye have heard,
and which was preached to every creature under heaven."
(Col. i. 23) ; or again, to the Romans, " But I say, Have they not heard
? yea,
verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words
unto the end of the world." (Rom. x. 18.) And, moreover, how
can you deny that in these two passages of the Epistles
there was a fulfilment of what Christ said should come to
pass in that generation ;" The gospel
of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world (empire),
for a witness to all the nations; and then shall the end
come;" (Matt. xxiv. 14.) According to your view, the end is
not yet come; according to the apostle's view, it must:
according to your view, what the apostle says, cannot be
true; it contradicts the evidence of your senses; it is
preposterous to affirm that the gospel was preached to every
creature," and so forth ; therefore, that you cannot
believe so and so, is no evidence that what is objected to is
false. You make an assertion, set up yourself as a ruler and
judge of God's meaning, and set yourself in array against
those to whom it was promised, that they should see eye to
eye, and be led into all truth." This maintenance of your
own individual judgment, would, by an apostle, be condemned
as the thought of "the natural man," to whom the covenant of
grace is " foolishness;" to whom it appears as absurd
to declare that in Paul's day the gospel had been fully
preached, just as it
appears equally absurd for Peter to proclaim as he did, on
the day of Pentecost, "This is that which was spoken of by
the prophet Joel, .And it shall come to pass in the last days (these last
days, Heb. i. 2,) saith God, I will pour out, my spirit on
all flesh." No, this cannot be ; Peter is wrong, you say;
"all flesh," is contrary to fact,
contradicts the evidence of our senses; we say, "
Let God he true, though every man be found a
liar;" let his Word speak its own language, ''
My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither
are your wags my ways, saith the Lord,"
Again, It may be that an objector brings
before you a scripture which you interpret in accordance
with a past second coming, but which, through ignorance or
prejudice, or perhaps both, he cannot receive, and
immediately, because he cannot receive it, he condemns you
as being in
error, and repeats his objection, as though not a word had
ever been offered in answer. Passing by the folly of such a
proceeding, suppose there were scriptures (and I am not saying whether
there are or not,) but suppose there were scriptures which
we could not reconcile with the doctrine of the past second
coming, is the doctrine to be denied and condemned for that?
No sensible person would say so;
no sensible opponent would venture to
take such ground, and why ? Because he would prove too much
;he would damage his own cause, more than he would ours; for
where the upholder of any religious system could bring one
scriptural objection against our doctrine of the past second
coming, I would
undertake to bring fifty, or five hundred, against his opinion of a future
coming. And then, moreover, with respect to the supposed
non-ability of interpreting every scripture in favour,
which appears to make against us, may we not be allowed
to ask, if it is not quite as possible that the
revelation of the infinite God should not yet be
exhausted in a way of discovery of its glories; just
as it is possible that the same should be the case in
natural things ;in
every department of natural science; especially if, as
we believe, priest-craft has so prevailed in the world
as to shroud in Egyptian darkness what must be
considered to be the commanding truth of the Word of
God, I mean,
this same second advent of the Lord Jesus Christ, which
is the question in debate between us and the various
religious establishments of the day.
Mention of the second advent reminds me,
that I must leave, at all hazard, this preparatory matter,
and come to the consideration of that our fundamental
position. The consideration will involve a view of
opposition between us and the common Christianity of the day
; and this view will, I expect, embrace short outline of
divers important events connected with a past second coming;
and this outline will convey much by way of answer to the
many objections that are urged against the interpretation of Scripture
which we maintain.
I purpose, then, to
prove, from the Bible, the second coming of Christ at the
destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. This must be done in
a manner concise enough to be consistent with clearness; and
so many are the different methods of proof which the
Scriptures allow, that the difficulty is to select that
which is best adapted to my present address, and which will at the same time
place the subject in the most incontrovertible position. I
do not wish, and we have no need that it should be said of
us, as we affirm of our opponents, that we deal only in
assertions, as might be said, if I were to take it for
granted, that because the second coming was proved over and
over again, in times past, in another place; there is
therefore no occasion to go over the same ground again,
though we now stand in a different position, and are bound
to give the
reason of the faith that is in us. And moreover, as I know well that these views of divine truth
are a complete revolution in religious matters; therefore,
I do not forget that there is a necessity for line upon
line, and precept upon precept, in order that the generality of minds may
arrive at anything like an apprehension of what I conceive to be their
vast and all-important bearings.
In proving the doctrine of the past
second advent, on this occasion, I
am disposed to adopt the plan which
has been ably followed out by my friend Mr. Stark, of
Torquay. The plan to which I allude is, the explanation of the Bible by
means of diagrams, shewing the various states,
dispensations, or constitutions of God, in which he was
pleased to deal with and manifest himself to his people (his
church) under each covenant, the law and the gospel. (See
Biblical Inquirer, No. 2.) I would observe, in passing, that I might
confine myself, for proof of the doctrine, to the testimony
of Christ to his disciples, as given in the 24th and 25th
chapters of Matthew. I might rest the doctrine of the past
second coming on the answer which Christ returned to the
disciples' question about the temple. ''When shall these
things be, and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of
the consummation of the age ?" I
might now maintain and prove, as you
know I have often proved, that all which is related in
answer, down to the end of the 25th chapter, refers to one
and the same period of time; and as all commentators will
allow that some matter relate to the destruction of
Jerusalem, and some to a final judgment yet to come, I might ask a question,
which has never yet been answered, "Where does one topic end, and the
other begin ?"
Or if, to extricate themselves from this difficulty, the
commentators say that they are interwoven, I ask again for
the proof, and that proof not from carnal reason, not from
human imagination, but from the word and testimony alone.
And if the proof should be attempted, I might ask innumerable questions like
the following :-''How do you reconcile your view of this
scripture, This gospel of the kingdom must first be preached
in all the world, for a witness to all the nations, and then shall
the end come ;'
how do you reconcile this with Christ's promise to his
apostles, 'Lo, I am with you always, even to the consummation
of the age,' seeing that the promise, in effect, is now no
longer visible, let the end have transpired or not - now no
longer visible, if (as must be allowed on all hands,) the effect
of that promise was, that which is declared in the last
verse of Mark's Gospel, 'They went forth, and preached
everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the
word with signs following;' which signs, the Apostle to
the Hebrews declares expressly, 'God also bearing them
witness with sips, and wonders, and with divers miracles,
and gifts (distributions) of the Holy Ghost, according to
his own will.' (Heb. ii. 4.) "
Or again, in choosing to rest my belief
of the past second coming on these two chapters of Matthew,
if it were argued that there is a double fulfilment of these
chapters-and let me here observe, that every popular
commentary which I have seen upon them, does not argue the
double fulfilment, but takes the same for granted; or if
there is a shadow of reason offered for the double
interpretation, it is the a tale human objection, "because it
is impossible that such and such things could be spoken in
reference to Jerusalem alone." Well, if it were objected
that the circumstances related in Matthew xxiv. and xxv.
were fulfilled, in a primary sense, at the fall of the
temple worship, and the end of the Jewish economy, but that
there is a secondary sense in which they are yet to be
fulfilled, I
might ask again
for the proof. I deny the doctrine of double fulfilment, as
having no authority from Scripture; as
a doctrine which has been exploded by
one of the first Biblical scholars of the day, in a work to
which no answer has ever been vouchsafed. (Dissertations on Prophecy, by
Dr. Lee, Regius Professor of Hebrew in the University of
Cambridge.) [See Note A.] I
can here speak with the greatest confidence, and am disposed
likewise to speak strongly, because I
believe that it is the same absurd
double interpretation which is at the bottom of the
thousand-and-one different doctrines of the day, all of
which doctrines, we are told to believe, are equally and
alike the truth of God. I would, to prove this, call to
your remembrance how often you have heard preachers.
especially what are called "Calvinistic
experimental preachers," give a double interpretation, a primary and
a secondary sense, of Christ's promise to his about-to-be inspired apostles, "Take
no thought how or what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate; for it is not you that speak, but the Holy Ghost."
How often have you heard the ministers of the day apply this
to themselves ; and yet one of these ministers (diminian) is
"able to gainsay
and resist" the other (Calvinist), not on a matter of mere
ceremony, but the very vital doctrines of Christianity
itself.
Again, to show the absurdity of double
interpretation, I may mention, that I
remember reading a review of a sermon
which I
published in the times of my ignorance, in which review
there was a passage to the following effect :-"It will rejoice us to find the author 'led into all truth.' "Now, according to the
religious belief of the reviewer, so far from being led into
all truth, I am, doubtless, in his estimation, the upholder
of the "vilest
heresy that has ever appeared in Christendom." Behold, then,
in this scripture, the application of what belonged to an
inspired ministry; and in the reviewer's expressed wish,
behold the assumption of the miraculous gift "of trying the spirits,
whether they be of God," and in the failure of that
assumption, behold the absurdity of double interpretation;
and, as the originating cause of the above absurdities,
behold the assumption of apostolic succession by those who
would be horror-struck if you told them that they believed
in that doctrine as firmly, but not by any means as
honestly, nor as wisely, as the poor despised Roman
Catholic. Our view, which we believe to be scriptural, is
this: - The Old Testament is typical of the New, and, as
typical, contains all that is in the New: but the New Testament is
neither typical of another New Testament, nor yet of itself.
The commonly received view is the reverse of this, and the
inevitable consequence of such view is that which the Mormonites have arrived at. We must have a further
revelation, to explain that which is already in our
possession: we must, if any prophecy of scripture is yet; to
be fulfilled, have a ministry to give us the infallible
interpretation of such prophecy :
therefore, by consequence equally
inevitable, there being none of these requisites visible,
God is charged with imperfection, with beginning a work, and
not being able to finish it; or, if this be preferred, God
is thought to be even such a one as ourselves.
We might thus proceed to our proof of the
past second coming, from the 24th and 25th Matthew; and in
the proof we might bring in the other three Gospels, and the
Apostolic Epistles, by way of confirmation ; but this would
extend the address further than our limits allow. I
choose, for the present, to adopt the diagram method of
dealing with the Scriptures - for many reasons, chiefly
because of its simplicity. A plan of this kind deals
with particular passages of scripture according as they fall
under different states or dispensations : a plan of this
kind preserves that right division of the Word of Truth
which Paul, in sketching the character of an inspired
bishop, enforced upon Timothy, and exhibits that beautiful
scripture in a glorious fulfilment, "The testimony of Jesus
is the spirit of prophecy." This method of dealing
with the Scriptures, moreover, as has been justly observed,
addresses both the eye and the ear, and thus appeals to an
objector, requesting him, as might well be done in a public
lecture, to point out what he may consider to be erroneous.
Diagrams, showing
the order of divine revelation, about in Scripture, and are
to me a convincing proof that "the hand which wrote it is
divine;" that the same Almighty Being who spread the starry
heavens, who "appointed the moon for certain seasons, and
the sun to his going down," is He who has declared, "Out of
Zion, the whole perfection of beauty, God shineth clearly."
(Compare Ps. 1. 2, with Heb. xii 16,24.) Diagrams, attended with this glorious
consequence, abound; take, for instance, the the diagram
presented to out notice in the first chapter of Genesis, as an
illustration of the above remarks. We find there the scriptural
account of the creation of the world, solely intended. I am inclined
to believe, for
the purpose of exhibiting a shadow of the different dispensations in the
church. I allude
to the division into day. How read we ? "The
earth was emptiness and void, and darkness was upon the face
of the deep;" but there ensued, as we are told, the distinct operations of
God in his creation work ;which
work is
described by the division of successive days, each day's
work being distinct, and each day's work complete. The chaos is
reduced to
order - at the end of the sixth day there ensued the Sabbath,
or rest; and "God
saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was very
good." These
days, we observe, were shadows of the dispensations, and the
rest was a typical rest, the antitype being a rest in the finished
work of the Lord Jesus Christ, which was to remain for the
people of God. In the light of these days we are satisfied
to behold the creation of "a
new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness;"
which believers of the apostolic day were looking for (2
Peter ii.13),
and for which they were exhorted "so
to run that they might obtain," but
which, if modem doctrines are true, they have not yet
obtained, and are looking for still. We are persuaded that
the last day in which it was lawful for a man to work out
even his own salvation, with fear and trembling." was that
of the apostles; that this preceded a seventh day, a "Sabbatismos" (Heb. iv. 9) of a finished work, of rest-"
rest," as Paul observes, "with
us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with
his mighty angels" (2 Thess. i. 7) ;and that this revelation
was at the cessation of their ministry and apostleship, that
is, when the Lord came to the destruction of Jerusalem, and was "glorified in his
saint., and admired by all them that believed;" while the adherents
to the Jewish house were " punished with everlasting
destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of
his power," as it is to this very day. We are persuaded that
then was the eternal Sabbath-keeping ushered in, into which
we have entered, most, if not all of us, after a weary
pilgrimage through the dispensation work, as though that
were to be enacted over again in our own individual person.
This is our belief. On the other hand, according to
religious systems, there is no such beautiful arrangement as the above at
all; being ignorant of God's distinct dealings, being
ignorant of God's righteousness, which is the righteousness
of a new heaven and new earth, and not of Moses- being
unable rightly to divide the word of truth, they look upon,
and virtually make, the Bible to be a book without form and
void - a chaos of
unutterable disorder, and have reduced it, in the estimation
of thinking minds, to the degraded position of the most
inconsistent, absurd, and contradictory system of religion
that was ever devised.
Again, I take another diagram - The
descendants of Abraham went down into Egypt, and Moses (a
prophet like unto Christ,) was sent to deliver them from the bondage to
which they had been subjected, the seed of Abraham having
been promised an inheritance in the land of Canaan. Here
again we have a diagram, which is presented to us in the
following order :-
-
1st. - The redemption from Egypt.
-
2nd. - The journey through the
wilderness.
-
3rd. - The possession of the promised land.
This was typical, and the same order is
anti-typically observed in the New Testament L
-
1st. - The redemption
from spiritual Egypt, or the bondage of Moses' law.
-
2nd. - The
journey through the trials and tribulations of the Apostolic
state.
-
3rd. - The land, rest, inheritance, or new heaven and
earth manifested and obtained at the second advent of
Christ.
No one, I think, can object to this arrangement; it is
a comparison of type and antitype, which recommends itself
to every unprejudiced mind at a single glance. No one will
quarrel with the arrangement, but very few will be disposed
to agree with me as to the time of type receiving fulfilment
in antitype. Into this, then, I will most patiently enquire.
I presume that it
will be admitted on all hands, that the first of these three
typical representations was accomplished on Calvary, when
Jesus said, "It is finished !" that spiritual Israel was then redeemed from
the bondage of Moses' law, as literal Israel had been from
Egyptian slavery; that the mild invitation of Immanuel then
indeed began to take effect, "Come unto me, all that are weary and heavy
laden, and I will give you rest;" that "grace and truth "were then introduced,
with a "yea and amen" witness, to
supersede the law that came by Moses. I suppose none who call themselves
Christians will deny this; so far from that, I believe there are few
but would in
words carry that redemption further than I should myself; for
I do not view it
complete in salvation until the appearing again the second
time. I pass by
this as granted
by all parties, and come to the second typical
representation,
"The journey through the trials and
tribulations of the apostolic state," answering to the
journey of the Children of Israel through the wilderness. That there were trials and tribulations in the
Apostolic state, needs no Apostle of this day to prove; nay,
so far from want of proof, if men would but be honest
with themselves, and had "such an heart in them" as
seriously to resolve upon examining the pretensions of
their several ministers and pastors, they might weigh them
in the balance of Apostolic suffering alone, and find them,
one and all, to be utterly wanting. If Christians of every
denomination would but contrast the temporal reward of the
"ministers of Christ," with that of those who have assumed
their office, with the hireling labourers of the day; if
they would but examine the testimony of an Apostle, and hear
him show forth this his apostleship; We both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted,
and have no certain dwelling-place, and labour, working
with our own hands (though the labourer was worthy of his
hire) ; being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer
it; being defamed, we entreat; we are made as the filth of
the world, and the offscouring of all things to this day"-
unto this day ;"if Christians would but seriously resolve
whether that "unto this day" is visible now; if they would bring these
matters, in their true and scriptural meaning, to bear upon
their self-styled ministers, the whole fabric of the
priesthood must soon be tumbled to the ground.
That there were trials and tribulations
in Apostolic times is granted. The testimony above quoted is
decisive. But we need not leave the matter here. It is
written, "Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus
shall suffer persecution;" and religious systems say that it
is exactly the same now. It may be; but in order to know
whether it be the Scripture persecution, I must know what it is
to "live godly
in Christ .Jesus;" and to know this, it must be resolved to
me what the words " in Christ Jesus "
mean. I go round to one body calling
itself Christian, and they give me their definition of what
it is to be "in Christ Jesus." 1 go to another, and another,
and another, and I receive their several interpretations.
I expect that
they will all "speak the same thing," be of the same mind
and judgment." I open them, I compare, and to my distress and
perplexity I
find that their sentiments on the subject are so various and discordant that it would be a hopeless task to
attempt to make anything of them. I
therefore reject their preaching, and
believe that for any of them to say, " All that will live godly in Christ Jesus
shall suffer persecution," is a mere assertion, unsupported
by a shadow of proof. It was not so in the Apostles'
day. These inspired teachers had no disagreement as to what
it was to he "in Christ Jesus;" and, being of one mind in
the doctrine, we receive their persecution as persecution
for truth's sake.
Again, it is written, "we must,
through much tribulation, enter into the kingdom of God"
(Acts xiv. 22),
but then religious systems deny that the kingdom is yet
come. And again, it is written of the 144 thousand, the
remnant according to the election of grace," the "all Israel," saved in that day with an
everlasting salvation, it is written of these, and "the
number which no man could number," These are they which came
out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and
made them white in the blood of the Lamb." But religious systems say that this is true
of every Christian now living, alter
departing this life ; and truly if it
be affirmed of any coming out of tribulation now, we need
not travel far for an example, in one whose name has been
cast out as evil, by those who not long ago could address
him as a dear brother in Christ Jesus." But no matter.
Religious systems say that there is this tribulation still,
as preparatory to an entrance into the kingdom of God. How
do they prove it ? Oh, the answer is in a moment, from such
systems as pretend to this part of Apostolic succession - Oh,
it is said, look what a sinner passes through before he
finds peace ; remember a law-work upon the conscience - a
horrible dread of eternal misery - doubts and fears as to the
soul's everlasting welfare -and so forth.
Is this the
tribulation of which Apostles speak? Nothing of the kind;
the Apostles knew better; they preached the gospel with
demonstration of the Spirit and power; they preached the
glorious doctrine of the assurance of faith ; "Whosoever loveth is born of God, and knoweth God ; and if we should say
we know him not, we should be liars, like unto the world."
Is this the tribulation of the kingdom journey, then I grant
there is plenty such like at the present hour. But then, we
ask, "Who is the author of it, and whence its origin ?" - The very systems themselves
: they have
"darkened counsel with words without
knowledge;" they have buried Christianity under a heap of
"wood, hay, stubble, gold, silver, and
precious stones;" they have set up, each for himself, a
"standard;" they have made poor enquiring souls their hewers
of wood, and drawers of water;" and, having done all this,
they call it Apostolic tribulation. Apostolic tribulation
was of heaven, and not of men. It was because of the
existence of that Jewish economy which was in their day
called "Satan transformed into an angel of light;" which was
a Satan going about as a roaring lion, seeking whom he might devour;" (compare 1 Peter v. 8, with Psalm xiv. 4,) which was Satan raging because
the time was short; all which is proved on a reference to
the Acts of the Apostles, where we find Satan going about
seeking whom he might devour, in the person of the Jews
persecuting the Christians from city to city, because, as
was averred, they ''spake
blasphemous things against Moses, the law, and the holy
place." This was the originating cause of trouble then, from
the man of sin, Antichrist, flesh, (the law, see Romans
viii. 8,) the carnal mind, which was
attached to the law, whose strength
was sin, which was the sting of death, the wages of sin, of
which death the devil had the power. The religious systems
of the day have taken up "the body of
this death ; "they have dressed and decked out the loathsome
corpse; they have called the same Christianity. There is no
beauty in it that men should desire it, and in trying to
fancy it, to love it, to fall down before it, and worship
it, there is trouble superadded to all the ills which "flesh
is heir to;" and what could you expect but trouble ? The
truth is, systems attach their own meaning to the scripture tribulation, and
that is a meaning which has no reference to the times and
seasons, and is quite independent of God's meaning.
Having offered these remarks upon the
word tribulation, I might go on at great length to prove,
from the Apostolic Epistles, these wilderness trials of
theirs, in connexion with the typical trials of Israel of
old. Take one instance out of many. Paul
addresses the Corinthians, in chap. x. 1st Epistle, in a way
of warning, by contrasting their position with that of
Israel in the wilderness. "These things were our
ensamples," or types, is the literal rendering. Here
is the very thing which we are contending for : and again,
in the 11th verse, "Now all these things happened unto them
for types, and they are written for our admonition upon
whom the ends of the ages (not as it is in our
translation rendered, "the ends of the world,") are come."
And what are these? "Neither let us tempt
Christ, as some of them also tempted ; neither murmur ye,
&c. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them."
This comparison of Old Testament with New, is sufficient
alone to prove the exact correspondence, even in point of
time, between type and antitype, which we seek to establish.
But this is not all. If Scripture is any
authority, we can fix the time.
The type in this diagram occupies a space
of forty years. "Forty years was I grieved with this
people." Now, let us bear in mind the testimony which
has been brought forward from Corinthians, and compare that
with the 3rd and 4th of Hebrews. Instituting a
comparison, we find the Apostle applying the same warning to
the Hebrew believers as to the Corinthians ; and in the
Hebrews it is glorious truth to notice how, in declaring the
antitype, he fixed the time to the same period of forty
years. Having discoursed of God's anger with Israel of
old, his long-suffering for the space of forty years, the
"to-day," "the Lord's day," as it is styled by John in the
Revelations, [See Note B.] he then enforces this type, and
applies it to those whom he was addressing, "Exhort one
another daily, while it is called 'to-day,' and so much the
more as ye see the day approaching." (Compare Heb. iii. 13,
with Heb. x. 25, and Rom. xiii. 12.)
This comparison appears to me conclusive
as to the time of the second advent, and beautifully
so when I recollect that the Apostolic ministry, "the Lord's
day," in which God was grieved with the Jews, as he had been
with their forefathers, was the like period of forty years.
I cannot avoid believing, from this comparison, that as Old
Testament Israel entered into the temporal Canaan at the
expiration of forty years, so also spiritual Israel entered,
not by faith, but by sight and enjoyment, into the eternal
and spiritual Canaan, after the forty years' wilderness
troubles of the Apostolic ministry.
On the other hand, the common opinion of
the day is well expressed in a verse of a well-known hymn --
"Jerusalem, my happy home!
Name ever dear to me ;
When shall my labours have an end,
In joy, and peace, and thee?"
It might be asked, if it were worth
while, How is the common opinion to be reconciled with what
Paul expressly states respecting himself and his
fellow-Christians, "Ye are come unto Mount Sion, and
unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem."
The religious establishments of the day,
one and all, believe that Moses led the children of Israel
through the wilderness, and that when Moses was taken
away, Joshua was raised up to be a leader and commander of
the people in his stead. Therefore they believe in an
Apostolic succession under the old covenant, until the
object of that succession was obtained. They believe also
that the Apostles led the New Testament believers under
their ministry ; they believe that they committed their own
miraculous gifts "to
faithful men, who should be able to teach others." They do
not believe that these Apostles, and their fellow-trustees of the New
Testament, led their people to the promised land,
executed their trust, till they all came to the incorruptible inheritance ; therefore they now believe in
Apostolic succession ; and if so, we ask where are the
gifts by which to prove our present trustees "faithful," and to
which of the conflicting parties of the day are we to
address ourselves as our guides, our watchmen, our
ministers, our pastors, our executors, under the New
Testament will, or covenant, till we all do come to this
rest, which is still, it is said, to appear for the
people of God ? These officers must be somewhere, if the
rest be not yet made manifest; for it is written, "He
gave some apostles, some prophets, and some evangelists,
and some pastors and teachers ; for the perfecting of the
saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying
of the body of Christ, till we
all come into the unity of the
faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect
man ; to the measure of the fulness of the age of
Christ." (Eph. iv. 11.) These pastors and teachers were
miraculously endowed men, as well as the Apostles;
Stephen and Philip, both deacons, were able to cast out
devils, to speak with new tongues, and so forth,
according to the measure of the gift of Christ. We ask
for these signs from our present pastors, teachers, and
deacons;" they cannot shew them; we have the evidence of
our senses that these gifts have failed. But they were to
continue till a given time, "till we all come." We
conclude, then, that this has come; that the great state
of the unity of the faith is manifested ; and as there is no
evidence of these miraculous gifts continuing after the
days of the Apostles, we conclude likewise that the time
of their ceasing was when the spirit of prophecy
departed. " We know in part, and
we prophecy in part; but when that which is perfect is
come, then that which is in part shall be done away." I submit
this view of the subject to the consideration of my
fellow-Christians, as a test whereby they may try them
which say they are "pastors
and teachers," whether they be the very successors of
the originals or no. If these successors reply, that
though they cannot work outward miracles, "signs to them
that believe not," yet they are commissioned of the Holy
Ghost, as well as Paul or Timothy, or the "faithful men" to
whom Timothy entrusted his commission ; then let us ask
for the Scripture proof of this assertion; let us ask
this, because, without proof, a
thinking mind will laugh such an
assertion to scorn. And if, leaving this refuge, they
affirm that though the heavenly Canaan be not yet
entered into, there needs no divinely appointed ministry
until this do come to pass; then let us ask what is to
become of the above-quoted passage from Ephesians, and
how can it be denied but that Christ has been guilty of
a breach of promise, when he mid, "Lo, I
am with you always, even to the
consummation of the age." Let the present pastors and
teachers read that Psalms as they choose to read it,
"to the end
of the world ;" let them understand that promise as they are bound
to understand it by the scripture, "Go ye into all the world, and
preach the gospel to ever creature: he that believest and
is baptized, shall be saved; he the believeth not, shall be
condemned. And these signs shall follow them that believe
: in my
name shall they cast out devils ;they
shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up serpents, and if they shall
touch any deadly thing, it shall
not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they
shall recover. And they went forth, and preached every
where, the Lord working with them, and conjuring the word
with signs
following." Mark xvi. Let, I
repeat, the present pastors and teachers act thus honestly
with the Word of God, and they must, from the Romanist down
to the Baptist, know that their name of minister and pastor
is only a "cloak whereby to lie in wait to deceive."
I come now to a
second series of typical representations. I shall show how
the New Testament unlocks the mysteries of the Old, in
a series of
antitypical references to the kingdom state, i. e., how the same conclusion which we have just considered is
exhibited in another way.
We have,
-
The kingdom or house of Saul.
-
The kingdom or house of David.
-
The temple of Solomon, for the record of God's name, to move no more.
This is typical, in the Old Testament;
and antitypical to this, we have, under the New Testament-
-
The opposing house of Saul, or the Jews
under Christ's ministry
-
The kingdom of David (Christ) in the
ascension state.
-
The opening of the temple at the
sounding of the last trumpet when the mystery of God was
finished.
If time would allow, it would be very
profitable to institute a comparison of scriptures under these several
heads of type and antitype for instance, with respect to
the kingdom or house of Saul answering to the Jews under
Christ's ministry, is there not much instruction conveyed to
us when we read of David in the cave of Adullam, that "every
one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented
gathered themselves unto him." It will not, I presume, be though1
fanciful to conclude that we have here a typical
representation of the fact regarding David's Lord, "The publicans and
sinners came together for to hear him," and he said, "The
Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anointed me to
preach the gospel to the poor: ht hath sent me to heal the
broken-hearted ; to preach deliverance to the captive" (Luke
iv. 18). Then, again, as respects the kingdom o David, in comparison
with the ascension kingdom of Christ, we have this record in
the Old Testament, '* There was long war between thf house of Saul
and the house of David, but David waxed stronger and
stronger, and the house of Saul weaker and weaker." Is not
this, i may be asked, a shadow of the glorious truth
recorded by the Apostle to the Colossians, "Having spoiled
principalities and powers, (Jewish,: he made a shew of them
openly, triumphing over them in himself,' (Colos. ii. 16; compare Psalm ii.)
And do we not acknowledge the antitype of David's house
growing stronger and stronger, in scripture like these,
"So mightily
grew the word of the Lord and prevailed," "to the pulling down of
strong holds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself"
(2
Cor. x. 4, 5; compare 3 Thess. ii. 4.) And then, once more, it is
written, The LORD (Jehovah) said unto my Lord, (the
resurrection name of Jesus; compare Psalm cx. i, with Acts
ii. 36,)Sit
thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy
footstool,"- is there no mention of anything typical to this
in the words of Solomon to Hiram, king of Tyre ? "Thou knowest how
that David my father could not build a house to the name of
the Lord his God, for the wars which were about him on every
side, until the Lord put them under the soles of his feet.
But now the Lord my God hath given me rest on every side, so
that there is neither adversary nor evil occurrent." (1
Kings v. 2,3.)
I think what has been stated will, if
Scripture is to be the standard of truth, be allowed; and
being allowed, we must draw the same conclusions from this
diagram as from the preceding. Paul's commentary in Hebrews iii. and iv. applies equally to both.
We are led to believe that as the Lord God put all
enemies under the soles of David's feet, and gave Solomon
rest on every side, so also was it with antitypical David
and Solomon. The Lord God, at the destruction of Jerusalem,
made his foes his footstool ; he completely abolished death,
of whom it is said, in 1 Cor. xv., "Death,
the last enemy, is disabled :" [See Note C.]
he took away entirely the first
covenant, which was "the
ministration of death," that he might establish supremely
the second, which was the ministration of life ; he removed
the things which, in Paul's day, "were
shaken, that the things which could not be shaken might
remain." (Heb. xii. 27) "The heavens (of the Jewish church) passed
away with a great noise ; the elements ('beggarly ') melted with fervent heat, the earth
also, and the works that were therein, (all that attached to
the Mosaic economy, see Heb. ix. 1-1 1,) were burned up, and
the new heavens and new earth appeared," (2 Peter iii.) Now,
if at the destruction of Jerusalem there was a taking away
of the first covenant; a removing of .the old heaven and
earth, and a burning up of the same ; and if sin, Satan, death, and
hell have their true and scriptural meaning in reference only to the
two covenants of Sinai and Sion, as consequent upon the
Adamic transgression -and proof to the contrary is defied - if
these things be so, then are we warranted in concluding that
the time when the covenant of Sinai was everlastingly
banished from the presence of God, and from the glory of his power," being
the destruction of Jerusalem, and every thing opposed to God being comprehended in that covenant, and having no
Bible meaning out of that covenant-that at the same
destruction of Jerusalem all these the enemies were put
under Christ's feet, the fall of Jerusalem being, if his own
words are authority, most indisputably his second
coming to "reward
every man
according to his works." (Matt. xvi. 27, 28.)
On the other hand, the common opinion of
the day is, that so far from sin, Satan, death, and hell being destroyed
in the finished work of Christ, these several enemies are
stronger than ever ; and truly they are so, if we
consent to leave the Bible out of the question, and look at
the revival of the Jewish economy as it exists in the
different religious systems of the day. What is the origin of all this,
which we believe to be a mistake ?
The truth is, that here, as in the
matter of tribulation already mentioned, religious systems
have fixed their own meaning to these terms, which is a
meaning independent of the Bible ; which knows nothing of
what it was John's intention to convey, when he said; Whosoever is born of God sinneth not;
"and which
carries itself, as might be expected, even into what these
systems call heaven itself; for, holding a resurrection of
the same body which is laid in the grave, they must believe
that "flesh and
blood" can enter into their kingdom of heaven, seeing that
it is impossible to apprehend how the body which we now
have can be missed, while yet it is denied that it is raised
a flesh and blood body.
But I am satisfied, as in the former
series of types, so in this, to test both by the ministry,
by the doctrine of Apostolic succession. We exhibited the
antitype of the building of the temple by Solomon the
opening of the temple not made with hands, at the sounding
of the last trumpet, when the kingdom of God was fully
established. Now the Apostle, in 1
Cor. xv., connects the sounding of the
last trumpet with the doctrine of the resurrection "at the
last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall
be raised." Now we know, from the Acts of the Apostles, that
the grand theme of Apostolic preaching was "Jesus and the
resurrection ; "so much so, that the Athenian philosophers
imagined this resurrection to be the name of some God :and again, Paul
declared, that "he was called in question of the hope of the
resurrection of the dead, the hope of the promise made unto
the Fathers; to which promise the twelve tribes, instantly serving God
night and day, hoped to come." (Acts xxiii. 6,with xxvi. 6.) Now
the resurrection, being part and parcel of that preaching of
the gospel to which this promise was made, "Lo, I am with you alway,
even to the consummation of the age;" therefore the
resurrection must be limited by the same consummation of the
age, and must consequently be past, the Apostolic age and
ministry being now no longer visible, and the promise of
Christ being now of none effect. No, say modem systems, the
resurrection is not yet past. Then it follows, we must have
preachers of the resurrection, and if so, we ask how is
their doctrine established ? What sign have these preachers
that they are the great power of God ? if they cannot shew
the credentials of their ambassadorship, the authority for
their preaching, the "outward
and visible sign" that it is "faithful" preaching, then no wonder that we
reject them, and disbelieve their doctrine.
But they give a sign. If, for a sign,
they tell you and me of a "mouth and wisdom," is it such as
we, their adversaries, can neither gainsay nor resist ? "If for a mighty
wonder whereby to prove their authority, they talk of "n sealing of the
spirit," or a sealing to their ministry, is it such as can
overthrow the sealing unto the day of redemption," which has
been proclaimed to you, and is proclaimed this day ? If they
test a minister of Christ, and a steward of the mysteries of
God, by what they call an ability to remove the
stumbling-blocks out of the way of Zion's children, then
should we long to see a specimen of their handiwork in
removing the scandals which, on their own showing, I have laid on their path. If they can, as they
say, wield the sword of the spirit in favoured seasons,
there is opportunity given for wielding it with effect in cutting down
"the vilest heresy which has ever appeared in Christendom."
If they surname themselves by the name of Paul, do they not
aver that here is a successor of Hymenaeus and Alexander ?
then, like Paul, in his day, let these his successors, in
their day, give us the inspired word of God, a New
Testament Epistle, and so prove that this is an error which
declares the resurrection to be past already, that same
already being the short space of nearly 1800 years, and a
generation only nearly twice as old as Methuselah; and when
these self-same successors have proved the doctrine of a now
past resurrection to be erroneous, then,
executing their high commission, let them deliver me, the
successor of Hymenaeus and Alexander, "over to Satan,
that learn not
to blaspheme."
So much then for our two diagrams. I shall now proceed to
bring before you a diagram on a larger scale, embracing
a comprehensive
view of the whole Bible, running upwards from Adam through
the line of promise, to the second advent of Christ at the
time of the fall of Jerusalem.
Having described the utility of the
diagram scheme, I give, on the next page, a sketch of the
diagram now under consideration.
This diagram shows the line of
promise up to the time when all promises were fulfilled.
This line I
call "the
truth as it is in Jesus," which opens up to us that
glorious scripture, "the testimony of Jesus is the
Spirit of prophecy." The line runs from Adam through
Seth, who was given another seed instead of Abel, whom
Cain slew, and is tamed on to Shem, the son of Noah, in
whose time was the deluge, or end of that world ;"the
world that then was being overflowed with water,
perished," says Peter, in 2 Epistle iii. 6 ;and yet "the perishing"
consisted only in this, "all flesh died that moved upon
the earth ;"the fish of the sea did not die ;the sun,
moon, and stars remained as at the first, and continue
to the present time, even though it was said, eighteen
hundred years ago, that the stars should fall from
heaven, before some then alive should taste of death
!
The line runs from Shem, through
Arphaxad. and up to Abraham, who is styled in the New
Testament, "the heir of the world." Abraham was the
heir of the world, as two special and particular
promises were made to him; the one under the name of
Abram, the father of the families of the tribes of
Israel; the other, as Abraham, or the father of the
nations ;and here I may observe, that a distinction which has
been drawn between the person, character, and work of
Christ as spiritual Adam, and spiritual Abraham, appears
to be altogether without foundation, spiritual Abraham
being evidently, in the promises, co-extensive with
spiritual Adam. [See Note D. ] In Abraham and his seed, the families
and the nations, Israel and the heathen, were to be
blessed. The seed was Christ, a fact which religious
systems would (judging from their conduct in other and
similar cases,) never have allowed, had not the New Testament
placed it beyond dispute. "Now
to Abraham and his seed Were the promises made. He saith
not, And to
seeds, as to many, but as of one, ("as the body is one,
so also Christ,") and to thy seed, which is Christ." The
line of promise, looking at the diagram, proceeds from
Abraham to David, and on to Christ.
