The Shayne Moses Project 2013

“Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” --- the shayne moses project last updated 15 May in the year of Motto: “For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.” - Romans 3:1-4; Numbers 23:19-24; Deuteronomy 32:1-4; Titus 1:1-4. * * * Make peace with the Creator in the only way possible: Ask Him for He is Good and will make it Right; His Way with His Goodness. Genesis1:1-31; 2:1-25; 3:1-20, 21-24; 4:2-5; 22:8; 1Sa2:2; 2Ki5:1-4, 13-16, 17-19; Ps6:2-5; 8:1-9; 19:1-6; 36:7-8; 39:12-13; 86:5; 119:68; 123:3; 143:7; Ec12:1; Is1:16-18; 38:14-17; 40:12-15, 18, 21-22, 25-26, 28-31; 42:5; 43:25-27; 45:22; Je23:23-24; 29:11-13; Mt19:17; Mk10:18; Lk7:47-50; 18:11-14, 19; Jo1:1-4, 5, 14; 3:3, 19-21; 5:41-44; Ac10:34-35; 17:24-27, 28-31; He9:27; 11:1-4, 5-8; Ja1:17; 2Pe3:9; 1Jn4:8, 16; Re14:6-7; 20:12-15; 21:1-4;22:14-15 * * * “Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?” - Proverbs 30:4; Psalm 2:7, 12; 89:6-9; Isaiah 7:14; 9:6-7; 48:15-19; 53:4-5; Micah 5:2; Matt. 1:22-23; John 5:17-30 YES WE CAN!!! See: THE MAGNIFICENCE OF JESUS THE COMING KING ... and the Three Stages of His kingdom! * * * He may have something more for you than peace: Ge2:5-8, 9-10, 15-18; 3:1-4, 9-12, 1316, 17-20; 4:1, 6-9, 10-13, 14-17, 25-26; 1Ki8:43; Ps19:7-14; Is7:14; 9:6-8; 42:6; 45:11; 65:1; Da7:25-28; 12:1-4; Zec4:10; Mt1:18-21; 3:1-4, 13-17; 4:12-15, 17-20; 6:31-34; 7:7-10, 21-24; 13:34-35; 17:5-8, 11-14, 17-20, 21-24; 20:15-16; 21:42-45; 27:50-53; Mk4:26-29; Lk11:49-52; 17:20-23; 18:5-8, 15-17; 19:11-14; Jn1:6-9, 10-13, 15-18, 29-32, 36-39; 3:5-8, 13-16; 6:28-29, 37-40, 44-47, 63-66; 7:16-19, 37-40; 8:18-19, 29-32; 13:17-20; Acts8:36-39; 15:14-18; Ro6:1-6; 8:28-31; Ga3:26-29; 4:9, 26-29; Ep1:3-23; Ph3:13-16; 1Ti3:14-16; 2Ti1:6-11; He9:28; 12:1-4, 5-8, 22-25, 26-29; 1Pe1:17-21; 3:18-21; 4:3-6; 1Jn5:6-9; Revelation1:1-4, 5-8, 9; 5:6-9; 13:7-10; 21:47; 22:16-21 * * * Naaman found healing and peace, 2Ki5:1-4,13-16,17-19; Ruth found grace, rest and reward with the people of GOD: Ruth 1:16; 2:2, 10, 12; 3:1 see The Gospel in Ruth.

You must read The BOOK and ask the author: GOD. Here are The Word of God and the Golden Rule of Interpretation. And the King James Bible Page. Also Understanding The King James Bible!

Ps138:2; Isa 34:16; Rev 1:3; Luk 11:9-12, 13; 1Jo 3:22; 5:14-15 Learn “The Truth About the Law” and find “FREEDOM FROM THE LAW of Moses, and Spiritual Growth in CHRIST.” Ro 2:14; Mt17:25-26 “But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way.” 1 Corinthians 12:31 Read this awesome article by my friend Richard McIntee about AMERICA! AMERICA! A Nation Adrift.

What we must do for any hope of making it: “laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God”-see Hebrews 6:1, Acts 20:21; and this good advice of J.D. Faust.

Free Will or Que Sera, Sera? From J.D. Faust's book ... THE ROD: WILL GOD SPARE IT?

“Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.” - Psalm 33:12 KJV. People have been trying to prove Him wrong for a long time; e.g., the Middle East peace Palestinian problem.

Click here to learn more about GOD's choice. “The LORD doth build up Jerusalem: he gathereth together the outcasts of Israel.” - Ps147:2 and Ge12:1-3; Nu24:5-9; De30:3; Ps48:1-3; 51:18; 87:17; 102:13-16, 17-19, 20-22; 122:6; 137:5-7; Is11:11-12; 14:32; 27:13; 46:13; 56:8; 62:1, 6-7; Je31:4; 32:37; 51:50; Eze36:24-38; Zec2:5; Ro11:1-4, 5; Re21:1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, 17-20, 21-24, 25-28.

Is There A Difference In The Churches? or The ORIGIN AND PERPETUITY of the CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST, and The American BAPTIST WAY. Ex19:6; Pr14:34; Isa9:7; 26:2; Eze17:22-24; Dan2:35, 44; Zec3:2, 9; 4:10; 6:12-13; Mat 6:18; 21:43; Lu12:32; Jn3:5-8; Ac15:14-17; Ep2:11-14, 15-18, 19-21; 2Ti2:5; Heb12:2, 22-24,28; 1Pe2:9-10; 3:18-22; 1Jo5:6-9; Re21:10-13, 14.

"The root cause of America's apostasy is not corruption in high places in politics and the courts; it is compromise and apostasy in the churches."--James Beller author of America in Crimson Red, and The Coming Destruction of the Baptist People.

The Evils of Religious Liberalism. And Standing Fast In The Truth.

Isa 5:18-20; 6:5; 8:12-15, 16-19, 20-22; 55:1; Mat 13:44-46; Ro11:18-21; 1Cor 13:4-7; Rev 3:1720.

“The real problem is the CHURCH. A soft, uncommitted, carnal, materialistic, lazy, self-righteous church is the root cause of ALL of America's problems...The spirit of Phariseeism is so prevalent among the Church today that it is no wonder why so many unbelievers refuse to darken the doors of a church....As a result, unbelievers have lost all respect for churches in general. I, for one, don't blame them....Yes, the very people who claim to love America the most and who claim to be interested in her blessing and prosperity are too often the very ones who are helping to destroy her.” --Chuck Baldwin Baptist pastor, constitutionalist, coauthor of To Keep or Not to Keep - Why Christians Should Not Give Up Their Guns, and Romans 13: The True Meaning of Submission.

For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. - 2Th2:7 And as for the Minority Report; those "which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him." To the excluded, excommunicated, "cast out" like our Lord Jesus, censured or otherwise disavowed; those "hidden ones", I offer these verses: Ge4:26; 49:10; Ex20:23-26; De7:7; Jg6:11-14; 1Sa2:9; Ps27:5; 56:8-12; 83:3; 84:3; 91:1; 102:7; Is4:3-6; 35:8; 51:1-2; La3:28; Eze7:22; Mt5:9-13; 10:31, 34-36; 13:33, 44; 18:20; 19:27-30; Mk6:10-11; Lk4:28-31; 6:20-23; 9:4-5; 10:11; 20:12-15; Jn6:37; 8:59; 9:22, 34-35; 14:21-24; Ac7:19-21, 58; 13:49-52; 16:37; 18:6; Ro11:2-5, 29; 1Co6:19-20; 2Co6:14-18; Ga4:28-31; Co3:1-4; 2Ti1:6-9; He13:10-13; 1Pe2:4-5; 3:18-21; 4:10-13; 1Jn5:7-10; 3Jn1:9-11; Re2:17; 3:20; 22:17-21 and Danes Dirge.

Must see Signs of the End" and "A People Must Be Prepared." by J. R. Graves.

“Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.” - Re 2:5 A gathering-together of Scripture references and notations about the Church Covenant.

E-mail,E-mail, WebSites, Site Links, Downloadables & Suggested Sites. .& . . .Suggested .....} {{ .. ... .. . ... .. . .. Contact . . Contact WebSites, Site Links, Downloadables Sites. . . . . . . . . . }

THE MAGNIFICENCE OF JESUS:* (A text book on Christology) by Harry Rimmer, D.D., Sc.D. 1943.

This is the sixth and final volume of the series of Apologetics known as “The John Laurence Frost Memorial Library.” It deals with the problem of the Origin, Nature, Incarnation, and Offices of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. [To which has been added "The Coming King", Chapter 4 of The Shadow of Coming Events by Harry Rimmer 1946.]

The book presents evidences to uphold the fact of the Deity of Jesus, deals with the mystery of His two natures, and gives a comprehensive presentation of His divine works for men.

Dr. Rimmer’s chapter on "The Psychology of the Virgin Birth" will charm and delight you, and when you lay this book aside you will most probably say —“That is his masterpiece!” You cannot afford to miss this great work.

CONTENTS: Foreword.

I. The Deity Of Jesus.

II. Jehovah—Jesus.

III. The Pre-Existence Of Jesus.

IV. The Attributes Of God As Seen In Christ.

V. The Incarnation Of Jesus.

VI. The Psychology Of The Virgin Birth.

VII. The God-Man. VIII. The Magnificent Prophet.

IX. The Effective Priest.

X. The Eternal King.

THE COMING KING.

FOREWORD.

“T

HE Magnificence of Jesus” constitutes the sixth and last volume of the set of apologetics called The John Laurence Frost Memorial Library.

Since the Scripture enjoins the believer in Christ to “be always ready to give to him that asketh a reason for the hope that is in your heart”; apologetics, the science of evidence, becomes of paramount importance. In an earlier day when the habit of Bible study was a common practice in the Christian community, men were able to give cogent and convincing reasons for their Christian faith.

But in the careless surrender of our principles which marked the debacle of historic belief that was occasioned by the rise of modernism, the Bible lost its grip upon the minds of the ministry. Hence its power was not applied to the problems of living by the mass of the laity, and we naturally entered the somber and bleak stage of spiritual degeneration from which the Church is now beginning to emerge. The quickest way to destroy any edifice is to tear out its foundation. Since the Bible is the foundation of Christianity, when faith in its validity and authority was weakened, the natural result was the surrender of orthodox Christianity, and the rise of infidelity. Hence the system of teaching called modernism manifested itself as the smartest move our enemy, Satan, had ever made against the Church of Christ.

When a generation of the practice and application of modernism left the starving still hungry for spiritual bread and the thirsty still famished for living waters, the retreat from the ghastly substitute for faith and salvation set in. At once there was a search for some acceptable teaching to displace the confessed failure of the system of scholarly unbelief which left the soul lost and the heart bleak and comfortless, and the return to orthodoxy was inevitable.

Having lost their grip upon the reality and certainty of the divine Revelation which is the holy Word of God, the survivors of the tragedy of modernism demanded that we prove our premises anew before they would or could accept the authority of that Book. Thus the revival of interest in apologetics both paced and accompanied the revival of historical belief, and remains today the most important theme in our program of teaching.

This series of six volumes is an attempt to condense, redact, clarify and present the reasons for the faith from which many of us never departed.

The preparation and presentation of these books has been made possible by the generous aid of Mr. and Mrs. Howard Frost, who desired to erect a continuing memorial to the son of their love, who took a short-cut and arrived Home ahead of his parents.

John Laurence Frost was born in Los Angeles, California, July 8, 1912. I first met him when he was studying at Harvard Military School, in Los Angeles, from which school he graduated in 1930. At that time I had a laboratory in connection with my home in the same city, and was doing some research in the biological sciences. Like most lads in prep school, Laurence met many theories and statements in his text-books and courses of study which shook his faith.

He formed the habit of bringing these problems to me, and fortunately, I was always able to supply him with a satisfactory answer.

I was attracted to the lad because of his quick and intelligent mind, for his mentality was far above normal for his age.

Our friendship deepened. Larry’s faith became settled, and he became a propagandist for orthodoxy.

He would come to the laboratory and get numbers of our publications, which he distributed to interested members of his classes, and to some of his instructors as well. His testimony and earnestness made a fine impression on his fellows: for he was certain that Christianity was true, and that an answer could be found to every problem infidelity raised against the Faith.

After graduation from prep school he went to the University of Southern California, and found that his position was opposed to the trend of belief and education, as his instructors were confirmed in the destructive philosophy of organic evolution. Once again I was able to help him through to a successful philosophy, and he came to see the perfect harmony that exists between science and Scripture.

Our ways parted when Laurence went to Stanford University and I went to the state of Minnesota. In his senior year at Stanford, while accompanying his parents on a tour of Europe, Laurence was stricken with poliomielitis, and died in Italy. His body was brought home for burial, and his sorrowing parents erected many fine and worthy monuments to his memory. These memorials were more than statuary: they were such as will live in the lives of many, for generations.

This series of apologetics is but one of those memories. The plan upon which we operate is already bearing fruit.

These books are made available to all students in seminaries, without cost, and thousands have already been distributed.

Any candidate for the ministry, regularly enrolled in an accredited theological seminary, receives these volumes, without cost to the recipient. They are available to the general public at a modest price: the commercial distribution being in the hands of the publishers.

Our files contain many hundreds of letters from young ministers who have been the beneficiaries of this gift, and their testimony to the worth of the memorial is unanimous. They all tell how they have been confirmed in the faith, strengthened in their own experience, and inspired to preach the Word of God and the Christ of that Word. Thus it may be said of Laurence, as was said of Abel: “By his gift, he, being dead, yet speaketh!” And his voice is heard by and through the ministry of the English speaking world for the entire coming generation.

In the original plan, the sixth volume was to have been “The Antiquity of Man.” But circumstances, the passage of time, and the weight of experience gained through the success of the earlier volumes, led us to change this plan. The successful minister is he whose ministry is Christocentric: the true Christian is he who “lifts up his eyes and sees Jesus only.”

Christianity is Christ. ~ ~ ~ To know Him aright is life eternal.

There is no other name given under heaven whereby we might be saved—the sinner has the choice of Christ or nothing.

So we present to the reader a simple statement of the Lord Jesus Christ, as God has revealed Him in the pages of His Word. As you read these proofs and evidences of the deity of Jesus, may your faith be strengthened, your mind enlightened, and your spirit saved by an acceptance of Him who came that you might have life, abundant.

CHAPTER I

O

The Deity Of Jesus

NE of the strangest and most intriguing sentences in the entire Bible is the one which commends us to “magnify” the Lord Jesus Christ. At first sight this seems to be a contradiction in terms. To magnify is to enlarge. In the pursuit of scientific knowledge we use in field and laboratory an ocular instrument called a microscope. Through the almost magical power of this amazing mechanism things which are normally invisible to the human eye are clearly seen in minute detail. It is possible by the aid of the microscope to enlarge creatures which cannot be seen by the unaided eye, to the extent of more than two thousand times their normal size. Thus we are able to study their nature, watch their processes, and derive much information concerning their cycles of life.

We seldom stop to think, however, that when we have thus magnified a protozoan to the utmost limit provided by modern optical methods, we have not changed its size one iota. The creature under observation remains its original invisible self, as the microscope leaves the specimen unchanged and unaffected in every sense. The power of the microscope affects only the observer, giving to him a wider, broader and deeper vision through which he can gain additional knowledge.

It is in exactly this same manner that we can and should magnify Jesus Christ. We certainly cannot enlarge Him, Who is the creator of the heavens and the earth. His natural magnitude is such that He fills the universe. Since it is Jesus Who upholds all things by the word of His power, there is naught that man can do to enhance His nature or increase His stature.

But if we have the proper equipment and sufficient intelligence to use the help thus provided, we can enlarge our own understanding and broaden our own point of view. It is for this purpose that the Spirit of God has given us an amazing instrument, which we call the Bible.

When we study the man Jesus Christ, looking at Him through the lens composed of the pages of God’s Book, He remains unaffected, but our vision is enlarged and we begin to see Him as He is and was.

Therefore, it shall be the purpose of this study in Christology to present to you the Christ of the Scriptures. We have no desire to attempt originality in this presentation nor to tell you any “new thing” about the Son of God. Since He was in existence with God as God before the earth was created, the ancient aphorism would apply to Him, “If it’s new, it isn’t true.”

Nor shall we obscure the issue by presenting human theories and man-made conceptions concerning the Saviour.

The magnificence of Jesus is seen only in the bright light of revelation.

For this reason, we will deal with the clear, logical and orderly sequence of revelation which the Scripture presents, concerning the Person, Origin, Nature, Incarnation, and Offices of Christ.

It may sound a little strange to the average listener when we use the phrase, “The Science of Christ.” Yet this is exactly what we mean by the term “Christology.” A science may be defined as “a correlated body of absolute knowledge.” When we gather together all the assured and proved facts pertaining to a certain subject, we correlate and integrate these facts and name such a collection, “the science” of that subject.

Therefore, a study which deals with the comprehensive and complete body of knowledge concerning Christ, would be a science of Him. To the casual reader it may sound like a senseless repetition when in the six-fold division of this material we separate the Person, the Origin and the Nature of the man Jesus. Of no other person this earth has ever known would it be possible to differentiate between his birth and his origin, or to speculate about his nature.