And so we find that Matthew begins his Gospel with these
words, "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David,
the son of Abraham."
Having offered these few observations
on the line of promise, up to the opening of the New
Testament, I shall now proceed to give a brief explanation of the
four last states under the New Testament, to the end of
the Apostolic ministry, which end we believe to be the
fulfilment of all the purposes of God in Christ Jesus,
in the establishment of his eternal and unchanging
kingdom.
The first state extends to the 61st
boundary line, and exhibits the ministry of John the
Baptist, as the forerunner and messenger to prepare the
coming of the Lord. This messenger of God, with his
ministry, was prophesied of, under the Old Testament ; "The
voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye
the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a
highway for our God." (Isaiah xl. 3.)
Now suppose, for a moment, that the
diagram represents a ladder, Jacob's ladder, if you
will, and suppose that the four states under consideration are four rounds of the ladder, and that the
last round is the Apostolic ministry, at which the
ladder ends. This ladder, we read, is "set up on the
earth, and the top of it reaches to heaven," and they
that ascend and descend upon it, are these same
Apostles - the angels of Michael, and the churches, as we
shall hereafter have occasion to show. This ladder is
the line of promise, beginning on the earth, with the
first man, Adam, who was of the earth ;so that Jacob
does not reach anywhere near the first of the four
rounds we speak of, which was the ministry of John.
Between Jacob's round of the ladder, and John's, Isaiah
comes in. Now, in looking at the diagram, you observe
lines drawn from an oblong square, and running up into
one or other of the four states of the New Testament.
These lines are so many different prophecies of Isaiah,
and one, which runs into the ministry of John, is the
prophecy above quoted out of Isaiah's 40th chapter.
I desire
here to offer a very important observation. The prophet
speaks of John as "a
voice; "and
John said, "I am the voice; "
but before John appeared on the
stage of God's dispensations, there was no voice at all, nor any
that answered to Isaiah. Isaiah's declaration was a
bidden mystery - a vail was over the face of it; it was,
in fact, a prophecy to be fulfilled, a word of the
wise, and yet a dark saying. When John began to fulfil
his course, the voice spoke, the vail was withdrawn, and
such portions of the Old Testament were interpreted by
the New, and men were no longer to be left in doubt,
either as to the time Or person of the fulfilment. Imagine then to
yourselves, and you must do so, in order to attain to a
right understanding of the Scriptures - Imagine that you,
like Apollos, (Acts xvii. 25,) lived in John's day, and,
like Apollos, though mighty in the Scriptures, you knew
only the baptism of John. How much of the Old Testament,
in reference to New, would you understand ? John's
baptism or ministry, as did Apollos, and no more. You
are standing within the first boundary line, in the
first of the four states of the New Testament, on the
fourth round of the ladder from the top; surely, then,
are you not entirely ignorant of the remaining three ? Is there not a vail over them ? is not the curtain down ? the mystery yet
unsealed ? is there anything more than a seeing afar off, as in the
case of Abraham and the Fathers ?
And yet, notwithstanding this fact stares
Christians in the face, they will read the Bible as they
read a newspaper, as though all of it had taken place only
yesterday; they will persist in mixing together the "times and seasons;"
they will have it, that, instead of God being a God of
order, he is the author of confusion. I am the more earnest
in offering these strong remarks, because I do believe that
if the right division of the Word of Truth were attended to,
the view of Divine revelation which we entertain would be
brought home with irresistible power to many a mind, which,
for want of that right division, cannot receive it. But to
proceed. John's ministry was of divine appointment; he was
"called of God."
He had, as Paul declared at Antioch, a
course to fulfil - a baptism, which the
same apostle calls, the "baptism
of repentance "
to minister, and prophecies to declare. Having such
commission, seeing that "the
law and the prophets were until John, but since then the
kingdom of God was preached;" thus, indeed, John was "a burning and shining
light." He was that Elias who was first to come, and restore
all things, of whom the disciples were ignorant that he had
come. [See Note E. ] John was dignified with the high and honoured title,
"the friend of the Bridegroom;" and Christ, in the parable
of the sheepfold, calls him the porter - "to him the porter openeth." John was "more than a prophet ; "of those born of
women - David, and Samuel, and all the prophets, there bad
not risen a greater than he; and yet, mark The glorious
truth, "He that
was least in the kingdom of heaven (the ascension kingdom of
Christ,) was greater than John."
We have here a list of remarkable sayings
concerning this forerunner of "the Consolation of Israel,"
the meaning of which sayings religious systems can only
guess at, and which they, for the most part, pass by as of
no account whatever. In the knowledge of a right division of
the word of truth, these sayings are clear in their
interpretation, and precious in their exhibition, of God's
orderly counsel and revelation ; here we are at no loss to
comprehend somewhat of the eternal weight of glory which is
laid up in that scripture of Proverbs, "The path of the just
is as the
shining light, which shineth brighter and brighter unto the
perfect day." Shining light! - look for a moment at the
testimony concerning John ; "He was not that light, but was sent to
bear witness of that light. This is the true light, which
lighteth every man that cometh into The world." Here we also
can bear witness to that light, and believe that it is not
such a "Will o' the wisp" as
religious sects would have us be persuaded ;for we see, in
the case of John, that as the different states, or different phases, of
the Church of God were unfolded, so they advanced in
importance, clearness, and extent, till it was not a voice
that spake; but there were heard voices, and thunderings,
and lightnings, and a great voice came out of the temple of
heaven, from the throne saying, ''It is done "(Rev. xvi. 17) ; and,
after these voices, after the pouring out of the seventh
vial in the desolation of Jerusalem, the seventh and last
trumpet sounded, and there were great voices in heaven (all the
prophecies sounding harmoniously together,) and the mystery
of God was finished, as he had declared by his servants the
prophets." (Rev. x. 7 ;xi. 15.)
I shall not, for
want of time and space, go through the remarkable history of John's birth, worthy of a
prophet indeed as that history is. I
pass on to
observe that in due time John began to fulfil his course, and we find, in Matt. iii, that he who
was to make straight in the desert n highway for our God,
(compare Isaiah xxxv. 8,) commenced preaching in the
wilderness of Judea, saying, "Repent ye, for the kingdom of
heaven is at hand." The kingdom of heaven was at hand, but
not yet come; just as when Paul wrote, "The time of my
departure is at hand," the time of his death was near, but
not yet arrived. John, in his preaching, fulfilled the
prophecies recorded in Isaiah and Malachi concerning him
;and here let me remark, that lines might be drawn from
either prophet, running up within the last boundary line, on
the side of the ministry of John. In reference to his
ministry, and the succeeding, John said of Christ, "He must increase, but
I must decrease." John was a burning light, a star in the
firmament of the church, but a brighter star was rising,
which, in its sending to, and shining upon, the lost sheep
of the house of Israel, and bearing a light to the Gentiles,
should eclipse the former, though that outshone the
splendours of all that ever came before it. John prophesied,
"I indeed
baptize with water, but there standeth one among you whom ye
know not; he shall baptize with the Holy Ghost and with
fire." Jesus came to John's baptism, recognising his divine
commission, and fulfilling all righteousness, as a "minister
of the circumcision." John knew not Jesus till this baptism,
but afterwards he bore testimony to him, and diverted
attention from himself, saying, Behold the Lamb of God, that taketh away the
sin of the world!" [See Note F. ] Thus John preached, and this was the
consummation of his preaching, which began with a voice,
"Repent," and proceeded to a proclamation of the things that
were to come to pass. John spake, with the greatest
clearness, of the fall of Jerusalem,-" the old wives' fable"
question, as it is called,-when he warned the Scribes and
Pharisees, by
intimating to them that the axe was now laying to the root
of the tree, that every tree that brought not forth good
fruit should be hewn down and cast into the fire; that he
was among those whose fan was in his hand, and whose purpose
it was to burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire. This was
John's prophetic testimony, which be wound up with this
exclamation, "0, generation
of vipers, who bath warned you to
flee from the wrath to come !"Here are strong
expressions,
terrific figures, and it might well be asked, What right
have any, as is the common practice, to put a different
interpretation On the things, than thy evidently bear in John's
ministry, and by what authority is it that modern successors
of John, interpret, for instance, the wrath to come," apart
from God's just vengeance on the Jewish nation ?John continued his
ministry, and men "rejoiced
it for a season." To that ministry, as we have seen,
belonged a baptism, so likewise prayer. This is clearly to
be understood. The disciples came to Jesus, and said unto him, "Lord,
teach us to pray, John also taught his disciples." John's
prayer was a dispensation matter peculiar to his ministry,
and doubtless, looking at Christ's prayer, it was offered up
for the greater and succeeding ministry, for the further
revelation of God's will; just as the prayer which Christ taught his disciples, was for that
kingdom in which they should sit on twelve thrones, judging
the twelve tribes of Israel. The Baptist fulfilled his
commission, and then disappeared from the stage of God's
dispensations. His ministry was complete in itself. There was no succession to that ministry;
and I trust we shall be
able satisfactorily to prove, indeed we have already proved,
that it is as reasonable for modern ministers to affirm that
they are succession of John the Baptist, as it is to speak and
act in the character of successors of the Apostles, which is
a charge that fairly attaches to them, from the highest
Calvinist down to the lowest Arminian.
WE have now considered, at
some length, the ministry of John. That ministry appears to me to require a much
more minute investigation than the compass of this work will
allow. The records which are left concerning it in the
Gospels, are most pointed and peculiar. It appears also that
these records are of such character and complexion, because
John's ministry was the connecting link between the Law and
the Gospel, the Old Testament and the New ; or, in other
words, between the natural man and the spiritual, that is,
the covenant of works, and the covenant of grace.
It has been proved that John's ministry
was prophesied of in the Old Testament, and that the
ministry was fixed, as regards time, "before the coming of
the Lord." It has been seen that John occupied the position
which had been assigned to him ;that he rose a star in the
firmament of the church, at the season appointed of the
Father. So far, then, all is well; a due order and
arrangement is preserved ;of all the good things which the
Lord had promised Israel should come to pass in the last
days, not one thing has failed hitherto, to the conclusion
of the course which John was to fulfil. This is by no means
of trifling importance, for if one of these things so
promised had failed - if, for instance, Elias had not come,
as the disciples, in their carnal ignorance once supposed
if the ministry
of Jesus had been the first under the New Testament, and a
gap or a gulph had been left where the ministry of John
should have come in, then that Jesus would have been no
better than (as Gamaliel hinted, see Acts v. 33-41)the Theudas and
Judas who had preceded him ; then the Apostolic day, (if we
can imagine such day at all,) would have been as a Babel,
worse confounded than that on the plains of Shinar, instead
of exhibiting a glorious oneness and simplicity of the
truth. Indeed, the consequence would have been none other
than that which is evident in the different systems now
mistaken for Christianity. These systems affirm that the
perfect state of the unity of the faith is not come ;and by
such affirmation they create a
gap between the cessation of the
Apostolic ministry and the present period, which it is
impossible for them to fill up from the Bible. The Bible
will render them no assistance. The consequence is as fatal
to Christianity as though I should take the Book of Genesis, and the
Revelations, and maintain that these two military books were
the whole of the inspired writings. But we have not so
learned Christ.
Having offered these further remarks on
John's ministry, I will now proceed with the following, and
entirely distinct, ministry of Christ. I now come, in a right
division of the word of truth, to consider the second of the
four New Testament divisions.
John was baptizing in Jordan, and Jesus
came to be baptized of him. But John forbade him, saying,
" I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me ?"Jesus answered,
" Suffer it to be so now, for
thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he
suffered him." (Matt. iii. 13.) After this baptism, there
ensued the temptation in the wilderness. "Then was Jesus led up
of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the
devil." I may be allowed to make a short digression on a
matter connected with this temptation. I would desire to
ask, for a moment, Who or what is signified here by the name
of "Satan ?" For
my own part, I
have no difficulty in considering Satan, in this temptation,
to signify Christ's own countrymen, the Jews, or, in one
word, human nature; just as I look upon Satan, in Job, to be no less nor
more than Job's three miserable comforters, and his own
self-righteous principle." The words, "Get thee behind me, Satan," in the
temptation in the wilderness, do not much differ from
Christ's word to Peter, " Get thee behind me, Satan, for thou art a
scandal unto me;" neither, again, is there much obscurity in
the suggestion, " Command that these stones be made bread,"
when I compare it with John iv. 31, " His disciples prayed
him, saying, " Master, eat ;" but he said unto them, "I have meat to eat
that ye know not of." There was a needs be for the
temptation, and also that it should here be recorded at the
beginning of Christ's ministry, in this figurative form. The
Apostle to the Hebrews writes, "In order that he might
destroy him that had the power of death, the Devil ('accuser of the
brethren'), it behooved him to be made in all things like
unto his brethren (the accused), that he might be a merciful
and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make
reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he
himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour
them that are tempted." (Heb. ii. 14-18.) One glorious
instance of this succour is recorded in the history of
Peter, when, at the denial, the Lord turned and looked upon
Peter, and he went out and wept bitterly. Now it is evident
who was the tempter, the Devil, in the case of Peter and the
rest of the disciples. The Lord, in the garden of
Gethsemane, bad straitly charged them thus -" Watch and pray,
that ye enter not into temptation." It is evident that the
temptation was from the Jews, as it is written, over and
over again, "for
fear of the Jews;" and observe how beautifully this
corresponds with Christ's own saying at that time to the
Jews, "This is your hour and the power of darkness." (Luke
xxii. 53.) Paul writes, "He is able to
succour them that are tempted." Follow
that Apostle from city to city, behold him flying on the
wings of Christian affection, proclaiming the unsearchable
riches of Christ, and ask yourselves, who were his tempters,
where lay his troubles, whence his fighting without, and
fears within ? That same Jewish house, that same covenant of works, in which the carnal mind
delighted, was at the bottom of all. And what is true of
him, is true of the rest. Peter writes to the brethren,
"Think it not
strange concerning the fiery trial (temptation) which is to
try (tempt) you." But religious systems say it is the same
still to this day. So say I; but, as was asked in the matter
of tribulation, so we ask here in that of temptation, Who
is the cause of this ? The systems themselves. They are
revivals of the Jewish house, and if I, for instance, were willing to let
Bible terms have any other than a Bible meaning, I might come forward
and say, that I have endured temptation from the revival of
the Jewish economy, as exhibited in the Church of England.
0that men would
permit that the Bible should speak for itself; that there
were such a heart in them as to cease from perverting the good ways of God.
This digression will be pardoned. I will now return to
our regular history. Jesus, having overcome the temptation,
"the Devil departed from him for a season;" and if this be a
personal Devil, an individuality, it will be difficult to
prove that he ever came to Christ again: not so, however, if
the Devil were the Jews; for how often is it written, "They came to him tempting him ? "Alter the
temptation, Jesus, being full of the Holy Ghost, returned
into Galilee, and there commenced his ministry, upon which
ministry I intend to offer but few remarks, as the subject
speaks for itself, and is its own interpreter. In looking at
the diagram, you observe the ministry of Christ begins at
the first boundary line, and ends at the second, which is
the period of time immediately before his crucifixion. These
were its limits, and if any one should extend those limits,
or bring into the ministry matter which did not belong to
it, this would be to make the word of God of none effect.
For instance, if any should aver that either Christ or his
disciples, in this ministry, preached the gospel, "with the Holy Ghost
sent down from heaven," they would confound two distinct
dispensations, and give occasion for innumerable errors,
which would only end, in what indeed we witness, in our
religious systems - a heap of confusion. This ministry of
Christ was peculiar, as was that of John; and as in the examination
of John's ministry, it was first of all proved that that
ministry was prophesied of in the Old Testament Scriptures,
so also I shall
now proceed to prove the same respecting the ministry of
Christ. I have
directed your attention to lines drawn from the prophecy of
Isaiah, in the diagram. One of these lines, as we have seen,
is a prophecy running up into the ministry of John,
foretelling that ministry. I now call you to notice another
line - a prophecy from the same prophet, running up into the
ministry of Christ, foretelling that ministry. The prophecy
to which I allude is the opening verse of Isaiah's 61st
chapter. "The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the
Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek;
he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to proclaim
liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to
them that are bound." I might go much further back for
prophecies respecting the ministry now under consideration.
There is a most remarkable one delivered unto Moses, in
Deut. xviii. 18, "I will raise them up n prophet from among
their brethren like unto thee, and will put my words in his
month ;and he shall speak unto them all the words that I
shall command him. And it shall come to pass that
whosoever will not hearken unto my words, which he shall
speak in my name, I will require it of him." We observe from
these words how forcible was the testimony of the Son of God
to the Jews in his ministry ;"Do
not think that I will accuse you to the Father; there is one
that accuseth you, Moses, in whom ye trust; for had ye
believed Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of
me." (John v.
46.) I might also refer you to the Book of Psalms, that glorious armoury of
truth; "Hear this, all people; my mouth shall speak of'
wisdom, (I
Christ, the wisdom of God,') and the meditation of my heart
shall be of understanding ('he shall be of quick
understanding in the fear of the Lord ');I will incline mine ear unto a parable, I will
open my dark saying upon the harp." Now this latter verse,
from the 49th Psalm, is quoted in Matthew's Gospel as a
prophecy of the ministry of Jesus ; All these things spake
Jesus to the multitude in parables, and without a parable
spake he not unto them ;that it might be fulfilled which was
spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in
parables, I will
utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation
of the world." (Matt. xiii. 35.) This is explicit enough, as
not belonging to David, but to David's Lord, to whom, and to
whom alone, belongs the crown of the Psalms, as of every
other portion of the word. The like testimony is delivered
in the Gospels, respecting Isaiah's prophecy above quoted,
and that by Christ himself; "When
Jesus came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he
went into The synagogue on the Sabbath-day, and stood up for to read :and there was
delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias; and when
he had unrolled the book, he found the place where it was
written, 'The spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath
anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent
me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the
captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at
liberty them that are bruised; to preach the acceptable year
of the Lord.' And having rolled up the book, he gave it
again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all of
them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he
began to say unto them, This day is this Scripture fulfilled
in your ears." (Luke iv. 18-21.) It has been
beautifully observed on this passage, that it is remarkable
the Son of God did not go through with the whole of this
prophecy concerning himself and his ministry. He was not
only to proclaim the acceptable Year of the Lord, but also
the "day of
vengeance of our God." I would here invite you to notice how our
all-wise God hath "made every thing beautiful in his time."
It was in time now for Jesus to Preach the acceptable year of
the Lord; "Come
unto me, all that are weary and heavy laden, and I will refresh you." It
was not in time to proclaim the day of vengeance of our God.
When the Son of the Highest, the Carpenter's Son, in his
countrymen's estimation, stood up amidst the doctors in the synagogue of
Nazareth, the hour was not yet come for the pathetic lament,
"0 Jerusalem,
Jerusalem !" The day of vengeance had its appointed season
of proclamation. If after he had stretched out his hand,
and no man regarded ;after he had wrought many miracles,
and wonders, and signs, among a disobedient and
gainsaying people; he could say, "I have laboured in vain, I have spent my strength for
nought; for this people's heart is waxed gross, and their
ears are dull of hearing - it was then that he executed his
commission to the full, saying, "
These be the days of vengeance, that
all things which are written may be fulfilled." In this
scripture we see that the Lord Jesus performed the work of the
ministry, according to Isaiah's prophecy; and we are not
left without further testimony of his own to that fulfilment, to this doing the work of an evangelist. When he
was about to leave the world, and go to the Father, he
offered up the following, in a prayer which, if any, may
indeed be called, the Lord's Prayer. "I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished
the work which thou gavest me to do." (John xvii. 4.) Now a question might very
pertinently be asked, either of Calvinism or
Arminianism, What interpretation do you put upon this
scripture ?
and how can you reconcile it with a subsequent
scripture, when Jesus said on the cross, "It is finished !"
and how do you reconcile this with
Jesus' own word, of all things written being fulfilled,
in the destruction of Jerusalem ?
and then, having accomplished the
task of making these three texts agree, how do you
reconcile with them your view of fulfilments yet future
?
Being ignorant entirely of a right
division of the word of truth, being altogether
strangers to God's righteousness, such questions as
these are of the number to which the Bibles of Calvin
and Arminius can return no answer. In the knowledge of
God's perfect and harmonious work, there is to us no
difficulty of reconciliation in the case. When we read
of Jesus speaking to the Father of a finished work, we
understand that of the ministry now under consideration.
We do not confound it with his redemption work, which
was wrought out through his death, neither with his
salvation work, which was accomplished when, (as we shall see,)
being a high priest, not after the order of Aaron, but
Melchisedec, he came not, like Aaron, out of the holy of
holies, but out of heaven itself, in the fall of the
Jewish economy, thereby making manifest that God had
accepted his ministerial, redemption, and intercessory
work, appearing as he did, a second time, without sin
unto salvation.
The finished work, then, of which we
read in John xvii., is the prophetic and ministerial
office, to which office Christ, quoting Isaiah Ixi.,
declared himself to be sent. Now it is in this work that we
behold Jesus a greater than John; just as we shall
behold the Apostles greater, as ministers, than Jesus,
according to his own testimony, The works that I do
shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do,
because I go
to the Father." Jesus said of John, Ye sent unto John,
and he bare witness to the truth." But he said also,
"I receive
not testimony from man;" nay, he said of himself, "If I bear witness
myself. my witness is not true." What then was the
witness ?
The answer is plain. Having said that he had greater
witness than that of John, he adds, "The works which the
Father bath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness
of me that the Father hath sent me." Examine the context
in the 5th of John, in which chapter the above texts
occur, and you find that these works were connected with
this solemn saying, "The hour is coming, and now is,
when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of Man,
and they that hear shall live;" and again, " Marvel not at this, for the hour is coming in
the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,"
(John v.25-28,)
which "marvel
"somewhat
resembles that addressed to Nicodemus, "
Marvel not that I said unto thee, ye must be
born again ;"and, indeed, the same truth is expressed in
both verses. Examine, I repeat, the context thus; and when
you hear the Son of God discoursing of works like these; and
when you read him affirming that these works were given him
to finish, for a testimony of his mission; and when you find
that one of these works is expressed thus, ''All that are in the
graves shall hear my voice," then stay a moment, and ask
yourselves a question or two about the common doctrine of
the resurrection, whether it do or do not bear testimony to
the mission of Christ, eighteen hundred years having
elapsed, and as yet, according to the commonly received
views, no fulfilment. Examine the works of the Son of God,
from the first beginning of miracles which Jesus did in Cana
in Galilee, down to the last work on record, the fall of
Jerusalem, and you hear one and all giving greater witness
than that of John, " Truly this was the Son of God."
Thus then it has been proved that
Christ's ministry was prophesied in the Old Testament. Three
several prophecies, from as many different prophets, have
been quoted, with their fulfilment in the New Testament;
therefore, as in the preceding ministry of John, it follows,
that such and such portions of the prophets became, in
Christ's ministry, a clear revelation to the church, no
matter whether understood or not. Having thus exhibited the
ministry, and its fulfilment, I will now proceed to enquire
somewhat further into the circumstances attending it. And
first, of the call of the disciples. John came preaching in
the character of the forerunner of the Lord ; so likewise
Jesus "chose
seventy disciples, and sent them before his face, into
every city and place whither he himself would come." (Luke
x. 1.)This
choice of the seventy was subsequent to that of the twelve
Apostles; "After these days, the Lord chose other seventy
also." The preaching of the seventy, in the character of
forerunners, was similar to that of John, "Be ye sure of this,
that the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you;" and yet
their preaching differed from John's. John did no miracle,
though Jesus puzzled the Scribes and Pharisees, so that they
could not say that John's baptism was of men, because all
the people counted John for a prophet. John's preaching was prophecy,
unattended with miracle; the preaching of the seventy, and
of the twelve, was accompanied with miraculous power, for
Christ said, "Into whatsoever city ye enter, heal the sick
that
are therein, and say unto them, the kingdom of God is come
nigh unto you." They did so. Having gone forth with their
message, and exercised the powers with which they were
entrusted, they returned to Jesus with joy, saying, "Lord,
even the devils are subject unto us." Thus, it is evident,
from the prophetic testimony entrusted to John, and the
miraculous powers bestowed upon the seventy, that there
never was an imperfect ministry sent forth of God, but that
when he commissioned any man, or any body of men, to perform
the work which he had in hand, he fitted and qualified them
for the work, and enabled them to go through with and finish
it; and, if he has any work in hand now, any dispensation
service, it is the very same to this day; we must have
ministers to do the work, and these must be qualified
equally with their predecessors. There are ministers, we are
told. Are they prophets ? No. Can they work miracles? No. Therefore
they are no ministers.
Jesus, as we have seen, sent the seventy
before his face; and when they returned with joy, he
intimated to
them the high honour which in this their ministry they bad
received, "He
turned him unto his disciples, and said privately, 'Blessed
are the eyes which see the things which ye see; for I tell
you that many prophets and kings have desired to see those
things which ye see, and have not seen them, and to hear
those things which ye hear, and have not heard them. '"(Luke x. 23, 24.)Here, once more,
have we occasion to notice the paramount importance of a
right division of Scripture; and here, again, we are
reminded that the path of the just is as the shining light,
that shineth brighter and brighter unto the perfect day. The
disciples went into every place whither Jesus himself would
come, but they were commanded not to go into the way of
the Gentiles, nor any city of the Samaritans, but rather
unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This latter part
of the verse exactly corresponds with Christ's own
ministerial mission, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep
of the house of Israel." I beg that this may be particularly
noticed, as drawing a line of separation between the
ministry of Christ and his disciples, and the succeeding
ministry of the Apostles, and also as affording us a key,
where- with, among other things, to open the true meaning of
the parables. When I hear, from Christ's own lips, that he
was not sent (ministerially) except to the lost sheep of the house
of Israel ;when
I know,
moreover, that his parabolic discourses were delivered
especially to
the Jews, then I am led to search into the meaning of those
parables, with special reference to the Jewish history. And
how does the search operate, and with what result ? With a result which
alone is sufficient to convince me that the views which
I entertain are
the truth of God. I consider what is left on record of the
preaching of Christ to his own nation and people; I find
that his preaching embraced the world before the flood,
"declaring the
end from the beginning;" I observe particularly, that he
went to the root of the apostacy in that age, when he said
to the Jews, "Ye are of your Father the devil, and the lusts
of your Father ye will do," (surely the Devil is Cain here,)
"he, the Devil,
was a murderer from
the beginning," just as he was a liar in Eve's peccable
composition. I see, in Christ's preaching, that he
associates the fratricide Cain with the fratricide Jews,
in his declaration that the blood of Abel should be required
of that generation, which had gone in the "way of Cain."
(Jude 11.) I
discover that Christ was very particular. in discoursing
upon Sodom and Gomorrah, the overthrow of Nineveh, and other
remarkable Old Testament portions ;and
that he discoursed on these subjects, in order to confirm
the evidence of prophecy, in a way of warning to the men of
that generation, upon whom the ends of the world were come,
and for whom the Apostle declares these things to be ensamples or
types. (1Cor.
x.I I.)I behold, then,
that Christ's preaching to the Jews was occupied with little
else than the fall of Jerusalem, let the fall of Jerusalem
be "old wives'
fables" or not. behold all the prophetic testimonies
revolving round "that
great and notable day of the Lord," that day being,
if the figure may be allowed, the centre from which the
whole Bible is a multitude of radiating lines. I refer to
the parables, properly so called, and the same Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, is Alpha and Omega throughout; the same
stiff-necked and uncircumcised people are still the
inexhaustible theme. I behold, in the light of the
successive ministries and dispensations, that the parables
have a definite meaning, of which, while a Calvinist, I could form no
conception whatever. Take, as an illustration, the parable
of the prodigal son. The common notion of the prodigal son
is, that he represents a repenting and returning sinner.
Therefore it comes to pass that there are as many prodigal
sons, as there are different descriptions of a repenting
sinner, and there are as many different definitions of a
repenting sinner as there are sects, systems, or
parties-their name is legion. And then, for an
interpretation of the elder brother, this is a character
which religious systems could never fathom; all that they
can say about him, or the whole parable, is, on their own
confession, conjecture. How do we interpret this word of the
wise, and his dark saying ? The prodigal is none other than
the ten lost tribes, which modern religious systems are so
diligently seeking for to this day. The elder brother
represents the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, and who the
Father is was never doubted. The same interpretation applies
to the lost sheep, and the lost piece of silver, in the same
xvth Luke, as also to Lazarus, in the parable
of the rich man, which rich man denotes the elder brother
Judah. The like interpretation is true of the "other sheep which are
not of this fold," in John x. These represent the lost ten tribes, the lost
sheep of the house of Israel, as do also the poor, the
maimed, the halt, and the blind, for whom a feast was made
and provided. Here is a list of parables, which, by understanding the nature and object of Christ's ministry, are plain
and intelligible, but which, for lack of that
understanding, are still parables, in the preaching of
religious systems. Here is a power to exhibit God's most
blessed will as one undivided truth, in opposition to a
thousand different doctrines, which must be false.
Having considered the ministry of Christ,
our next step (following the plan adopted in discoursing on
the preceding ministry,) ought to be into the baptism
thereto appended. I shall dismiss this part of our subject
with a remark or two upon the latter part of the 3rd chapter
of John's Gospel. We read, in verse 22, "After these things
came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea, and
there he tarried with them and baptized." This is explained
in a parenthesis, in 2nd verse of 4th chapter, "Jesus
himself baptized not, but his disciples," showing that the
disciples' ministry, at that time, was only an appendage to
that of Christ. John was baptizing at the same time, and
his disciples, with certain of the Jews, came to him, saying, "Rabbi,
he that was
with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold
the same baptizeth, and all men come unto him." John's
disciples and the Jews were then disputing a certain
question about purifying, so that in this mention of
purifying, and two baptisms, we are led to under- stand what
was in Paul's mind when, in 6th Hebrews, he exhorted to
leave the first principles, among which was the doctrine of
"divers baptisms," or washings. The disciples, in their
address to John, appear to have entertained a fond thought that
John was himself the Messiah, or, at least, a desire that he
should assume that character, and the answer which is
returned to that address would lead us so to conclude ;
Ye yourselves bear me witness that I
said, I am not the Christ, but I am sent before him." The
same remarks are illustrative of John's sending certain of
his disciples, when he was in prison, to Christ, asking,
"Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another ?" This was not,
surely, for John's satisfaction, but for the satisfaction of
those who followed him. He would here again divert men's
minds from himself; and such would be the effect consequent
upon the answer to the disciples' question, "Go and shew John again
those things which ye do see and hear. The blind receive
their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the
deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the
gospel preached to them." (Matt. 4.) Now John did no
miracle; this, then, was to tell the disciples that he
(Christ) had greater witness than that of John.
I will now offer a
few observations on the subject of' prayer, in connexion
with this ministry of Christ. "And it came to pass, that as
he was praying in a certain place, when he ceased, one of
his disciples said unto him, " Lord, teach us to pray, as
John also taught his disciples." The Lord did teach them a
prayer, and that is commonly called The Lord's Prayer; and it is
prayed four or five times every Sunday morning, thereby
transgressing the precept, '' Use not vain repetitions."
this prayer was very necessary at the time when it was
given, "Jesus
said, If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts
unto your children, how much more shall your heavenly Father
give the Holy Spirit unto them that ask him." (Luke xi.
13.)How
glorious here is the comparison of spiritual things with
spiritual, in John vii. 39, "The
Holy Ghost, or Spirit, was not yet given, for Jesus was not
yet glorified." To ask for the Holy Spirit now, betrays the
most lamentable ignorance of the Bible.
Again, "Thy kingdom come," was once a
beautiful petition, for they were then preaching, "The
kingdom of heaven is at hand." According to religious
systems, it is at hand still. The cloven foot of Apostolic
succession is ever creeping in, as exhibited in the absurd
scheme of a double interpretation of scripture terms. It
will he allowed by all sects, that the kingdom of heaven is
come, in a certain sense or senses. They will speak of a
kingdom of grace in the heart, a kingdom of Christ in the
church, and a kingdom of glory above, while there never was
but one kingdom of heaven. That was the Apostolic dispensation of the Holy Spirit-preached gospel, in its
progress and final establishment to be an eternal and
unchanging kingdom. It was this kingdom of the new and
better covenant in Christ's blood, which the disciples
prayed for, but when it was come, the petition was
made void, because obsolete, out of date. This will clearly
appear, if for n moment we connect the petition with what
Christ is recorded to have said to his disciples ;in John xvi. He had
told them, "I
will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your
joy no man taketh from you." After this he added, "And in
that day ye shall ask me nothing." What day ?This question puzzled
me along time,
until I discovered the answer in the foregoing verse. That
day in which they should ask him nothing, was the day when he should
see them again ;that is, the time between the resurrection
and ascension; which day, for aught I can see, may as well be
called the Lord's day, as the first day of' the week. Thus
scripture is truly its own interpreter, and thus it is that
every day we see fresh cause for exclaiming, "It becometh
well the just to be thankful." Well then, to proceed. When
Christ had said, ..At that day ye shall ask me nothing," he
said, moreover, "Verily, verily, I
say unto you, whatsoever ye shall ask
the Father in my name, be will give it to you. Hitherto ye
have asked nothing in my name; ask, and ye shall receive,
that your joy may be full." Was Christ false witness, or the
faithful and true, when he said, "Hitherto ye have asked
nothing in my name ?" Every one, from the highest Calvinist, down
to the lowest Arminian, replies, "The faithful and true."
Then, I ask, by
what authority do you repeat, or by your presence in the
services of the Church of England sanction, the repetition
of this the Lord's prayer ? If the testimony of Christ is of
any any value, there is nothing asked in his name in that
prayer; indeed, this is plain, from the wording of the
prayer. But he bids them hence- forth to ask in his name. If
men are to be guided by the testimony of Christ, then that
which is called the Lord's Prayer was a proverb to the
disciples. "These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs,
or parables." (John xvi. 25.) This is borne out by facts;
for when the disciples prayed, "Thy kingdom come," every one
knows that their notion of the kingdom was that it should be
a kingdom of this world, a kingdom in deliverance from the
Roman power, and not from Moses' law. Exactly the same is
the notion of those who pray, "Thy kingdom come," to this day, as
is evident from their millennia1 dreams. But to return.
"These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs; but the
time cometh when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but
I shall shew you
plainly of the Father." After this there follows, in the
next verse, "At that day ye shall ask in my name." What day
? The time then
coming, when there should be no more proverbs; when they
should be led into all truth; when the Holy Ghost, the
wonder- worker, should bring all things to their remembrance
; then should they ask in his name, and if in his name, they
must put the Lord's Prayer aside. Now that they did ask in
his name is evident; "Whatsoever ye
do, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus'-that Jesus who was
crucified, and in his resurrection made Lord and Christ - "giving thanks unto God, even the Father, by him." And that
the disciples did put aside the prayer Christ taught them,
is equally evident; not a vestige of it is to be found in
any one of the Epistles, or in the Acts; therefore, I conclude that on this
one ground of objection we might safely rest our secession from the
Church of England. I have thus glanced at the subject of
prayer, in its connexion with Ch&s ministry, and have
proved from Scripture that the prayer of that
ministration passed away. Two states or constitutions
have now been manifested; every thing that appertained to them has come to
pass, whether one or one thousand understand the fulfilment. The vail has
been withdrawn from the ministries of Christ and John ;the
curtain has been lifted up so far; we have read
the proof of this revelation
in the words, * I have finished
the F
4 work
which thou gavest me to do."
We are come, then, to the garden of Gethsemane, wherein the
69th Psalm, among other prophecies, lifts up a voice on high. We travel from
Gethsemane to the judgment hall of Pilate, and from thence
to Calvary, and there, at that hour and power of darkness,
we read of the fall of Jerusalem occupying the mind of the
Son of God, be the interpretation of that fall what it may.