But, at the very outset of our consideration of the man Jesus Christ, we face this quaint and unique anomaly.

There is no mystery about your origin. Your life began as the natural climax of common biological procedures.

Nobody wonders about your nature.

You are a human being with a nature such as is common to all humanity.

But the origin of Jesus Christ is not related to His birth, nor was His nature dependent upon His human ancestry.

There is a sharp, clear-cut gem of startling brilliance in the single verse in the Acts of the Apostles, which states that the coming of Jesus to save the earth had been predetermined in the counsel of God before the earth was formed. If this be true, the coming of Jesus to Bethlehem of Judea, was not His origin, it was his incarnation!

The Nature of Christ is derived from His eternal being, and the ministry of Jesus is confessedly beyond the power of man’s comprehension. If our Saviour had never made any other claim to deity, He still would have covered the

subject conclusively when He said, “As the Father hath life in Himself, even so hath He given it to the Son to have life in Himself.”

There are two kinds of life which must be recognized at the outset of this study. Creature life is always imparted, and is derived from vital ancestry. Hence the life of a creature leads the explorer back through an inevitable chain of biological links to the imperative necessity of a primal creation.

But the Creator life has no beginning, even as it can have no end. Hence, the life of the Creator is inherent. Thus Jesus claimed to have the kind of life which characterizes the God- hood, when He said, “As the Father hath life inherent, so hath He given it to the Son to have life inherent.”

If we attempt a study of the Nature of Jesus, all of our thinking must be correlated to the fact of His eternal being and His identity with God. Understanding of His ministry must be rooted in the comprehension of His Person.

When we outline our material for systematic presentation, the study of the Nature of Christ and the Person of Christ are inseparable subjects and are also equally related to the fact of His origin. In like manner the Incarnation, the offices and works of Jesus are also inter-dependent, but they also rest upon the first three phases of our inquiry.

He could not have become incarnate had He not been in existence. It is equally certain that the authority of His offices derives from His Person, even as His works are possible only because of His nature.

This book shall then have one purpose. It shall be a simple, brief, and condensed attempt to assemble the evidences and revelations concerning Jesus Christ, in order that we might have an adequate understanding of Him, Whom to know aright is Life Eternal.

Of course, all of these ideas and presentations are closely bound together. Though we seek to divide the components of our subject for orderly analysis into the five natural divisions, we can nevertheless express the whole idea of the nature of Jesus Christ in the one word, “Deity.”

One of the basic and underlying reasons for the common lack of Scriptural understanding on the part of the average Christian is resident in our natural carelessness in the use of words. Very often many words can be used to convey the same idea, whereas one specific word carries a definite and single understanding which admits of no error in thought. It is not enough, for instance, to speak of the divinity of Jesus. The word “divinity” has many wide and proper applications. It pertains to anything that is heavenly, celestial, dedicated to religious purposes or supernatural in nature or application. Indeed, the word has come to mean far more than this.

I lost all affection and respect for the word “divinity” when I was forced to partake one night of a gooey, sugary and revolting concoction called divinity fudge. The young people’s party, which had been given in my honor, was composed largely of high school lassies who seemed to think that this confection was indeed divine! It was so messy it practically required a spoon to aid in its consumption. I believe the recipe called for white of egg, sugar and nuts,—especially nuts!

When I think back on that insipid, sweet conglomeration, I can understand why the word divinity means so little in the thinking of the average person.

We can apply this common expression to Jesus and still find ourselves welcomed by those who hold the degraded views of Christ which constitute the Unitarian philosophy.

But the word deity has but one proper connotation. It pertains exclusively to the Godhead. When we say “the Deity of Jesus,” we leave no doubt as to our meaning in the mind of the intelligent listener, and we have put ourselves squarely on record as accepting the conception of Christ, which is the heart of the Christian revelation. Indeed this is the essential and basic premise of Christianity.

After the fact of deity is established, an incarnation becomes more reasonable than a birth. In like manner, if the fact of deity can be demonstrated, the pre-existence of the Incarnated One cannot be questioned. Also, for a Person Who existed before His earthly incarnation, the problem of origin, unfathomable at best, must be abandoned to the obscurity of an Infinite, Eternal God. The only statement which illumines the dark problem of the origin of such a man, was uttered by John when he wrote that Jesus “was in the beginning with God, as God.” It is not an overstatement to say that our hope of redemption from sin is dependent upon the fact of the deity of Jesus.

Protestant Christendom at least is united upon one basic premise; namely, no man can save men from sin. The forgiveness of iniquity, and salvation from the consequences of sin lie solely and exclusively within the power of God Himself. With the single exception of Jesus Christ, the earth had never known a man who was completely and utterly sinless. From the fall of Adam to the present hour, every natural human being has required and does require a saviour for himself. Now then can one who needs a saviour be the Saviour of others?

All sin is an offense again: God. Therefore, forgiveness lies exclusively with Him. All that man could never do in accomplishing the redemption of a lost race, lies easily within the power of God to accomplish. Therefore, we say that if Jesus Christ were only human, we are yet dead in our sins, cut off from God, without hope in this world or help in the age to come; for no man could be the saviour of men.

It is equally certain, however, that if Jesus Christ was God before He became man, the God who thus manifested Himself in human flesh, could be the Saviour of men. We can only trust in Christ, in confidence and security, if we know beyond question that He is the God Who is able to save. For this reason, we must maintain that the fact of deity in our Redeemer is a prerequisite to our salvation.

I do not mean to imply that you are lost if you do not possess this knowledge of the nature of Christ. We are not saved by what we know. Indeed, we were redeemed and regenerated by faith in Jesus before we knew much concerning the nature and ministry of His Being. It is the fact at issue and not the comprehension thereof which is vital in this respect. So I merely seek to emphasize the underlying fact of deity as the basis and foundation of salvation.

Also, the Person of Christ must be understood before we can fully comprehend His offices and His works. This is equally true of the mystery of the incarnation. It applies with the same force to the problem of the virgin birth. If the deity of Jesus is established, then the supernatural event which resulted in the Bethlehem birth becomes the only acceptable explanation for the appearance of God in human form.

To show the inter-relation of the various phases of this deep study, let us apply the law of Mendel to the birth of Jesus and illustrate the necessity of conceding His deity.

In case you have forgotten Mendel’s law, may we summarize it for you in this brief citation: “Every individual is the sum total of the characteristics, recessive or dominant, in its two immediate progenitors.” In plain language, Mendel’s law states that there is nothing in any individual that was not in the father or the mother of that person; and everything which was in the father and the mother, is in the offspring. Some of these characteristics inherited from our immediate parents may not be apparent and, therefore, we call them recessive characteristics. Such recessives, however, generally become dominant in the next generation, and it is quite common to note characteristics of grandparents being strongly developed in the grandchild. A certain percentage of the dominant characteristics of the parents will become recessive in their children, even as recessive characteristics, transmitted by the parents, become dominant in the following generation.

It might be humorously suggested that Mendel’s law is a splendid thing for young married couples to remember.

It might save some arguments in the family. When little Willie becomes very naughty and lies on the floor, kicks and hollers, “I won’t,” the intelligent parents will never argue concerning his resemblance to either the father or the mother.

Remember that this is the grandparents coming out in Willie, and much friction might be saved in the immediate family!

It is a common practice in the study of genetics and normal biology to work out tables of probability which will accurately forecast the characteristics of future generations, if the breeding experiments are carefully controlled. Since Mendel’s law states that in every individual we find all of the characteristics of the two progenitors, (which of course, go straight back to the first created pair of each species) we have an argument for the virgin birth. Apply this biological principle to your own personal thinking of the incarnation of Jesus Christ, in the following syllogism: If Jesus had a mother who was human, as was true in the case of Mary, from her He would inherit all the characteristics of humanity. If the father of Jesus was also human (whether it was Joseph or some other nameless man) , from him He would also inherit human characteristics. So we work out this single equation: man plus man equals man.

In this case Jesus Christ was only human. Since man cannot save men from sin, we would then still be lost in spite of our trust in Christ.

Make the reverse application to this same problem and we are equally in darkness and doubt. If Jesus had had a mother who was deity, from her He would have inherited all the characteristics of deity.

If He had a father who was God, from Him He would inherit the characteristics of the Godhead. God plus God equals God! Such a being is so utterly remote from and unapproachable by sinful man, we would have no way of access to His presence. You see, the problem of salvation is to bridge the unfathomable abyss which separates a holy God from an unclean sinner.