There, on the road to the place where they crucified him, he
turned unto certain that followed him weeping, and said,
"Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for
yourselves and for your children ;for behold the days are
coming in the which they shall say, Blessed are the barren,
and the wombs that never bare. Then (in these coming days,)
shall they begin to say to the mountains. Fall on us, and to
the hills, Cover us;" and yet, notwithstanding this is so
definite in its meaning, modern Christianity steps in with
the monstrous absurdity of double interpretation, and thinks
it a small matter to affirm that the cry, "Mountains, fall
on us," is a cry yet to be lifted up, at an imaginary
judgment-day. (See Scott's and Henry's Commentaries, &c.,
&c.) We accompany the Son of God to his death, and in the
scriptures just quoted, we behold how truly his ministry was
to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Into the history
of that death it is not my purpose to enter, neither into
the prophecies concerning it. We know the record, the
unconditional record, of the same, ''The
gift of God is eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord,
who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our
justification." It was a prophecy of this man, "His
name shall be called Wonderful." One record of that name I
read in the closing words of the Gospel by John, "And there
are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if
they should be written every one, I
suppose that even the world itself
would not contain the books that should be written. Amen."
One very touching example of these "many
other things "
we have in the conversation of Jesus with the disciples on
the way to Emmaus; cc And beginning at Moses and all the prophets,
be expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things
concerning himself." (Luke xxiv. 27.) We are tempted to wish
that that exposition had been written; glorious indeed it
must have been, when the effect upon the ignorant hearers
was such as this; "Did not our heart burn within us while he
talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the
Scriptures ? "
We are advanced now into the third state
under the New Testament, the third division of the
diagram, which represents the period of time from Christ's
resurrection to his ascension. Of this state we have no
obscure intimation in Isaiah liii. 10, "He shall see his
seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the
Lord shall prosper in his hand." This prophecy is the line
which I would
draw from the oblong square already mentioned, into this
third state. There is an explicit prophecy of this state in
the 16th Psalm, of which the Holy Ghost, by Peter, has this
remark, "David, seeing that God would raise up Christ to sit
on his throne, spake before of the resurrection of Christ,
that his soul was not left in Hades, neither his flesh did
see corruption." During this state, the conversation of
Christ was confined to his disciples;
his ministry was ended, therefore he spake no more to the
people, though he was seen of above 600 brethren at once. This
state was very peculiar; peace was written upon
it, and Christ appears to have been all in all to his
disciples, so that it was indeed true which he had
told them beforehand, "At that day ye shall ask me nothing."
But while thus happy in the society of their Lord, and of
each other, we must not forget that the ignorance at which
the Lord hinted, in the close of his ministry, was yet
untaken away. In order to prove this, I must go back a little way, to the
season between the death and resurrection. The women which
had followed Jesus prepared spices and ointments, that they
might embalm his body; so much did they understand the psalm
which said, that his flesh should not see corruption. They
came to the grave - the body was gone - and they were told that
Jesus was risen. They returned to the eleven; they informed
them of what they had heard and seen, and with what results
? "Their words
seemed unto them as idle tales, and they believed them not."
And why did they not believe ? Because, as we are informed
in John's Gospel, "they knew not the Scripture, that Jesus
must rise again from the dead." This is plain enough, and
yet who of the preachers of these times recognises it ?
which, of all of them, does not in his preaching hold
forth, that the disciples were equally well informed before
as after the ascension ? Nay more, have we never heard that
David was better instructed in spiritual things than any
Christian is or can be now ? How seldom do we meet with even a glimmering
of a knowledge of the times and seasons, and how pitiable
is the thought of the unutterable confusion which has thus
ensued ! 0yes,
when we think of these things, we cease to wonder at Mary's
simple question to him whom she supposed to be the gardener,
"Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast
laid him, and I will take him away." We cease to wonder that
two of the disciples, as they journeyed to Emmaus, should
say, even after they knew that Jesus was gone from the
grave, ''We trusted that it had been he which should have
redeemed Israel." And ceasing to wonder at these things, in
the present prevailing ignorance of the spirituality of God's
word, we are at a loss what to say to this reproach, "0
fools and slow
of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken :ought not Christ to
suffer these things, and to enter into his glory ?" 0
fools! aye,
and how much more now. "Have I been so long with you, and
yet have ye not known me ?" Was this the reproach in days when the Holy
Ghost was not yet given, in times when the New Testament was
not written ? and are we necessitated to ask the same
question of those who talk of the power of divine teaching,
of a finished salvation, of the unconditionality of eternal
life, of comparing spiritual things with spiritual, of the
Bible being " foolishness to the
natural man, because it is spiritually discerned1"
Is it
come to this? while at the same time these very persons, who
thus betray their ignorance, will pity us as being in error,
or even condemn us for unbelievers !
It is written, and it is well that it
is written, for it is glorious, experimental truth, "My
thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my
ways, saith the Lord."
During this intermediate state, Christ
gave to his Apostles their extended commission. He had called the
twelve unto him previously, as we have seen from Matt,
x., and had sent
them forth, as he had sent the seventy, to preach the
kingdom of heaven, and to prove their preaching by signs and
wonders, in power over unclean spirits, and healing all
manner of diseases. " He ordained
twelve, that they might be with him ;"and for what purpose
they should be with him, we learn from the Gospel of John,
"Ye also shall
bear me witness, because ye have been with me from the
beginning." Now at the time when the twelve were called to
their apostleship, he restrained their ministry to the lost
sheep of the house of Israel; a restraint which remained in
force till long after it was virtually removed. It was
virtually removed when he said unto them, ''Go ye into all
the world (empire), and preach the gospel to every creature;
and lo, I am
with you always, even to the end, consummation, or
perfection of the age." This was an unlimited commission,
accompanied with a particular promise. But these words were
not addressed to Judas, only to the eleven. Judas had
obtained part, or shared in the lot, of the ministry,
(compare Act. ii. 17, with Acts ii. 25, 26,) but from
his lot he by transgression fell. He had neither part nor
lot, no interest whatever, in the extended commission, " Go
ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every
creature;" if he had, he would have inherited the promise,
"Lo, I am with you always, even to the consummation of the
age." So that we observe from this, that the old cry of a
Judas among the Apostles, is an idle sound. There was a
Judas among the Apostles, when they wist not what manner of
men, nor of what spirit, they were. There was no Judas in
that company which could soy, " God
hath given unto us the spirit of a sound mind, for we have
the mind of Christ." The Lord delivered unto the eleven
their extended commission, and his promise. This promise
was, that he would be with them even to the end of the
world, which end of the world was akin to the end of the old
world, not a dissolution of this visible system of things,
but an end of the Jewish economy and nation ;an end
corresponding to the preceding end at the deluge, in more
respects than one ;for as Noah and his family alone found
favour in the eyes of the Lord, and were saved alive, so an
inspired Apostle writes of Israel, "Even
now there is a remnant, according to the election of grace." And
again," If the righteous scarcely be
saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear ?" The commission,
with the promise, is recorded in Matthew's Gospel. Now, for
the nature of the promise, we refer to Mark, where we read,
"And these signs
shall follow them that believe :
In my name shall they cast out devils;
they shall speak with new tongues; they shall take up
serpents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not
hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall
recover."
This brings us, in due order, to the last
of the four states, the Ascension Kingdom of Christ; for it
is immediately added, " So then, after the Lord had spoken unto them,
he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of
God. And they went forth and preached everywhere, the Lord
working with them, and confirming the word with signs
following." Now we are not to understand by this, that on
the instant after Jesus had spoken, and after he had
ascended, the Apostles so went forth. No, we search the
Scriptures, comparing one portion with another, and though
we find recorded that Jesus opened the understandings of his
apostles, and expounded unto them the Scriptures, yet we do not confound this understanding with
that of the day of Pentecost. Be the understanding never so
great, it did not qualify the Apostles as preachers of Jesus
and the resurrection, for the Lord accompanied it with this
warning, "Behold
I send the
promise of the Father unto you, but tarry ye here at
Jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high." Be
the understanding however clear, it was compatible with
ignorance, such as the following, "Lord,
wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel ?" for
this question appears to have been put immediately before
the ascension. Let the understanding be what it may, Jesus
himself intimated its weakness and inefficiency, when, in
reply, he said, "It
is not for you to know the times and seasons which the
Father hath after having received the promise of the put into his own
power."
After having received the promise of the
Holy Ghost, it was for them to know the
times and seasons. Peter discovered this knowledge, when,
on the day of Pentecost, he proclaimed the last days of
Joel's prophecy; and Paul writes, in his Epistle to the
Thessalonians, "But of the times and the seasons, brethren,
ye have no need that I should write unto you." (1 These. v.
I .)
We have now examined three Evangelists on
this matter of Apostolic commission, and we find that
their testimony agreeth together; they bear witness to these
Apostles, that they were designed by Christ to be ministers
indeed. The eleven having been appointed, as we have seen,
did wait at Jerusalem for the promise of the Father.
Previous, however, to the fulfilment of that promise, they
must needs (if I am not mistaken) busy themselves with doing,
as usual, a little work on their own account. The
ever-forward Peter counselled his brethren to choose one who
should supply the place of Judas, who had fallen from his lot
in the ministry, according to prophecy in Psalm cix. Peter
stood up among
the rest, and said, 's Of these men which have companied with us all
the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning
at the baptism of John, until that same
day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be
a witness with us of his resurrection." (Acts i. 21.)
Peter's suggestion, no doubt, had its origin in the
remembrance of what the Lord had said to the twelve, Ye also
shall bear me witness, because ye have been with me from the
beginning." Whether Peter was now acting with or without
authority, I do not undertake to decide, but I am inclined
to think that the choice of an Apostle was unauthorized, and
it appears to me that the Lord Jesus afterwards set aside
the choice, in calling the persecutor, Saul of Tarsus, to
supply the place of Judas as one of the twelve foundations
of the spiritual temple not made with hands. Besides, I do
not find that an Apostle could elect an Apostle :these first-rank
officers in the church were commissioned directly from the
Lord: moreover, there was at this time no promise to the
disciples that they should be led into all truth, and
therefore, as they had always been in error hitherto, it
seems most likely that the present was no exception :and again, we can
find no Scripture warrant for their strange proceeding in
casting lot, in a matter of such momentous importance. And,
be it observed, it makes nothing against this view, that the
proceeding was conducted with solemn prayer, "They continued with
one accord in prayer and supplication," it may be for the
Holy Ghost, according to the promise, "How much more
shall your heavenly Father give his Holy Spirit to them that
ask him ? "Their
prayer at this time was, most unquestionably, not prayer
in the Holy Ghost; it had nothing whatever to do with this
subsequent exhortation of an Apostle, "Praying
alway in the Spirit," or with that scripture of deep
meaning, Rom. viii. 26.
But to proceed with our history. The
Apostles waited at Jerusalem, and when the day of Pentecost
was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place,
and suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing
mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were
sitting. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and
began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them
utterance," &c.
We are now arrived within the last of the
four states, the Kingdom of Heaven, in considering which,
I propose, for
brevity's sake, to confine myself chiefly to Peter's
sermon on the day of Pentecost. The subject is so vast, that
it is impossible to give more than a mere outline, and for
our present purpose this must suffice. This state is called
THE MOUNT ZION STATE
and was prophesied of in Isaiah's second
chapter, 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, that
the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the
top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills,
and all nations shall flow into it; for out of Zion shall go
forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem." The
law here mentioned is, as we shall hereafter have occasion
to show, "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus."
This went out of Zion, of which Zion it is said in Psalm
cxxxiii., "There the Lord commanded the blessing, even for evermore." Now, that these prophecies were fulfilled in
the Apostolic dispensation, is evident from Paul's word to
the Hebrews, "Ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city
of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem." This the Hebrew
believers would well understand, being acquainted with the
Old Testament Scriptures; and I suppose that it will be
admitted on all hands that when the Apostle here writes to
them of Mount Zion, it is a spiritual mountain which he has
in mind; that here, at all events, Zion and Jerusalem, the
city of the living God, are not literal, as under the
dispensation of the law, in the land of Palestine, but, as
under the gospel, entirely of a spiritual nature. And this
being admitted, I leave it for the consideration of those who
believe that the Jews (so called) will be restored to literal
Palestine, whether they are not by this belief inverting
with a vengeance the work of God, and really maintaining
that the Church of God, having thus, in the Apostle's day,
borne the image of the heavenly, that church is to be
brought hack again, by some inconceivable process of
inversion, certainly far from divine, to bear the image of
the earthly. The notion is preposterously absurd; and were
it not that, if we might follow the bent of nature, we are
always for looking upon God as even such an one as
ourselves; were it not for this propensity, it were
wonderful how ever such a fond delusion as a future Jewish
restoration should ever possess any who call themselves
Christians.
It appears that the
name which has been affixed to this fourth state is scriptural.
I shall now proceed to discuss the glorious things connected with this
Zion, the city of God, out of which God then clearly shined,
and shineth for evermore. As already stated, I will begin
the examination with a glance at the wonders which were
revealed on the day of Pentecost. This glance will suffice
to prove the great object now in view, and that is, that the
ministry of this Mount Zion state was prophecied of in the Old
Testament, and that, as we have seen in preceding
ministries, these prophecies were all fulfilled.
This position is proved at once from the
opening words of the history of the Pentecostal day. We
read, "There was
a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it
filled all the house where they were sitting." This is an
exact fulfilment of what was predicted in Psalm civ., "He maketh his angels winds, and his ministers
a flame of fire." We say, a fulfilment of this prophetic
verse, not from our own fallible interpretation, but because
the Holy Ghost so speaks in Heb. i., when treating of the kingly
pre-eminence of Christ in that day of the Apostolic
dispensation, "And unto the angels (or messengers) he
saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers
a flame of fire." The Apostles, these angels of the
churches, are at least numbered in this company, as is
evident from the following question, "Are
they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to
minister for them who shall be (are about to inherit)
heirs of salvation ?" And again, "Unto
angels he bath not put in subjection the world to come
(about to come) whereof we speak." (Heb. ii. 5.)
The like prophetic announcement of
the Apostolic baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire, is
given in 1st and 10th of Ezekiel, where, I conceive, the
members of the Apostolic Church are shadowed forth under
the figure of wheels. I will quote the 13th verse of
chapter x.,
in connexion with verse 17, "It
was cried unto them in my hearing, 0wheel !-for the
spirit of life was in them." Now what we are to understand
by the spirit of life, we are informed in the following
chapter, which is only a continuation of the same
subject. We rend in chapter xi., concerning the house of
Israel, "Although I have cast Them far off among the
heathen, and scattered them among the countries, I will
even gather you from the people, and assemble you out of the
countries where ye have been scattered, and I will give
you the land of Israel, and I
will give them one heart, and I
will put a new spirit within you, and I will take the
stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh,
that they may walk in my statutes, and keep mine
ordinances, and do them; and they shall be my people,
and I will
be their God." (Ezek. xi. 16-20.) There is so much
important matter in this connexion of the chapter, that
I will, for clearness' sake, discuss this connexion at
some length. And first, I would observe, that the wheels
are addressed in a collective form, as constituting one
wheel, "It was cried unto them
in my hearing, 0 wheel!" Now I conceive that we
have here a beautiful prophetic figure of a glorious
reality under the gospel dispensation. Christ prayed for
the eleven before his passion, and not for them only;
'Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which
shall believe on me through their word; that they all
may be one." From this I might call you again to notice
how sound and scriptural is the view which we take of
prayer, in its dispensation character. Christ petitioned for a oneness; and to this oneness, to
the prevailing power of Christ's petition, the Apostles, in
their Epistles, bear abundant witness. Paul writes, "As the
body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of
that one body, being many, are one body; so also Christ. For
by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body ;baptized,
as on this pentecostal day, with the Holy Ghost and fire."
This passage is in 1 Cor. xii. When we read, "so also Christ," we
see an emphatic meaning in Paul's question, in the first
chapter of this Epistle, "Is Christ divided ? "When we read, "we
are all baptized into one body," we cease to marvel at an
otherwise very marvellous scripture, "In Christ Jesus there
is neither male nor female." And when we understand Paul's
argument, in this chapter, we recognize the magnificent
series of oneness which he lays before the Ephesian
believers, "There
is one God and Father of all; one Lord, one Spirit, one
faith, one baptism, one body," the church, of which this one
resurrection Lord was the head and Saviour; a temple for a
habitation of God, through the Spirit; and yet in that body,
temple, or church, there are many members, just as Ezekiel's
one wheel was yet many wheels.
These observations will lead us into a
large field of enquiry. Suppose that we put on one side the
comparison of spiritual things with spiritual just
instituted, we are not left without abundant proof that t1e
inference drawn from it is correct, viz., that Ezekiel's
prophecy respects the Apostolic dispensation and ministry.
In chapter xi., verse IS, we read, "All the house of Israel
wholly are they unto whom the inhabitants of
Jerusalem have said, Get you far from the Lord; unto us is
the land given in possession." Now I
remember that Ezekiel prophesied among
the first-fruits of the captivity of Judah, the body of the
nation being yet in their own land, and therefore I conceive it is this
body, the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who are thus taunting
the captives. But is there no meaning in the word "wholly,"
attached to the house of Israel ?
It matters not for our present
purpose, whether there be or no, only if there be-if the
word wholly extend the persons spoken of beyond the
tribe of Judah, then we conclude that the promises in the
two following verses must be taken in their most comprehensive application. The promises read thus :"Although I have cast
them far off among the heathen, and although I have
scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them as
a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come.
Therefore say, thus saith the Lord God, I will even gather
you from the people, and assemble you out of the countries
where ye have been scattered, and I
will give you the land of Israel."
(Ezek. xi. 16, 17.) Now, as I have said, I conceive this to be
prophesied of the whole family of Jacob, and the promise
annexed to the above, in the 19th verse, strengthens this
view ; I will give them one heart, (here is the one wheel,)
and I will put a new spirit within you, and I will take away the
stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them a heart
of flesh." I take this to be a New Testament promise. Though
we could allow, for the sake of argument. that this new
heart and new spirit might receive a fulfilment at the end
of the seventy years' captivity, yet other portions of
Ezekiel's prophecy are decisive as to its being a New
Testament blessing; and, above all, being here connected
with the wheels, it must of necessity be carried to New Testament times, as we shall show
when discoursing of the wheels, from Daniel's prophecy. To
prove what is meant by a new spirit, in Ezekiel's prophecy,
I quote a passage from his 37th chapter; "I shall put
my spirit within you, and ye shall live, and I will place
you in your land." Now concerning whom the prophet is here
speaking, is
evident from the verses immediately following ;"Moreover,
thou eon of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For
Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then
take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick
of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel, his companions;
and join them one to another; into one stick, ad they shall
become one in thine hand." Then we read, verse 18, "When the
children of thy people shall speak unto thee saying, Wilt
thou not shew us what thou meanest by these ? say unto them,
Thus saith the Lord God, Behold I will take the stick of Joseph, which is in
the hand of Ephraim, and the tribes of Israel his fellows,
and will put them with him, even with the stick of Judah,
and make them one stick, and they shall be one in mine hand.
And the sticks whereon thou writest shall be in thine hand
before thine eyes. And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord
God, Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the
heathen whither they be gone, and will gather them on every
side, and bring them into their own land ;and I will make them one
nation in the land, on the mountains of Israel, and one king
shall be king to them all, and they shall be no more two
nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any
more at all." (verse 18-22.) Evidently this is a prophecy of
the restoration of the ten tribes. That such restoration is
to be found in the sacred records is universally admitted;
there are, however, great differences of opinion as to the
time when the restoration should be brought about. The
subject is important in a proof of the past second
advent ;and as it now occurs in the course of that proof,
I shall consider
it with somewhat of the attention which is due. Omitting the
history of the cutting off of the ten tribes in the reign of
Rehoboam, I shall quote a prophecy of the rejection of these
tribes ; Within
threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken, that it
be not a people." (Isaiah vii. 8.) Ephraim where mentioned
as the head of the ten tribes, as also in the prophet Hosea.
This prophecy records that Ephraim, or Israel, should,
within seventy years, be no more a people, i.e. should be cut off
from the Jewish covenant, should be no longer
recognized on the earth as the favoured portion of the Lord,
the people of God. When Judah was sent into captivity, it
was not so. At the expiration of the seventy years, they
were brought back to their own land, to the rebuilding of
the temple, and the re-establishment of their worship; so that it was true of these in
Christ's ministry, 'They sit in Moses' seat.'
The tribes given to Jeroboam (who made Israel to sin,) were
never designed of God to be restored to the privilege of
being hi8
people, under the Jewish economy. They never have been so
restored. We believe, and we shall prove from Scripture,
that the restoration was to be, and did come to pass, under
the power and glory of the house, not of Moses, the servant,
but of Christ, the son ;that dong with that restoration were
fulfilled all the promises made to
Abraham, the heir of the world, made in
connexion with a spiritual land, flowing with milk and honey, the
glory of all lands, even this, "Thy
land, 0 Immanuel
!" That the
restoration was promised under a spiritual covenant, is
evident from the quotations which have already been made out
of Ezek. xi. and xxxvii., respecting the new heart
and one spirit. This will appear further, if we connect
these scriptures in Ezekiel, with their parallel passages in
Jeremiah xxiii. and xxxi., where we find that this one heart
and one spirit is attached to an everlasting covenant ;"
Behold the days come, saith the Lord,
that I will make
a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house
of Judah ;"and writes Paul, "In
that he saith a new covenant, he hath made the first old;"
so that there are but two covenants. What, then, is the tenor
of the new ?
"This is the covenant that I will make with the house of
Israel. After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in
their inwnrd parts, and write it in their hearts, and will
be their God, and they shall be my people." (Jer. xxxi. 31-34.) The everlasting property of
this covenant is expressed (as religious systems must say,)
by the everlasting continuance of this visible system of
things. "If
those ordinances, the sun for a light by . day, and the
moon and the stars for a light by night, if these depart
from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also
shall cease from being a nation before me for ever." (verses
35-6.) Will all religious systems agree with this statement
of the restoration of the tribes, so far as we have
now proceeded ?
No, for they believe that the sun, and moon, and stars will
depart from before the Lord ;therefore they believe that the
new covenant is everlasting, and yet not everlasting ;or, in
other words, religious systems do not believe in a new
covenant at all. They will admit, in words, that the
covenant which the Lord made with his chosen people, when he
brought them up out of the land of Egypt, hath long since
disappeared, and is no longer, as in Paul's ministry, "waxed old, and ready
to vanish away." (Heb. viii. 13.) They will admit in words,
to which they can attach no meaning, that all restoration
expected belongs to a new and better covenant- words, we
repeat, to which they can attach no meaning; for what, in
wonder, it is asked, do they mean, by asserting that the
land of Israel, so often mentioned, as in the passages above
quoted, is literal Palestine; how can they believe such
contradictions, except they take the new covenant to be
another appearance of the old ? But this by the way. We have seen, from
Jeremiah xxxi., that the restoration was to be, not
according to the covenant that God made with the fathers of
the house of Israel and Judah, when he brought them out of
Egypt. I will parallel that scripture with another out of
the same prophet, in his 23rd chapter, 5th and following
verses; "Behold
the days come, saith the Lord, that I
will raise unto David a righteous
Branch, and a king shall reign, and prosper, and shall
execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days,
Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely." This
is the restoration of the tribes, without a doubt, even if
we had not the 3d verse, which plainly declares that event;
" I will gather the remnant of my flock out of
all countries whither I have driven them, and will set up shepherds
over them, which shall feed them," &c. And what follows &r
the promise of a righteous Branch ? "
Therefore, the days come, saith the
Lord, that they shall no more say, The Lord liveth, which brought up the
children of Israel out of the land of Egypt, but the Lord liveth which
brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out
of the north country, and from all the countries whither
I had driven
them, and they
shall dwell in their own land." If I
were to linger for a moment, for The
purpose of illustrating this passage out of the New
Testament, I
would offer the following : The days come when they shall no more talk of
the glory of the old covenant, which was but a ministration
of condemnation and death, but of the glory of the new covenant, which is
a ministration of righteousness and life, the rather
glorious; so that that which was glorious had no glory, by
reason of the glory which excelled. Now here is great
mention of days,-" the days come," in those days," and so
forth ;but observe, all the days of the Bible have an appointed time ;all
The days of the Old Testament Scriptures have their bounds,
which they cannot pass. These be the days of vengeance, that all
things which are written may be fulfilled." if objectors to
the past second advent could but blot that faithful saying
out of the Bible, or if they could but twist and turn it as
they think they can other scriptures, what a relief it would
be. But "Ig litera
scripts manet." There the record is, and, there remaining,
the days in which the Lord God would make a new covenant
must be sought for prior to Jerusalem's desolation. The days
when the Lord would bring his people, as he did some time, from the
depth of the sea, and cause them to dwell in their own land,
must also be sought for on the other side of the year 70,
and not, as is
the fashion, on this side.
But further, we
will examine the Scriptures, and see whether or no they fix
any temporary epithet to these days, by which to determine
Their fulfilment. I open the prophecy of Hosea, and refer to his
third chapter; "Afterward shall the children of Israel
return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king;
and shall fear the Lord and his goodness, in the latter
days." Here, again, is the restoration of the ten tribes, a
restoration after having been many days without a king, or
prince, or sacrifice-image, ephod, and teraphim : and, if modem
doctrines are true, when their still future restoration
takes place, it will be to sacrifice, ephod, image, and teraphim, to the old covenant of beggarly elements and
carnal ordinances. To the restoration, in this passage of
Hosea, there is a time fixed, - the latter days.* I cannot here stay to
examine minutely into the scriptures connected with the Iast
or latter days; to do this would require a volume. I should have to begin with Jacob's
dying address to his twelve sons, "Gather
your- selves together, that I may tell you what shall befall you in the
last days;" (Gen. xlix. 1) and proceed from this to
what Balaam
said unto Balak, Come, and I will advertize thee what this people shall do
to thy people in the latter days;" and so on throughout the
whole Bible. Sufficient for our present purpose, to have
discovered that the &urn of the captivity of Israel was to
be in the latter days; for, having discovered this, I think
we may find the restoration in Peter's sermon on the day of
Pentecost. How read we ? "This
is that which was spoken of by the prophet Joel, and it
shall come to pass in the last days, saith the Lord, I will pour out my
Spirit upon all flesh." Peter fixes the date of the last days to the time
when he was thus speaking. In Acts iii. 24, he styles that
time "these days," saying, Yea, and all the prophets, from Samuel
and those that follow after, have likewise foretold of these
days." Now, that the restoration of the tribes is intimately
connected with Peter's quotation from Joel, is evident on a
reference to Joel's prophecy. After the words, "Whosoever
shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be delivered," we
read, "for in
Mount Sion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the
Lord hath said, and in the remnant whom the Lord shall call;
for, behold, in those days (the last days), and in that time
(the last time), when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and
Jerusalem, I
will also gather
all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of
Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people,
and for my heritage, Israel, whom they have scattered among
the nations, and parted my land." The systems of the day are
looking for all this yet to come, for a bodily gathering
into the literal valley of Jehoshaphat, thereby subverting
the new covenant, and forgetting, when they think of Jesus, as David, king of Israel, that
he is the root as well as the offspring of the first David,
the resurrection Lord and Christ, in whom there is and was a
blessing, with a11 spiritual blessings, in the heaven of
heavens. We recognize the children of Israel, seeking David
their king, in the three thousand devout Jews, from every
nation under heaven, from the north country and all
countries, who were of the remnant who the Lord would
call; the remnant according to the election of grace, as
Paul writes, when exhibiting the antitype to the seven
thousand who had not bowed the knee to Baal. We realize, in
the conclusion of Peter's sermon, the fulfilment of the
magnificent language of the prophets, when telling of
Messiah's kingdom, "The promise is unto you, and to your
children, and to all that are afar
off; even as many as the Lord our
God shall call."
But while thus believing, and thus
persuaded, I am
content that an objector shall deny that the Jews, out of
divers countries mentioned in Acts ii., were of the
dispersion of the ten tribes. If it be any advantage to an
objector, he may take the full benefit of an admission that
all these, out of every nation under heaven, belonged to
Judah, and were not strangers to the commonwealth of Israel,
but devout men, coming up, according to the law, to worship
with their brethren, after the manner of their fathers. What
then ?Is there
aught gained by such an admission in the matter of the
restoration of the tribes? Nothing whatever. The restoration
is equally clear as taking place in Apostolic times, without
the testimony of Acts ii. as with it, and Peter himself is
our authority for this statement. His first Epistle is
addressed to the strangers scattered through divers
countries. Let us see what Peter writes to these strangers,
by way of discovering who they were, and what their name.
I find the
object of my search in the 10th verse of the 2nd chapter;
"Which in times
past were not a people, but are now the people of God; which
had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy." Now I
do earnestly desire to be guided into the truth. I am contending for
nothing but truth; truth is the sole object which I have in
view; and I believe that in this verse I read the fulfilment
of prophecy, which said that the children of Israel should
return and seek unto the Lord their God, and David their
king. Without adverting to the prophecy already
quoted, ("Within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be
broken that it be not a people,") I will give you the grounds of this
belief, from the marginal references in the small Bibles
which are in almost every one's possession,-I mean the
marginal references to 1 Peter ii. 10. One reference is to
Hosea i. 10,"It shall come to pass that
instead of that it was said unto them, Ye are not my people,
it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living
God ;"(compare Rorn. viii. 19-21 .)
Here is the very word of Peter to the
strangers. Another reference is to Hosea ii. 23, "I
will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy, and
I will say unto
them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they
shall say, Thou art my God." Here again are the very words
of Peter to the strangers. How then can we conclude that
these are other than of the dispersion, Hosea's prophecy
being allowed to be concerning the outcast of Israel, under
the name of Ephraim P But there is still another marginal
reference appended to the 10th verse of Peter's 2nd chapter;
the reference is Rom. ix. 25, which is the quotation out of
Hosea already mentioned. I refer you to the following, the
27th and 28th verses of that chapter, "Esaias
also, as well as Hosea, crieth concerning Israel, Though the
number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea,
a remnant shall be saved; for he will finish the work, and
cut it short in righteousness, because a short work will the
Lord make upon the earth." Who are meant by the remnant is
evident from the 11th chapter, "Even so then, at this
present time, there is a remnant according to the election
of grace." This remnant contained ''all Israel," as Israel
then denoted Abraham's true seed, but according to
the common interpretation, there is to be a time when there
shall not be one unbeliever in the family of Jacob; a
conclusion as preposterous as the universalism which
rests for support on passages Eke that out of Corinthians,
wherein the Apostle is discoursing of none but the church,
viz., "As in
Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."
So much then for one verse from Peter's
Epistle, in order to prove who and what were the strangers
to whom he was writing. I will now proceed to another, from
the last verse of the same second chapter; "Ye were as sheep going
astray, but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop
of your souls." There is a class of religionists who talk
much of sheep, of Christ's laying down his life for hi8
sheep, of sheep knowing the voice of the good Shepherd.
Calvinists will tell us, that the sheep will not listen to
the voice of a stranger, (Anninian,) for they know not the
voice of strangers. Calvinists will descant by the hour on
the nature and disposition of sheep ;what
silly, innocent creatures they are, how prone to wander ;and
then Calvinism will lay this flattering unction to the souls
of its experimental hearers, as a description of themselves,
God's elect family, his sons and daughters, for whose
manifestation, we are to suppose, the whole creation is
wait- ing, in earnest expectation, as in the Apostle's day,
of mighty signs and wonders. What would Calvinism say, if it
were told that all this is little better than wood, hay, and
stubble ? What would Calvinists siiy, if it were denied that
any beside the descendants of Abraham, any but Jews, were
ever spoken or prophesied of, at least in the Old Testament Scriptures, by the figure
of
sheep? Calvinism, being thoroughly self-satisfied, can hardly be
expected to condescend to a reply. But, supposing that a reply
should be
vouchsafed, would it be &r the quiet manner of Nidemus,
"How cpn Theee thinge be ?" I have searched even
The
New Testament, and can find m direct a
plication of the term sheep to any but Jews, though I. am willing
to dow, thatas
Id,in Apostolic
timea, signiied the mmpany of believers, so ah sbeep, was
used to designate the same company, Min Paul's address to
the Epheaian elders, "Take
heed to all the flock." But I do, at all even@, deny the use
of the figure now,
if for no 0th reaeon than that the office of shepherd,
whether applied to Christ or his ministers, has been
vacated, and therefore the preaching of Cal- vinism, in the
use of thie &preymay well be styled old wiveav
fables. Peter's strangers are addreseed as sheep ;they must, to my
The least, be included in the dispersion of the tribea This
willopen np The
ecatteriog mentioned in 1st verse, which agrees with the
language of the prophet, Isaw
all Israel scattered on the hills, as sheep that have no
shepherd." The only other Epistle where a direct allusion is
made to sheep, is that to the Hebrews, which again is an
apprat confir-mation of our exclusive view; "Our
Lord Jesus Christ, that great Shepherd of the sheep." (Heb. xiii.
20.) Then, again, if we go back to the parables, ifwe examine the
ministerial work of the Lord Jm, we see that it is written
as with a sunbeam, that by sbeep, in that work, we are to
understand them of the house of Israel. In the parable of
the sheep-fold, there are these words, "Other sheep I have which
are not of this fold ;them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and
there shall be one fold and one shepherd." Peter and Paul
tell us, that in their days there was one fold and one
shepherd, the Great Shepherd of the sbeep. All religious systems
will allow, that the lost tribes are at kast among the
sheep, and this is all that I need contend for. Have they
not then heard the voice of the Shepherd for the space of 1800
years ?and if
they have, where is the Jewish matoration men are now dreaming about ? especially if,
as I shall prove here- after, the office of Chief
Shepherd hath long since been vacated by our divine
Immanuel. Then, once more, connect Peter's Epistle to the
strangers, with Chriat's parting exhortation to Peter,
bearing in mind that Peter was the Apostle of the Jews, as
Paul of the Heathen. What said the Lord to him, who had
denied with an oath that he knew him ? "Simon, son of Jonas,
lovest thou me more than these ? He aaith unto him, Yea,
Lord, thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed
my lambs. He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son
of Jonas, lovest thou me ? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord, thou knowest
that Ilove
thee. He saith unto hi, Feed my sheep." (John xxi. 16-18.) And so the Lord asked the
third time, and a third time received his answer
;corresponding with Peter's three denials. If thew things
suffice not, search further. Let us open the prophets; let
us take, for instance, Ezekiel's 34th chapter, wherein there
is great mention of shepherds and sbeep. We read in the 12th
verse, '<Asa
shepherd eeeketh out his flock, in the day that he is among
his sheep that are scattered, so will Iseek out my sheep, and will deliver
them out of all places where they have been scattered in
the cloudy and dark day." &the
following verse we learn somewhat further of this
deliverance; .*And I will bring them out from the people, and
gather them from the countries, and will bring them to their
own land," &c. In 16th verse, we are instructed in the
character of those whose deliverance should be effected;
"Iwill seek
that which was lost, (" this my son was lost, and is found again,"
"if a man have a
hundred sheep, and loge one of them." Luke xv.,) and bring
again that which was driven away, and will bid up that which
was broken, and will strengthen that which was sick."
(Compare Ezekiel xxxi. 8, and Luke xiv. 13,) For the time
when these things should be brought to
paas, we refer to the parallel
chapter, the 23rd Jeremiah, where we read in 3rd verse,
"Iwill gather
the remnant of my flock out of all
countries whither I have driven them,
and will bring them again to their folds." This should be
fulfilled in a given day, as we read in the 6th and
following verses, "Behold the days
come," &c. The same period of fulfilment is to be found in
Ezekiel xxxiv., "I will set up one shepherd over Them, and he
sball feed them, even my servant David." The fulfilment is
under the Gospel. We repeat the limit, "These be the days of
vengeance, that all things which are written may be
fulfilled." These are the last days, which, by the proper
principles of interpretation must be limited by the
scripture just quoted, but which are not left without their
limitation in other scriptures; "Little children," writes
John, "it is the
last time," or hour, the eleventh hour, as we read in one of
the parables, an hour which is interpreted in the parable of
the ten virgins; "At midnight there was a cry made, Behold the
bride- groom cometh." The ingenuity of religious systems is
at fault here, for the little expressive word with which
this parable is introduced, incontrovertibly proves the time
and season of fulfilment ;"Then shall
the kingdom," &c. Wben 7 In the life-time of some standing
around the Lord ;"Watch,
therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come."