Still applying Mendel’s law, we see how this was made possible. Let us accept for the moment the fact that the historical record is true and that Jesus Christ had a mother who was human. From her He inherited the heritable characteristics of humanity. If He was conceived in the womb of His virgin mother, by the direct miracle of the Holy Ghost, and God was His Father, Jesus did derive from Him the attributes of deity. Thus we write our third equation: Man plus God equals the God-man, namely, Jesus Christ, Who retained His deity while presenting Himself in the mantle of

flesh. Since God can save men, Jesus Christ becomes our Saviour only if the virgin birth of the Redeemer is true.

Let us hasten to concede that the Scripture does not demand belief in the virgin birth as a prerequisite for salvation. It does, however, set forth the certainty that the fact of the virgin birth must be true before we can be saved.

Undeniably, the church is full of ignorant Christians. In fact, when we first turned to Christ as Saviour, we were all ignorant and were moved purely by an act of faith. We can be saved without understanding the nature of the process just as babies are born knowing nothing of embryology. To illustrate this point, let us remember that when you were a baby you drank milk and ate simple foods which kept you alive in spite of your ignorance of the operation of metabolism.

You did not have to comprehend digestion and ingestion before you could derive benefit from your food. The life was in the food in spite of your ignorance of the manner in which it could become incorporated into the very substance of your body.

Let us presume that nobody could breathe without fully understanding the function of the diaphragm. In that case you would have perished within one hundred twenty seconds after your birth. For many years the breath of life has entered your lungs because the functioning of the diaphragm is a fact. It is not your knowledge of this fact, but the integrity of the fact that made your life possible.

In this exact sense, it is the fact of the deity of Jesus which is the basis of your salvation. You could be saved and remain an undeveloped babe in Christ. For you must see that salvation does not depend upon your understanding of its mysterious operation, but upon the mighty facts which constitute the source of its power.

This issue has been obscured by the deliberate attempts of false teachers seeking to distinguish between the Christ of the New Testament and what they call “The Jesus of History.” Of course this is purely a gratuitous and unwarranted assumption. The Christ of the New Testament and the historical Jesus are one and the same Person. Jesus is the Christ, and there is no source of knowledge concerning Him outside of the pages of the New Testament. All historical evidence concerning the nature, work, and offices of Jesus are bound in the one volume which is the Word of God. Hence we have no right to any conception of Jesus Christ which is contrary to the portrait of Him found in the New Testament. No honest teacher or student can claim the right to a conclusion which is contrary to the evidence.

The historical facts of the man Jesus, and the evidence which support His very existence as a person carry with them the delineation of His Nature.

Hence it is sheer folly to claim the right to depart from these acceptable, established evidences and preach a Jesus whom Paul and the other apostles never knew. The fundamental error of this school consists of an over-exaltation of the manhood of Jesus, which completely ignores His deity. It is neither honest nor scholarly to over-emphasize one phase of any subject, while disregarding equally apparent phases of that same subject.

For instance, one of the leaders of current thought wrote a masterful book some years ago which was entitled, “The Manhood of the Master.” No honest reader could find any fault with that book. Beyond question it was a good book, very credibly written. It completely covered its theme and developed its thesis in a skilled and scholarly fashion. I personally read the book a good many times with delight and benefit. This was the finest presentation of the human side of Jesus which has been produced in our century.

The author made a fatal mistake, however, when he failed to write a companion book which he should have entitled, “The Deity of the Master.” He quit when he had covered one-half of the theme of Jesus—Who was both man and God! No informed person denies that in the days of His flesh, Jesus displayed a perfect humanity. This fact is stated in New Testament scripture and is frankly confessed by all our great creeds. It is fundamentally dishonest for any teacher to present half of the facts in his case, close the issue and come to a conclusion on the basis of insufficient evidence. The New Testament scriptures are equally adamant in their clear cut demand for acceptance of the deity of Jesus. Becoming man, He remained God: and the Christ of the New Testament, who is the Jesus of history, can only be denominated the God-man.

This dishonest clouding of the issue is the customary technique of false teachers. They seek to obscure the clear revelation of God by inventing these subtle discrepancies which exist only in their imaginings. For instance, Modernism portrays a startling contrast between the God of the Old Testament and the God who is revealed in the pages of the New Testament.

Digging into the unlimited resources of their fevered imaginations they tell us that the Old Testament Deity appears as a harsh and repulsive God of warfare and battle. He manifests hate and brutality, even going so far as to order the extermination of helpless people like the innocent Canaanites. According to this school of interpretation, those victims were murdered so that the Jews could have their land.

On the other hand, we are told by this same flighty group of pseudo-historians, that the God of the New Testament is purely and exclusively, “A God of Love.” These men who deny the inspiration of the New Testament text are apparently unconscious of their quaint position when they then proceed to predicate their whole conception of God upon one verse of the Book they have previously repudiated. They seem to know and possess only one proof-text, namely, “God is love.” In this subtle fashion they seek to convince us that the Old Testament records are highly unreliable and are opposed to and contradicted by the later writings of the Gospel. They assure us that the earlier portions of the Book are but the folklore and fables of a semi-barbaric people who naturally clothed their brutal conceptions of the Deity in the garments of their own base nature. So their traditions portray an Old Testament God who is a tribal deity, functioning only in the land of Palestine, and dealing exclusively with the twelve tribes of Israel. But in later years, according to this theory, as men became civilized and cultured, the idea of God underwent an advancing evolutionary process. This culminated when men grasped the fact that God is the Father of all humanity, a loving God who makes of all mankind one vast brotherhood!

Aside from the fact that this just isn’t so, it is also a gross over-simplification.

The Scriptures are themselves the refutation of this false statement concerning the Hebrew conception of deity.

Teachers who claim that the Old Testament teaches a God who is harsh, brutal and bloodthirsty, have evidently never read the Bible. Or if they did, they certainly missed the magnificent portrayal of the gracious, merciful and loving nature of God as His character was revealed in the tragic episode of Sodom.

Here we have the record of one of those allegedly innocent Canaanitish people who were exterminated by the hand of divine judgment when God Himself moved against their iniquity. The destruction of Sodom came as a merited punishment for the consistent practice of sin so vile we could not portray its particulars in a book which must pass through the United States mail. Yet, in spite of the flagrant evil of the Sodomites, God was willing to spare the entire city if ten righteous persons could be found within its borders. Surely mercy and grace could be carried to no greater extreme than that! The account makes no attempt to excuse the sinners or condone their conduct. On the contrary: for the uncompromising language of the Genesis record paints the dark and somber portrait of a city and degenerates in words that are scathing and brusque. But even though the guilt is recognized and acknowledged, the God of the Old Testament reveals Himself as being so kind and forgiving that He stands ready to forgive the guilty rather than bring suffering upon the sinless.

Such false teachers evidently never read the Psalms, or if they did they missed the number of times the Psalmist speaks of God as being gracious, merciful, tender, loving, forgiving, and as manifesting “loving-kindness” toward the penitent.

Consider the outstanding instance of Psalm 78, which reviews the sad and tragic history of Israel’s disobedience to God, in spite of all the mighty works which He had wrought for her redemption and deliverance. It reviews the escape from Egypt, the preservation in the years of wandering, and the bitter fact of ingratitude on the part of those who thus benefitted from God’s grace. Admitting the justice that would ensue if God forsook so wicked a people, the Psalmist then bursts into an ecstasy of praise because God again forgave His People and continued to love them!

So even in this particular Psalm, which recognizes the necessity of punishment, the mercy and gentleness of God are nevertheless exalted. The key to the entire Psalm is verse 38, which states: “But he being full of compassion forgave their iniquity and destroyed them not; yea, many a time turned he his anger away and did not stir up all his wrath.”

This is strange language, indeed, to try to integrate into the modernistic picture of an Old Testament portrayal of God. What is unkind, vicious or repulsive about this Hebrew characterization of God? Note that He is not depicted as being occasionally moved to compassion. The text specifically says, “Being full of compassion.” Recognizing the justice of God’s indignation against sin, the psalmist nevertheless remembers that “many a time turned He His anger away.” Again, confessing with humility that the people deserved rigid punishment, once more the writer reviews the history of Israel and humbly confesses that God “did not stir up all His wrath.” This is certainly the zenith of loving kindness and tender mercy. It is culled almost at random from the alleged folklore and myths of the Hebrew people and goes back to a period that preceded the coming of Christ by a full thousand years of time.

This is not an isolated instance, but is a true presentation of the general picture of God as His character is presented in the Old Testament text. No higher and more gracious aspect of the love of God has ever been furnished to this sad world than the lovely drama which constitutes the Book of Hosea. This is one of the most touching and moving records of human tragedy in all living literature. The prophet Hosea tells us how God used this man’s own misery and domestic unhappiness to instruct the entire nation of Israel concerning their conduct toward God. Encouraged to do so

by the commandment of God, Hosea married a confessedly wicked and adulterous woman, entering into that union with the knowledge that she would not be faithful to him. Exactly as he expected, his wife heeded the call of sinful living with strange men and soon wandered off in the paths of illicit love.