This is our testimonv. from Peter and his
Epistles. to the great Scripture prophecy of ti;restoration of the
ten' tribes. in ~earic~ mind the character of the
strangers. we recognize their interest in the writings of
the prophets. weocai undersLd that they should be appealed
to from these writings. These observations will give us a
key to that much-abused chapter, the last of the 2nd
Epistle, wherein it is supposed we have a prophecy of the
end of this visible system of things. Without stopping to
prove that such supposition is false to true philosophy, and
therefore can never be true to true faith, we may justremark, that those
whom Peter was addressing, being of the families of Israel,
knew better, as understanding the symbolical language of
Scripture prophecy. They were not willingly ignorant of that
language, any more than the devout men from every nation
under heaven would be at any loss to conceive the symbolical
meaning of the wonders in heaven and earth, the blood and
fire, and pillars of smoke, connected with the great and
terrible day of the Lord. Bearing in mind that Peter was
addressing Jews, we expect to read of Jewish terms and
phrases, and this, it is conceived, is especially the case
with respect to the heaven and the earth assing away,
there being no mention c in any of the Apostolic 8pistles but
those of Peter, and that of to the Hebrews.
I have one more
prophecy to consider, in connexion with tl lost tribes,before Ireturn to the 10th
Ezekiel, the chapter which rise to this discussion. I direct
your attention to the 89th Psalm. Psalm shows the paramount
importance of a right division of the of troth. The former
part of the Psalm relates to the spiritual ble of the new
and better covenant, which was ordered in all thine sure to
all the seed. This is down to the end of the 37th verse.
there ie a break off, marked by the word Selah, which, saith
the CI
Paraphrast, signifies that there is no ceasing of that thing
to wl is affixed. Truly, we would say, this is no mistaken
signification, Belah is set to a testimony like this, "His seed shall endure
fo rurd his throne as the sun before me. It shall be
established fc M the moon, and as a faithful witness in
heaven." And here I observe, how these verses alone
completely overthrow the absurc trine of an end and
destruction of this globe on which we live. the 37th verse
we read, "But
thou hast cast off and abhorred, hast been wroth with thine
anointed. Thou hast made void the nant of thy servant; thou
hast profaned his crown to the ground hast broken down all
his hedges; thou hast brought his strong to ruin." This is
under the first covenant in the land, and respec tem oral
kingdom. It is a lament for the separation of the triber the
Rouse of
David, a prophetic lament. Now suppose we searct other
prophetic witness, for something bearing upon the lamentat
David. We discover the object of our search in the prophet
A In
his ninth chapter we have the
following : "
In that day will Iup the tabernacle of
David, that is fallen, and hedge up the brt thereof, and I
will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the of old, that they may
possess the remnant of Edom, and of E heathen upon whom my name is
called, saith the Lord, who this." And again in the 14th
verse, " I will bring again the ca1 of
my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities,
and ir them," &c. This is the testimony of Amos, whose prophec!
especially to the tribes of Israel, as Joel's was to Judal~.
The testi has an appointed time, "
In that day ;" we want to know what
and whither shall we go for our knowledge ?To this popular
mentator, or that writer on prophecy, in this our day ?No inc not while
memory retains the glorious truth, that there is nothing Old
Testament which is not to be found also in the New. Ther we
have recoune at once to the New Testament Scriptures tiexplanation of this
prophecy in its appointed time. We wish f infallible Holy
Ghost commentary, and we have our wish. We ha? desired
commentary on Amos recorded in Acts of the Apostles, cha In
that chapter, we read of a discussion stirred up in the mat
circumcision, by the old adversary, the Jewish house. Peter
gal opinion touching the matter in dispute; then Paul and
Bar rendered an account of their ministerial, Holy Ghost
mission; wards row up the Apostle James, and quoted the
prophecy of 1 aa above, affirming that it was fulfilled in
God's visiting the Gel
to take out of them a people for his
name :which
visiting was by the instrulnentality of Peter, and is
declared by James to comprehend the returnof the lost ten tribes. How
absurd are the carnal, literal views of prophecy, now so
generally entertained, when viewed by this judgment of an inspired Apostle.
James declares, that in visiting the Gentiles, God builded
up the tabernacle of David. Impossible !say religious
systems, Jerusalem was then, and is still, trodden under
foot of the Gentiles." James affirms, that in his day of the
gospel administration, the ruins were builded up by him
whose name was " the repairer of the breach, the restorer of
paths todwell
in." I cannot
believe it, cries the stickler for future fulfilments. James
makes proof of his ministry, by shewing that the residue of
men had sought, and were seeking, the Lord. This contradicts
the evidence of our senses, replies one who is promoting
Christianity (Judaism) amongst the Jews, and seeking for the
lost tribes in the four corners of the earth. It is
preposterous, say these, for James to preach the gospel
after this fashion, for does not the prophecy of Amos, which
he quotes, declare that the tribes shall build the waste
cities, and inhabit them, and plant vineyards, and drink the
wine thereof, and make gardens, and eat the fruit of them ?
Such is a specimen of the absurdities of modem Christianity.
AS we have often said before, we repeat, "Let God be true,
though every man be found a liar." My thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither your ways my ways, ssith the Lord." The
Lord's thought, we believe was, in this matter, the thought
of .James, and the Lord's way, was that described by him who
proclaimed, "I
am the way ;"and who also,we conceive,
proclaimed, " I am the resurrection and the life," in
opposition to the carnal conceptions of carnal minds.
Now, as with Peter's sermon in Acts ii.,
we instituted a comparison with his Epistle, so also here,
in James' sermon, in Acts XV., we can follow the like method
with his Epistle. We have proved from internal evidence,
that Peter, the Apostle of the Circumcision, wrote for the
apecia1 benefit of the circumcision. The like proof appears
in the Epistle of James. I need only quote the first
verse,-" James, a "Want of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,
to the twelve tribes which scattered abroad, greeting." This
is so plain, that there is no necessity to examine the greeting, to see if
it sustain the address. There one verse, however, which I
may mention, the 18th, in which James sPe&of himself and the brethren as "a
kind of first fruits of God's c~t~res."The marginal
reference to this verse, in the small Bibles, is Rev. xiv.
4,where we
read,-"These are they which were redeemed among men, the
first fruits unto God and to the Lamb." Who are these, and
whence come they ? I looked, and lo a Lamb stood in Mount Sion,
and with him an hundred and forty-four thousand, having his
Father's name written on their foreheads." This is the
possession the mountains of Israel which was promised to the
scattered tribes. Perhaps there is a connexion between
James' first fruits and the three devout Jews, out of every
nation under heaven, who recelved the word on the day of
Pentecost, when the law of the spirit of life went Oat of
Mount Sion; and it may be, that there is some light thrown
upon James, by what Peter said when he was preaching beside
the
See Note I.
H
beautiful gate of the temple,-" Unto you
jrst, God baving raised his Son Jesus, sent him to
bless you, in turning away every one of 1 from his
iniquities." And here let me observe, that the advocates
(personal
second coming of Christ cannot maintain that this sendi
mentioned by Peter, was personal and visible, for who of his
audie saw him after his resurrection ?
Why, then, should not Peter's hea have
rejected such preaching as being contradictory to the
evidencl their senses P And yet it was not so. "Many of those which be the word
believed."
I will now conclude the subject of the
restoration of the tiibes. must believe, from the brief
examination which has been made, tha! restoration future is
without Scriptural foundation ;that it arises ti the common
error of all systems which deny a past second advent, error
of comparing spiritual things with natural. Ibelieve, that w
The
Bible, which is the testimony of Jesus, speaks of a
restoratiol: means no more a literal and carnal restoration,
than did Christ me literal and carnal second birth, as
Nicodemus supposed, when he SF of the regeneration. I
believe that there is as much
absurdity in notions of those who are now ignor-antly
engaged in ''promoting
C1 tianity among the Jews," as there was in the notion of
the mask Israel, when Christ said to him, "Ye must be born
again." I do doubt but the same surprise would be expressed
by our present restorationists, when told of apast spiritual second
coming, as expressed by Nicodemus when told of the second
birth :-"How
these things be P" Such a mistake as this of Nicodemus and
learned doctors respecting the first advent, and doctrines
There' connected, gives to me a plain and intelligible
solution of the mist; now prevalent, among the learned and
the unlearned, respecting second advent and its accompanying
events. We are almost incli to ask how it can be wondered at
that the adherents to any of religious systems should be
ignorant of the spirituality of the secadvent, when we see that those who
sat in Moses' seat-those had the law and the prophets read
in their synagogues every S bath-day - those who were most intimately acquainled with the Testament prophecies-those against whom the
reproach was jc urged. "Art thou a
master in Israel and knowest not these things ? that these
were, as all religious sects will allow, utterly ignoran the
character of the promised Messiah, and the nature of his k
don]. There is, to my mind, no compaiison between the advant
of the Jews of Christ's day, to whom were committed the om
of God, and those religionists in our day who read the Bible
ignorance of the times and seasons :
no comparison, I repeat, betv The
advantages of the two parties, so far as a right
interpretation of law and the prophets is concerned. Knowing
the entire distinc between the two covenants, I cannot, from
the Scriptures, believe the restoration of the Jews was ever
intended to refer to that Jerus; of which Paul wrote,
"Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage her children ;"but I am
persuaded, from inspired apostolic testim, that the
restoration was to Jerusalem of which Paul likewise u to The
Galatians, "Jerusalem, which is above, is free, which is
mother of us all," to which they were come, blessed with all
spin blessings in
Christ Jesus. Knowing the difference between the law and
The goapel, it is surely needless to tell a spiritually
minded person that wedo not imagine such an absurdity as
a bodily movement, a flesh and blood restoration to an earthly,
corruptible, defiled, and fading inheritance (for such
it must be, according to modem doctrines of an end of
the world), but as Peter writes to his strangers,
to an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth
not away. They who are now called Jews, may go back to that
which is now called the Holy Land, for they, like their
forefathers, are still looking for a Messiah. In the lapse
of ages such a thing may be, but this going back will never
be 88 the
people of God-is not spoken of in the Bible-is a matter upon
which Scripture is altogether silent; in fact, we defy any
man, or any body of men, to prove that Scripture says one
word by way of prophecy of any historical event subsequent
to the destruction of Jerusalem.
One word more, and I leave the
subject. While I believe the doc- trine of a future
restoration is an absurdity, yet, at the same time, I
can respect the attempt at consistency made by the
advocates of such -toration, when compared with certain
classes of religionists, certain Calvinists, and others
who disbelieve the future restoration, and yet hold that
the second advent is not past: who maintain that when
Christ said, "These be the days of vengeance, that all
things which are written may be fulfilled," he included
the restoration of the Jews, and excluded the resurrection of the
dead, or the end of the world. This is miserable
inconsistency, and reduces such systems far below the
level of thoee which they are so prone to condemn
and hold up to ridicule- ridicule, however, of none but
the very few who are equally inconsistent, and labouring
under a similar infatuation. I could have desired tolneert in this
place a diagram of the restoration of the tribes, which would have proved the view
I have taken so
plainly, that n child might understand it, and thereby
confound the views of those who are looking for a
restoration yet future. The diagram, however, would
render the Present little work too expensive for its
purpose, and, as I may perhaps, at some time, devote a volume to the
subject of the restoration in its rdation to the
doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, the diagram
may for the
present be excused.
I return now
to the 10th
chapter of Ezekiel, from whence this digression upon
the tribes proceeded. In that chapter, as we have seen,
the Apostles and their fellows are prophesied of under
the figure of wheels. "It was cried unto them in my
hearing, 0 wheel,
for the spirit of life was in them." I proceed to
compare this with Daniel vii. 9, "I
beheld, till the thrones were pitched down
(till the judges sat, see Matt. xix. 28, compared with I
Cor. vi. 3), and the ancient of days did sit, whose
garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like
the pure wool : his throne was like
the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire." This
agrees with Ezekiel's vision, and the description given
of the wheels in both prophets is much the same.
"Wheels, as a burning fire," is Daniel's vision. The
spirit of life, or the living creature, was in them,"
writes Ezekiel ;and explains, in his first chapter, "As
for the likeness of the living creatures, their
appearance was like burning coals of fire, and like the
appearance of lamps.''- (Ezek. i. 13, compared Rev.i. 14-16, and i. 20.) For our present explanation of the burning fire,
applied to the angels of the churches, Imay be permitted
again to refer
to Psalm civ., as prophetic of the ministry of
reconciliation. He maketh his angels winds, his ministers
a flaming fire."
This is paralleled in Daniel, "A fiery stream
issued and came forth from before him; thousand
thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten
thousand stood before him." And having thus compared
Ezekiel, Daniel, and David, we will bring the comparison to
bear upon the day of Pentecost. The figure of fire is
applied to the apostolic baptism, "And
there appeared unto them cloven tongues, as of fire, and it
sat upon each of them, and they were all filled with the
Holy Ghost, being baptised of the Holy Ghost and fire."
Our next inquiry is into another
comparison of prophecy with the events on the day of
Pentecost, which will also further shew the correctness of
the interpretation of' "the wheels
"which has been
suggested. Daniel's vision of the wheels was connected with
one who sat on a throne, like a fiery flame; so, also,
Ezekiel's vision is connected with the same personage. ".And
above the firmament, that was over their heads, was the
likeness of a throne, and upon the throne was the likeness as the
appearance of a man above it." (Ezek. i. 26-7.) Both prophets
speak of a person in the throne. We search another prophet,
and discover what is the name of the person. In Isaiah's 6th
chapter, we read, "In the year that king Uzziah died, I saw also the %rd
sitting on a throne, high and likd up." The word "also,"
here connects the posstrge with what has gone before. We
may look back till we come to the first verse of Isaiah's
prophecy, where we read, "The vision of Isaiah, the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem," &c.
Observe the words, "concerning Judah and Jerusa- lem."
Suppose we read them in the two opening verses of the second
chapter, "The
word that Isaiah, the son of Amoz, saw concerning Judah and
Jerusalem. And it shall come to pass, in the last days."
What is the inference from this ? That the last days
concern Judah and Jerusalem, and are not the last days of
England, France, or of any country in America, which never
could be included in the term "all
the world" (empire), "Go ye," &c. They are
last days connected with the sceptre departing from Judah,
and a lawgiver from between his feet: last days, bounded by
this express Scripture, "These be the days of vengeance,
that all," &c. It was for these days, and it was in
reference to Judah and Jerusalem, that Isaiah saw "the Lord sit- ting on
a throne high and lifted up." This word "Lord," ashere used, is
in common characters; not so, however, in the fifth verse,
where the prophet speaks of the LORD of Hosts. It need
hardly be mentioned, that this latter is Jehovah's name, and
that the former is the resurrection name of Jesus, as we
shall have to shew presently, when we come to that part of
the subject. We find, then, that he who sat upon the throne
was Christ; but this is not sufficient of itself to
establish the connexion between Isaiah's prophecy and those
of Daniel and Ezekiel. However, the concluding portion of
the verse in Isaiah vi. will supply the lack: "I saw also the Lord,
sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train
filled the temple." What we are to understand by "his tritin," will won
appear, from a comparison of spiritual things with spiritual. The words, his train," are
rendered in the margin "the skirts thereof." This is
opened up in Psalm cxxxiii. The first verse of that
Psalm describes the blessing of brethren living in unity, or
even together. This is explained by the observations offered
upon the circumstance of the
wheels being addressed only as one wheel ;and no doubt
but the prayer of Christ, '<that they all may be one,"
isshadowed out here. The second verse enters into adescription of
the unity :
It ielike
the precious ointment upon the head, that mn down upon the beard,
Aaron's beard, that went down to the skirts of
his garments." Thisve&
is in connexion with the priesthood, and if the
testimony of Jesue be the spirit of prophecy, then, from
this mention of Aa~nn, we carry
the fulfilment of this Psalm to
times following the death of Christ, when he was priest
by one offering of himself, once offered. Observe also,the word
"head "-like the precious ointment upon the head. Is
there here no intimation of the Head and S:rviour of the
body, which is described in the finstverse to be brethren in
unity, and in the present verse under the figure of "the
skirts of the clothing 2" We must remember Paul's
question, cr Is Christ divided ?" and the answer, "As the body is
one, so also Christ;" and recollect also, that believers
were kings and priests in apostolic times. The last
verse of the Psalm beam out all that has been said,
"As the dew of Hermon, that
descended upon the mountains of Zion." This is
paralleled in Hosea's prophecy of the restoration of the
tribes, I
will be as the dew unto Israel "-"There
the Lord commanded the blessing, life for evermore."
This is paralleled by Isa. ii. 3, out of Zion shall go
forth the law," not the ten Sinai commandments, but the
law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus.
Such, then, is the comparison which
we have instituted between four prophets. We have
established that they all speak the same thing, and that
their prophecies must be fulfilled at the same time. We
will now, in due order, proceed to investigate their
fulfilment from the Apostolic writings, having proved
that they belong to a new covenant. We have recourse at
once to the day of Pentecost, hoping to discover, in the
records of that day, a revelation of the prophetical
testimonies we have just been considering. The prophets,
we are told, prophesied of grace that should come in
gospel times. This reminds of a glorious passage in
Peter's first Epistle. Peter speaks of salvation ready
to be revealed in the last time, and says, "Of which salvation
the prophets have enquired and searched diligently,
searching what or what manner of time the Spirit of
Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified
beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and THE GLORY that
should follow." (I
Peter i. 10,-11.)
'Searching!'
And does not this agree with
Christ's word to his disciples, "Many
prophets and righteous men have desired to see those
things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear
those things which ye hear, and have not heard them!" And do not both scriptures agree with what we read in
Corinthians, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither
have entered the heart of man,
the things which God hath prepared for them that love
him ?" This is a quotation from Isaiah ;but, saith the
Apostle, "God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit."
Thus we see a beautiful correspondence with Peter's
saying, "Unto
whom it was revealed that not unto themselves, but
unto us they did minister the things which are now reported
unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you,
with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven." We will now
examine Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost, and see what report he
gives of the four prophets under consideration. The first
passage quoted shall be the 33rd verse of Acts ii. :"Being by the right
hand of God exalted." Without at present examining into
the nature of Christ's kingly and priestly office, let me
merely notice the fulfilment of the prophecies which spoke
of a throne, and the appearance as of a man upon the
throne. This is Ezekiel's, and also Daniel's testimony,
but I will take only the prophecy of Isaiah, that being
sufficient for our purpose; "I saw, also, the Lord, sitting
upon a throne,
high and lifted up." Now bow does Peter reveal this mystery?
"Let all the
house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same
Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ ;"and
being made Lord and Christ, he must have the pre-eminent
place of Lord. So Peter likewise says, that he was by the
right hand of God exalted, according to David; The LORD said
unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand till I make thy foes
thy footstool." Isaiah's prophecy was to come to pass in the
last days, which concerned Judah and Jerusalem. and Peter
says, of his days, These be the days of which all the
prophets, from Samuel and those that follow after, have
spoken." These be the days which concern Judah and
Jerusalem, for I say, saith Peter, let all the house of
Israel know assuredly. These be the days in which Isaiah saw
the Lord sitting on his throne; for I tell you, saith Peter,
you dreamers of an earthly Messiah, you worshippers of a
kingdom that is of this world, that Messiah is now exalted
at the right hand of the Majesty in the heavens, is now a
king entered upon his dominion. These be the days when
Isaiah prophesied, " The law shall go forth out of Zion," the law
of grace and faith, excluding your law of works; for I warn
you, saith Peter, Repent, and be baptized, every one of you,
into the name of Jesus Christ. God hath raised him from the
dead, whereof we all are witnesses ; and if you shall
confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in
your heart that God bath raised him from the dead,
you shall be saved; for with the heart man believeth unto
righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto
salvation." (Rom. x. 9.) This is the law of Sion, which
the Apostles preached. The feast of Pentecost was
appointed in commemoration of the law of Sinai, so likewise the same
feast is the appointed time for the law of Sion. So much,
then, for Isaiah's testimonies, as explained by Peter. I
will take another of the prophets, Daniel, respecting
another particular of the Pentecostal day. Daniel writes,
"A fiery stream
issued and came forth from before him that sat upon the
throne." Jesus, being made Christ, as the Lord's anointed,
received the promise of the Father, the promise of the Holy
Ghost and fire; and, saith Peter, he hath shed forth this,
which ye now see and hear. Compare the word "shed" with the
"fiery stream,"
and there is established a connexion between the two
portions. This brings me to another prophet, in reference to
the Pentecostal day - David, in the Psalm already quoted, "Like the precious
ointment upon the head, that ran down upon the
beard." This ointment was prefigured in the circumstance of the
woman with an alabaster box of ointment, coming to Jesus to
anoint him. They that stood by lamented the waste, and
thought the ointment might have been sold for so much. and
given to the poor. What was the answer ? "She did it for my
burial. And verily I say unto you, wheresoever this
gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall
also this, which this woman hath done, be told for a
memorial of her." 0 what a precious memorial, when we can
understand it as it was intended, and witness the memorial on this Pentecostal day ! We can behold a
beautiful correspondence between the ointment running down,
and Jesus, shedding forth the Holy Ghost, the oil of joy,
the unction from the Holy One; that anointing of which John
writes, "Little children, ye have an unction from the
Holy One, and ye know all things. The anointing which 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." Surely this is the tenor of the
new and better covenant, "They
shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man
his brother, (as under the law,) saying, Know the Lord; for
they shall all know me, from the least (little children),
even unto the greatest (fathers), of them. This anointing is
a vast theme. It is shadowed forth under many figures : "The
dew of Hermon," or, "I will be as the dew unto
Israel." Peter quotes Psalm cx. in his Pentecostal sermon,
and was not this portion of that Psalm fulfilled at that
time, "Of the
womb of the early morning, to thee the dew of thy youth,
seeing that then a nation was born at once, and the earth
was made to
bring forth in one day."
In the preceding section, we have stated
that fire is an emblematic figure of that preaching of the
gospel which was with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven.
I might go on at great length, shewing the continual
application of that figure through various scriptures of the
apostolic epistles; i. e., how we may understand that it is the word
of God, or the New Testament in Christ's blood which is
signified, when the figure of fire is used. The Apostles,
according to a prophecy before quoted out of Daniel, were to
judge on thrones as a fiery stream, by their fire ministry.
So we find that immediately before the Lord delivered to his
disciples the parable of the faithful and wise steward, in
Luke xii., he had said unto them, "Let
your loins he girded about, and your lights burning."
How peculiarly applicable was the figure of light, we learn
from the sermon on the mount, "Ye are the light of the world
:a city that is
set on a hill cannot be hid." After the Lord had delivered
the parable above mentioned, he proceeded to my, 'Iam come to send fire
on the earth, and what will I if it be dready kindled.' 'I
have a baptism to be baptised with ;'
surely a baptism of the Holy Ghost, as
he was put to death in the flesh, but quickened in the
spirit, tbrough the operation of mighty power wrought in him
when raised from the dead. The kindling of this fire is a
dissension in one house : five in one house divided, three against
two, and two against three. This house is, without doubt,
the house of Judah, as the description exactly accords with
the words of the rich man,-- 'I have five brethren.' The
dissension is exhibited in the history of the Acts of the
Apostles, wherein we find the opposition of Judaism and
Christianity; the gospel being the fire and sword which
brought discord among those who had hitherto lived together
as brethren in the house of Moses, the servant. In the same
book of Acts, we find the Holy Ghost preached gospel, rr
fire, in
pricking to the heart the multitude on the day of Pentecost:
in causing a Felix to tremble, and an Agrippa to confess
himself almost persuaded to be a Christian : in discovering the deceit of Ananinsand
Sapphira, and from the mouth of man, yet that man an
inspired minister, sending them to their doom. In the
apostolic epistles, the figure of fire may be read in that
powerful description of the word which Paul delivers in
Hebrews iv. -the word of faith which he preached-I' For the
word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any
two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of
soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a
discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." The
latter clause of the verse is equally applicable to the
figure of fire, and, indeed, so is the whole description.
The like figure is elsewhere expressed, as in 2 Cor. iii.,
where we read the marks of a real evangelist,-" Who hath
made us able ministers of the New Testament; not of the
letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, hut the
spirit giveth life." And then, once more, in the
consummation of all things, in the end, let that end be what
it may, we still behold the word of God signified by the
same figure, as in 1 Corinthians iv. 6,"judge nothing before the time,
until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden
things of dark- ness, and will make manifest the counsels of
the heart." What is meant by the light- what is this making
manifest ?I go
back a little way, to third chapter of that Epistle, wherein
it is written, "Every
man's work shall be made manifest :
for the day shall declare it :for ,t is revealed in
fire, and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort
it is." What other connexion need we seek for this verse,
than that of the baptism with the Holy Ghost and fire ?
What, other interpretation is required, than that of the two
covenants, the one as a fire, consuming the wood, hay, stubble, gold,
silver, and precious stones of the other :for the trial of
faith should be more precious than that of "gold which perisheth,"
equally with the stubble. And instituting such connexion,
and receiving such interpretation, what difficulty should
there be in concluding with certainty respecting "the day"
and the judgment thereof ? What difficulty, except in minds
which have been nurtured from earliest infancy in the
nursery tales of hell - torments, and are resolved to adhere
to such follies to their dying hour ? Quotations
illustrating the gospel under the figure of fire might be
multiplied. When Paul tells the Thessalonians that "the Lord Jesus shall
be revealed from heaven, with the angels of his power, in
flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God,
and obey not the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ;" I take
that scripture and compare it with another, in Romans ii.,
in which he writes of" a day when God will judge the wcreta of men, according
to his gospel." When I read in Peter's last chapter of the heavens
being reserved for fire to the day of judgment: of the
heavens being on fire and dissolved :of
the elements melting with fervent heat, and the earth and
the works therein being burned up :and
when I know that
these heavens, earth, and elements resolve themselves into
the simplicity of the two covenants, then here also,
hitherto, I can
bring the Pentecostal baptism :this,
also, I can see to be the fire of that word, of whose Author
the Apostle to the Hebrews writes, Our God is a consuming
fire," and writes, moreover, immediately after he had
signified a removing of an earth and a heaven, as of things
that could not remain, in the establishment of a kingdom
that could not be moved. (Heb. xii. 26-29.)This comparison alone satisfies me so much of the
true meaning of the last chapter of Peter's Second Epistle, that
it would not move me for one moment, if I stood alone in my opinion.
Having thus proved the Apostolic
ministry, under the figure of a baptism of fire, our next
step is to prove the same thing under the figure of a
baptism of water. In the 14th chapter of Zechariah we read,
"And it shall
be, in that day, that living waters shall go out from
Jerusalem." That day, is the day of the Lord. Without
inquiring into the day, we are at once satisfied upon the
meaning of the living waters, from infallible testimony ;"He
that believeth on me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his
belly shall flow rivers of living water." How invaluable is
the commentary which follows in a parenthesis, "But this
spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him
should receive; for the Holy Ghost was not yet given,
because that Jesus was not yet glorified." (John vii. 38,
39.) The Holy Ghost was given on the day of Pentecost. Then
were the prophecies fulfilled which spake of pouring water
upon him that was thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground;
which water and floods are explained by what immediately
follows in the prophet; "I
will pour my Spirit upon thy seed, and
my blessing upon thine offspring, and they shall spring up
among the grass, as willows by the water-courses." (Isaiah
xliv. 3, 4.) Then, indeed, was the invitation given with
effect, the invitation which depended upon the sure mercies
of the resurrection David, Ho, every one that thirsteth,
come ye to the waters." "I
am the root and offspring of David, and the bright and
morning star. And the Spirit and the bride say Come, and let
him that heareth say Come, and let him that is athirst come,
and whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely.''(Isaiah lv.,
compared with Rev. xxii.) And when we compare Zechariah's
prophecy of living waters going out of Jerusalem, with
Christ's commission to his disciples, that repentance and
remission of sins be preached in his name, beginning at Jerusalem,
do we not see the application of
these living waters to the day of Pentecost, (which we have
made from Isaiah and Revelations,) further confirmed ? It
would require a volume to open up the glorious things spoken
of Zion, which are connected with this similitude of water.
Bearing in mind the comparison which we formerly instituted
between the journey through the wilderness, and that through
the trials and tribulations of the Apostolic state, what a
magnificent figure we have in the typical record, "He smote the rock, and
the waters gushed out, and the streams flowed withal." And
again, we read, "When the poor and needy seek water, and there is none, and
their tongue faileth for thirst, I
the Lord will hear them, I the God of Israel
will not forsake them. I will open rivers in high places, and
fountains in the midst of valleys. I
will make the wilderness a pool of
water, and dry land springs of water." (Isaiah xli. 17, 18.)
When we read
this glowing description, and take it to Apostolic times,
and apply it to the poor and needy, the weary and heavy laden,
to whom the ministry of Immanuel was directed -when we apply it to
the refreshment afforded to these in preaching the glad
tidings of the gospel of peace-when we witness the prophecy
fulfilled in those Jerusalem sinners praising God, and
living together in gladness and singleness of heart, then
indeed the Bible does exalt itself above the word and the
testimony of man. Then, truly, we can pity the poor,
enquiring souls, who now-a-days are tormented by the title
of poor and needy, weary and heavy laden, for we can give
this title its proper time and place. And if we should
allow, as indeed we do, that there are hundreds of our day
who answer to the above character, who are fast bound in the
bondage of Moses, and his covenant of works, we ask here, as
in former cases, Who is to blame for this ? Religious
systems, again, is the answer. And if we were willing that
this character of
poverty and need should be diverted out of its true place,
still we should most strenuously deny that the
experimental preachers, who are so fond of descanting
upon that character, could direct to this living water,
seeing that we also know from experience, that these their
waters are as little like the gospel streams, as were the
waters of The Nile when running with blood like her waters
when overflowing the banks; seeing that such waters are so
destitute of any refreshing or reviving power that I can compare them to
nothing so well as to this, "The wicked are like the
troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire
and dirt." I have a lively recollection of having been once
asked by a dear friend to preach from the text, "When
The poor and
needy seek water, and there is none ;"&c.,
but speaking on such a text was then out of the question.
And why 7 because I was myself seeking water, and there was none.
I was looking
for the living among the dead, expecting to find the desired
object among the dogmas of religious systems ;and thus, like
as Saul, when seeking his father's asses, met with a kingdom,
so, pursuing that which was no better than the morning
cloud and early dew, I have lighted on a kingdom that fadeth not
away. This is the kingdom - "The gift of God is eternal life, - and this is
life eternal, to know thee the only true God, and Jesus
Christ whom thou hast sent;"-and this is the know- ledge-not
in part, as it was during the dispensations, but to know as
we are known ; that which is perfect being come, and that
which war, in part being done away.
Before I leave the subject of the Apostolic ministry,
as signified by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of
the Holy Ghost, (Titus iii. 5, 6, with Acts ii. 33,)the new birth of
water and the Spirit, I have one or two important
observations to offer. As, in speaking upon the baptism by
fire, we brought that figure to bear upon the consummation
of all things, at the close, as we believe, of the Apostolic
dispensation, so now I shall bring the figure of the
baptism of water to the same conclusion. In discoursing upon
Christ's ministry, we directed attention to the fact of his
going back to the end of the old world, in the deluge, by
way of warning to the Jerusalem sinners of the world that
then was, in the end of which Paul tells us he appeared to
put away sin. Christ referred to Noah's preaching, so did
Peter in his first Epistle. After having discoursed of the
long-suffering of God, in the days of Noah, when the ark was
a preparing, he speaks of few, that is, eight souls, who
were saved by water, and then adds, "The like figure
whereunto baptism doth also now save us by the resurrection
of Jesus Christ, who is gone into heaven, and is on the
right hand of God." Now compare this with Peter's discourse
on the day of Pentecost ; "Therefore, being by the right
hand of God exalted, he hath shed forth this." Shed what
?The baptism of water, the promise of the Holy Ghost. Now
then, let us revert to Noah and the deluge. We read, " The
same day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up,
and the flood-gates of heaven were opened." The same day of
Pentecost the heavens were opened, and, as Isaiah writes in
his 55th chapter, when speaking beforehand of the
resurrection of Christ, and the glory that should follow,
the sure mercies of David descended from the throne; the
rain came down, and watered the earth, making it bring forth
and bud, which rain was the word out of the mouth of the
resurrection Lord, which word was the gospel preached in
demonstration of the spirit and of power. But
further. In the account given of the deluge, we read, "The waters
prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth." The
parallel appears to me to be found here; "So mightily grew the
word of God and prevailed." Again-It was prophesied of in
Habakkuk ii. 14, "The earth or land
(Judea) shall be filled by knowing the glory of the Lord, as
the waters cover the sea ;"which scripture is paralleled by
one out of Joel, who prophesied only of Judah and Jerusalem,
"It shall come
to pass in that
day that all the rivers of Judah shall flow with waters, and
a fountain shall come forth of the house of the Lord."
(Joel iii. 18.) Habakkuk's prophecy is of the gospel
overspreading Judea, for that only is the earth or land here
signified, and explained by a word which fell from Christ,
Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel until the
Son of man be come." But further still. In the history of
the deluge we read, "The waters prevailed exceedingly upon
the earth, and all the high hills and the mountains were
covered, and the ark went upon the face of the waters." We
compare this with a glowing prophecy in Micah iv. 1, ''In the last days it
shall come to pass that the mountain of the house of the
Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains, and
it shall be exalted above the hills, and people shall flow
unto it."
Another comparison might likewise be
instituted with Ezek. xlvii., wherein I conceive we have a beautiful figure
of the successive dispensations, each increasing in glory,
in a description of the gradual rise of the waters. The
prophet has a vision of the house of the Lord. "And behold,
says he, there ran out waters on the light side. And when
the man that had the line in his hand went forth eastward,
he measured a thousand cubits, and he brought me through the
waters ; the waters were to the ancles ;" the next thousand
these waters are to the knees : at the third measuring of a thousand, they
were to the loins; and in the fourth and last period of a thousand,
the waters were risen, waters to swim in, a river that could
not be passed over." Without saying anything of the first
thousand, the beginning of the rise of the waters, further
than that I am
inclined to think that they have a reference to John's
ministry ; (" The law and the prophets were until John
;since then the kingdom of God is preached;") passing by
this, how beauti- fully illustrative of the Holy Ghost
dispensation of the Gospel, is the description of the
waters, as waters to swim in, a river that could not be
passed over. How gloriously this appears in the light of
scriptures like the following: "Eye hath not seen, nor ear
heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the
things which God hath prepared for them that love him ;but
God (says Paul) hath revealed them unto us by his
Spirit; for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things
of God." How magnificent is the
expression of the prophet, "As rivers that could not be
passed over;" when again we find an interpretation of that
figure in such spiritual manifestation as is afforded in
Ephes. iii. 18, " That ye may be able to comprehend with all
saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and
height, and to know the love of Christ which passeth
knowledge." This is sweetly told in one of our hymns :-
" Stronger this love than
death or hell, Its riches were unsearchable; The first-born sons of light
Desired in vain its depths to see; The could not
reach the mystery, length, and breadth, and height." This brings us to the fulness of Peter's
comparison of the Holy Ghost Baptism with the waters of
Noah. As the natural waters, in the days of Noah, covered
the earth, and exalted Noah and his family in the ark above
the hills, so also the spiritual waters, in the days of
Peter, covered the earth or land of Judea, and exalted Peter
and his fellow-believers, in the true ark, in heavenly
places in Christ Jesus, above the eternal hills. And again,
as in the days of Noah, those only who believed God, through
that preacher of righteousness, were saved, and the rest
perished, so, in like manner, in Peter's day and generation,
those who obeyed his gospel endured to the end, and remained
Gods house by that enduring, these were saved,-some saved so
as by fire, so also saved as by water,-while those who
counted the blood of the covenant an unholy thing, those who
alway, as their fathers, did despite to the spirit of grace,
(see Gen. vi. 3,) and resisted the Holy Ghost, hardening
their hearts, were condemned. The day of salvation to them
in the ark, was a day of perdition to
ungodly men ; or, - to apply our figure,
the very same knowledge of the Lord, which, like water spreading over the land, bore believers in
safety to the
haven where they
would be, was a flood wherein to
drown the world that then was; wherein
to cast them as
into the depths, with a millstone round the neck, in which
floods and in which depths, the deep things of God, they are
still suffering vengeance, according to the awful sentence,
"These shall go
away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into
life eternal."
I now conclude the
examination of the Apostolic dispensation, under the figures of fire and water, in
which I have
been obliged to anticipate a little, or rather forced to our
grand conclusion by a necessity over which there is no
control. I shall now proceed to speak of the same
dispensation more plainly, and with more express application
to the ministry. Let it be remembered that our leading
object is a discussion of the ministry, in a proof of the
past second advent; and while we are discussing some of the
glorious things of which this was a ministry, it will be
well to weigh these things as they were ministered by the
Apostles, with the same things as they are pretended to be
ministered by the hireling labourers of the day.
The first prophecy to which I shall refer
is Isaiah lii. 7, "How beautiful upon
the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good
tidings, that publisheth peace, that bringeth good tidings
of good, that publisheth salvation, that saith unto
Zion, Thy God reigneth. Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice, with
the voice together shall they sing; for they shall see eye
to eye when the Lord shall bring again Zion." This prophecy
is the line which I would draw from the square so often
mentioned, running up into this, which I believe to be the
last dispensation. It is the prophecy from Isaiah, whereby
we prove the Apostolic ministry. We show the fulfilment in
an express application to Christ's Apostles, from the
testimony of one who said that he was not a whit behind the
very chiefest of the Apostles. Paul writes, in Romans x., "How
shall they hear without a preacher, and how shall they
preach except they be sent ? as it is written, How beautiful
upon the mountains are the feet of them that preach the
gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things. But
I say, Have they not heard ? Yes, verily, their sound went
out into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the
world." This is an inspired declaration, quite as comprehensive as one
which is so much used and abused by modern missionaries,
"The earth shall
be filled with knowing the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the
sea." Our point is gained. We have learned that the Apostles
and their fellows were the very watchmen of whom Isaiah,
being moved by the Holy Ghost, did speak. Suppose we take
the several particulars of Isaiah's prophecy in order. How beautiful upon the mountains;" and how
beautifully this corresponds with a prophecy already quoted
of the lust days, wherein the mountain of the Lord's house
should be established on the top of the mountains; so that
from this comparison, and this mention of the last days
alone, we might arrive at a true conclusion as to the time
of fulfilment. But to proceed. What is that which is
beautiful upon the mountains? "The feet of him that bringeth
good tidings." There is a sweet passage parallel to this in the Song of
Solomon ;"How beautiful are thy feet
with shoes, 0prince's
daughter." Both scriptures are clearly opened up in their
application to the Apostolic ministry. Christ so applies the
figure in the parable of the prodigal son ;"Put
a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet." Paul explains
the shoes in Rom. x., as also in his exhortation to the
Ephesian Church, " Having your feet shod with the preparation of
the gospel of peace." All these scriptures are crowned by a
verse in Psalm cxix., Thy word is a lamp to my feet, and a light
to my path.' Again, passing by the publication of peace as
obviously applying to the preaching of Him whose name is
"our peace," the Prince of peace, we come to the title
of the publishers, "Thy watch- men." This title, likewise,
is to be found in the Song ;"The watchmen that go about the
city found me." This title clearly attaches to the Apostolic
ministry. Christ in the parables reiterates the word, "Blessed is that
servant whom his Lord when he cometh shall find watching."
And, asIsaiah writes, "Thy watchmen, Zion," so,
corresponding to this, Paul exhorts the Hebrews, whom he
addresses as having come to Mount Zion; Obey them that have
the rule over you, and submit yourselves; for they watch for
your souls, as they that must give account" (Heb. xiii. 17.)
Paul enumerated this watching among the signs of his
apostleship ;"In watching often, in fastings often." This also he enforced
upon his beloved Timothy, 'a Watch thou in all things, endure
afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof
of thy ministry." There were other feet than those which
were beautiful upon the mountains, as it is written, "Their
feet are swift to shed blood," which was true of her who was
drunk with the blood of the martyrs, and upon whom in that
generation came all the righteous blood shed upon the earth.
And here let me remark, that if in Jerusalem was found the
blood of all the prophets, is not this decisive enough as to
the duration of the ministry; for he gave some prophets, as
well as some apostles; and it could not be that a prophet
should perish out of Jerusalem. There were other watchmen
than those who stood on Zion's walls; "His watchmen are
blind; they are all dumb dogs, sleeping, lying down, loving
to slumber; yea, they are greedy dogs, which can never have
enough." Every word of this description will be borne out by
facts, if applied to those who sat in Moses' seat, in the
days of Christ's ministry. The prophet speaks of blind
watchmen :so
Christ says to the Pharisees, "Ye
blind guides; if the blind lead the blind, shall not both
fall into the ditch ? " The prophet speaks of ignorance. How often
does Christ say, "Thou fool !"
Isaiah has it that these watchmen were
'#dumb dogs,"
and Christ parallels that with "Ye
make void the law of God by your traditions;" dumb enough,
when they had reduced the word of God to silence. And then
that these watchmen should be sleeping, lying down, loving
to slumber ;how just the description of those who laid heavy
burdens, grievous to be borne, but who would not touch these
burdens with one of their fingers. And then, once more, that
the watchmen were greedy dogs, never having enough ;this is none other
than the Pharisee to the very life, who devoured widows'
houses, and for a allow made long prayers; and as it was in
the beginning, is now ;there is nothing new under the sun.
But further-Zion's watch-men were to see eye to eye. The
promise of Christ at once applies this to the Apostolic
ministry; "He, the Comforter, shall guide you into all
truth." They to whom these words were addressed had the mind
of Christ: they were able ministers of the New Testament;
they preached the gospel of peace, with the Holy Ghost sent
down from heaven, and consequently there was a divine
necessity that they should see eye to eye. And it was so.
John writes, in his first Epistle, "That which was from the
beginning, which we have heard, which we have Been with our
eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled
of the word of life. This then is the message which we (who
sit on thrones,) have heard of him, and declare unto you,
that God is light, and in him is no darkness at
all." Peter is
quite as decided as John on the subject of his preaching. He
writes, "I will
that ye be able, after my decease, to have these things always in
remembrance; for we have not followed cunningly devised
fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of
our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eye witnesses of his
majesty. Peter testifies to the truth of John's preaching ;
when speaking of the Book of Revelations he says, We have
also a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that
ye take heed." Peter likewise makes approving mention of
Paul's Epistles - that same Paul who had withstood him to the
face for his cowardice in presence of the Jewish house. Paul
shall close our proof of Zion's watchmen seeing eye to eye.
How read we his parting address to the Church of Ephesus
? '' I am pure from the blood of all, 1have not
shunned to declare unto you the whole counsel of God." And
again, "If we, or an angel from heaven preach any other
gospel than that which we have preached unto you, let him be
accursed."
So much for a brief exposition of
Isaiah's prophecy from the Apostolic Epistles. To do
anything like justice to the subject would require that a
volume should be written. Have I
ended all that I
intended to say on the prophecy? Oh
no. I remember a
hymn which begins thus-
" How
beauteous are their feet Who
stand on Zion's hill, Who bring
salvation on their wings, And words of
peace reveal. "
From this hymn, it would appear that
there are watchmen now; but after the examination just
instituted into the character of a watchman in Apostolic
times, I leave the question in the hands of a child, to try
whether modern watchmen be the very successors of the
originals or no. We have noticed two classes of watchmen,
judge you which of the two modem watchmen most resemble.
The Apostles and their fellow servants published peace.
Numbers of our modem watchmen say even of their brethren,
"No peace with
Rome," but a determined and deadly hostility -for what ?-for
the momentous principle of the difference betwixt 'tweedledum and
tweedledee.' The Apostles and their companions did not shun
to declare the whole counsel of God. Now, one part of that
counsel which Paul declared to the church at Ephesus was,
"
Predestination according to the good pleasure of the
Father's will ;" but yet have we never heard of modem
watchmen, who hate and abhor the very sound of predestination ?
The Apostles could speak with Holy
Ghost assur ance,-"If any man preach any other gospel than
that ye have received, let him be accursed." We are now told
to believe that a hundred different doctrines are one and
the self same truth. Where, then, is the
gospel, and what becomes of the curse ? The
ministers of the day may tell their hearers
that they watch for their souls as those
that must give account : let the people ask
them to prove their watching to be
real. " Show me thy faith by thy
works, for faith without works is dead." Canst thou say
this,-" In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and
thirst, in fastings often ? " Ah ! methinks, if you test the watchmen of the day
by such a talisman, they would rather abjure the title. Like
the accusers of the woman taken in adultery, you would have
to say of them, "they went out one by one." and left the
title of watchman alone. As is recorded of the disciples
in their treatment of their suffering Master, you would have
to tell a tale of our watchmen, in their treatment of this
much loved title, when suffering is to be attached to it,
"they all forsook it and fled." They will be watchmen in
laying on of hands, forgiving sins, conferring the Holy
Ghost, administering ordinances, presiding over religious
meetings and tea parties, leading captive silly women and a
few sillier men, and so forth, but they will have none of
the doctrine of Apostolical succession in this or any other
title, when poverty, persecution, and scorn is the only
temporal benefit they are to derive. The Apostles, in their
character of watchmen, could say, "God
hath set forth us the Apostles last, as the death-doomed;"
or, as it is in
the margin, as the last Apostles. If they were the last,
where are their successors: and that they were the last, is
it not evident, in that in Babylon, where the Lord was
crucified, there was found the blood of all the prophets and
righteous men slain upon the earth ? If we are to have
successors of the Apostles, let them be no mockery, let them
be no Igmen
of straw," no ludicrous effigy of the originals, like a Guy Fawkes
on the fifth of November. This is the
substance :-"A spectacle, a theatre, an exhibition, unto
the world, and to angels, and to men ; fools, weak, despised,
defamed, naked, buffeted, reviled, the filth of the world,
and the offscouring of all things." (1
Cor. iv., through- out.) It is very
hard to think how an Archbishop with £15,000, or a Methodist
preacher with £50 a-year, can answer this description.
Having examined the apostolic title of
Watchman, I will now proceed to another name whereby these
men of God were known. We read in Jeremiah iii., "I will take you one of
a city, and two of a family, and I
will bring you to Zion :and I will give you
pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with
knowledge and understanding." So also in Jeremiah xxiii.,
when the Lord had said that he would gather the remnant of
his flock out of all countries, whether he had scattered
them, he added, "1 will set up shepherds over them, which
shall feed them." Now, David prophesied of this in the 68th
Psalm, "The Lord gave the word, great was the company of
those that published it." In the parallel explanatory
passage to this, which we have in 4th Ephesians, we find
pastors among the company : "He gave some pastors."
These pastors, says the Spirit in Jeremiah, were to be
according to the Lord's own heart. How did the Lord manifest
this ? "By
signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds, the Lord working with
them." How did they themselves, in their preaching, bear
witness to this ? by proclaiming, "We
are labourers together with God :
we have received a ministry of the
Lord :we warn
every man, and teach every man, that we may present every
man perfect in Christ Jesus." These pastors were to feed
with knowledge and understanding. So Paul prays for the
Colossian Church, "that they might be filled with the
knowledge of God's will in all wisdom and spiritual
understanding;" and how necessary was the prayer in that day
of knowing in part and prophesying in part, when it was
neither clear nor dark - how necessary, we learn from the Epistle to the Hebrews, in
which Paul writes, "Ye are become such as have need of milk,
and not of strong meat, for every one that useth milk is
unskilful in the word of righteousness, being a babe." So
also Peter, having been commissioned, "Feed my Iambs," follows out the
commission in his Epistle, wherein he exhorta to desire the
sincere milk of the word that they may grow thereby. There
are pastors, so called, now, as there are watchmen. But If men, thy pastors diappear, 0 Lord, we claim
the signs that
were Of old by thee
bestowed.
Pastors were for the work of the
ministry, for the perfecting of the saints, for the edifying
of the body of Christ, till all came into the unity of the
faith and knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man.
When all were come to the designed end, to a perfect illan
in Christ Jesus, pastors would be no longer needed, they
would be useless, their name would be a nonentity, and their
office a sinecure. If this state of the perfect unity of
faith, and the perfect man, have not come, then pastors are
needed. There are pastors :then
comes the unanswerable question, Where are the marks of a
pastor whereby to prove them true ? These marks, evidences,
signs, are, as we showed in our first diagram, not
forthcoming, therefore we are obliged to conclude, that the
work for which the originals were ordained and sent forth is
a finished work. If it be not, if there are pastors, or even
the shadow of any such character, then let us throw down
our arms of opposition and join the Roman Catholics, for
there can be no question whatever but that they approach the
nearest in their pretensions to the originals. But the
witness of our conscience, and the plainest declarations of
God's word, tell us that Romanism is a system of falsehood,
a rebuilding of an accursed Jericho. Therefore, if we are to
have pastors, we cannot find them. Are we then to reject the
Bible ?No
;we stand by the
testimony of the Apostles, the authorized interpreters of
the word, who alone can prove to
us the absurdities of religious
systems. I will proceed no further with this proof of the
ministry, for fear of repeating matter which has been
already advanced. I have merely glanced at the Old Testament
names of the Apostles, and their fellow ministering
servants. Time and space will not allow to examine the title
of Ambassador, a title which even some who claim that of
minister are compelled to abandon. We forego the pleasure of
descanting upon the high dignity of an Apostle, as a
ministering spirit : a steward of the mysteries of God :an angel of the
churches :a
king on a throne of judgment : a branch in the true vine :one of the twelve
gates, and twelve foundations, shadowed out in Elisha's
twelve yoke of oxen, and the twelve oxen supporting the
molten sea in Solomon's temple. We forego all this, for the
purpose of instituting a brief examination into some
particulars of the preaching of these men, towhom such
magnificent titles are given. We read that they had not
shunned to declare all the counsel of God, and therefore we
at once have recourse to their writings, rejecting the
counsel of those who style them- selves their successors. We
quarrel not with the honours, the worldly advantages, which
modern ministers enjoy, but because they obtain these under
false pretences, because, as the present Bishop of Chester
affirmed in his charge for 1841, they say that "they
sit in the Apostles' seat, and hold the office which they
held." * 'They
say;' yes, like certain of old time,' they say and
do not.' Let them put off these assumed titles, and
appeal to the world without these supports, which do not
belong to them, and let them call themselves expounders
of, or lecturers upon, a finished work of God, and then,
let us see what will become of them, what will become of
their systems, what will become of cant, hypocrisy, and
fanaticism-then we shall be agreed, but not till then.
In considering some particulars of
this counsel of God which the Apostles declared and
fully preached, I shall return to Peter's sermon on the
day ofPentecost; and the first subject concerning which
a few obser- vations shall be offered is the
resurrection of Christ. The resurrection of Christ!
exclaims one, why, is not that a doctrine which requires
no comment :is
it not perfectly plain and intelligible to all ? So far
from this being the case, it is my persuasion that there
is no doctrine which has been more perverted by
religious systems, nor is there any leas understood. The
Jews, in Christ's ministry, sought a sign,"What sign
shewest thou unto us, seeing thou doest these things?
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple,
and in three days I will mise it up." Now did the Jews
understand him ? Far otherwise
:they said,
"Forty and
six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three
days? But he spake of the temple of his body." Now
observe what is written immediately after this; "When,
therefore, he was risen from the dead, his disciples
remem- bered that he had said this unto them." (John ii.
22.) But before that he appeared unto them after his
resurrection, they understood not .the Scriptures, that
he should rise again from the dead.
I have already
commented upon the important position which the doctrine
of the resurrection immediately assumed in the ministry
of the Apostles. Peter, as we have seen, was anxious
that one should be chosen who should supply the place of
Judas. For what purpose? That he might be a witness with
them of his resurrection : and in hia sermon, the moment that Peter
comes to the name of Jesus of Naza- reth, he couples it
with his resurrection. The doctrine is the doctrine of Apostolic preaching. Whence its importance ?
Because the resur-rection of Christ was a pledge of the
resurrection of our bodies of clay? But we shall soon
see that no such pledge is anywhere to be found in
Scripture. Because the resurrection of Christ proved him
to be the Christ, the mediator of a new and better
covenant? Granted. I am persuaded that the true solution of
the question, Whence the paramount position which the
doctrine of the resurrection occupies in the sacred
records Pis
to be found in Peter's declaration, that God, in raising
his son Jesus from the dead, had made him both Lord and
Christ. Let us examine. Peter related the fact, "God bath raised up
Jesus of Nazareth, having loosed the pains of death,
because it was not possible that he should be holden of
it." Peter, having received power from on high, could
reveal things which had been kept secret from the
foundation of the world, and, preaching to Jews, of
course he goes back to Moses and the prophets,
convincing, out of the Scriptures, that the same Jesus
whom they had crucified, was he of whom Moses and the
prophets did write. He quotes the 16th Psalm ;"David
speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face;
for he is
* See Note K.
on mg right hand, that Ishould not be moved."
When we read,"David speaketh," we are
to understand it of David speaking as he was moved hy the
Holy Ghost, because the words, '<Iforesaw the Lord alway
before me," are not David's words, but Christ's. So Peter
immediately declares, "He,
seeing this before, (seeing it afar off,) spake of the
resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell,
neither his flesh did see corruption." Paul, in Acts xiii.,
delivers himself much to the same amount; "We
declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which
was made unto the fathers, God hath fulfilled the same unto
us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again ;as
it is also written in the second Psalm, "Thou art my son,
this day have I
begotten thee." These commentaries of Paul and Peter must be
understood exclusively of the resurrection of Christ. Of the
body of which it is here prophesied that it should rise, it
is also predicted that it should not see corruption. But
this, as Peter shows, could neither be said of David, nor
yet of the great mass of the human race. Their bodies do see
corruption. They must adopt the language of Job, and
say to corruption, Thou art my father,
and to the worm, Thou art my mother, and my sister." Let the
resurrection of Christ be a pledge as it may, still it is no
pattern, of the resurrection of dust. There is awide difference, an
immeasurable distance, a kind of impassable gulf of
separation, between the case of a body that has the breath
of life breathed into it again on the third day, and while
it remains in sub- stance unimpaired, and a body that has
been dissolved for centuries, that has been burned by fire,
that has undergone a countless series of new combinations of
matter, both animal and vegetable.
But it is said, in opposition to this, It
is not argued that the material body of the Saviour arose
from the grave-it was a spiritual body. To estimate the
value of this statement, I will examine the arguments which have lately
been brought forward, in a work written in denial of the
resurrection of the human body, and in affirmation of the
resurrection of a spiritual body. The work in question is by
Mr. Bush, Professor of Hebrew in the New York City
University, and containe much of Scripture interpretation
that is very valuable. The Professor, speaking of the
resurrection of Christ, (see Anastasis, p. 151, et seq.,)
says, "It seems
to be afair
presumption that the same body which rose also ascended. But
the evidence is certainly conclusive that it was not a
material body which ascended." Granted the pre- sumption,
what evidence have we to prove that it was not a material
body which ascended ? was it a material body in the case of
Elijah's translation, and if so, what Scripture warrant is
there for concluding differently-in that of Christ ? Again
-Mr. Bush writes, "The circum- stances
of Christ's appearance, in repeated instances subsequent to
his resurrection, are far more consistent with the idea of
his possessing a spiritual body, than the reverse." So let
it be; but then the like circumstances of appearance are
recorded before as wqll as after the resurrection. "The body of Christ,"
it is affirmed, "was
endowed with power of entering a room when the doors were
closed." This is pure assumption, but, supposing that it
were fact, was there not the self- same evidence of a body
"divested of
conditions of matter," when Jesus came to the disciples,
walking on the sea, and they thought they
had seen a spirit; or, when he went
through the midst of his enemies unscathed, while they were
purposing to throw him headlong from the hill? But
further-The disciples came, and held Jesus by the feet, and
worshipped him :he
commanded Them to handle him, to see that it was himself,
flesh and bone, and not a spirit divested of conditions of
matter: he told Thomas to reach his hand and put it into his
side :he did eat
in the presence of bis disciples a piece of broiled fish,
and an honeycomb, (see Acts i. 4, margin.) All these are
facts which scatter to the four winds the indefinite notions
generally entertained of a spiritual body, of the human body
undergoing some sublimating process of change. How are these
facts met in the work to which allusion has been made ? Mr.
Bush maintains that these facts were "miraculous
adaptations of the visible phenomena to the outward senses
of the disciples;" and then he goes on to say, "that the
wisdom of this miraculous adaptation is apparent, from the
effect which his sudden appearance among them produced, even
while his form and aspect were predominantly human. They
were terrified and affrighted; how much would their terror
have been increased had he appeared a pure, spiritual
entity, were that possible." Surely there is, or there need
be, no body at all, on Mr. Bush's own showing: surely we are
not far disagreed when we find him putting the supposition
of the Lord Jesus appearing a pure, spiritual entity ;a spirit, say, in the
form and likeness of humanity. But again- Our author
supports his miraculous adaptation scheme by the
circumstance of the three angels who appeared to Abraham in
the plains of Mamre. It is said Abraham set meat before
them, and stood by Them, and they did eat. Mr. Bush says
that this eating was doubtless an optical act, and so he
evades the question which is very naturally asked concerning
these angels, What became of their bodies after they had
eaten, and departed ? But to conclude these remarks-Mr.
Bush, in his third section, sums up his examination of the
resurrection of Christ in the following words :-"As our Lord
did not ascend in a material body, he must have put it off either
at the ascension itself, or at some time previous, during
the forty days of his sojourning on earth." Now, of this
latter hypothesis he says truly, that we have no proof. Why
not take the former, without begging the question, as is
done by saying, "As our Lord did not ascend in a material
body." Where is the proof of this ? where is there not proof
to the contrary ? What becomes of Enochk and Elijah's
translation ? Did Elijah put off his body before parting
from Elisha P Iask, If the material
body of Christ did not rise from the grave, what became of
it ?for it was
not found in the grave, only the clothes were lelt there.
Mr. Bush attempts to reply to this; he says, "It
must be maintained that the body which hung upon the cross
was miraculously dissolved, or resolved into primitive
elements." Facts already stated plainly contradict this
:such
dissolution could not have taken place till the Lord stood
in the position of Elijah, that is, till he
ascended up to the right hand of the bajesty in the heavens.
Mr. Bush labours to prove that Jesus ofLn ascended during
the forty days, but the proof to me is entirely unsatis-
factory. What can I think of such an hypothesis, supported by such testimony as the following ?After having quoted
Jesus aying, All power is given unto me in heaven,"&c., Mr.
B, observes, "This language, and his breathing upon them, in
token of his imparting to them the Holy Spirit, supposes a
previous ascension." But the same language would prove an
ascension prior to the crucifixion ; for Jesus prayed before
his passion, 'a As thou hast given him power over all flesh,
that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast
given him." (John xvii. 2.) Mr. B. supports his previous
ascension by stating, that it was after our Lord's ascension
that he was to give gifts to men ;but doee not the verse
just uoted from John xvii., contradict this ? and besides,
is it true that jeaus did give gifts during the forty days?
Certainly not, in the sense in which these gifts were
prophesied of. The @fi was that of the Holy Ghost-but the Holy Ghost
was not given hll the day of Pentecost, because, till the
expiration of The forty days, Jesus was not glorified. Mr.
B.'s great mistake, in the doctrine of the resurrection of
Christ, appears to be wrapt up in one short sentence, which
he has printed in Italics : "He died in a natural
body, he went into haven in a spiritual
body."
It is from the expression spiritual body," that the whole of
what I believe to be his errors, and those of the commonly
received views of the resurrection, have- arisen; being in
ignorance that the Scripture never speaks of the human body
of Christ, either before or after the ascension, when it
speaks of a spiritual body, or a being made like unto the
body of his glory.
That our way may be cleared as we
proceed, Iwill
now give a
summary of the conclusions which are deducible from the
foregoing examination.
I. The common
doctrine of a resurrection of our bodies falls to the
ground, when attempted to be established from the resurrection of Christ,
there being no similarity between the two cases.
2. Supposing the commonly received
doctrine to be true, and that the resurrection of dust
depends upon and follows aRer the resurrection of
Christ-what then ? Why, having proved that no change had
taken place in Christ's body, a spilit not having flesh and
bones, as he had, does it not follow that no change will
take place in our bodies; that they will likewise be flesh
and bones ? Is it not an inevitable con- sequence that we
also shall have the capacity of eating a piece of a broiled
fish and an honeycomb : that, according to the supposition of a Rev.
Gentleman, lately preaching on the Millennium, there will be
the pleasure of eating and drinking in that Utopia miscalled
heaven ?And
this being the case, what becomes of this, among other
scriptures ?
In the resurrection they neither marry
nor aregiven in
marriage, but are equal, or like unto, the angels ;"that is, have no
distinction of sex, are neither male nor female; as Paul
writes, " In Christ Jesus there is
neither male nor female." In Christ Jesus! that is, in the
resurrection, in the born-again dispensation, in the
regeneration kingdom ; for, saith the Spirit, "Ye are allone, and every one
members one of another ;" one new man, following on to come
into the measure of the age of the fulnese of Christ, or to
be made like unto the body of his glory. This alone is
sufficient to scatter the commonly received notions of the
resurrection to the four corners of the earth ; inasmuch as,
if there be neither male nor female, neither marrying nor
giving in marriage, the resurrection of which Christ spake
to the Sadducees cannot be attached to this body of dust and
ashes ;for where, in such case, could there be, by any
possibility, a resurrection of thesame body as was laid in
the grave ?This
view is strengthened by a reference to the passage in Luke's
Gospel, parallel to Matt. xxii. 30. In Luke xx. 35, we red
these very remarkable words, "The children of this world
(age) marry and are given in marriage :but they which shall beacccounted worthy
to obtain that world, and the resurrection (that is)
from the dead (7;s Lvarrrkcros 45 IxYE~GY,) They neither marry nor are given in marriage."
phraseology of this velw is very peculiar, as regards the
expression "accounted
wortlcy," as well as #' the resurrection that is from the dead." This
would seem to denote a special and select resurrection. The
double article in the Greek, in addition to the preposition
Zx, from out
of, strongly
marks a speciality. The same construction is to be met with
in Acts iv. 2,
xvii. 31, 35, and Phil. iii. I I. This speciality will, we
conceive, admit of an easy solution, when we come to speak
of the first resurrection.
We have established that if our bodies
are to be raised, in accordance with the resurrection of
Christ's body, they must be of the same nature; then, as a
further inference from the subject, we ask, How is this to
be reconciled with Paul's language to the Corinthians, "We
shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed." The word
in the original does not signify change, by way of
alteration, but of sub- stitution. Our raised bodies,
according tothe
common view, must be of flesh and bones. Is flesh changed,
or is there a substitution of another kind of flesh ?Possibly ;but still
that which is born of the flesh is flesh. Are bones changed
?and does this
constitute a spiritual body P Then where is the change; and
what is the meaning of the Scripture which saith, "We shall not all
sleep, but we shall all be changed ?"
This passage, be the meaning thereof
what it may, plainly indicates that there should be some
believers animally existing at the time of the event of this
change; and this agrees with Christ's words, "There
he some standing here which shall not taste of death till
they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom." The common
doctrine is sadly self-inconsistent; the same body is to be
raised, and yet it is to be changed; the same body is to be
deposited in the dust corruptible, and the same body is to
be raised incorruptible. This "change," spoken of in 1 Cor.
xv., is a difficulty in the way of Mr. Bush's theory of the
resurrection. He says, "Here
we encounter a great difficulty in view of our previous
position, that the true resurrection takes place at the
death of every individual believer, when he emerges from a
material into a spiritual body." The difficulty lies in this
question, "Is it not implied, not to say expressly asserted,
that the resurrection of all the righteous in this passage,
and in 1 Thess. iv. 17, is simultaneous, and that the event
is still future, to occur at the epoch of the second advent,
and in conjunction with the translation of the living
saints? "The
answer which Mr. B. vouchsafes to this question, is, to say
the least of it, somewhat startling. He maintains that the
Apost.les were mistaken in regard to the time of the second
advent. This opinion will be noticed hereafter, in its
proper place.
We sl~all now bring forward a crowning
evidence that there is no connexion between the resurrection
of Christ's body and the presumed resurrection of du&, or
that if the resurrection of Christ be a pledge of our resurrection, this last resurrection
can have no concern with the human body. Suppose the
contrary. Then I ask, HOW waa Christ the first fruits of
them that slept ? How was he the first that should rise from
the dead ?How
was he the first begotten from the dead ?How will any who hold
the common notions of the resurrection answer these
questions, in accordance with such notions P How, it may be
asked, will an objector dispose of these and other similar
Scrip- ture evidences, in opposition to the facts of the
Shunamite's son, the young man of Nain, or the case of
Lazarus? Paul writes to the Hebrews, ''Women received their dead raised to
life again :
others were tortured, not accepting deliverance, that they
might obtain a better resurrection." The preachers of the
day will tell us that this better resurrection is still in
prospect, still to be obtained, a resurrec- tion at the last
day, to a spiritual body like Christ's; but then we have
already concluded that no change took place in Christ's
body, conse- quently another interpretation must be sought
for Paul's better resurrection. Christ was the first fruits:
this clearly demonstrates that his resurrection teaches no
such thing as a resurrection of dust; because we are in
possession of Scripture testimony that natural bodies of
clay were raised before him. But the resurrection of Christ
was, as we have seen, the doctrine of Apostolic preaching.
"If Christ be
not risen, then is our preaching vain," every word that we
utter against the covenant of works is false, it is neither
waxen old nor ready to vanish away. "Your faith is also vain
:""we are of all
men most miserable, and ye are yet in your sins." But then
again, that the Apostle was not of all men most miserable,
is evident :he
was always rejoicing in hope of the resurrection of the dead
;and that the Corinthians were not still in their sins, is
equally clear from the mention of the "exceeding greatness
of God's power toward them that believed, according to the
working of his mighty power, which he wrought in Christ,
when he raised him from the dead." This conjunction of
spiritual things proves once more the vast importance of the
doctrine of the resurrection. It is clear that such
importance attaches not to a resurrection of dust. We are
con- strained, therefore, to seek for it elsewhere; and, as
already stated, I think that we shall discover the object of
our search in the following passage of Peter's Pentecostal
sermon :-"
Therefore, let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that
God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both
Lord and Christ." An examination into the meaning of this
scripture will give us a view of the resurrection totally
different fi~m those views which now generally obtain. The
word "therefore,"
it will be observed, connects this verse with the preceding
portion of the chapter; and the verse itself suggests a wide
distinction between the character of Jesus before, and
after, his death and resurrec- tion. For the purpose of our
inquiry, we look back into Peter's sermon, as far as 22d
verse; "Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of
Nazareth, a man approved of God among you." We observe
particularly this title, Jesus of Nazareth, and we ask, Why
does the Apostle introduce the subject of his preaching in
these lowly terms, in this humble guise ? The reason is
obvious, because it was only thus that his hearers had known
him, or been accustomed to recognise him in the midst of
them. "Is not this the carpenter's son, of Nazareth, of Galilee, and are not his mother and
brethren with us P " "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth ? "These were common
saying8 in the days of the Loid's personal ministry.
Ignorance of the times and seasons, in a right division of
the word of truth, has hindered from noticing the difference
of manner in which the Son of God is mentioned during his
own ministry, and the succeeding ministry of the Holy Ghost.
HI?is simply
Jesus, in the records of the four gospels; this title,
however, is changed for Christ in the Acts and Epistles, or
Jesus Christ, or the Lord Jesus Christ. But it is objected,
Was he not Lord and Christ during his personal ministry
?Certainly not;
Peter's testimony is decisive upon that point; for, says he,
God hath made a crucified Jesus, Lord and Christ. But it is
objected again, Does he not in his ministry ask his
disciples, "Whom
do men say that I the Son of Man am ? "
and did not Peter answer, "Thou art the Christ ?"
Yes, all this is very true. It was the Lord's own answer to
the woman who said, I know that when Messiah cometh, which is
called Christ, he will tell us all things." Jesus answered,
"I that speak to
thee am he." Messiah he undoubtedly was, but only in a
prospective point of view. He was now under the arrest of
death -under its power, reign, and dominion, and had yet to
submit to the stroke of divine justice on account of the
transgression of the first Adam; for, "in that he died, he
died unto sin once ;but
in that he liveth, he liveth unto God." The assertion may
safely be ventured, that Messiah he undoubtedly was, not in
anything at all approaching to such manifestation aswas given on the day
of Pentecost, after he had fulfilled the Messiah'lc
character, as given in Isaiah liii., or in Daniel, where it
is written, "After threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be
cut off, but not for himself." Peter responded to the Lord's
question, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;"
but it is quite evident that Peter wist not what he said, or
of what manner of spirit he was, any more than on the Mount
of Transfiguration, when he said, "It is good for us to be
here! "The
rejoinder made by the Lord was this, "Blessed art thou,
Simon Bajona; flesh and blood have not revealed this unto
thee, but my Father which is in heaven." 0no !this was a name
abhorrent to flesh and blood, and beyond the comprehension
of the carnal mind. This was a resurrection name, which
belonged to the kingdom of heaven, and flesh and blood could
never enter that king- dom ;therefore
it was well said that this was none of Peter's confession.
The whole of that conversation is worthy
of the closest study. Immediately after the Lord had blessed
Peter, he gave unto him the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
Now we know that Peter used one of these keys on the day of
Pentecost, in opening the mysteries of the gospel to the
Jews. Is it not then highly probable that there is an
intimate connexion between that very Pentecostal day, and
Peter's confession of the Messiah ? a connexion which the
Apostle exhibits, when he tells the house of Israel that the
crucified Nazarene was honoured with a name above every
name, Lord and Christ.
But further-It is recorded that Jesus, in
this conversation, charged his disciples that they should
tell no man that he was the Christ. Wherefore, whence the
necessity of this P Because his hour was not yet come; as he
said, "Your time
is alway ready, but mine is not yet." So we may very well suppose it to
have been the case here. Bearing in mind the carnal notions
of the Messiahship which the dis- ciples, in common with the
rest of their countrymen, entertained, they would no doubt
be prepared to proclaim abroad that name upon which such
mighty things were thought to depend. But Jesus anticipated
this consequence of Peter's confession ; and it is somewhat
remarkable, that in the two other places (in John's Gospel,)
where we read of con- fessions made concerning the
Messiahship,-one by Martha, and the other by the disciples,
-the narrative breaks off, and the conversation comes at
once to an end. Again -to make known what and what manner of
time was signified in Peter's confession of Christ, we are
told in three of the Gospels, that " from that time Jesus began to show unto his disciples that
he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the
elders, and chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and
raised again the third day." This at once brings Peter's
confession to the day of Pentecost for its fulfilment. And
in what immediately follows we see a confirmation of the
remark which we ventured to offer upon Peter's ignorance.
When Jesus spoke of persecution, suffering, and death, this
was so foreign to Peter's carnal notions, so utterly
repugnant to his temporal kingdom scheme, that he took
Jesus, and began to rebuke him; "Be merciful to thyself,
Lord ; this shall not be unto thee." I
cannot refrain from observing here,
that it would seem strange, how it could enter the heart of
any man to imagine that Peter, or any of the disciples, had
so much as a glimmering of Chris- tianity at this time.
Peter was a thorough Jew, and as the Christianity of systems
is only a mixed Judaism, no wonder that the Peter of
Christ's ministry is mistaken for the Peter who preached the
gospel in demonstration of the Spirit of power. However, the
wisdom of God corrects the mistake; "Get thee behind me,
Satan; thou art an offence unto me; for thou savourest not
the things that be of God;" thou no more speakest that which
is revealed of my Father in heaven; no, thou savourest those
things that be of men, and this thy speech is a revelation
of flesh and blood.
We will glance for a moment at one more
particular of this con- versation, by way of showing how the
exposition thereof revolves round the day of Pentecost.
Jesus, having for the occasion changed Peter's name to
Satan, proceeded to speak of that which had given offence to
Peter, telling him, in the spirit of prophecy, that it was
ordained to be bis own lot; " If any
man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up
his cross, and follow me ;"let him leave house and lands,
wife and children; let him cut off a right hand, or pluck
out a right eye; let him leave all the worldly good which
attached to a worldly covenant, and let him follow the
fortunes of him that should suffer many things of the
ministers of that covenant, and be killed. After this
intimation of his disciples' trials, Jesus comforted them
with a glance at the bright side of things, saying, "There be some
standing here which shall not taste of death till they see
the Son of Man coming in his kingdom ;" thus connecting
Peter's confession with the tribulations of the Apostolic
ministry and the time of the end, and so signi fying what
and what manner of time Peter did speak of, when he said,
Thou art the Christ, the Son of the
living God." We have then established, as it were, the day-dawn of
this glorious title; and be it observed, that it militates
nothing against this view that Jesus is oftentimes addressed
as Lord in the Gospels, that name so used there being merely
a title of respect, equivalent to the expression Sir, so
often tobe met
with in the Gospel by John. They are the same word in the
original, and want of attention to this, or ignorance of the
original, has given rise to many a foolish controversy. One
such controversy I remember, in a correspondence which appeared
in a Calvinistic Maga-zine, upon the woman taken in
adultery. The question was this, Whether or no this woman
was, to use the Calvinistic phraseology, '' a child of God,
or a quickened vessel of mercy." On one side it was stoutly
contended that she must have been "one of the living
family." Why ?