When her misconduct brought upon her the judgment of the law of that day and she was sold into slavery, he mortgaged his possessions and beggared himself to buy her back.

Again she left his protecting affection and strayed away with strangers. Once more he forgave and restored her to suffer the same harsh treatment, when she further sinned against his love.

Then from this experience, God illustrated His complaint against Israel. He had taken this nation to be His own peculiar people, even designated them as “the wife of Jehovah.” He surrounded her with blessing and promise, with prosperity and peace. She repaid God by going off into idolatry and forsaking Him Who had redeemed her, and this she did not once, but repeatedly. The book of Hosea reaches its climax in the beautiful figures of speech which constitute the portion that might be called, “The Lamentation of God.” We find this in the eleventh chapter, verses one to four. Here Jehovah says: “When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt.

As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images.

I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by their arms; but they knew not that I healed them.

I drew them with cords of a man, with bands of love! and I was to them as they take off the yoke on their jaws, and I laid meat unto them.”

Every parent understands the figure of speech in these touching words, “I taught Ephraim also to go, taking them by their arms.” You remember when your first child began to learn to walk. You stood it on rubbery legs that bent at the wrong time and in the strangest directions.

You held your arms straight out and with a strong hand under each arm of the wobbly babe you taught him to take his first feeble steps. My, what excitement there was in the family when the wee one could toddle a dozen steps by himself without crashing in an unexpected dive! There is no intimate experience of parenthood more tenderly humorous to recall than this instance when you were teaching your baby to walk.

This, then, is the picture of God in the Old Testament; a loving, gentle, kind Father whose strong arms support the toddling race of Israel as He seeks to teach them to stand by themselves. How in the name of honest scholarship the Modernists can claim that “the God of the Old Testament is brutal and harsh” passes the understanding of normal men.

Out of the many, many such references in Old Testament scriptures, all of which depict a God of gentle mien, the best summary is in Psalm 86:15, where the Psalmist writes of God in these words: “But thou, O Lord, art a God full of compassion, and gracious, long suffering, and plenteous in mercy and truth.”

Not even in the New Testament, with its full revelation of the love of God, can you find a stronger statement of the tender kindness of our heavenly Father than this Psalm contains. The conclusion then must be that the Modernists’ picture of God in the Old Testament is unwarranted by the facts in the case, and is a deliberate attempt to replace revelation with the figments of human imagination.

The second premise of Modernism is equally untenable. The statement that the God of the New Testament is purely a God of love is not only an over-simplification but frankly ignores the evidence and the issue. Some teachers are fond of chanting poetic phrases about “gentle Jesus meek and mild,” and shutting their eyes to the sterner side of His nature. Such men must have overlooked this picture of the Saviour in Revelation 19:11-16: “And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.” In these startling verses, we are given a portrait of Jesus Christ as He shall be seen when He returns to this earth to take over His dominion. There is no question but that the rider of this white horse is our Lord Jesus. He bears the names of deity, and is called by the title which John gives to Christ in the prologue to his gospel, “The Word of God.” The name engraved upon His vesture is KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS; therefore, we are forced to the

conclusion that we are dealing here with the person of Jesus of Nazareth.

The fifteenth verse constitutes a complete negation of the mawkish concept of Jesus underlying Modernism. John portrays Christ as coming with the sword of His Word, wherewith He shall smite the nations! Note, please, that the purpose of the Word which Christ wields upon His return is not to convert, comfort, or console; but to chasten! In this aspect of His work, Jesus is said to rule with a rod of iron, and He comes treading the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. How different is John’s portrayal of the “New Testament Jesus” in this chapter of the Revelation, from the common trend of Modernistic thought!

We realize of course that the Modern teachers will at once denounce the Book of Revelation, claiming that it is made up of weird figures and may not be taken literally. They claim to draw an understanding of Christ from the Gospel record, but when we consider their teachings in the light of the four Gospels, their case is no better than it is in the Revelation. As an instance, we refer to the direct action taken by our Lord when He cleansed the temple with whip in hand. It has been suggested by men who seek to twist the evidence to fit their fancy, that it was not a real whip which our Lord used. This school of interpretation claims that it was merely a symbol of authority. Analysis of the record, however, will not bear out this position.

The godless wretches whom Jesus assailed were degenerate Jews of the lowest type. Their stock in trade consisted of cash.

When such men fled in haste and terror, leaving their physical assets behind them, they were pursued by something more than a symbol of authority. What authority would these men recognize in a humble, unknown, peasant from Galilee?

And had they indeed recognized His right to cancel their concession as money changers in the temple, they would have taken time at least to have packed up their belongings and secured their wealth. But when the lash fell upon them, wielded by the arm made strong by the labors of His carpenter shop, they waited for no ceremony or preparation but fled in haste and fear. I do not imply that Jesus was a brawler, but I do deny that He was the kind of milk-sop that Modernism has painted Him. The Modern theory collapses completely in the light of the teachings of Jesus. In the thirteenth chapter of Matthew, we have a series of parables which portray our Saviour’s idea of the coming kingdom. In the parable of the wheat and the tares He portrayed an enemy who scattered the seed of a harmful weed, after the good seed had been planted. When His disciples asked Him to explain to them the meaning of these figures of speech, He said: “He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seeds are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.”

How can any honest reader escape the significance of those words? Jesus clearly taught that this gospel age is to end in a harvest conducted by angels. All those who have wrought iniquity and have rejected the offer of mercy and grace shall be sternly dealt with and consigned to that place of punishment which is figuratively called “a furnace of fire.” Whatever may be implied in this illustration, the fact stands clear that the Son of Man shall Himself superintend the meting out of due and just punishment to the wicked.

Our Saviour was gentle, and meek, and mild iii the days of His flesh where and when His purposes were served by the exercise of mercy and love. But when the issue demanded, He could be stern and severe in His character as judge.

How then can we reconcile these glaring discrepancies between the theories of Modernistic interpretation and two clear statements of the Word of God? Frankly and simply, they cannot be reconciled.

A complete picture of God and comprehensive understanding of His dealings with man can nevertheless be derived from the statement of Holy Writ which says that God, “is the same yesterday, today and forever.”

Whether He deals with men under Old Testament laws, under the grace of the gospel offer, or reigning in the Kingdom age,—under any and all circumstances, God never changes!

He is always merciful and kind where He can be. He is stern and just where He must be.

The reason for this will become apparent when we survey the attributes of God in a later chapter in this book. At this point, we need merely to emphasize the fact that though Jesus Christ is God, changeless in nature, conditions may cause His manifestations to assume various aspects.

Again reminding the reader that we are not entitled to any conception of Christ which differs from the revelation

of Him made in the Scriptures, we dare repeat that phrase, “Jesus Christ is God.” All Bible students should be, and generally are, familiar with the epistle of Paul to Titus. Six times in this short epistle we meet the heartening and blessed phrase, “Our Saviour.” The first time is in 1:3 where the apostle says— “But hath in due times manifested his word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour.”

The second occurrence is in the fourth verse: “Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.”

In verse three it is God who is our Saviour, but in verse four God is called the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

We find this same phrase in 2:10,—“but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.”

Its next appearance in 2:13, “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

So, one verse says that God is our Saviour and the next one says that Jesus, when He comes again, will be manifested as both God and Saviour.

Later, in the third chapter, we find this same contrast and connection. Verse four reads: “But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared;” and the sixth verse reads, “Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour.”

Simply then, we read these things together. The Holy Spirit uses the phrase “Our Saviour” six times in these three short chapters. Three times, it is God Who is the Saviour and three times it is Jesus Christ. The apparent contradiction is harmonized in the one statement that Jesus Christ is both God and Saviour. Hence, we are justified in using the term deity in connection with One Who merges His identity with the identity of God for the salvation of men.

For if Jesus Christ is the Saviour of men, His saving power must derive from His own Godhead. It is only logical to speak of Jesus as God our Saviour, for none but God could save men.

In any case, this is the most important subject wit It which the intellect of man can deal. Any text that deals wit It Christology can only be valuable if it helps the reader to summarize and comprehend the evidences that are intended to convince the Christian of the deity of Christ, thus establishing the grounds of their salvation. It is one thing, however, to state a fact and quite another to prove it with irrefutable evidence.

We repeat for the sake of emphasis, that our only source of knowledge in the study of Christology consists of the historical records which men call the Bible. But when we refer to them and accept them in their entirety, we find no difficulty in proving the Godhood of the man Jesus and thus assuring the certainty of salvation for those who trust in flint.