Because she called Jesus, Lord, and it was argued,"No
man can call Jesus, Lord, but by the Holy Ghost." And this
is called gospel; this, we are told to believe, is a trying
of the spirits whether they be of God ;this is an
interpretation of scripture by those who maintain that it is
not they who speak, but the Holy Ghost! Alas! alas! what a
day we live in ! as certain of these interpreters would
exclaim, on hearing or reading of our
views of divine truth.
We shall now proceed to show the
connexion between another conversation recorded by the
Evangelists, nnd the day of Pentecost, in order to discover
clearly the significant meaning of Peter's words, when he
says, "God hath
made that same Jaus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and
Christ." The conversation to which I
allude is recorded in the latter part
of Matt. xxii. In that chapter we find three several
personifications of Satan coming to Jesus and tempting him:
the Herodians, the Sadducees, and the Pharisees. The
Sadducees' tempta- tion was in the form of a question
concerning the doctrine of the resur- rection of the dead.
They appealed to Moses, to the five books of the law, which
alone they received to be from God. They appealed, saying,
"Master, Moses
said." They imagined Moses spake nothing of a resurrection,
which therefore they denied. They supposed that this
resurrection was to be found only in the writings of the
prophets, who were of no estimation among them. By a single
appeal to Moses, their own strong-hold, the Lord put them to
an ignominious silence, and showed the falsity of their
position, be that position what it may. Jesus said unto
them, "Ye do
err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God." As
touching the resurrection of the dead, and "that the dead
are raised, Moses showed at the bush, when he called the
Lord the God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob; for be
is not a God of the dead, but of the living, for all live
unto him." (Luke xx. 37.) How marvellous is this answer, and how we do
here indeed see that it was well said in the prophets, His
name shall be
called Wonderful." Let me ask, for one moment, of those who
are stumbled at the novelty, as it is called, of our views
of divine revelation, Would you, would any one, ever have
imagined that there was written the doctrine of the
resurrection in the words, r6 Iam the God of Abmham,
and of Isaac, and of Jacob ? " Surely it is not too much to beg for a
patient hearing, and to entreat that our fundamental
position of the past second advent may have a careful
investigation ;an investigation fiaom the Scriptures of
unerring truth, to which alone almost al! parties acknowledge an appeal. Surely it is not
too much to ask this among innumerable other questions,
calculated to exhibit a difference between popular doctrines
and Scripture, Was it a resurrection of dead bodies of which
Jesus spake to the Sadducees ? There is not one word said
about a resurrection of dust, and if the answer of Jesus at
all related to such resurrection, it was no answer whatever,
for how does the fact that Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob are now living, prove the
resurrection of their bodies ? This question is such a
difficulty to the advocates of the resurrection of dust,
that They are obliged to leave this conversation out, in a
proof of such resurrection, and to make a confession as fol-
lows-a confession from which Ientirely
dissent. "The most that this argument proves is the
immortality of the soul ; that the souls of the patriarchs
did not die with their bodies, as the Sadducees believed."
(hrrectwn of Sam Body Asserted, by Dr. Hody.) We must seek for
a meaning to the resurrection of the dead, different from
the com- monly received opinion in this passage, at all
events. Professor Bush maintains that Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob must bave been raised when this conversation with the
Sadducees took place, and must bave been living in
resurrection bodies. The Professor is again at variance with
the plainest declarations of Scripture, for if Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob were then raised, what becomes of this
scripture, "Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become
the first-fruits of them that slept?" Mr. B. is quite
correct in maintaining that the conversation with the
Sadducees teaches nothing of a resurrection of dead bodies,
any more than does the scripture which says, " Behold this
child is set for the fall and resurrection of many in
Israel." But Mr. B. is, I submit, altogether wrong many
times, when he strays from that one grand object of his
work. What can we think of his opinion that the patriarchs
were then in the resurrection, when we read in Job, "Till
the heavens be no more 1shall not awake, nor be raised out
of my sleep ;"and when the Holy Ghost witnessed, some time
after the conversation in question,
"David is not
yet ascended into the heavens ? "
Job was not awaked, David was not
ascended, the patriarchs were not raised then; but let me
here observe, it does not follow that They are not now, as
we shall hereafter have occasion to &ow. When Mr. Bush
quotes Paul, "If
by any means I
might attain unto the resurrection of the dead," be appends
to this a note from Mr. Noble's "Appeal," to the following
effect: "The Apostle speaks of this resurrection as
something attainable in this life-what can he mean by
attaining to the resurrection of the dead, but a state of
complete regeneration; whereas, to make him talk of striving
to attain to the resurrection of dead bodies, which all (if
any,) are to experience, whether they strive for it or not,
and which, strive as they will, they cannot bring on any
sooner, this is to make him talk in a strange manner
indeed." There can be no doubt of this; but mark, when it is
affirmed that the Apostle spake of a resurrection as of
something attainable in this life, is there not here a
contradiction to the statement that the resurrection of the
dead, in the case of the patriarchs, is tantamount to a
future state, and that they must have been raised at the
death of the natural body? And then, moreover, how does all
this agree with Heb. xi. 35, " Othew were tortured, not accepting
deliverance, that they might obtain a better resurrection ? "Paul's exposition
is plain and intelligible, from the last verse of that
chapter, "God
having provided some better thing for us, that they without
us should not be made perfect." ,4nd having this, we
care for no other exposition, for we need none.
However, to return to our argument. The
answer of Jesus com- pletely met the cavil of the Sadducees.
The multitude were astonished ; the Scribes answered,
saying, "
Master, thou bast well said." The Pharisees exulted to see
the Sadducees put to shame and confusion. In this one
particular of Pharisaic rejoicing, coupled with the circum-
stances connected with it, we have a key tothe true
interpretation of this discoulse, which interpretation will
throw a flood of light upon the great scripture of the
Messiahship of Jesus, now under considera- tion. It is of no
moment to enquire wbat was the Sadducean hypothesis on the
resurrection. Our concern is with the answer which Christ
rendered to their question. We find that the Pharisees
triumphed in the discomfiture of the opposite party. Was
then the Lord agreed with the Pharisees upon the disputed
doctrine 7 I
answer no, by no means; and I ground my answer upon what
follows. When the Pharisees exulted, Jesus proceeded to put
down their exultation, by silencing them, as be had silenced
the Sadducees, and as we shall presently find, on the
self-same doctrine of the resurrection. How read we ?Jesus said to the
Scribes, who had raised him for his dexterous reasoning,
'.What think ye
of Chdd whose son is he ? They say unto him, The son of
David. He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit
call him Lord, saying, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou
on my right hand till I make thine enemies thy footstool. If David
then call him Lord, how is he his son ? "As it had been with
the Sadducees, so it was with the Pharisees, "No man was able to
answer him a word." Now I gather from this that the Lord's view of the
resurrection was prospective, and not, as Mr. Bush affirms,
that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were raised at this time.
Christ silences the Pharisee, through the possession of the
knowledge of a
future revelation. He asks them for the interpretation of a
scrip-ture, about which it is impossible that either they or
his own disciples could give one word of explanation. Why so
? Because the Holy Ghost was not given, and the answer to
the question, "If
David," &c. could only be rendered under the ministration of
the Spirit, when that which was spoken by David 11ad come to
pass. The answer, as we know, was rendered in Peter's
Pentecostal sermon. We couple this with the acknowledged
truth, that the preaching of the Apostles was Jesus and the
resurrection. But such preaching displeased the Pha- risees.
equally as much as it displeased the Sadducees, for they
were grieved that the Apostles taught, through Jesus, the
resurrection of the dead. They could not endure the name of
the crucified Nazarene, along with the resurrection, for the
resurrection belonged to Messiah's day, and they would not
have that man, the Carpenter's Son, to reign over them.
Holding carnal, earthly views of the doctrine, they might
well, indeed, from other causes, demur to Apostolic
preaching of Jesus being the first-fruits and the
first-begotten, seeing that there had been those who were
raised before him. And why, may we ask-supposing for a
moment that the Jewish doctrine of the resurrection was the
same aathat now
generally entertained-why are not the systems of the day
equally consistent with the Pharisees on such a supposition
? Why do they not substitute the Shunamite's
son and the resurrection, or Lazarus and the resurrection
?But it is all
vanity.
To proceed. We will now connect the
conversation in Matt. xxii. with Acts ii. 29. "Men and brethren,"
saith Peter, "let
me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is
both dead, and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto
this day." But yet, though it be said, David was dead and
buried, there was the resurrection of David, for God is not
the God of the dead, but of the living. Where then was
David's existence? David had life in the promise; "These all died in
faith, not having received the promises, but having seen
them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced
them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on
the earth." These promises were the promises of life in
Christ Jesus, as an apostle witnesseth, when he speaks of
the life that now is, (in this dispensation,) and of that
which is to come, (in the coming age,) even that eternal
life which God who cannot lie promised before the world
began. David, as having life in promises yet to be
performed, was not yet ascended into the heavens; but when
the promises should be performed, then should David ascend.
Now if, instead of David, we read Abraham, or Isaac, or
Jacob was not yet ascended into the heavens, then Iconceive that we
shall arrive at the true meaning of the resurrection of the
dead, concerning which Christ spake to the Sadducees and
Pharisees. Abraham, David, Samuel, and all the prophets,
were none of them ascended into the heavens, were none of
them raised, or in the enjoyment of the resur- rection
spirit of life, when Christ entered into this conversation,
and when Peter preached on the day of
Pentecost. But it does by no means follow, that because they
were not then, therefore they are not now ascended ;nay, it
amounts almost to a demonstration, laying aside altogether
the proof of the past resurrection, as connected with a past
second advent, that the patriarchs must now have
ascended-must have obtained that better resurrection, for
which a Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ greater riches
than the treasures of Egypt, and to win which a Paul counted
the loss of all things as only of so much value as himself
was reckoned, even the filth of the world, and the
offscouring of all things -no
more than dung and dross. How so ?
how does this past ascension appear so
self-evident ?
Simply because Christ is called the first-fruits of them
that slept; or, to use Mr. Bush's words, the first in rank
;the author, the procuring cause, of the resur- rection of
the saints. The figure of first-fruits suggests and implies
a harvest. Now the harvest, as we find in referring to the
worship under the law, began to be gathered in immediately
after the presentation of the first-fruits; and surely it
would be a very violent construction of the analogy to
suppose it to imply that hundreds or thousands of years
might elapse between the resurrection of the grand
Precursor, and that of the mass of his followers. But
according to the commonly received opinion, the first-fruits
(Christ) have been gathered in, and nothing more; the whole
harvest is yet to follow. This alone is sufficient, one
would think, to confine the resurrection within a
dispensation limit, to the period of the vanishing away of
the Old Covenant. This alone suffices for a complete overthrow of the
popular doctrine: and eurely we may here at least adopt an
opponent's language, and exclaim, with reason, It is
preposterous to imagine such a thing as your gross and
grovelling doctrine. There is, however, none of this
violence inour
view of the whole harvest following the firet-fruits, in the
period of that genemtion of men to whom Christ ad-his
ministry; within the compass, and at the conclusion of, the
Apo&lic age and dis-pensation.
Having generalized thus far, we will now
examine Peter's exposition of the great truth wherewith the
Lord put bia
adverearie to ailence in the days of his flesh. "If David called him
Lord, how Mhe
then his Son ? " The resurrection of Jesus is, we maintain,
The solution of the riddle ;but let us ask, for one moment,
how does the theology of our own day help out the silence of
the Pharisees, and demonatmile wherein lay their ignorance
?To whom shall
we go?Our
minds, naturally enough, have recourse to those whose
Biblical attainments are, or are supposed tohe, the greatest
:to Calvinists,
or even such asare advanced beyond Calvinism, and very
wisely reject all 'isms.'
We love this rejection of 'isms.' We love tohear of party namea
being metaside.
We love, moreover, to bear or to read of a knowledge of the opposition between
God and man,in thoughts, ways, word, and work, only let it
be knowledgeof the right sort, setting forth a Scriptural
statement of such opposition. Now, let it be supposed that
the queetion which Jeaus put to The Pharisees is the
doctrine of divine inversion, ae
stated by Christ himself: and let it
be supposed further, that no sooner is this doctrine
understood, than the explanation of the puzzle is found to
be atonoe
simple and satisfactory :and
having supposed all this, let us
examine the account given us of the
doctrine in question. Here it is, ready to our hand-"The
Pharisees knew what Christ was to be in flesh, but what he was to be in
spirit they knew nothing." True,and
the reason, we say, is obvious. "They were unable to answer bow
Christ could be at once David's inferior and David's
superior.'' Trite again, leaving out the words "at once."
"But," it ia
urged further, "we are not so circumstanced. The solution
from the doctdne of divine inversion is as follows
:-According to the flesh, or as man, the Messiah was David's inferior,
or the superiority of David to Christ arose fim David in
order of time having appeared first and Mdbsecond." There
needs no prophet to tell us this; surely if this were
carried into the most Anninian free-will assemblv. into the
midst of anv sect (not Unitarian) professing Christianity,
icwould be inunediateli acknowledged. But su~pose we examine
the inversion for one moment. according to
spirit, o; ib possessing an everlasting existence at God%
right hand, an existence which he had before his incarnation
no less than subsequent to it, the Messiah was David's superior or Lord. The
superiority of Christ toDavid sprang from
the Measiah as Creator having existed first, and David, as
the Messiah's creature, having existed only in the second
place." Enougb ;we will quote no farther. It is nffinnedthat the above
solution wasa
puzzle to the Jews, but can thitl really be a puzzle at all
?Might not a
Unitarian, who rejects such &tion as
the above, answer after this fashion ?
If there were nothing deeper, nothing more prdbund, conveyed
in the quation of Jeeus, it is hard to conceive that there
is any difficulty whatever in the way. The ignorance of the
Pharisees, at this rate, simply resolves itself into
ignorance of the commonly received doctrine of the Trinity.
But if that doctrine, as held by religious systems, be
erroneous, as I
believe it to be; or, to aay no more, if religious systems
cannot explain this glorious doctrine, as Iam persuaded they
cannot; then the puzzle, leaving the Pharisees on one side,
and taking only the mind of the pro- pounder of the
question, must be sought for elsewhere. Now how strikingly
oppoeed tothis
Creator and creature solution of the riddle propounded by
our spiritual Sampson, does the following statement of the
general expectahon of the Jewish nation, with regard to
their Messiah, appear. I speak not of their knowledge of the true
bearing and import of that expectation, only of the
expectation itself. cc The general opinion of the Jews," says Dr.
Lightfoot, cc
looked forward to a period of consummation or restitution,
frequently called 'the
last day,' 'the
world to come,' 'the
reign of the Messiah,' when a new order of things was to
beushered in,
among which was the event denominated the resurrection
of the dead. Connected with this resurrection,
was the deliverance of the Jewish nation from the voke of
their enemies- their advancement to acknowledged pre-emine&e
over all other people - the restoration of the Shekinah-the
rebuilding of Jerusalem and ita temple in renovated
splendour-the endowmeni of the earth with a new and
unexampled fertility -the
cessation of wars and bloodshed -and
an indefinite period of peace, prosperity, and happiness,
from the rising to the going down of the sun." A very slight
acquaintance with Old Testament prophecies will suffice to
shew from what source the Jews had derived their
expectations ;and a knowledge of the spiritual meaning and
application of those prophecies will clear up the point of
the Pharisees' inability to answer the question put to them
by Jesug an inability totally independent of any view of the
common doctrine of the Trinity. As the Jewish nation
overlooked the previous ordained humiliation of Messiah, so
they were entirely mistaken in the notions which they
entertained of his glory. When he had entered into his
glory, when he was set down at the right hand of God,
angels, authorities, and powers being subject unto him, all
the thought that his own, who received him not, cherished
concerning him was conveyed by the reproach, That
deceiver.' In the days of his ministry, he testified,
ccThis people's
heart is waxed gross, their ears are dull of hearing, and
their eyes they have closed." In the judgment-hall of Piate
this saying was very manifest, cr
My kingdom is not of this world
:if my kingdom
were of this world, then would my servants fight ;but now
iemy kingdom
not from hence." But if we enter into a discussion of the
mistakes and misapprehensions of the Jews respecting their
Messiah, we shall only be repeating what has been already
advanced. Let it suffice to have pointed out the "why and
wherefore" of Sadducean and Pharisaic ignorance; and having
done so, let us proceed with the great matter in hand, our
examination of Peter's Pentecostal sermon, the glories of
which sermon, I
think, will never be exhausted, and of which Ican only hope to give
an account which shall be little more than the shadow of the
substance. It has been shewn that the doctrine of the
resurrection does not derive iits importance from the presumption that the resurrection of Christ was a
pledge of the resurrection ofbuman bodies. It has been
likewise demonstrated, that Christ, during his ministry,
pointed to times subsequent to his ascension for an
exposition of the things concerning himself, and for an
interpretation of the doc- trine of the resurrection, upon
which the Pharisees were in error. It has been proved,
moreover, that these erroneous notions are not corrected by
the knowledge of David having appeared first in order of
time, and Messiah second. The exposition of the resurrection
doctrine, then, is yet to be given from the question, If
David then call him Lord, how is he his son ?We shall be aesisted
much in this exposition by a pro-phecy in Isaiah xi., for
Iconfess that
Iam well nigh
overwhelmed with the vastness of the subject. The chapter
referred to begins thus: -
And there shall come forth a rod out of
the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his
roots." The next verse explains what and what manner of time
the prophet did speak of, when he thus testified before hand
:-"And the
spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom
and understanding." We have only to compare this with a
scripture often before quoted, which Jesus read in the
synagogue of Nazareth :-"He
opened the book where it was written, The spirit of the Lord
God is upon me ;and he closed the book, saying, This day is
this scripture fulfilled in your ears." Tt will be admitted
on all hands, that this prophecy relates to Christ's first
appearance in the days of his flesh, as the offspring of
David, and of the fruit of David's loins; as the tender
plant, and the root out of a dry ground, out of the dry and
withered stock of David, the glory of whose house had long
departed from Judah. But in Isaiah xi. 10, we read, "Tn
that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand
for an ensign of the people." The day in question is the day
when, as we read in verse 6, "The wolf also shall dwell with
the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid, and
the calf and the young lion and the fatling together, and a
little child shall lead them." I
remember being much amused, at the
last exhibition of paintings in Liverpool, by a picture
actually repre- senting this passage in a literal
interpretation. There were depicted allthese different and discordant
animals, living together in harmony. It is hardly possible
to credit the evidence of our senses, when we see such
preposterous imaginations concerning Him who is spirit, and
must be worshipped in spirit and in truth. And yet, for
aught we know to the contrary, it is as reasonable to
suppose that the fierce, carnivorous animals mentioned by
the prophet, should become gentle and harmless as the lamb,
as it is to imagine, what really is entertained, that a
hundred antagonistic religious parties should eat of the
same bread, and drink out of the same cup. How gloriously in
contrast to the views of systems, stands the exposition
which the Lion of the tribe of Judah gave of the
above-quoted passage, through the instrumentality of his
servants the Apostles. I allude to the vision of Peter, when
he saw a certain vessel descend, as
it had been a great sheet, upon the
which, when he had fastened his eyes, he considered, and saw
four-footed beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and
creeping things, and fowls of the air ;and he heard a voice
saying unto him, "Arise, Peter, slay and eat." Peter's
answer opens up Isaiah's prophecy; "Not so, Lord, for
nothing common or unclean hath at any time
entered my mouth." What follows ?
"The voice answered
again from heaven, What God bath cleansed, call not thou
common. And while Peter doubted what this vision should
mean, and while he thought upon it, behold three men which
were sent from Cornelius stood before the gate, and the
Spirit said unto him, Arise, get thee down, go with them,
nothing doubting, for I have sent them." The issue was, that as Peter
preached to Cornelius and his house, the Holy Gbost fell on
the Gentiles, as on the circumcision; and Peter seeing this,
said, "Of a
truth Iperceive
that God is no respecter of persons." He then understood,
and could explain, the prophecy of Isaiah concerning the
clean and unclean beasts (under the law,) feed- ing
together; the unclean-the wolf, leopard, lion, and bear,
represent- ing those who were aliens to the commonwealth of
Israel, and strangers to the covenant of promise; the
clean-the lamb, the kid, the calf, and the cow, representing
them of the circumcision ;and the lying down togeTher
prefiguring Jew and Gentile, bond and free, feeding in the
same green pasture, and reclining beside the same still
waters of the gospel of Jesus Christ, of him of whom it is
written, "He is
our peace, who bath made both one, that he might reconcile
both unto God in one body on the cross, having slain the
enmity thereby." This expo- sition recommends itself at once
to an enlightened mind. There is however tome some obscurity
as to the application of the word Gentile. It seems quite
clear that the ten tribes are included in Isaiah's descrip-
tion of the clean nnd unclean beasts living in harmony,
because we read that this root should be an ensign for the
nations, and should assemble the outcasta of Israel, and
that then should the envy of E hraim
depart, and the adversaries of Judah be cut off; then E
hraim {&rael) should not envy Judah, and Judah should not
vex Ep !raim ;
that then, in the last days of Judah and Jerusalem, they
should beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears
into pruning-hooks ; nation should not lift up sword against
nation, neither should they (Israel and Judah,) learn war
any more." I
cannot avoid including the ten tribes under the term
Gentiles, as I
see the passage in Isa. xi. including them among the unclean
beasts; and it may be asked, Were they not unclean, as being
cut off that they should be no more a people under the old
covenant ;and does not the description of their uncleanness
agree with the description of the ten tribes in the
parables; as, for instance, Lazarus full of sores, and the
prodigal feeding on swine's huske? There is something worthy
of consideration in this. Israel and the Heathen were
undoubtedly on a level, as being neither of them 'Ithe
people of God;" but still, Israel having once been a people,
while the rest, who are included (as we think,) under the
term Gentile, never were the people of God, as never having
been in cove- nant; the Holy Gbost marks a difference
between them, as in Hosea ii. 18, where is a passage somewhat
parallel tothat
which we have commented upon in Isaiah xi., In that day will
Imake a
covenant for them (Israel, or Ephraim,) with the beasts of
the field, and with the fowls of heaven, and with the
creeping things of the ground." The Lord ishere speaking of
Israel as again "a
people," but under the new and better covenant, and so in
contrast with the heathen world; just as in Ezekiel. xxxiv.,
where Ephraim, being addressed as under covenant, or in the
everlasting remembrance of the promise to Abruham, is styled scattered and lost
sheep. We may remark, by the way, that in the 25th verse of
the same chapter of Ezekiel, there is mention of the
covenant with the bwta of the field, as in Hosea; "1 will
make with them a covenant of peace, and will cause the evil
beaststo cease
out of the land :"and
this should be when the Lord's servant David should be a
prince among them. This subject is interesting as a subject
for inquiry; but, however, it alters not the time of
fulfil-ment of Isaiah's prophecy in chapter xi. If Christ
have been lifted up, as a light to
lighten the Gentiles, then, as Mr.
Wilkinaon, in the Last Days," observes, the wolf and the
lamb, &c.have
been recon- ciled, in the new spiritual state, and have been
brought to lie down together in peace and amity in the
gospel dispensation ;for the prophet mys, gCIn that
day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall
stand for an ensign of the people." If the figure of the
clean and unclean animals has not been fulfilled, then
Christ has not stood an ensign for the nations, and the Gentiles
have never sought after him.
But to return from this digression. When
we read, "In that day there shall be a root out of Jesse,"
we suppose that it will be admitted that this relates to the
gospel dispensation. The question arises, When was Cbrist the
root of Jesse ?
During his ministry, when he asked the Pharisees, "If David
then call him Lord, how is he his son ?" By no means
Throughout his ministry, and up to the time of his
resurrection, Christ was but the offspring of David, and the
rod out of the stem of Jesse. It was in the
resurrection'that he was the root of David, and so he
testifies in the Revelation given to John, "1Jesus, am the root
and the offspring of David, the bright and morning star."
Here we have an explanation of that which really is still a
mystery to all
Judaizing systems, as much as it ever was to the Sadducees and
Pharisees. When Christ was seen of John, in the viaion, he
said, "Iam he
that liveth, and was dead, and behold I am alive for evermore :"and John, whose
Revelation we believe to have been written at least before
any of the Epistles, styles that same Jesus, whom the Jews
had crucified, "the faithful witness,
the first-begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings
of the earth." Kings of the earth ! How remarkable this
expression, and how clear the mean-ing! In the resurrection,
when Jesus appeared the root of David, we behold the
fulfilment of a
prophecy in the 45th Psalm, "Instead
of thy fathers, shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make
princes in all the earth." This is a solution of the riddle
which Jems pro- pounded to the Pharisees, as we are taught
by inspired testimony in Hebrews i., where the Apostle,
discoursing of the resurrection glory of Christ, quotes the
6th and 7th verses of the Psalm. How glorious is the harmony
of the Scriptures ! Christ saith to John, "1am the root and
offspring of David ;so David, seeing this before, spake of
it, saying, '*Instead
of thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and David, shall
be thy children ;for a seed shall serve thee ;and thy name,
thy resurrection name, shdl be called Wonderful, the mighty
God, the everlasting Fatkr, the prince of peace." These
children were to be made princes in all the earth ;so John,
in the Revelation, ascribee the glory unto the prince of the
kings of the earth, saying, gg Unto him that loved us, and washed us
from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priesta unto God and
his Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever."
These children doubtless embraced all that had fallen asleep
in hope of the resurrection of the dead ;and thus Abraham
and the patriarchs, being the fathers of Christ according to
the flesh, became his children in the resurrection. This
magnificent subject shines out from almost every page of
Scripture. In the resur- rection, Jesus was declared to be
the Son of God with power ;s6 As the Father," said he, "hath life in himself,
so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself." Thus
he spake in the time of his personal ministry; and in the
same conversation wherein he spake of some coming forth to
the resurrection, and of the dead hearing his voice. Now,
"this life in himself," was manifested at the resurrection,
as Peter bears witness in his sermon ;"Having
loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that
he should be holden of it." As having life in himself, we
behold him the root of David; and as the root of David, he
speaks of himself and hi disciples, in the following
beautiful figure: ''I
am the vine, ye are the branches." Now the branches bear not
the root, but the root the branches. In the root is the
life, and thus Christ, being the root of David, according to
the Spirit, in hi resurrection, we understand what that
scripture meaneth which saith, "I am
the resurrection and the life." Christ being raised from the
dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him;
and therefore and thereafter comes in the glorious assurance
of faith, "Because I live, ye shall live also :"''yea,
though ye were dead, yet shall ye live ; for whosoever
liveth and believeth in me, shall never die." Here, we
repeat, (and we dwell with untold satisfaction on the
repetition,) here, in the resurrection, was the life. But
what life P That of dead bodies? Not so, otherwise David is
not yet ascended into the heavens; otherwise the
first-fruits have been gathered in, but not another grain of
the harvest ;otherwise the corn of wheat hath fallen into
the ground, and though it were said that it should bring
forth much fruit, as yet it hath brought forth none. But
thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift,we have not so learned Christ;
we have learned to compare spiritual things with spiritual,
and dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare
ourselves with some that commend themselves. It is the
interpretation of the inspired Peter, that David spake of
the resurrection of Christ, "that his
soulwas not
left in hell;" and we know that the first Adam was made a
living soul, but the last Adam, in resurrection power, was
made a quickening spirit; and thus it is that Paul speaks of
the word which in one place he calls his gospel, and says,
that it is a divider asunder of soul and spirit; of the
living soul, and the quickening spirit; of the first Adam,
and the second. The confusion that has arisen upon the
doctrine of the resurrection, is, I
believe, to be attributed mainly to a
want of attention to these words in the passage above
quoted, "His soul wasnot left in hell." It is generally
supposed that the death of the first Adamrelated to the human bodies of
men. So far from this being fact, I
consider that the death of the body,
or animal death, has no more importance attached to it in
the Bible, than in any other history of successive
generations of men. Just as is the case with the word time.
Death and time are dispensation matters in Scripture :we hold that at the
close of the dispensations, in the fall of Jerusalem, there
was time no longer; so, in like manner, we
maintain that at the same close there was no more death. But
there is time, if we are content to lay the Bible usage of
this relative term aside; so also there is death, if we
choose to follow the same course of exclusion of Bible
meaning. I apprehend that we may take three several views of
the word death, as used in the Bible.-There is animal death,
or the death of the body; as when God saith, s6Moses, my servant,
is dead." There is the death by Adam, of which Paul is
discoursing in 1 Cor. xv. ;" For since
by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the
dead." This death was distinct from animal death, for we
read, "In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely
die;" consequently, if this were the dissolution of the
body, Adam must, on the very day of transgres- sion, have
given up the ghost; but we read again, "All the days of Adam
were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died." I know
that it may be said, the denunciation pronounced by God was
a solemn pro- spective judgment; but facts contradict this.
The death is clearly shown in the immediate exclusion of
Adam from the garden of Eden, which garden was but a type of
a spiritual Eden, as Adam himself was only the figure of him
that was to come. The death is exhibited in the care with
which the Lord God prevented Adam from putting forth his
hand, and taking also of the tree of life, and eating, and
living for ever. This tree of life, finds its exposition in
the blessings of a fully revealed gospel, as we know from
what the Spirit said unto the churches, " Unto him that overcometh will I give to eat of the
tree of life which is in the midst of the paradise of God
:" "and this is
the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith." Adam
was excluded from this eternal life, which could be
possessed by none till Christ our life had appeared :he died to an earthly
paradise, and to natural and temporal blessings, to be
raised to a heavenly paradise, and to spiritual and eternal
blessings. And this reminds of a third description of death,
concerning which there is a great account in the pro
hets-the death of the tribes of Israel. As Adam died in the
loss ofthe good
thine which at his creation God had given him in Eden, so
Israel died in the loss of the good things which appertained
to the first covenant in the land of Canaan. This is the
death spoken of in the pro hecy of Hosea, and in Ezekiel
xxxvii. We read in Hosea, " When
Ephraimspake
trembling, he exalted himself in Israel ;when he offended in
Baal, Ae died." And yet saith the Lord, in the same chapter, " Iwill ransom them
from the power of the grave ; I will redeem them from
death." (Hosea
xiii.) Now it is in reference to this death in the land,
under the first covenant, that we read of such exhortations
as the following: "Turn
ye, turn ye, why will ye die, 0house of Israel !"
How absurd then do the same
exhortations now appear, as they fall from the pulpits of
Arminian preachers! And how ludicrous also ! "Turn ye, turn
ye, why will ye die ? " is sounded forth still ;but the
exhortation is not quoted to the full; "0house of
Israel," is omitted. The exhortation, as used now-a-days,
should run thus to be faithful, " Turn
ye, turn ye, why will ye die, 0house of England!"
0that there were such a thing, in many a church and
chapel, as a glimmering even of a know- ledge of the times
and seasons !
Then, indeed, what we are continually advancing would
require an excuse for being, what it really is, trite and obvious, and not for being
mischievous and paradoxical. But again-We read in
Ezekiel xxxvii. of the dry bones-which were not those of
the people of England, but the dry bones were the whole
house of Israel-we read concerning these, an invitation,
Come from the four winds, 0 breath, and breathe upon these slain,
that they may live." If our interpretation of the
character of the hearers on the day of Pentecost be
correct, we see the life of these bones, in the
breathing of that spirit which was like a rushing mighty
wind ;we witness there and then the opening of the
graves, according to the prophecy of Isaiah, in answer
to this complaint, Our bones are dried, our hope is
lost!" Thus saith the Lord, 4'Behold Iwill open your
graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and
I will put my spirit within you, and I will place you in
your own land." This spirit, as we know, was the spirit
of life in Christ Jesus, and the land was the spiritual
inheritance, flowing with milk and honey, which is the
glory of all lnnds. But we shall be returning to a
subject that has been already briefly discussed. As
Israel died, in the worship of Baal, to the worship of
the true God, as that was established under the first
covenant in the earthly land, to be raised to the true
spiritual worship under the second covenant in the
heavenly land, so Adam died to his creature integrity
and creature comnlunion with God in an earthly paradise,
to be raised in the resurrection of Immanuel to the
garden of the Lord. " By one man sin entered into the world,
and death by sin, and so death passed upon allmen, in whom
(in the first Adam head) all have sinned." And again-"By
one offence judgment came upon all to condem- nation."
This is expressed again -<' By one man's disobedience many were made
sinners; so by the obedience of one shall many be made
righteous." Obedience whereunto ?
To the law of Moses, as it is
often said-Christ hath made up the breach, and repaired
the broken law, and made it honourable ?Nothing of the
kind. That law was only an appendage to the Adam
transgression, until the seed should come to whom the
promise was made; and to suppose that the obedience of
Christ for his people is obedience to the law of Moses,
is to maintain that the life and righteousness brought
in (not wrought out) by Christ, is merely a second
edition of that which Adam enjoyed in Eden. Besides, the
law which Christ magnified and made honour- able, was
not the Sinai, but the Sion law-the law not of sin and death, but of the spirit of life in
Christ Jesus. The obedience upon which the Apostle lays
such emphasis is here-"Being found in fashion as a man,
he humbled himself, and became obedied unto death, even
the death of the cross;" for a
Cursed is every one that hangeth
on a tree;" and again, "He learned obedience by the
things which he suffered, and being made perfect, he
became the author of eternal salvation to all them that
obey him ;"as it is written, "The mystery which was kept
secret since the world began, is now made manifest, and
made known to all nations for the obedience of faith."
(Rom. xvi. 26.) In reference to the obedience of Christ,
(for Christ's was the obedience of faith, as well as his
people's,) it is written in Isaiah, "He was numbered
with the transgressors;" he was made sin, and so
received the wages due to sin, which is death. This was
the denunciation, the day that thou eatest thereof thou
shalt surely die'-thou, the living soul; and so we read, "When his
soul ehall make an offering for sin ;"and again, "My soul is
exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." In the fall of Adam, sin
had its reign
and dominion full and complete, for then death paseed upon
all, and if there were no resur-rection, this death would
for ever remain. But there was to be a resurrection, in
prospect of which a promise was given; which promise was the
mystery hid from ages and from generations, to which, in the
Apostle's day, the twelve tribes instantly serving God were
hoping to come. This promise was that of a resurrection from
the state of death introduced by the Adam fall. It runs like
a golden thread throughout the gloom and bondage of the old
covenant administration of death. It distinguishee between
the two seeds; " I will put enmity between thy seed and her
seed." Love," saith John, "is
of God; and who- soever loveth, is
born of God ;"" he that loveth not his
brother, abideth, as Cain, in death. Whosoever hateth his
brother, as Cain, is a mur-derer, and ye know that no murderer
hath eternal life abiding in him." It was this promise that
was made to Abraham. The romiae was, that he should be the
heir of the world. We compare trlat
with the scripture of Jesus, " Except
a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth
alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit;" and
then we behold this heirship of the world. The promise was
to Abra-ham and his seed, which is Christ, not through the
law, but through the righteousness of faith. And thus we see
the force of the Apostle's reasoning, "If righteousness come by the law,
then Christ is dead in vain." Abraham was fully persuaded
that what God had promised, he was able also to perform
;he was
persuaded of the resurrection of Christ ; he saw that
resurrection in a type, when his faith was tried in the
offering up of Isaac, accounting that God was able to rake
him up from the dead, from whence also he received him in a
figure. Thus, in the intended sacrifice of Isaac, aa it is
here expressed by the Apostle, we see the meaning of
Christ's saying to the Jews, 'cYour father Abraham rejoiced
to seemy day;
he saw it, and was glad." This day was not that in which
Christ was then ministering; for, said he to the Jews, "This
is your hour, and the power of darkness." It was the
resurrection day which Abraham rejoiced to see ; thesame
that John calls " the Lord's day," and
Paul, in the Hebrews, the day of salvation." "Now is
The
accepted time, now is the day of salvation;" and yet we hear
continually this proclamation still sounded forth by those
called Arminians, and Calvinists cannot silence them, or
prove them to be in error. It was the same resurrection day
of which David spake in the second Psalm, according to
Paul's opening up of the mystery of that Psalm in Acts xiii.
and Hebrews i. Paul testified at Antioch on this wise,
" We declare unto you glad tidings,
how that The promise which was made unto the fathers, God
hath fulfilled the same unto us Their children, in that he
hath raised up Jesus again; as it is alsowritten in the second Psalm,
''Thou art my son, this day have I
begotten thee;" and this day is with
the Lord as a thousand years, and the thousand years as one
day; and this thousand years is the first resur- rection. It
was, moreover, this day of the first resurrection which Job
saw, when he said, '<Iknow
that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shd stand at the latter
day upon the earth ; and though after my skin, worms destroy this body, yet OUTof my flesh shall
Isee God."
These, Abraham, Daniel, Job, and all the fathers, died in
the faith of the promise of the resurrection yet to be
fulfilled, and their faith was counted to them for
righteousness ;and the same righteousness, saith the
Apostle, "shall
be imputed to us if we believe on him that raised up Jesus
our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences,
but raised again for our justification." In being delivered
for our offences, he made a reconciliation ;"For
we," saith Paul, " were reconciled to God by the death of his
Son :"and then,
looking upon this death as if it were a link in the wondrous
chain of redemption, he adds, "much more, being reconciled,
we shall he saved by his life." Daniel testifies very fully
to the work of Messiah, as in ix. 24, where we read,"
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy (holy)
people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression,
and to seal (or perfect) sin- offerings, and to cover
iniquity, and to bring in a righteousness of ages, and to seal
(or finish) vision and prophet, and to anoint a holy of
holies." This is a magnificent passage, the fulness of which
is, we conceive, connected with the fulfilment of the
mediatorial character of Christ, when, at the overthrow of
the Jewish house, he appeared the second time without sin
unto salvation, thereby showing that the neces- sity for
intercession was done away. We quote the passage now, for
the purpose of drawing attention to the words, "to
bring in a righteous- ness of ages." Now it is evident that
this was not "
in being delivered for offences," hut in "being
raised again for justification of life ;"which resurrection
was an event with continuous effects, up to a given time, up
to the final resurrection at the last day. The resurrection
of Christ, in this aspect, may he defined as the
fountain-head from whence flowed all spiritual blessings in
Christ Jesus, or, as a summit from whence to view the
wonders of Immanuel's land. It was so in the faith of the
patriarchs of old, when as yet the event itself was in the
womb of the future. This was the Pis@ promise, in which the
fathers rejoiced. It appears that until that day, that
glorious resurrection period, had transpired, the new
testament in the son of God, with all its divine blessings,
had no place, and could not come into operation ;"A testa-
ment ia of force ahr men are dead, otherwise it is of no
strength at all while the testator liveth." Thus, then, in
this view of the resurrec- tion of Christ, we can enter into
the meaning of Paul's strong language in 1Cor. xv., where he
tells the Corinthians, "If Christ be not risen, ye are yet
in your sins." Sin reigns still unto death, and the reign of
grace has never yet commenced. If the first-fruits have never
appeared, it is in vain to expect the harvwt; if the root
have not revived out of the dry ground, what must become of
the branches ?
Nay, argues the Apostle further, "If Christ he not risen,
then they also which are fallen asleep are perished."
Abraham is perished, and what then becomes of the promise,
"1am the God of Abraham ?" what, indeed, becomes of the
being of a God who cannot lie ?" David is perished ! so then
it was a false conclusion wherewith he comforted himself on
his dying bed, saying, "Although my house be not so with
God, yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant,
ordered in all things and sure." a
But, beloved." writes the Apostle,
athis is not so
; now is Christ risen fmm the dead, and become the
first-fruits of them that slept."
We have thus endeavoad toexhibit somewhat of
The lmgtb and breadth of that mad fundamental dimpo~tantbranch
ofthedoetrine
of The Gospel-the resurrection of The Son of Gud-which,
we again
emphatically pronounce, was not a mmrmhn of dnst Oar next step is
from the resurrection of Christ, The Father of The
age, to
thatof bis seed, the sainta : from the fi-fmita, to the harvest; and fiwn the fustaegO~enand W-born,
TheHead, to
Therest of
theWy, themembers.
After what baa heen already 0-ed,we are,
ofcorn, prepared
for a resurrection which doe not concern thehuman bodies of
men. And being prepared for a view of the mmmxtion, thou&
not that of our bodies, we are, as bas heen seen,far from looking upon the
rewr-don of C brist merely as a great mirack, confinnato
y of his
mimion. There is nothii in this confirmation view, as it is
generally considered in Easter Sunday sermons :there is everything in
it, provided that it be scripturally carried out. There is
notbi in such view,if CW have not come a second time :there is everything,
if be bare. There is nothong if Christ have not come a second
time, because we have no authorid ministry to enforce and
explain the imperfectly4eveloped doctrine:
there was very much in Apostolic
times, because such minis-try
was then forthcoming -such ministy being esentially
requisite for the ratification of that which was yet future.
Bow 0th hare we heard the death of Christ diecoursed upon as
a great event: and then that tbi death was nothing without
the resurrection-and then that the resurrection was crowned by the
ascension-and then-no
;there we have a full stop. Wi it, we ask, be admitted that
all these
glorious events must go for nothing, without the second
appearing ? Then, why are we to be harassed by
being told that the second appearing isyet future-harassed, because we
know not to whom to have recotme ss our pastors and
teachers-harassed, became we know that the heaven-inspired ministers of Jesus Christ
were appointed until the second appearing-harassed, because
we must be oppressed with the painful thought, that if the second advent
have not transpired, Christ &.been
onf~thhlto hi. word ;and we arendtated to adopt the prayer of the Roman Catholic (which, in
heir ignorance, Protestants gave M
ridiculously abused, in the present
intolerant outcry against an act
of imperative justice toward the
Romanists :we
allude to the opposition offered to the Maynooth grant
:)we must adopt
their prayer, and say -"Lord,
if it be an error which we have followed, thou thyself hast
deceived us by thine Apdes, by the pastors and teachere
appointed by thee for the work of the ministry, for the
perfecting of the saints, for the edifying of the body of
Christ; for these, thy ministers, were given to the end of
the world :till
we all should come into the unity of the faith, unto a
perfect man." Iam
aware that these remarks are only a repetition of what has
been stated in a former part of the work ;but Ibelieve that the
question cannot be too frequently asked, Where is the
ministry ?
In considering the resurrection of the
members as consequent upon that of the head of the body, we
leave out the confirmation view of the doctrine, and shall
only touch upon the commonly-received doctrine of a
resurrection of the human body, as we shall have occasion to
explode the same in the Scriptures, which will come under
our notice. Indeed, in the remaining observations which
I have to make
on this subject, I shall mainly confine myself to an examination
of divers Scriptures bearing upon it.
The Epistle to the Romans commences with
a declaration concerning Jesus Christ, that he who was
made of the seed of David, according to the flesh, was
"declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the
Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead." The
Son of God being seated on the throne of David, was ssessed of the key of
David-" had the kegs of hell and of death." These keys must
not be confounded with the keys given to Peter :this
would be to put Peter into the place of Christ, and to
confound the root with the branches. The key of David was
Christ's investiture with all power in heaven and on earth,
by which he opened and none could shnt, and shut and none
could open. Having the key of David, be opened the kingdom
of Heaven to all believers, and none could shut :the gates of hell
should not prevail against it. He opened the Gospel
dispensation, and shut that of the law, himself being the
body from which the shadows of the law proceeded, and none
could open. The key of David, as the key of death, is
beautifully expressed in the words, "When
thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death, thou didst open
the kingdom of Heaven to all believers." Paul, likewise, in
2Tim. i. 10,
gives us an exposition of the opening and shutting, where he
writes-"He hath abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light
by the Gospels - or, again in 2 Corin. ii., where he speaks of the
ministration of condemnation and death being done away, in
the ministration of righteousness and of life. These
Scriptures establish an immediate connexion between the
resurrection of Christ and his everlasting seed in the life,
as there was an immediate connexion between Adam and his
posterity in the death. Christ and Adam are two heads, two
seeds; and, saith Paul, in 1 Cor. xv., To every seed," or, more
literally, "To
each of the seeds there is his own body." As the body in the
first Adam died, and was judged in his one trans- gkon, so
the body in the second Adam lived, and was acquitted in his
one justification. And here, I apprehend, is an answer to the objection so
often urged, If the second advent, the judgment and the
resurrection, transpired at the destruction of Jerusalem,
how are we, the people of England, or the people of China,
interested in these eventa? For an answer to this, we might
simply refer to Eph. ii. 7,"That, in
the ages to come, he might show the exceeding riches of his
grace in his kindness towards us through Jesus Christ :"or, again, Unto him be glory in the church, by
Christ Jesus, throughout all generations of the age of
ages." But, we ask, how were we interested in tlre sinof Adam, or the
sacrifice of Christ: and why was it not as requisite that we
should be present on both occasions-why should we not be
present at the judgment in Eden, ss muah as at the judgment
of the great day in Jerusalem ? The great mistake is that the family of God
will look within themselves, instead of coming out of themselves and looking at the dispensations which God has
severally manifested. The effect of the resurrection of
Christ was, that thereby he had abolished death, and brought life and
immortality to light. This was true, independent of all
understanding of the truth :it
was true, whether known to one or one thousand. The sun
shines, but because I am in a dungeon, and cannot see it, therefore,
I deny that the
sun shines. So it is in dealing with the Bible, with God's
various dispensations. There they are, a revelation, no
matter as to the ignorance or knowledge of that poor
earth-worm, man. On the day of Pentecost, Peter declared
that Jesus of Nazareth was at the right hand of God exalted.
Like the man in the dungeon, who denies that the sun shines,
so Peter's hearers might have denied, and many of them did
deny, that Jesus was King in Zion, because they did not
see him with the
bodily eye. This, however, did not alter the truth, any more
than if it be denied now that Christ has come a second time,
because every eye did not see him, can alter the fact of
that
appearing. To deny that there can be a revelation, without.
it be a revelation to me, is to deny that there can be a God, unless
that God
manifest himself to me individually: he may be known to all
the world ;but if he be not known to me, there can be no God ! Now,
let us take this and bring it to bear upon the resurrection
consequent upon the resurrection of Christ. This
resurrection attached to a state or constitution, in my
apprehension of it. In this state or constitution allthe family of God,
who were of the existing generation, were interested,
independent of their knowledge. For instance, the Philippian
jailor, as he was judged in the first Adam head, so he was justified in
the resurrection of the second Adam head. Did his ignorance
of these facts, prior to Paul's preaching, absolve him from
the judgment any more than it precluded him from the
justification ?
By no means. As he had been in the state of
condemnation by the first Adam, so
was he then in the state of
justification by the second. He was reconciled to God by the
death of the Son, and not by the knowledge of that death
;and much more, being reconciled, he should be (not he was)
saved by his life, when he should appear the second time
without sin unto salvation. How infi- nitely important is
this truth, which I have thus feebly, indeed, expressed
!0 that there
were such a heart in believers now, that they would cease to
measure themselves by themselves, and consider how much more
glorious it is to measure themselves by the finished work of
the Lord Jesus Christ-to survey themselves, not in the glass
which reflects their own natural image, but in the s
lendours of a
meridian and tropical sun, which absorbs within itself
a1rthat
image, and causes its shadow to disappear !
The resurrection of the members of the
body belonging to the second Adam head is scripturally
apprehended only in its dispensation character, in its
relation to the covenants of Sinai and Zion. This is clearly
seen on reference to a former part of this treatise, wherein
we discoursed of the vast change of state, accompanied with
a somewhat corresponding change of knowledge, which wns
given tothe
disciples immediately subsequent to
the resurrection of Christ. We say a
somewhat corre- sponding knowledge of the state, because we
must not conclude that, on the day of Pentecost, the curtain
which had been over the Mount Zion state was entirely lifted
up, for that could not be until the end of all things, in
the fall of Jerusalem ;and, therefore, an Apostle writes,
<'We know in
part." Now, the Apostle testifies to this change in 2 Cor. iii., and last verse, "We all,
with open face, beholding, as in a glass, the glory of the
Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory,
as of the Lord the Spirit." This is a most important
Scripture, and will well repay a minute examination. The
Apostle, when he writes, "we all," is
discoursing of the one body which Christ had reconciled, of
which body he has many things to say to these Corinthian
believers. The change which he intimates is not any
remodelling, any alteration, any glorifying of the natural
bodies of these believers, but it is a change from the
ministration of condemnation and death, of which he speaks
in the former verses of the chapter, to the ministration of
righteousness and life; or, m other words, from the firsti nferior and
temporal covenant, which was added because of the Adam
transgression, to the second superior and spiritual covenant,
which was brought in when that transgression was redeemed.
"Now," saith
Paul, "the
ministration of the law was glorious, though it were the
ministration of death, so that we were, 0 Corinthians, formerly
in a glorious state and dipensation. But the ministration
of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus, setting ns free from
that of sin and death, is rather glorious. We are changed,
translated, dinto
that glory; and now such is this our resurrection, of such
magnificence, that that ministration in which we formerly
were hath no glory whatever, by reason of this which
excelleth, in which you now stand :the
fine gold is tarnished and dim ;ai-chabod is written upon
our glorious death state; and now we see that all our
righteous- ness in that state is as filthy rags, which the
wind hath swept away.,' So much by way of comment on the
information which Paul was here conveying tothe Corinthians.
Now, it is possible that certain of the Corinthian believers
could not recognize this exceeding glory, into which Paul
affirmed that all were changed. It is probable that such
might be the case, when we consider the Judaizing
inclinations of the Galatian church. But did this put them
out of the pale of that changed state ? Did Paul compromise
the change of state, because of their refusal to acknowledge
it PHear him
: 6gYe are not
under the law, but under grace." Did not the Apostle
expressly maintain thisdistinction of state, independent of
any and all individual knowledge of the same ? Hear him
again :"Christ
is become of none effect; whosoever of you are justified by
the law: ye are fallen from grace." But the grace state was
there still, and they were in it. They were fallen from the
privilege of enjoyment, as foolish and
bewitched; as having begun in the Spirit, and desiring to
end in the flesh ;as having made a start with Christ and
grace, and falling back to Moses and works; concerning which
falling it is that the Apostle addresses the backsliding
Galatians in these affectionate terms, "My little children,
of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in
you." It might well be asked here, What have the notions of
the new birth which are now commonly entertained, to say in explanation
of that passage? There would be none to answer this inquiry,
for the common views of the day look upon Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob as having been regenerated-born again, equally
with Paul or Peter.
Upon this verse in 2Cor. iii., we found what we consider
to be the scriptural doctrine of the resurrection of the
body, which it pleased God to give to
the second Adam head. The resurrection
was a regeneration ;for these terms I conceive to have the same meaning.
The resurrection was also a reformation; a change had been
made in the priesthood, and where n
change is in the priesthoood, there
must, of necessity, saith Paul, be a change of the law; and
where a change is made in the law, there is a change in the
constitution. Thus it waa with the Church of God; there was
a change in its constitution on the resurrection of Christ,
as there wae in The constitution of England on the bringing
in of the Reform Bill. The change effected through the
resurrection of Christ, had nothing to do with the animal
existence or non-existence of believers and unbelievers, any
more than had the Reform Bill of 1831, any relation to the
animal existence or death of those who opposed or favoured
such reform. And let it be observed, that it is just as reasonable for a
person to maintain that the laws of England were not altered
at the time of the passing of the Reform Bill, as it was
reasonable for a Jew, in the Apostolic day, to deny the
first resurrection-or as it is for Christians, of our day,
to deny the final resurrection at the fall of Jerusalem.
To sum up the whole matter. The fact is,
that God's own established worship is of the first
importance; but this worship has been manifested by Him in
various forms, at different times. The worship, for the time
being, was the true worship ;the worship must be accord-ing
to the state of the church, so that it comes to pass that it was just as
idolatrous under the dispensation of Christ to abide by the
dispensation of Moses, as it had been idolatrous under
that dispensation for the Ten tribes to be drawn aside to
the worship of Baal. The testimony of the prophet, when
speaking of gospel times, is decisive in this case; Isaiah writes, in chapter lxvi. verse 3, "He that killeth an
ox, is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as
if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation,
as if he offered
swine's blood." Now, to offer an oblation, to sacrifice a
lamb, and to kill an ox, were well- pleasing in the sight of
God, under the law. Yes, but the prophet is describing
matters asunder
the gospel, when, the law having passed away, those
commendable things had become an abomination to the Lord. We
rest our rejection of the sacrament of the Lord's Supper
here, as will be seen in the sequel.
Having briefly described the nature of
the resnrrection, as a dispen-sation matter attaching to the
body of Christ, and not to bodies of clay, we will now
proceed to offer a few Scripture evidences of such
resurrection during the ministry of the Apostles.
The Body raised.
And hath raised us up together, and made
us sit together in hea- venly places in Christ Jesus.-Eph.
ii. 6. If ye then be risen with Christ.-Col. iii. 1.
Quickened. You hath he quickened
who were dead in trespasses and sins.- Eph. ii.
I. Hath quickened us together with Christ.-Eph. ii. 5.
Changed.
Ye are changed into the same image,
from glory to glory,- 2 Cor. iii. 18. This change was typified in
Zechariah iii., in the person of Joshua, the high priest
representing the church. "The
angel spake unto those that stood before him, saying,
Take away the filthy gar- ments from him. And unto him
he said, Behold I have caused thine iniquity to pass from
thee, and I will clothe thee with change of raiment."
Zmh. iii. 4.
Having hinted at two resurrections,
and having, from the above- quoted passages, proved one
resurrection to have transpired in the Apostolic age, we
will now proceed to give Scripture evidence of the
other.
The Body to be raised.
And God hath both raised up the Lord,
and will also raise up us by his own power.-1 Cor. vi.
14. Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus,
shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present us with
you.72 Cor. iv. 14.
To be quickened.
But if the Spirit of him that raised
up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up
Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth
in you.-Rom. viii. 11.
To be changed.
We shall not all sleep, but we shall
all be changed.-1 Cor. xv. 51. Who shall change our vile
body.- Phil. iii. 21. Here are two resurrections
scripturally proved. That the believers
to whom the Apostle addressed the
above-quoted passages were raised, cannot be denied
;that they were raised together
with Christ, is equally evident ;and if Christ's
resurrection was merely a resurrection of dust, it may
be asked, as it has been and will be asked, How were
believers risen with Christ, seeing that they had
not undergone animal dissolution ?
This being raised with Christ, was
the first resurrection ;and Paul, writing of another to
follow, agrees with John in the Revelation, from whom
most probably he learned the doctrine. In Rev. xx.5, 6, we read
asfollows:
But the rest of the dead lived not again until the
thousand years were finished. This is the first
resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection; on such the second death
hath no power; but they shall be priests of God and of
Christ. and shall reinn with him a thousand vears." On
these verses is foudded a doctringwhich is very popular
wiih many of the Apostolic I succession of our times-the
doctrine of the Millennium. And here Iwe would notice
for amoment
the wonderful impertinence of the dogma of Apostolic
succession, when considered in relation to the thousand
years' reign. Many who claim to be successors of the
Apostles, do not believe in a Millennium at all ;and of those who
do teach and preach it in a prospective character, there
are hardly two that are agreed; and yet, be it observed,
these have all the same ordination, (for Ispeak in
reference to the Church of England, "the Holy Catholic
and Apostolic " Establishment,) they are all ranged under
the same succession, and this
is their seeing eye to eye, as
Zion's watchmen : this diecord, we are told, is their being of the same mind
and judgment: this confueion and discrepancy, is a being led
into all truth- you may say of all
Ministry, as the hand-writing on the
wall said of Belshazzar, ICThou
art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting !"
From the statement which has already been
given respecting a resurrection during the period of the
Apostolic ministry, we are of opinion that an easy and simple solution
of the thousand years' reign may be rendered. It is well
worthy of remark, that there have been commentators upon the
Book of the Revelation who have maintained that all the
seven trumpets therein mentioned have been sounded, but who
have not seen the sounding of the seventh and last trumpet,
as synchronous with the resurrection of the dead, in 1 Cor.
xv. It is equally worthy of notice that there have been
commentators on the same Book, who have maintained the
fulfilment of most matters therein, prior to the fall of
Jerusalem, but not of all, because of the obstacle of this
thousand years, which they could not expound, in agreement
with the like period. Dr. Hammond is a case in point. In&ting his commentary
on the New Testament, he determined to leave out all
exposition of the Revelation :but
when he came to the Book, and read in the opening chapter
that the time of the fulfilment of the prophecies was athand, (Rev. i. 4.,)and that the
things which God gave unto John were shortly to come to
pass, he was so struck with this express language, that he
was drawn by an irresistible necessity to attempt an
exposition. The Dr., in the last chapter of 2nd Peter,
utterly repudiates the notion of that chapter teaching a
physical destruction of the globe. He writes, ''This passing away and
dissolving heavens, earth, and elements, sounding very
tragically, are mistaken for the burning of this globe." But
when he arrives in the course of exposition at the thon-
sand years' reign, he looks to futurity. Had that subject
been opened up to him and others, in what we conceive to be
its true retrospective meaning, we can imagine that there
would now have been spared much of the pains and trouble
which must be the lot of all who endeavour to set before
Christian people a view of the Bible as being harmonious and
self-interpreting, and completely fulfilled and finished.
How glo- riously self-interpreting does the Bible appear,
when we connect the first resurrection with the oft-repeated
assertion, that believers, to whom the Apostles addressed
their Epistles, were raised, quickened, translated, changed,
and born again, so that they should never taste of death ! There
is no mention of a resurrection, a quickening, a change,
trans- lation, or regeneration having transpired prior to
the Apostolic dis- pensation, before the death and
~wurrection of Christ. No mention, we say, though Jesus
affirmed, in his ministry, "He
that heareth my word, is passed from death to life;" seeing
that this he spake in the spirit of prophecy, as he did when
he breathed upon his disciples, and said unto them, "Receive
ye the Holy Ghost." On the other hand, as we have seen, the
Epistles and Apostolic preaching are altogether taken up
with this resurrection, which had then transpired. Our
business is therefore to examine the context of John's
declaration concerning the first resurrection, in order that
we may discover whether it do or do not bear internal
evidence of an application to the Apostolic age. We refer to
the commencement of the 4th verse "And I saw thrones," &c.
Now we understand that there
exists the same relation between the Prophecy of Daniel
and the Revelation of John, as between a lock and a key;
Daniel's prophecy being the sealed book which John saw,
and which none but the Lion of the tribe of Judah could
prevail to open. We conclude that the judgment described
in the opening of John xx. 4, is identical with that of
Daniel, as related in his seventh chapter. This judgment
of Daniel has been proved in relation tothe Apostles, in
a former part of our treatise. There is a parallelism in
the lannuwe in which it is described with that which is
kmployed in the ~evehio;. "The judgment of Daniel," says
Professor Bush. "assuredlv
commences svnchronicallv with the commencement of Christ's kingdim, and flows oi with the flix of his
earthly sovereignty dnring the gospel age." Mede asserts
that the kingdom of the Apocalypse, wherein the saints
reign with Christ a thousand years, is the same with the
kingdom of the Son of Man, and saints of the Most High,
in Daniel. If, then, we establish that this kingdom of
the Son of Man commenced when he ascended up on high,
and sat down at the right hand of God, then it will
follow that we have found, at all events, the beginning
of the thousand years' reign ;and then, as Professor
Bush justly observes, the inference is obvious, the
Millennium of John must be referred to a ~ast. and not a
future period of historv. It is merelv the designation
of 6ne ilustrious portion bf the reign of Christ, durini
the dispensation that commenced at his inaueuration
askin^ in
Zion. of wGch the second Psalm recites the decrei. Now,
for thi proof of the commencement of Christ's kingdom,
we may be permitted to refer back to the comparison and
correspondences which we instituted and observed in
treating of the Apostolic Baptism of the Holy Ghost and
fire. Our concern at present is with an exposition of
the verses which speak of the thousand years' reign, in
connexion, if possible, with the exposition formerly
given of Daniel's prophecy in respect to the time of
fulfilment. We begin with suggesting on enquiry as to
whether Rev. xx. 4, is correctly translated ;and here we
will append the follow- ing valuable remarks from Gipp's
First Resurrection, p. 133. "In our translation, the verbs,
sat, was given, lived, reigned, are in one tense; but the
verbs, had worshipped, and had received, are in another. In
the Greek, however, they are all in the same tense, the
aorist. According to our translation, the time of the
"worshipping the beast," and "receiving his mark," &c., is
different from that of "sitting on the throne," the "living
and reigning." The impression which it conveys is, that the
"worshipping the beast," &c. took place in some period
antecedent to that during which the persons reign with
Christ. I cannot, however, perceive that the original
implies this. It appears to me that as all these verbs are
in the same tense in the original, so they must all refer to
the same time :and that whatever be the time of "not
worshipping the beast, nor receiving his mark," the same is
the time of "sitting on thrones, living, and reigning." I
conceive,
therefore, that the time during which the persons
described refuse to woship the beast and his image, is
that during which they are sitting on thrones, living
and reigning with Christ. Having made these observations,
I would
suggest whether it would not be more conectly translated
thus: "And 1 saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them:
and I saw the
souls of those who were beheaded for the testimony of Jesus,
and for the word of God, and such as worshipped not the
beast, neither his image, and received not his mark upon
their forehead, and their hand, and lived and reigned with
Christ the thousand years." With these remarks I concur, and likewise
with the following as an outline of the prophecy, "That a body of persons
would arise in the kingdom of the beast, who would, in a
figurative sense, sit upon thrones, have judgment given unto
them, and live and reign with Christ :and
that the subjects of this the first resurrection, would be
characterized by refusing to worship the beast and his
image, and would be exposed to persecution, and to be slain
for the testimony of Jesus, and the word of God." This most
important exposition is an insuperable bar to the reception
of all view of the Millennium as being yet future. The
saints, in John's vision, are described as beheaded for the
testimony of Jesus; which circumstance is clearly opened up
in such histories as Herod's stretching out his hand to vex
certain of the church ;and killing James, the brother of
John, with the sword. "Now,
on the supposition that the Millennium of John is yet
future, and coincident with the seventh thousand years from
the creation, we hold it to be impossible to assign a
satisfactory reason why the saints then living should
be characterized by attributes that pertain to believers
of another and entirely different period ;for we strenuously
maintain that it is the same persons who live, and reign,
and judge, and are beheaded, and all too at precisely the same time.
They live in the midst of, and
notwithstanding, their being put to death." The above are
Mr. Bush's observations; they might have been considerably
strengthened, had he taken what we conceive to be the
scriptural view of the beheading. We confine that within the
period of Jerusalem's desolation, and we have the most
express authority for so doing, as appears from the
following passage :"And
in her (mystic Babylon, the city where the Lord was
crucified,) was found the blood of prophets, and of
saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth."
Now we remember that a prophet could not perish out of
Jerusalem, and that Jesus had testified that all the
righteous blood shed upon the earth should be required of
that generation; and in this remembrance we have a limit put
to the beheading in John's vision. We must by no means
include among the number of those wliom John saw, any who
perished after the destruction of Jerusalem, for a plain
reason, that though it is true there have been martyrs
(there have been no rophets, however,) since that period,
they are not the subjects of !cdpture testimony. Therefore
Profemor Bush comes in collision with more than one express
Bible declaration, when he affirms that the martyrs in the
reign of Cbarlemagne, or in the fiRh century, are alluded to
in Rev. xx. 4.
However, the inference which he draws against future mil-
lennial views, from the fact of martyrdom and kingdom being
synchro- nical, is most just, and suits our present purpose,
which is to give what we conceive to be the scriptural
doctrine of the Millennium, as confined to the period of the
Apostolic ministry.
There is another particular deducible
from the above exposition of Rev. xx. 4, which equally
militates against the doctrine of a future Millennium. So
far as I have head of or understand modem Millennarianism, this future thousand years is
to be a period of universal peace, when the wolf shall lie
down with the lamb; when there shall be no more death, nor
curse, nor barren land ;when nation shall not lift up sword
against nation, and when they shall learn war no more. But
how does this Judaizing view agree with John's vision ?He saw the souls of
the saints living in the midst of the slaughter of their
bodies, for we maintain that the beheading cannot be
separated from the reigning. Let our present millennialists
understand the slaughter of the cruelties exercised by the
Papacy; let them descant upon the fires kindled around the
martyrs and confessors of the Reformation, (have I& Reformers
never kindled fires? vide Calvin versus
Servetus;) let them describe in
glowing colours these fires, the beacon lights towering in
the dark ages above the stakes to which martyrs were tied.
What then ? Their Millennium, on their own showing, is a
season of persecution. The reign of the Beast is, on their own showing,
the reign of apostacy and death ;but most unquestionably
this reign is synchmnical with the first resurrection,
which precedes the destruction of the Beast. The period of
the thousand years was, says Mr. Bush, in the main, aperiod of the empire
of spiritual death. It was not a prosperous era, but the
reverse; and this agrees with the tradition in the Jewish Midrash
Tillin, where it is said, that "upon
the coming of the Messiah, the world shall he desolated
for a thousand years." What will millennialists say to this
PBut it is all
vanity. To attempt to open up md expose the conflicting and
discordant views of those who look for the thousand years as
yet to transpire, would be something like attempting to
sweep away accumulations of rubbish which centuries have
deposited in one place; we should run a considerable risk of
being smothered with dust. As to examining the expositions
of prophecy in regard to the Millennium, which Mr.
Bickersteth and writers of the Evangelical school have sent
forth into the world, we should think that would be lost
labour. The fashionable evangelical class of theologians
have no mind wherewith to grasp these subjects; they are
deficient in intellectual requirements. Indeed, if there be
one phasis of religious opinion more contemptible in an
intellectual point of view than another, it is the
mingle-mangle Calvinistic and Arminian, now so popular in the land ;and which, being so popular, would tell
very little in favour of English intellect, were it not that
it is a known fact, that the think- ingminds of our countrymen care as
much for one set of religious opinions as another; or, Gallio-like,
care for none of these things; or, if they seem to care, it is only semblance, arising from
self-interest, and a hundred causes connected with that
predominating principle of human action.
But to proceed with our investigation of
Rev. xx. 4, 6. Having established the important truth that
these first resurrection saints were living and reigning in
the midst of the slaughter of their bodies, the enquiry will
naturally be suggested in many minds, "How can these things
be ? "The
answer is at once simple and satisfactory, from a reference
to a scripture which has often already been quoted, and can
never be insisted upon or examined too frequently. We allude
to the words wherewith the Lord met Martha's carnal notions
of a resurrection, '# I AM the resurrection and the life ;he that
believeth on
me, though he were dead, yet shall he live; and
whosoever liveth and believeth in me, shall never die." This
was the life lived by the millennia1 martyrs; a life which
is exhibited by the Apostle in Rom. viii., in one of the
noblest strains of eloquence which ever fell from the lips
of man, For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor
angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present,
nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other
creature, shall be able to se arate ua from the love of God which is in
Christ Jesus our Lord." (Lm. viii. 38-9.) This was a life,
beyond the reach of those who were able to kill the body, but after that had no more
that they could do." This was a life of which the Holy Ghost
bath left a memorable record in the stoning of Stephen ;'I
They stoned Stephen, calling upon
God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive myspirit! "
Whether these saints were in the
flesh, or out of the flesh; in the body, or out of the body;
their living, reigning, and judging was all the same,- was
still going on without a moment's interruption. Animal
dissolution to them was no more than laying aside at night
the garments which had been worn during the day; as Peter
indeed testifies, when he writes that he must shortly put of
his tabernacle. This was life, therefore, which had nothing
in common with a resurrection of dead bodies; which involved
no implication of the revival of such bodies; but, on the
contrary, which rather expressed a rejoicing in an
everlasting liberation from the clog of mortality ;for,
saith one, "To
me to live is Christ, and to die, gain;" though yet when
that one did die, he was still no more at that tune than a
partaker of the first resurrection.
In continuing our examination of this
subject, there is one more particular connected with the
passage in Rev. xx., which ought to be noticed, before we
proceed tofix
the period of this first resurrection, and that is the 6th
verse. " But the rest of the dead
lived not again till the thousand years were finished." Let
it be observed that here, as throughout the whole chapter,
there is not the remotest allusion to
dead bodies, though the verse has been
usually read and understood with such application. And let
it be further observed, that the words <'till the thousand
years were finished," do not of themselves necessarily
imply, that when the thousand years were finished, then,
they did live, or live again, but rather, that they never
lived at all. The context, however, satisfies me that they
did live, just as much as that the Devil and Satan was loosed
for a little season, at the expiration of the thousand
years. But no Scripture testimony is forthcoming respect-
ing a living again. Mr. Bush observes, that there is no
authority for the insertion of the word "again." in the text.
He says, "We may
here remark, that what we deem the false construction
usually put upon the passage respecting the living of the
rest of the dead, has undoubtedly arisen from a false
reading of the original. In the established text of the
earlier editions of the Greek Testament, the lection is, O~K&Y;(VOOLY,which
properly implies, lived not again, and after this our
translation was made. But all the modern editions
unanimously reject this reading, and adopt, duxlived
~(~COLY, not." This gives a new
complexion to
the passage. Indeed, this makes the passage intelligible,
which, with the word "again,"
it was not, because "to live again"
implies previous life. But previous life, in the view which
has been given above of the life of the slaughtered saints,
there could be none, inasmuch as such life is equivalent to
immortality; or, at all events, we may saythat if the words
"lived not again" signify those who embraced not the
testimony of Jesus, the word again" must be interpolated, as it is not
predicated of those who held the witness of Jesus, that
their life was a living again. If not affirmed of one, where
is the connexion if it be affirmed of the other. I am
inclined to consider the rest of the dead (for I see nothing gained by
rendering it, the rest even the dead,) as included
and comprehended in this pas- sage from Hebrews xi., "These all died in
faith, not having received the promises." This view is
confirmed from the circumstances of the limit which, as will
be seen in the sequel, we are constrained to affix to the
thousand years. It may also be mentioned, that it is possible
there may be an intimate connexion between "
the rat of the dead." and such scriptures as
the following : "
David is not yet ascended into the heavens;"
or, till the heavens be no more, I
shall not awake, nor be raised out of my
sleep." Besides, it may be added, where is life predicated
in Scripture of any but of those who are in "Christ our life
?"There is a
resurrection of the unjust, but it is to condemnation, not
to life, or living again : it is to condemnation, as opposed to life. AS
dead they live, as dead they die ;
as dead in a Scripture sense, they
rise; and as
dead, they are judged to a second death. It is death all
over : " let the
dead bury their dead." However, we insist not upon this-upon
John's vision of the dead standing, small and great,
before God ;"" of the dead being
judged out of the books," and so on :
let it be granted, that by the rest of
the dead, or the rest, even the dead, we are to understand
those who had worshipped the beast, or those who had not the
testimony of Jesus ;still it is evident that the thousand
years' reign, and the life of the rest at the close of that
thousand years, are events which are staged in this world,
and during a past period of the continuance of this
visible system of things. It is evident, we say, if the two
strongest passages on the resurrection, which are to be
found, one in the Old, and the other in the New Testament,
be any proof and confirmation. One passage to which we
allude, is Daniel xii. 2,"
which," says Professor Bush, "contains, more
emphatically perhaps than any other in the Old Testament,
the germ of resurrection doc- trine." The verse is as
follows: "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the
earth shall awake; some to everlasting life, and some to
shame and everlasting contempt." Now, that this scripture
must be confined, as regards a fulfilment, to the present,
and not to a future state of existence, will be evident by a
more literal version : "And many of the sleepers of earth-dust shall
awake ; these to the life of the age, and these to the shame
and contempt of the age." The age is the age of the Messiah
; and thus we see from what source the Jews derived their
notion of the resurrection in this world and on this earth,
to a life in the world which we have already had occasion to
notice. This passage in Daniel occupies much of the
attention of Rabbinical writers, when describing the glories
of Messiah's kingdom. They, as we well know, stage this
resurrection contemporaneously with n
period of peace and prosperity, from
the rising to the setting sun : and, therefore, tradition, if it be of any
weight, is in favour of the fulfilment of Daniel xii. 2, irrespective of what k now generally omkrsbod
by and of The world, and a day of judgment. But we have no need
to have remam to
The opinions of any learned Rabbi in
these matters. We need not de&te from our well-tried practice of
comparingqirbml
things aitb
spiritad. Let ne examine, for one moment, thecontext
in Dan. in order to diecover whether or no that context will&d anything by
way of firing the time when this awakings should transpire. Now, we
learn, from a glance at the first
rerae, tbm
important f.ct, tht The event spoken of in the second vm k tooccar at a pe&d when Michael shall
stand up, the great prince that standeth for the children
of thy people; and there shall be a time of tronbk, wch
re never
was since There was a nation, even
to that ~ametime:
ad at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one
that shall be f d written in The boot" Now, as I have stated before, Irepeat; Ido earneatly deah to
know and receive what k tmth. How can any man, with such desire,
avoid comparing this language with The Saviour's own words
in Matthew xxiv. 31? "There shall be great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning of
The world to this time-no, nor ever shall be." And having
institated, as the earnest inqaim aRer truth is bound
to institote, such comparison, bow ia it eble toavoid coming tothe wnclosion, that
Daniel's prophecy is confined within the bit of the fall of
Jerusalem? The
comparison clearly iden* The periods; for, ashas been most jdyobeerved, there
cannot be two epoche, both of which shall exclode all
parallels in the way here described, as thi would be to exclude each other.