So, from this point we will proceed to present to you in a concise and simple form those evidences and facts as they are set forth in the Scriptures.

CHAPTER II

T

Jehovah Jesus

HE primary revelation of God is shrouded in such mystery that the human mind is bewildered and baffled in its attempt to understand Him. For instance, it is clearly revealed in scripture that God is one Being constituted by three Per- sons. We give to this complex person the name “Trinity” and make our prayers to the God Who is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. It would be folly to seek to explain this startling revelation to the sindarkened mind of natural man. We can only say that we believe it because we do not comprehend it By that we mean that the mind of man can embrace any subject which originates in minds of men. No man can conceive a scheme of thought so complex that no other human mind can grasp it. It has been said for instance, that the theory of relativity propounded by Professor Einstein is so incomprehensible, that only twelve other men in the universe have mastered it. (I am not sure that there are twelve, as I have never met the other eleven!) It is inevitable, however, that there must be some who do comprehend this theory.

The doctrine of the Trinity, on the other hand, bewilders the most astute and is frankly beyond the comprehension of the most learned. Therefore, we say if this theory cannot be comprehended by

man, it could not be invented by human processes. This inscrutable mystery of the Godhead must be a revelation from a Being whose nature is infinitely higher than ours, and whose understanding surpasses our highest possible mental spheres. We must have something to worship which is in- finitely greater than we. Hence our natural reason leads us to accept with gratitude and by faith that which we cannot receive through sheer understanding.

God, Who is the Trinity, has revealed Himself to men by many means. The reason for this becomes apparent when we remember the darkness of man and the infinite brightness of God. There must be a progressive revelation of God to man because of man’s natural limitations. As an illustration, let us presume that some professor of mathematics left the State University to teach geometry to boys and girls in the kindergarten. His progress would be utterly nil. This failure would not be due to the lack of understanding of the teacher, for we may concede that he is a master of this subject. But the immature minds of babes are not capable of dealing with higher mathematics. Mathematics depends upon a progressive education. Children must learn to add, subtract, multiply, and divide. They go from the study of the multiplication tables to fractions and decimals, and over a span of years, as their understanding is enlarged their ability to deal with the science of figures develops to the point where calculus becomes easy.

In exactly that same manner, God finds it necessary to deal with humanity. It is for this reason that in earlier ages God revealed Himself in different portions and by many means to the fathers. The Old Testament is a record of that progressive revelation.

Some years ago I saw a skilled surgeon perform an operation on eyes which had been blinded for many years. I watched with delight and admiration as this master of surgery exercised his amazing technique of surgical healing. When the operation was finished they covered the eyes of the patient with several layers of gauze and varying thicknesses of bandages. Over the entire dressing, they bound a black cloth before the attendant wheeled the man away.

I asked the doctor, “Will the operation be successful?” He replied, “It is successful now.”

Greatly interested, I persisted, “Will the man be able to see?”

With equal emphasis, “The man can see now!”

Although I was pretty sure I knew the reason, I nevertheless asked the doctor, “Then why did you cover the man’s eyes with so many bandages?”

While divesting himself of his robe, the doctor took time to say, “If I let that man see now, he will never see again! I have restored sight to those eyes, but they will have to learn to bear the light. He will lie for some time in a darkened room, having the bandages removed one after another at long intervals of time. After some days, the hour will come when, with all shades drawn, he will open his eyes and see things in the subdued light of that darkened room.

Twenty-four hours later we will increase the light, gradually, until at last he can walk out in the full light of the day. If the strength of full daylight, however, reached his eyes without preparation, he would be instantly blinded anew and no power on earth could ever again make him see!”

This is an exact picture of God’s dealing with man. If the full holiness and splendor of God were suddenly revealed to sinful creatures, they would be blinded by His glory beyond hope of recovery.

God has led the race step by step through a long series of revelations concerning Himself. This progressive revelation was made necessary by the very weakness of sinful nature. But it must be emphasized that in every age, God was not willing that any should perish, and has made a revelation of Himself that is sufficient to lead men in that age to a saving relation to Him. This long series in the chain of revelation climaxed in the person Jesus Christ.

Our Saviour is God’s last word to man!

The Spirit of inspiration is not abroad in the earth today as it was in Bible times, simply because God has no more to say.

The revelation which began in the prophets of old and continued through the New Testament apostles is a complete, comprehensive and satisfactory presentation of the God who is Creator and Saviour.

Thus, if we reject Jesus Christ, God has no other means of reaching man, for Christ is the God whom we thus reject.

Because of the nature of God (which is enshrined in holiness) there has always been the need of a mediator between God and man. We read in I Timothy 2:5— “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, Himself man, Christ Jesus.”

It may be added, after a complete search of the Scriptures, that there has always been this one mediator between

God and man. He appears in revelation under different names, all of which, however, apply to the same Person.

Among the sacred names of God as He revealed Himself to the Hebrews in Old Testament times, is one hallowed name, the exact form of which is lost to our modern age. The American Revised Version seeks to recapture this name with the form “Jehovah.” Other scholars say it should be “Yah” or “Yawah.” This is a question of small moment, and one that it is impossible to settle, because of the dramatic disappearance of that word from written records. The loss of the exact form came about in this fashion: The name (which we will call Jehovah) occurs in the Old Testament text something over seven thousand times. It was held in such reverence and awe, men never spoke it in audible tones. When the priest was reading the law and came to this sacred name of God, he shut his eyes, bowed, crossed his hands on his breast, and worshipped. The congregation, knowing that he was thinking the name of God, bowed with him and joined in hat homage.

When a scribe was copying the law, the ceremonial admiration of that name was so great, he always used a new pen to write the holy appellation when he met it in the text. In the course of time, it became agreed that since the name was never spoken they would leave a blank in the record, and copies thus were made in this fashion. When the reader came to this blank, he knew that the name of God was intended, and he paused and worshipped at the thought of that name. Thus, after generations and centuries of this practice, t he name became lost. For the sake of convenience, we will use the English form “Jehovah” and simply state that it was the holiest word for absolute deity in the Hebrew text, and that it always means the Person of Jesus Christ!

This subject is too important to pass over quickly. What we are saying now is that Jehovah, the God of the Old Testament, is the same Person as Jesus, the Saviour of New Testament records.

Every time the person of Jehovah occurs in the Old Testament, it is in connection with God’s dealings with men.

When questions of mercy and grace are implied, the Person of the Trinity who functions in that crisis is always the Jehovah Person.

The name first occurs in the second chapter of Genesis, in connection with the finishing of the planet earth for the coining of men. Thus Jehovah is the God Who is Providence.

The next occurrence is related to the specific creation of man, as the story is recapitulated in Genesis 2:7.

From this point onward, in Holy Writ, all of God’s dealings with men in connection with the outpouring of His kindness and love come through Jehovah.

The third chapter of Genesis contains the first announcement of a coming redeemer. It was Jehovah Who said that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent’s head.

In the fourth chapter of Genesis, the God Who accepted Abel because he came by means of the shed blood of the lamb, was named Jehovah.

In the sixth chapter of Genesis, when God made provision for the salvation of the believing remnant from the judgment of the flood, it was Jehovah Who gave to Noah the pattern of the ark.

On the eve of the departure of the children of Israel from the land of Egypt, it was again Jehovah Who demanded the sacrifice of the Passover lamb, and who commanded the application of its blood on the lintels and the doorposts.

When the law was given from the slopes of Sinai, it was Jehovah Who gave this code to men, outlining their whole duty to God in that age.

It would be impossible to thus present in one chapter the many thousands of occurrences of this name in the record of God’s dealings with men. We merely cite again the text previously quoted, “There is one mediator between God and men.” Since God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, and His Person is unchanging regardless of the name He bears, Jesus was Jehovah and Jehovah is Jesus. This alone would be sufficient proof to establish the deity of our Saviour.

When we thus state that Jesus is Jehovah, we must expect to present proof for this startling and significant statement. Such proofs are easy to produce. In fact they constitute one of the most entrancing series of studies to be found in the Bible.

We may begin such a study by noting how t he New Testament apostles who knew the Lord Jesus Christ, applied the Jehovah texts of the Old Testament to His Pei son and works. The significance of this is seen when we remember that the apostles were godly Jews. The name of God was sacred to them, and they would never have been guilty of such

blasphemy as applying the divine name to one who was purely human. Take your Bible and note how frequently time apostles cited the Old Testament passages describing Jehovah and applied them to the Person of Jesus.