This awaking,
mentioned by Daniel, is assuredly something which is to
transpire at a
time of trouble, which time will answer to nothing but to
the end of the Jewish state, and the destruction of
Jerusalem. The language which describes that destruction is
exclusive. What then is the consequence implicated in the
above settlement of the time when Daniel's prophecy should
be fulfilled?
Plainly, as all
most acknowledge, this awaking or resurrection is not, as is
generally supposed, connected with a resurrection of the
human bodies of men ; for it may be asked, where is there any
account of such rdon taking place at the destruction of
Jerusalem, that time of trouble which, if modern doctrines
of a literal conflagration of the globe be true, will not
even be paralleled in horror by such conflagration !We are comtmbed, by
the force of a question like this, to
seek out another interpretation of
Daniel's awaking: and we cannot but conclude, from this one
evidence alone, that the "awaking
from the dead," announced by Daniel, points mainly to a
spiritual, and not a corporeal resurrection, according
to that emphatic
declaration, "I
am the resurrection and the life." Professor Bush thinks
that "The
words of the prophet" may be construed as having respect to a
literal resurrection, in the several individual instances
of resuscitation of the dead recorded in the Gospels, and in
the remarkable display of resurrection power which was put
forth upon "the many bodies of the saints that slept, which arose and
came out of the graves after his resurrection." We see no call for such
construction :
but the Professor immediately adds, and with this beautiful sentiment
we fully concur, "But this (literal fulfilment) we regard, as
in the main, a mere outward and sensible adumbration of a
far more glorious work of moral quickening, which was to be the result of Christ's
accomplished redemption in behalf of his people, and in which this
prediction was to receive its more complete and signal
fulfilment."
But further. We stated above that the
thousand years' reign was an event which must have been
staged in this world :our
proof of which position we would draw from the passage in
Llaniel, which has just been considered. Let us now revert
to Revelation xx., in order to see if there be any wnnexion
between that chapter and Daniel xii. The pasage in Daniel
suggests the idea of a judgment, as well as of a
resurrection. Now, afer the vision of the living, reigning, and
judging saints, John has a vision of a judgment, which
jud,sment, as we learn from Rev. xi. 18,is subsequent to the close of the
thousand years, and intimately connected with the sounding
of the seventh trumpet, at the period of which sounding it
is said, "And
the time of the dead is come that they should be judged, and
that thou shouldst give reward to thy servants the prophets,
and to the saints, and to them that fear thy name, small and
great." This judgment, we cannot but conclude, is referred
to in Daniel's prophecy. There is internal evidence which
6xea the
period of the fulfilment of the prophecies to be the same.
We read in Daniel, "At
that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that
shall be found written in the book." So, parallel to this,
we have in Revelations, "Whosoever was not found written in
the book of life wascaet intothe lake of fire." Now, the
common opinion refers this to the last judgment, and makes
it synchronical with the parable in the latter part of
Matthew xxv. This is wrrect :but
if the judgment in Revelations be the same with that in
Daniel, then the last judgment is
long since paased, and death and hell
have long since been cast into the lake of fire. How so
?Because we
have already proved that, if words have any meaning, the
deliverance spoken of by Daniel was assuredly eomething
which was to transpire at a time of trouble, which time
can,by no fair principle of interpretation, be applied to
any other event or period than the destruction of Jerusalem.
Now, if this deli- verance and judgment of the dead must thus, by
scripture comparison, be referred to Jerusalem's desolation,
and if the judgment be subsequent to the first resurrection,
and prior to the New Jerusalem, which New Jerusalem (as
Mr. Bush allows) supervenes immediately or speedily upon the
overthrow of mystical Babylon (Jerusalem)-if these be fair
positions, and we shall be glad if any one will prove that
they are not, then, at once we settle it for an established
truth, that the millen- nium of John must be sought for,
must be platformtd, previously to the overthrow of the
Jewish Church and State, in the year 70, by the Romans. This, one would think, is
conclusive against all millennia1 schemes, whose
accomplishment is yet future. We confess to the mat intense
anxiety, to know by what process of interpretation this
result, as to the time of the thousand years, is to be set
aside.
But to proceed. It was stated that we
should examine two passages on the resurrection - one from the
Old Testament, and the other from the New-with a view towards
determining the locale of the first resurrection. We now come to the
New Testament passage, in John v., 28, 29 ;"Marvel
not at this :
for the hour is coming in the which all that are in the graves
shall hear his voice, and shall come forth :they that have done
good, unto the
resurrection of life, and they that have done evil, unto the
resurrection of damnation." It is admitted, on all hands,
that our Lord in this passage refers to the prophecy of
Daniel, which we have just been examining :the marginal
references in all Bibles point out these Scriptures as parallel passages.
If so, then the
same period which fulfils Daniel's prediction will apply
to this also, even though it were (as it
is confessed to be) the strongest paasage in the New
Testament in favour of the common view of the resurrection.
We have quoted the passage merely for the purpose of
connecting it with that in Daniel, and thereby obviating
objections which might, and doubtless would, have been
urgwl, if it had been passed over in silence. Before this
Scripture can he adduced as evidence of a resurrection of
dust, the positions which were taken up, in a consideration
of Dan. xii., 1, 2, must be overturned. With this remark we
take our leave of the passage. It does not otherwise come
into that part of the subject which now engages our
attention, or we might notice the violent strain of language
which the common notion puts upon this Scripture. ''When we read, 'The hour is coming,'
it cannot be questioned (says Mr. Bush) that this is usually
the phrase to denote an event, or order of events, just upon
the eve of occurring: whereas, if Christ had intended to
point forward to a very distant future, it is not easy to
perceive why he should not say, "he hour will come,' not to
mention that the word 'hour' seems to imply a season,
contracted within narrower limits than those which we should
assign to such an event as is usually understood by the
general resurrection." These observations are very just,
though Mr. B. seems quite at a loss for an understanding of
the passage, and is forced to acknowledge that Christ did
adapt his teaching to prevalent ideas, which were grounded
on the literal record of the Scriptures. This is moat
painful, and utterly inadmissible, as witness the
conversations in Matthew xxii. Had Mr. B. been able to recognize the meaning of the phrases, "last days" and "last day," he would never have
arrived at such a conclusion. The hour that was coming, in
the which all in their graves should come forth, was the
hour that John had in view wben he wrote, "Little children,
it is the last hour "-the hour of Jerusalem's desola- tion,
when the Lord would come again to be glorified in his
saints, and admired by all them that believed. This
construction does no violence to the meaning of words ;but surely it is a
strange talk to say, "The hour is coming," when eighteen
hundred years have gone by, and the hour is still coming-
"Rnsticus expectat dnm
defluat amnis : at ill:, 'I Labitw et labetnr, in omne
volubilis mvum.
But it is time to conclude our
examination of the first resurrection. From comparison of
spiritual things with spiritual, we have been con- strained
tofix the thousand years to times preceding the destruction
of Jerusalem. If this be a correct view, then it will be
argued, we must seek for the commencement of this period
somewhere in the history of the Old Testament. But this
argument proceeds on the supposition that the thousand years
were literal years : while we maintain that it is just "reasonable to
believe that the silence in Heaven, mentioned also in the Revelation, was a
silence for a literal half hour. As we are persuaded, from
internal evidence, that the Millennium must be platformed
previous to the overthrow of Jerusalem, so, from similar
evidence, we date the commencement of the thousand years
from the day of Pentecost. The slaughtered witnesses of
Jesus, who worshipped not the beast, as lived and reigned
with Christ." So we read, in Rev. xx. 4,and, again, in the 6th verse,
"Blessed and holy is he, having share in the resurrection
that is the first; on these the second death hath not power;
but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall
reign with him a thousand years." This is merely a
repetition of what had just before been advanced: and we
allude to these two passages for the purpose of showing
their reference to the announce- ment of the Apostolic
ministry. "Therefore,"
said Peter, "let
all the house of Israel know assuredly that God hath made
that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and
Christ," i. e.,
King and Priest on his throne;
as it is written, "The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on
my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool." Now,
Christ was not King and Priest till his ascension ;for, "if
he were on eaith," says Paul in Hebrews viii. 4, "he
should not be a Priest" - so, neither were any who were
beheaded for the witness of Jesus, for "they lived and reigned
with Christ." But on the reception of his own kingly and
priestly power, he would confer that same power on his
disciples; and surely it is a violent interpretation to
think that so many yean have rolled away, and "the Kings and
Priests" have never yet appeared. This, however, is the
construction which modem Millennarianism adopts. How simply
and forcibly opposed to all this is the statement of a
scripture which we have often quoted, "In the regeneration,
when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his
glory, ye (my disciples, my Apostles) shall sit on twelve
thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." We suppose it
will be allowed that the regeneration commenced on the day
of Pentecost: that, there and then, there were those who
were born again of water and of the Spirit : "by the washing of
regeneration and renewal of the Holy Ghost," as we read in
the Epistle to Titus: that there and then the desire of the
mother of Zebedee's children was answered, "Grant that these, my
two sons, may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other
on thy left, when thou comest into thy kingdom." The church,
or corporate body of divinely-inspired members, was the sole
interpreter, the "pillar
and ground of the truth," during this first resurrection
state, the Apostolic ministry : but now the word itself, which they preached
and lett on record, is its own sole and all-sufficient
interpreter. Paul, as one of the heads of that body, (for
God set forth divere officers in the church, Jirst Apostles)
declares that Hymeneus and Philetus had erred concerning the
truth now under consideration, saying that the resurrection
was past already. Now, so far from that being the fact then,
the first resurrection was not past, let alone the second ;
and yet, will it be believed, that after the lapse of
eighteen hundred years, we who condemn the error of which
Paul spake aa emphatically as he condemned it himself -is it
credible that we sbould be quoted as the followers of
Hymeneus and Philetus ? Such is a specimen of the groasly
inconsistent charges which are urged against the doctrine of
a past second advent. They who prefer these charges forget that there were two resurrections,
and are therefore ignorant of the "why and because" which
led some of those who lived during the first resurrection to
believe in fables. They forget, or know nothing of, the
important position which the resurrection doctrine held in
Apostolic preaching, an& consequently, have no excuse for
falling into the comparatively pardonable mistake of a
Hvmeneus or Philetns. in and ;luring diyi when it was
neither clear nor dark, when they but in part, and knew only
in part. Mr. Bush, whose writings we have so frequently quoted,
entertains strange notions of the first resurrection. He
allows that the thousand years' reign is past; but, at the
same time, he affirms that the Saviour's second advent must
be pre-millennial. This is the order of events according to
Mr. B. First comes the second advent :then
the millennium : then
the overthrow of mystical Babylon, whose destruction
synchronizes with that of the Beast, the symbolic
designation of the fourth or Roman empire ;and the passing
away of the Roman empire is the result of the sounding of
the seventh trumpet, at which sounding there is to be an
extensive conversion of the Jews. This arrangement certainly
cannot be scripturally accounted for, though Mr. B. may
affirm that his theory is scriptural, and therefore irrefutable. He conceives that the
second advent commenced at the destruction of
Jerusalem ; but between the destruction of Jerusalem
and the overthrow of mystical Babylon he places the thousand
years' reign. Of course, he assumes that Jerusalem and
mystical Babylon are not identical; if they can be proved to
be identical, (d that they are so, the fact that on
Jerusalem was charged, the blood of the prophets is quite
conclusive to me), then the above arrangement presents a
disorganized view, a broken chain of scripture events.
*And supposing
that, as Mr. B. states, the overthrow of mystical Babylon
synchronizes with that of the Beast, then Babylon being old
Jerusalem, we must refer the Beast to some other
interpretation than that of the Roman empire, or to some
other interpretation applicable to
the Roman empire. ft does not. come
within the province of this work to discuss these points, or
we should be very much disposed to examine whether "the
Beast," "the
abomination of desolation," &c.,
do not find their interpretation as
connected with Jerusalem, and not with Rome. But to conclude
the subject of the first resurrection. As we do not find
that Scripture teaches this thousand years to be yet future,
so neither are we disposed, after the above Scripture
investigation, to agree with any view of the thousand years
past, similar to that which Mr. Bush adopts. To imagine a
first resurrection after the second advent is to imagine an
impossibility, for Scripture declare9, plainly enough, a
resurrection prior to that advent. A resurrection subsequent
to it cannot properly be called a first resurrection, and
therefore, this cannot have been fulfilled in the successive
rising up of faithful witnesses of Jesus, and sturdy
resisters of the Papacy, during the lapse of those ages of darkness and
decline which throw their gloomy shadows upon the pages of
ecclesiastical history. If a resurrection were predicted of
such a period, it can never be proved that it occurred, and
for this simple reason, that we have no one to give us the
infallible proof of such
See NoteL.
occurrence. In short, and in full,
writers on prophecy may, if it so please them, carry
Scripture predictions further down in the annals of time
than the desolation of Jerusalem, and they may exercise
their ingenuity in so doing ; but there is one insuperable objection to
such proceedings-there can be no certainty in their
opinions. So long as Christians will wander out of the Bible
and Bible times for the date of the fulfilment of any Bible
event, no wonder that we have sect after sect springing up
to advocate the most monstrous absurdities. We do believe,
that to this one circumstance of the dislocation of prophecy
alone, is to be attributed the deplorable confusion which
now exists in the nominally Christian world. One sect looks
upon one particular portion of the Scripture as yet to
receive an accomplishment: another sect, another: and the
one says to the other, My opinion of a futurc fulfilment may
he the very antipodes of yours, but it is asgood as yours ;you
cannot prove it to be erroneous. This is a fair argument :and we are at no loss
for a case in point whereby to illustrate the argument. One
sect fixes the end of the world to the year 1846 :another carries the
end some twenty years further down :
which can prove the other wrong ? Time
alone can do this. In the meanwhile, both parties goon wrangling
together. It would be a happy thing if time, while
discovering the gross absurdity of this one particular of
future fulfilment, namely, an end of the world, should
also break up the several systems whose fixed periods for
that occurrence have been proved false. But alas ! it is not
so :no sooner is
one date worn out than the very same party reviews its
calculation tables, and determines upon another; and what
ismost pitiable, this other prospective date is believed.
Surely The word of the wise man is borne out by fact, ''Madnew is in the
hearts of men while they live." Surely there wns some truth
in the following exquisite lines of one whom the world looks
down upon as an unbeliever :- "And truth, a em which loves the
deep, And all things weighedjin custom's falsest
scale; 0 inion an omnipotence, whose veil
dmtles the earth with darkness, anti1 right dnd wrong
are accidents, and men grow pale Lest
their own jud enta should become too bright,
And
their
the
thongg
be
crimes,
and
earth
have too
much
light." -
BYRON.
The thought will often suggest itself,
that, look what way one will, whether back into the past or
forward into the future, we see abundant evidence of the
practical infidelity of religious systems. They are unbelievers, inasmuch as they do not credit the express
declaration of Christ, that he would come to judgment in the
glory of his Father, before some standing near him should
taste of death. They are equally and alike unbelievers, as
they practically avow their distrust of a coming yet future.
Let it he asked, which of all of them, having houses or
lands, does not
recognize the propriety of the proceeding which grants a
lease even for the period of nine hundred and ninety-nine
years? And having asked this question, let it be judged
whose doctrines are infidel. or likely to lead to infidelity
!
Having now considered at some length the
doctrine of the first resurrection, we are prepared to take
a further step in advance to our great conclusion.
A first resurrection necessarily implies
a second; and a second resurrection supposes a period fixed
and determined to the first. That period, we undertake to
show, was the fall of Jerusalem, because, as we shall
endeavour to
prove, the second resurrection was synchronical with that
grand event. Bush, and other learned writers on prophecy,
are completely at one with us in our conclusion that the
Millennium, or first resurrection, is past. Mr. Bush writes
as follows: "It is within the limits
of this (Roman) empire, under its nominally Christian
phasis, and during the prevalence of the power of the Beast
and his worship, that this grand moral resurrection takes
place; as such resur- rection was predicted, so it
occurred." Now, Mr. Bush holds that the passing away of the
Roman empire, in its decem-regal form, was the destruction
of the Beast. But we are not aware that the exact period of
a thousand years was accomplished at such time, or that it
can he shown, on such supposition of the first resurrection,
that it was exactly a thousand years. Therefore, the views
of this writer do not appear to attach any consequence to
the term, a thousand years; and as to the views of
Millennarians of our day, who are looking for a Millennium
to come, on
their own confession, they must, to
be honest, acknowledge that those
views amount to nothing better than a peradventure :they are, at best,
only conjectural, and what is only conjectural, is not
worthy of the nature of faith. Perhaps it may be expected
that another matter in connexion with the thousand years
mentioned in this chapter should not be passed over in
silence; because an objection may be raised that this
circumstance does not accord with our view of the Millennium. It is written in Rev. xx. 2, "And he laid hold on
the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil and Satan,
and bound him a thousand The exposition appears to us
simple and satisfactory, in exact correspondence with the
commencement and conclusion of the thousand Of course, we do
not, as before stated, believe in a Devil with horns and
hoofs, but are content, if we must speak comprehensively, to include under that name
every thing that opposed and exalted itself against the
Lord, and against his anointed. The angel having the key,
will apply to him who affirmed that all power was given to
him in heaven and earth, and who had the keys of death and
hell. Now, considering the Devil and Satan to receive an
interpretation in a knowledge of the two covenants, the law
and the gospel, we conceive we have the exposition of the
circumstance of this thousand years' binding in a former
part of this discourse, wherein we interpreted the opening
and shutting of the two dispensations, one whereof was shut,
so that no man could open ;and the other opened, so that not
even the gates of hell should prevail against it. This we
proved to have
been accomplished on the day of Pentecost. Here, then, we
conceive we have the commencement of the thousand years'
binding, equally with the thousand years' reigning. On that
day, the kingdom of heaven was opened by Christ, through the
instrumentality of Peter; and the ministration of
condemnation and death was then, as Paul writes in 2 Cor.
iii., "done away." Mention of the name of Peter, reminds
also of the promise, "I
will give unto thee the keys of the
kingdom of heaven : whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be
bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth,
shall be loosed in heaven." Now whatever meaning may be
attached to the Devil and Satan, he was bound, and he was
shut up :none
but the binder could unbind or loosen, and, moreover, be it
observed, that this personage was
loosed at the expiration of the
thousand years; and, above all, hie *' loosing " was
connected with gathering all nations to battle, and an
encompassing of the "beloved city." Can this "beloved city"
he Rome? can any city answer to that description but
Jerusalem, the holy city, that great city? Let the beloved
city receive what interpretation it may, it is a city in existence
before the judgment, and the judgment most assuredly
precedes the New Jerusalem: therefore the New Jerusalem is
not the beloved city.
We have thus given a consistent
exposition of the things which in this chapter are
predicated of the Millennium, taking the Millennium to
be the duration
of the Apostolic ministry, or the first dominion of the
kingdom. (Micah iv. 8.) This first dominion, or
resurrection, this thousand years, is that, we conceive,
which was spoken of by Zechariah the prophet, "And it shall
come to pass in that day, that the light shall not be clear,
nor dark, but it shall be one day, which shall be known to
the Lord ;not day nor night; but it shall come to pass that
at evening time it s hall be light." Paul, in his inspired
ministry, gives us the exposition, where he writes, 'I
Now we see through a glass
darkly, but then face to face;" now, in this one day of the
first resurrection, which is known to the Lord as a thousand
years, and a thousand years as one day. So also Moses, when
lamenting over the children of Israel, in their forty years'
travel through the wilderness, makes his complaint in the
90th Psalm, saying, "A thousand years in thy sight are but
as yesterday when it is pad, as a watch in the night." It
has sometimes occurred to us, remembering the typical nature
of Israel's wanderings, considering the to-day of the forty
years, that there is more meant in this verse than usually
meets the eye; that this thousand years' watch in the night
may have some connexion with the word of the Lord concerning
his coming again ;"And if he shall
come in the second watch (of the night, which was divided
into four watches), or come in the third watch, and find
them so, blessed are those servants." But this by the way.
We must proceed to investigate the sacred records concerning
the final resurrection; and if this be done very briefly,
let it not be put down to inability or want of matter, but
rather to the
necessity of concluding this treatise, which has already far
exceeded its intended limits. It must here again be
observed, and will, we presume, be admitted, that the second
advent, the end of the world, the resurrection of the last
day, and the day of judgment, are all bound up together, as
being cotemporaneous. Therefore, let it not be forgotten
that all scriptures which speak of a resurrection, however
difficult of interpretation they may appear, must bow down
and submit themselves to the second advent, if that event be
proved to be past.
But we have another object in view, in
thus adverting to a proof of the past second advent, as
connecting itself with the resurrection, and that is to
bring all the exhortatory portions of the Epistles to bear
upon the fulfilment of the resurrection; so that, bringing
the exhortations to bear upon one doctrine, one future
event, we shall consequently bring them to hear upon all,
though for our present purpose we shall only make one event the eubject of
investigation. As an illustration of our meaning, take
the following lines :
Exhortations,
and comforts, and threats,
Were addressed to a church
under grace;
These are past-she the warfare forgets,
In thy
final and endless embrace.
Now, the exhortatory parts of the
Epistles are a bone of endless contention between Calvinists
and Arminians. Arminians will have it, that there is no
final perseverance, sure and certain, promised in such
passuges as the following :"Let
us labour, therefore, to enter into that rest, lest any
manjall after the same example of unbelief: fall so that it
shall be impossible to renew to repentance." Or again,
Arminiane cannot credit final perseverance, when they read
of some bringing on themselves swift destruction, by denying the Lord thlbought th.
Or again, Arminianism grasps a
double-edged sword, when it finde even a Paul confessing,
that he is constrained to keep under his body, and biing it
into subjection, lest that by any means, when he has
preached to others, he himself should be a cast-away. Or
again, the Arminian glories in his covenant of works, when
he reads such necessity to be up and doing as is conveyed in scriptures
like this; ''Strive
to enter in at the strait gate, for many shall strive, and
shall not be able :" or when he is exhorted, "If ye then, being
evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how
much more shall your heavenly Father give his Holy Spirit to
them that ask him :"or
when he is upbraided, "Ye
will not come unto me that ye might have life." Or, once
more, the Arminian prides himself upon the proclamation,
"Know ye not that they which run in a race, run all; but one
receiveth the prize. So run, that ye may obtain;" thereby
implying, that many might run, and fail of attaining the
prize. Arminianism makes her boast of these and such like
scriptures, all the day long. Now we do not say that
Calvinism, or that which is got beyond Calvinism, does not
attempt to meet the boast, but as having formerly been
initiated into the mysteries of Calvinism, we do mean to my
that Calvinism is very loath to come to the meeting, and is
conscious that she makes but a poor affair of it at the best
of times, and would have been delighted beyond measure if
the all-wise God would only have been so wise as to have omitted such
scriptures altogether. Calvinism cannot see that to such
scriptures God appointed a certain day; set them their
bounds which they could not pass, even the sounds of a
church, and a ministry, and service, and ordinances, and
preaching, which was like unto a net cast into the sea,
enclosing fish of every kind, both bad and good ;in short,
the limit of a dispensation of the fulness of times.
Calvinism cannot recognize this glorious conditionality
as having passed
away, and consequently must believe that those scriptures,
which prove to be Arminian strong-holds, are applicable now;
and Calvinism, be it observed, is not alone in the
difficulty. There is, what we must call a nondescript
Christianity, which professes to reject Calvinism, and all
conditionality ; which puts aside altogether the
exhortations and threats, so much in favour with the
Arminian, and so terrific a bugbear to
the Calvinist, and which explains that
putting aside, by telling us that the gospel was proposed,
in the times of the Apostles, under the form of a law, but is now proposed as a
matter of fact, divested of the form of law; bringing out,
as we are given to understand, the third grand exhibition of
the enmity of Inan to God. This system, however, forgets to
reconcile this matter of fact, this unconditionality, this
rejection of such a scripture as "So
run that ye may obtain," with its avowed belief in a future
resurrection of dust, an end of the world, a new heaven and
new earth, cum multis aliis, altogether inexplicable, and
utterly inconsistent with such unconditional statement of
divine truth. How-ever, (we may say,) we are not so
circumstanced. We are believers in the finished and complete
rest of the kingdom of God, and we affirm as follows: If
this rest have appeared, is manifested, and doth now remain
for the people of God, a rest in the finished work of
the Lord Jesus Christ, into which all his ransomed family
are ushered at the moment when they enter upon an earthly
existence; how then can there, by any possibility, be any
labouring to
enter in ?how
can there be the least danger of failing to attain that
which is already our own ? What is the use of an exhortation to strive
for what is already in possession; and why should 1ask God
for that which he has already given me? Is he a man that he
should lie, or the son of man that be should repent ?Hath he said, and did
he not do it? hath he spoken, and is it not come to pass
? Or again-If
the race hath been run, and the prize gained, by those
specially appointed to the work; if the crown of life which
was promised hath been bestowed; if this prize and crown,
appearing in the Apostles' day, in the distant prospect,
with a weary wilderness and, to many among them, a Jordan of
death between, is now the fulfilment of a promise which was
then laid up in store-why then (the promise being
fultilled,) are we to be exhorted to look for its fulfilment
again and again, and so exhorted to doubt the faithfulness
of a covenant-keeping God ? Itet the words, "So
run that ye may obtain," be confined in an application to
the resurrection of the dead; if the resurrection of the
dead be the end of the race, and if the resur- rection have
transpired, would it not strike the mind of a child of seven
years old, that it is an absurdity to exhort now to run a
race, for the obtaining of that which is already
obtained ;and,
if the resurrection of the dead have not transpired, would
not the same child perceive at a glance that there must have
been some misapprehension in Paul's mind, when, eighteen
hundred years ago, he confidently declared that he waa
pressing toward the mark, for the prize of the high calling
of Godin Christ
Jesus, if by any means he might attain tothe resurrection
from the dead ? Misapprehension, indeed, there must have
been, seeing that Paul, on the common opinion, is still
striving for the mastery, still pressing toward the mark,
still desiring to be clothed upon with his house that
should be from heaven, still groaning being burdened, and
groaning as he is now unclothed, but not yet clothed upon,
for, according
to the common
opinion, mortality (this mortal) is not yet swallowed up
of immortality and life. It is idle to tell us that we are
quibbling by using this argument; the shoe is on the other
foot; it is our opponents who are the quibblers. It is
equally idle to tell us, that when Paul spoke of attaining
to the resurrection of the dead, he meant merely the
knowledge of that resurrection ;for
this exposition does not accord in the least with his
expressed wish in 6th Hebrews, that the Hebrew believers should leave the word of
the beginning of Christ; the first principles of the oracles of
God, among which
is enumerated the doctrine of the resurrection of the
dead. No, it was not the knowledge of the resurrection as a mere
matter of speculative science, but it was this :-"Yea, doubtless, and
I count all
things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ
Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and
do count them but dung that I may win Christ,
and be found in him - that I may know him,
and the power of his resurrection;" for,
"being
reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being
reconciled, we shall be saved by his life, seeing
that our life is hid with Christ in God, and when Christ our life shall appear, then shall we also
appear with him in glory."
Having developed at some length the
nature of the resurrection, nuder the Apostolic figure of a
change, we need not travel over the same ground again, but
we may proceed at once to an exposition of the scriptures
which contain the doctrine of the second resurrection. The
first scripture that we shall examine will be found among
the pas- sages quoted in page 93, under the head of the Body
to be changed. -"Who shall change our vile body, that it may
be fashioned like unto the body of his glory." (Philip. iiu.
31.) As a minister of the Church of England, I have read these words
many a time at the grave- side of poor perishing dust and
ashes. And here
let me be allowed to revert again to the wide distance which
separates between us and seceders from the Establishment who
have preceded us. We do not object, for instance, to the
Burial Service, because a minister who may entertain (as the
Church of England entertains,) the doctrine of election,
is obliged by the law of the land to thank God that he bath
taken the precious souls of all whom he (the minister,)
intern, to himself, though that same minister may have no
hope whatever of the salvation of many of them. No-we object
to the Church of
England Burial Service altogether, for all and for any ;we
believe in our consciences that it is a gross perveraioxi of
Scripture which reads 1 Cor. xv. over dust and ashes. We
protested against this while miniiring in the Church of
England, from her pulpit, and before her face, and
there-fore cannot now be accused for repeating the protest
behind her back. We abjure and renounce the common practice
of employing the sacred word of the Almighty to
support that which that word, without
man's tradition, condemns. We profess to be Protestants in
something like a reality-Protestants
against Protestant Popery-Protestants against Protestant
idolatry, Protestants against Protestant impiety; and as in
innumerable other instances, so here in the passage before ns, where we read, For our citizenship is
in heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour, the
Lord Jesus Christ, who shall change the body of our
humiliation, that it may be fashioned like unto the body of
his glory, according to the working whereby he is able to
subdue even all things unto himself." Now it may be thought
that strong language has been used in the paragraphs
immediately preceding; but let it be remembered that, in the
exercise of our judgment, we are only speaking
conscientiously of the doctrines of the Church of England,
with something of the freedom wherewith the ministers of the
Establishment speak of the doctrines of the Church of Rome.
We. like
them, may affirm that our charity
rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth ;and
whose charity appears most to resemble truth, would quickly
be determined by any unprejudiced man of the world. If any
of the clergy of the Establishment should deign to peruse
these pages, (and I hope many will, and answer them also, if they
can,) I would
solicit of them to weigh their Burial Service in the balance
of what maybe
(to say no more,) a scriptural exposition of the texts from
which that service is compiled. And, first, of Philippians
iii. 21. The first thing in this scripture which ought to
arrest the attention of the most careless reader, is the
remarkable usage in which " body" is employed in the singular, coupled
with the plural pronoun 6cour." We are nurtured from
earliest infancy in the dogmas of creeds and catechisms to
say, "I believe in the resurrection of the body," or surely,
among the numbers who hear and read this verse times without
number, there must have been many before now who would have
arisen to question the common interpretation. On the common
interpretation, we confess our inability to conceive a reason why
the plural, "bodies;'
should not have been employed, as in the passage, '' sball
quicken your mortal bodies." "This,"
says Mr. Bush, " may appear, at first blush, a criticism of
little weight; but we are persuaded it is one of prime
importance, and that we are entitled to demand some rational
solution of the problem involved in the phraseology."
Nothing, certainly, would be more natural than the use of
the plural, if Paul were speaking of the physical
resurrection of believers. As it is, we cannot doubt that
the term is to be taken in a collective sense, for the
mystical body of Christ; so that "
our body," in this connexion, is
merely another phrase for the body to which we belong, for
" we being many members, are one
body." If this "our
body "be not a
collective, corporate body, there is a difficulty, on every
other explanation, in accounting for the plural pronoun
joined to a singular noun ; whereas if the phrase "our body" be taken as
applying to a number of individuals incorporated together,
then the construction is according to usage, and is correct.
Mr. Wilkinson, in his work on the "Last
Days," illustrates the usage so appositely, that Ishall take the
liberty of transcribing a portion of his remarks. He writes
--Ic A
few proofs from the Scripture will best explain the meaning
of this phrase: Genesis xxxvii. 26, "What profit is it if we slay
our brother? " Matt. vi. 9, "Our
Father, which art in heaven :" 1
Thess. iii. 9, " Now God him- self, and our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ
direct our way unto you." If it were admitted that by the
term "our body," may be understood Ihs bodies of
individual believers universally, then "our brother," "our father," "our God," "our Lord Jesus
Christ," would mean many brothers, fathers, Gods, and Lords,
whereas the contrary is the fact; and the same is true of
the plissage under consideration, our vile body :"
it does not mean many bodies, but one
only, and Therefore it relates to the church only, in its
collective character, as " one body." (See Ephes. iv. 4.) The same is true of that
place, Rom. viii. 23, "Waiting
for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of owbody," where the Apostle is
speaking, first, of the heathen world, "the whole creation,"
waiting to "be delivered from the bondage of corruption,
into the glorious liberty of the sons of God :"he then pro- ceeds
to say, "And not only they (the
heathen world,) but ourselves also, (of the Jewish nation,)
which have the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves
groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit,
the redemption of owr body." And to this amount is Ephes.
iii. 6, "That
the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the Bame body,
and partakers of his promise by the gospel."-This
interpretation of Phil. iii. 21, is substantiated by the context,
in which occurs the passage already commented upon, If that
by any means I
might attain unto the resurrection of the dead." It is not
unworthy of notice that the Apostle writes in the first
person singular throughout the chapter, until he arrives at
the citizenship ;and even supposing that the term, our vile
body," did include the believers whom he was addressing,
still it could not be proved that the plural "our "was affirmed only of
himself, inasmuch as the Epistle opens with these words,
"Paul and Timotheus, the servant of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in
Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and
deacons." But it will be asked, How was Christ's body the
church to be called a "vile body ?" Does not the Apostle say that
the church was changed from glory unto glory ?and did they not all
with open face behold as in a glass the glory of the Lord ?
This is very true. It must be granted that the body then
beheld the glory of the Lord, and was changed into the same
image from glory unto glory. But then it must at the same
time be admitted that this most important scripture of 2 Cor. iii. is a sword which cuts two ways. Let it be assumed,
for one moment, that this passage is an obstacle in our path
;is it not equally so in that of an objector P Is it not a
fair challenge to call upon those who entertain the commonly
received opinion, to reconcile Paul's statement here, that
believers were changed into lhe same image, with his
apparently counter statement in 1 Cor. xv., "As we have
borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image
of the heavenly ?" Do not the popular opinions lead to the
adoption of two images of the heavenly ! and if so, then we ask for
what has never yet been given-for an explanation of this
twofold character. And while religious systems are adding
the above to the already long catalogue of problems proposed
for their solution, we will proceed to unfold our views on
the subject in debate.
We conceive that there is much by way of
exposition conveyed in the Apostolic description of the
nature of the sight which believers then enjoyed, "Beholding
as in a glass
the glory of the Lord." But more especially will this
appear, if we compare this with another scripture, where we
read, "Now we
see through a glass darkly, (iv obfyP.r~. in an enigma,) but then
face to face." The result of the comparhn will be, that
believers in the Apostolic day beheld the glory of the Lord
.only darkly, and through a glass; that the body of his
glory, or his glorious body, according tothe likeness of
which they were to be fashioned, was then but as a dim and
indefinite picture. And this perfectly accords with the
language of another of that company, which was led into all
truth, seeing eye to eye-the Apostle John, where he records
his testimony, Beloved, now are we the sons of God, (and if
sons, then heirs,) and it doth not yet appear what we
shall be; but we know that when he shall appear we shall be
like him, for we shall see him as he is." (1
John iii. 2.) Without stopping to notice, that, according to
the general interpretation of this verse, it doth not even
yet appear what we shall be;
let us observe that the words, we
shall see him he is,' seem to imply that, at his appearing again the second time, they
should not only have an altered apprehension, but also that
his appearance should be changed; or, in other words, that
the image of Christ, into which they were said to be then
changed, was diverse from that of the change which was still
future, or that the body which then was, was not that body
that should be. This would make the glorious body to be then
future likewise; or, in other words, it would, if the
expression may be allowed, place Christ and the church, the
Head and the members, in the same position. And this we
believe to be scriptural, and therefore true. It is a view
supported by numerous passages, as for instance, "When he doth appear,
we shall be like him." Now the likeness is not a likeness to
an absent one, but to one present. But Christ was then
absent; he was the forerunner entered within the veil ;he
was hid from believers within heaven itself, exercising his
mediatorial office ;he was the advocate with the Father,
the high priest " touched with a feeling of infirmities."
This was his image then ;this was also the image into which
believers were then changed. They were priests, lifting up
holy hands. knowing that the inwrought, energetic prayer of
a righteous man availed much ; yea, and if the Romish
doctrine, or any doctrine of Apostolic succession, beyond
the fall of Jerusalem, be true, Romanism has a valid plea
for its doctrine of the invocation and intercession of
saints. '
Believers, in the Apostolic day, were thus "predestinated to
be conformed to the image of the Son ;"and