The first text that we note is Isaiah 40:3: “The voice of one that crieth, Prepare ye in the wilderness the way of Jehovah; make level in the desert a highway for our God.” The reader will note that the prophecy states that the God whose name is Jehovah is expected to visit the earth, and that He will be preceded by a forerunner. Now read what the apostle Matthew says in Matthew 3:3: “For this is he that was spoken of through Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in he wilderness, Make ye ready the way of the Lord, Make his paths straight.”

Matthew thus states that the coming of John the Baptist as forerunner of Jesus was the final fulfillment of this prophecy of Isaiah. Therefore Jesus is the God whose name was Jehovah and of whom Isaiah was speaking.

A similar prophecy is made in Malachi 3:1: “Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and Jehovah, whom ye seek, will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant, whom ye desire, behold, he cometh, saith Jehovah of hosts.”

This prophet also states that the God whose name is Jehovah is coming to the earth. According to this prophecy, Jehovah shall appear in His temple bringing a new covenant; and His coming shall be heralded by a forerunner.

Now read Mark 1:2: “Even as it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, Who shall prepare thy way.”

There is no escaping the conclusion that Mark believed that the prophecy of Malachi was fulfilled in its entirety.

This New Testament writer acknowledges John to be the promised fore- runner, and Jesus is accepted by him as the God Jehovah.

It is not too much to say that this is the common and consistent practice of New Testament writers. Note the clear statement of Isaiah 44:6: “Thus saith Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, Jehovah of hosts: I am the first, and I am the last; and be- sides me there is no God.” In these tremendous and impressive words, the Lord God describes Himself as the Redeemer whose name is “Jehovah of Hosts.” He claims eternal existence for Himself in the phrase, “I am the first and I am the last,” and declares that He is the only God in existence. Now consider the amazing audacity of John the Apostle, who knew Jesus perhaps better than any other man that ever walked the earth. In the Book of the Revelation, in chapter one, verse seventeen, and chapter twenty-two, verse thirteen, John describes Jesus in these words: “And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as one dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying, Fear not; I am the first and the last . . . I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.”

It is impossible to escape the significance of this statement of John. He applies to Jesus the Old Testament description of the one great God. He makes Him to be first and last, the beginning and the end, the Alpha and the Omega.

This certainly was the view held by Paul the Apostle. Note this clear prophecy of Jeremiah 23:6: “In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is his name whereby he shall be called: Jehovah our righteousness.”

When the Saviour of Israel comes He shall bear the designated name of “Jehovah our Righteousness.” With this thought in mind, open your Bible to I Corinthians 1:30 and there you will read: “But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption.”

Thus Paul, led by the Holy Spirit, ascribed to the man Jesus the attribute of righteousness which is one of the names of Jehovah. Jeremiah the prophet salutes God in this characteristic name “Jehovah our Righteousness.” Paul the Apostle addresses the Saviour in these familiar terms “Jesus Christ our Righteousness.”

It would profit the reader to make an exhaustive study of this common procedure of the apostle, but we can take time to present but one more. The twenty-fourth Psalm is the Psalm of the uplifted gates, and of the coming in of t he

Lord of glory. Verse ten of this Psalm reads: “Who is this King of glory? Jehovah of hosts, He is the King of glory.”

In the second chapter of I Corinthians, Paul the Apostle sets forth the hidden mysteries of the Gospel, admitting the impossibility of making it clear to the sin-darkened intellects of lost men. So when he speaks of the crucifixion of the Saviour in the eighth verse, he says, “Which none of the rulers of this world hath known: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.”

Thus the conclusion of Paul the Apostle is that the God of Psalm 24:10 is the Redeemer who triumphed through Calvary’s dark and tragic suffering. To this agrees the Apostle James who says in James 2:1: “My brethren, hold not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.”

These brief references must suffice to suggest the significant fact that the apostles did use the Jehovah texts of the Old Testament ascribing them to the Jesus whom they knew.

Even more important is the manner in which the apostles applied the Jehovah name to the living Christ. In their writings, the apostles used the name of God frequently, and often ascribed it to the Person of Jesus. One instance will suggest itself immediately to the Bible student’s mind. In the twentieth chapter of John, there is a record of strange things that occurred after the resurrection of the Saviour. John tells us that upon the day of the resurrection, the disciples were gathered together for evening worship in a room which had been made secure against intrusion. Jesus appeared in their midst, and convinced them of His resurrection from the dead.

One man, however, was absent from the company and did not see the Saviour at that time. This man, whose name was Thomas, refused to accept the testimony of the disciples, and said that he would not believe that Jesus had been raised from the dead until he could see with his eyes and feel with his fingers the wounds that he had seen made.

For this reason, history has named him “Doubting Thomas.” This is manifestly unfair, as Thomas was not so much a doubter as an investigator. He should be called “Scientific Thomas!” He was the kind of man who wanted physical evidence and who insisted on making personal investigations before he accepted any fact that was outside the sphere of normal conduct. I am rather glad that Thomas is in the record. It has been charged that the disciples were hysterical, suffering hallucinations, had neurotic visions, and that Jesus was not really raised from the dead. The calm and skeptical demands of Thomas certainly set him far beyond the circle of hysteria!

The attitude of Thomas was very natural. He had helped take a dead body down from its place of execution. With his own hands he had handled a corpse, and had helped prepare it for burial. He was with that company which carried this dead body to the place of entombment and laid it away from the light of day. Quite naturally he wanted proof before he would believe that that body was again alive! Skepticism may challenge the testimony of other witnesses to the resurrection, but the cool analytical procedure of Thomas, the scientific investigator, stands as the unanswerable testimony to the fact that Jesus did rise from the grave.

Eight days later, when the disciples were again gathered together, and Thomas was with the company, Jesus appeared to them with a personal message for the stubborn fellow. He challenged the apostle with these words: “Reach hither thy finger, and see my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and put it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.”

When Thomas saw Christ alive after His burial, he could no longer deny the evidence of his own senses. He cast himself down before the Saviour and saluted Him with these words, “My Lord and my God.” Such language cannot be misunderstood.

It is comprehensive, clear, and final. The name of God was ascribed to Jesus by those who knew Him when He walked the earth.

The apostles had the finest authority for so doing, for Jesus Himself assumed the name of Jehovah! In His teachings to His disciples and in many of His controversies with His enemies, He frequently called Himself by the name of God. One outstanding case of our Lord’s use of the divine name is introduced in the great controversy recorded in the eighth chapter of John. Let us refresh the reader’s mind by recalling to him that the subject of the disputation was the origin and nature of the Saviour. His enemies were sneering at His claims to preexistence, and were accusing Him of blasphemy, because He identified himself with the Person of God. When He continued to refer to God as His Father, they took refuge in the fact that they were children of Abraham, and were thus the heirs of all the covenants and promises that God had made with the patriarch. Jesus quietly replied that Abraham, their father, had rejoiced to see Christ’s day, and was glad because of the promise of His appearing.

With deepening anger, the Jews demanded to know how a man not yet fifty years old could have known Abraham and the prophets, and brought the argument to a conclusion by demanding, “Whom makest thou thyself to be?”

Their indignation burst its bounds when Jesus calmly re- plied, “Before Abraham was, I AM.” So they took up stones wherewith to slay Him. According to their law, they were justified in so doing, for God had commanded that blasphemy against the sacred name should be punished by death.

Perhaps the startling nature of this episode is not clear to the modern reader, but to the Jews, whose minds were steeped in the Mosaic writings, His meaning could not be made clearer. To shed light upon the amazing audacity of His utterances, we should revert to the third chanter of Exodus. There we are told that as Moses was tending his sheep on the plains of Midian, his attention was attracted to a bush which spontaneously burst into flame. His curiosity was further excited by the fact that the bush was not consumed in this mysterious fire, but the longer it burned, the brighter the fire became. Drawing near to examine this phenomenon, Moses was greeted by the voice of God, offering him a commission to lead the children of Israel out of bondage into the freedom of the promised land. In the course of the conversation there recorded, Moses asked a natural question. It must be remembered that the Jews had been in bondage for many, many generations and had absorbed the philosophy and religion of Egypt. The Egyptians were the most pantheistic and polytheistic race of antiquity. We have their records containing the names of more than twenty-two hundred different gods and goddesses whom they worshipped. In their years of slavery, the people of Israel had accepted the Egyptian pantheon, and had forgotten the name of the God of Abraham. Therefore, when Jehovah spoke to Moses in the burning bush, and told him to tell the children of Israel that “God” had sent him, Moses, to be their redeemer, the leader asked a natural question. He said, “Which God shall I tell them sent me? When I go to the children of Israel and say, ‘God hath sent me,’ they will say, ‘What God?’ What is Thy name?”

To this query God replied, “My name is I AM.” So when the Jews asked Jesus, “Who do you make yourself to be?” and He named Himself as the “I AM,” they understood Him to be claiming identity with the God Who spoke to Moses from the burning bush! In their eyes this was the ultimate blasphemy, and they were justified in their attempt to execute the offender, unless, of course, He was speaking the truth.

Why should not the apostles, who knew the Saviour, apply the name of Jehovah to Him when He claimed the name for Himself?

To make the case even stronger, a casual survey of the New Testament is sufficient to show how Jesus assumed to Himself the attributes and authorities of Jehovah. All we can know of the attributes of God, we learn from the pages of His revelation. There is no other source of information concerning the character and nature of the Infinite God except a self- revelation. Let us compare a few statements of Holy Writ concerning God’s attributes and authority with Christ’s assumption of these same qualities in the days of His flesh. Read first of all Isaiah 43:11: “I, even I, am Jehovah; and besides me there is no Saviour.”

These words from God to Isaiah permit of no misunderstanding, and are not subject to the vagaries of individual interpretation. The God Who is Jehovah says in plain words, “Beside Me there is no Saviour.” Now read Luke 19:10 and John 10:9: “For the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost ... I am the door; by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and shall find pasture.”

In words that a child can understand, Jesus said He came to be the Saviour of men. In others words, He came to accomplish the task that is peculiar to Jehovah. When He offers Himself as Saviour, He puts Himself in the place of the Almighty Who has previously established the fact that He alone can be the Saviour of the lost of Adam’s seed.

From your earliest childhood you have been accustomed to repeating the beautiful melodies of the twenty-third Psalm. We recall to your minds its opening verse: “Jehovah is my shepherd; I shall not want.”

In this figure of speech, the heavenly Father portrays Himself as the Guide, Protector, Defender, and Provider for those who are His flock. To the Christian mind that lovely phrase “Jehovah is my shepherd” speaks volumes of meaning.

How startling it must have been to the people of Palestine when they heard the words of Christ as recorded in John 10:11, “I am that good shepherd; the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.”

This was an astonishing assertion that Jesus made, when He laid claim to the possession of one of the chief

offices and attributes of Jehovah. Unless Christ is to be judged guilty of blasphemy, it must be conceded that He identified Himself with the Person of God in such instances as these.

For another such episode, read Deuteronomy 30:20: “To love Jehovah thy God, to obey his voice, and to cleave unto him; for he is thy life, and the length of thy days; that thou mayest dwell in the land which Jehovah sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.”

Two things are said of God in this short passage: first, He is our life, secondly, He is the length of our days.

Of the man Jesus, the Apostle John said in John 1:4: “In him was life; and the life was the light of men.”

John’s authority for this statement derived from the very words of Jesus Who said: (John 5:26) “For as the Father hath life in himself, even so gave he to the Son also to have life in himself.”

The significance of this strange claim is perhaps better appreciated in our generation than it was in that ancient day when it was uttered. For the sake of emphasis, we repeat here that our modern researches have taught us that there are but two kinds of life. These we may define as Creator life and creature life. The life of a creature is always imparted.

There is no living thing without vital ancestry. As far back as the record of life can be traced, nothing has ever been born that did not come from parent, or seed, or spore. But the life of the Creator can best be defined by the word “inherent.”

In- deed, this is the exact sense of what Jesus said in these words: “As the Father hath life in himself.” A life that is selfexistent, not derived from any other source, and eternal, can be ascribed to the Godhead alone. Therefore, it is highly significant that Jesus said He had that same sort of life in Himself. It was the life which was in existence from the beginning of eternity, which actuated the physical body of the Saviour when He walked the earth in the form of a man!

No thoughtful student can read these things and fail to understand their import.

One of the most delightful prose poems ever put into human speech is the sixtieth chapter of Isaiah. Out of this incomparable song, we lift this passage, citing verses 15-20: "Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated, so that no man went through thee, I will make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations.

Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I Jehovah am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors righteousness.

Violence shall no more be heard in thy land, wasting nor destruction within thy borders; but thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise.

The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee: but Jehovah shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory.

Thy sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy moon withdraw itself; for Jehovah shall be thine everlasting light, and the days of thy mourning shall be ended.”

Go back and read those words again. See the amazing claims, which Jehovah makes for Himself. He is here portrayed as Saviour, Redeemer, Mighty One, and the Light of men. Jehovah states that there will come a time when sun, moon, and stars will be needless, because all men shall walk in the light of His person and being. Was it blasphemy when John the Apostle wrote these words? (John 1:4-9) “In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.

He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.

That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.”

No, John could not have been guilty of blasphemy, for he had the authority of Christ Himself to ascribe these divine attributes to his Saviour. It will be remembered that Jesus had said, “I am the light of the world. He that followeth Me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.” We cannot blame John for his complete faith in the integrity of Christ’s claim, nor can we oppose this statement of John with the theories and opinions of any modern commentator or scholar. The first requisite of a credible witness is that he be present to observe the fact to which he later

testifies. All of the New Testament writers ascribe deity to the man Whom they knew. No critic, born nineteen hundred centuries too late to know what he is talking about, has the authority to question the record left by eye-witnesses of these stupendous historical events. The authority of the apostles is supreme when they give evidence concerning the nature of the Christ whom they knew and served. If they assert His deity, their testimony is final.

Certainly we cannot question the deity of Jesus without impugning His veracity. The calm manner in which He took to Himself all of the prerogatives of God, attests the truth of His claims. In the twentieth chapter of Exodus, we have the record of a law given to the new nation of Israel by Jehovah, which was that of Legislator. The giving of the law began in these words: “And God spake all these words, saying, I am Jehovah thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

With this startling introduction, God addressed certain words to the Hebrew people which were to be changeless and operative as long as they remained the people of God. There was no judge or king who had power to change one word of the law which God Himself had given.

Now, note these strange words as recorded in Matthew 5:21-22, 31-32: “Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: but I say unto you, that every one who is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother Raca, shall be in danger of the council; and whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of the hell of fire . . . It was said also, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: but I say unto you, that every one that putteth away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, maketh her an adulteress: and whosoever shall marry her when she is put away committeth adultery.”

Here is a suggestive situation. In the days of His ministry, Jesus Christ never deviated from a high fidelity and complete obedience to the law as given at Sinai. It can be truthfully said that He, of all humanity, was the only person who ever thoroughly and completely kept that law without a single violation. Indeed, His own statement was that He had come “to fulfill that law.” Yet in this Sermon on the Mount, in the section which you have just read, He had the audacity to change the divine law by adding to its demands and its penalties!

His authority for so doing can derive from only one source. In our modern day, we recognize the right of any legislature or legislator to rescind or amend any law which had been previously enacted by the same authority. The Congress of the United States has no power to enact a statute which a future Congress may not cancel or change.

Following this principle, we concede the certainty that if God gave the law on Mount Sinai, He had the authority to amend that law on the Mount where the sermon of Jesus was proclaimed. Thus in this instance, at least, our Saviour took to Himself the divine authority of the great Law-Giver. He thus exercised the right of Jehovah to deal as He saw fit with the law which He had previously given to His people.

This mental attitude of Christ toward the law was often reflected in His life and ministry. No portion of the law committed to Moses was ever enforced more strictly, or its violation punished more surely, than the paragraph which dealt with the sanctity of the Sabbath day.

The stern requirement of God is summarized in Exodus 20:10-11: “But the seventh day is a sabbath unto Jehovah thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: For in six days Jehovah made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: where- fore Jehovah blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.”

This is a clear statement of the reason and purpose behind the establishment of this day of rest and worship.

Definitely and with finality God said “It is the sabbath of Jehovah thy God.” That is to say, this day belonged to Him exclusively. With what amazement did the Jews hear the words of Jesus as recorded in Matthew 12:10: “For the Son of Man is Lord even of the sabbath day!”

In that astounding sentence, Jesus claimed to be the Master and Sovereign of the day that belongs exclusively to Jehovah.

It would be hard to find an enlightened theologian who would deny the fact that only God has the power to forgive sins.

Certainly the people of Israel conceded this fact, for they remembered such scriptures as Psalm 103:1-3 and Psalm 130:3-4: “Bless Jehovah, O my soul; and all that is within me, bless his holy name. Bless Jehovah, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits: Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; Who healeth all thy diseases; . . . If thou, Jehovah, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who could stand? But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared.”

We cannot gainsay these words. There is forgiveness with God and only from Him can grace and pardon flow.

Even we Gentiles can sympathize with the astonishment of the people of Israel when they witnessed the episodes recorded in the ninth chapter of Matthew. How their hearts must have hammered in their breasts when they heard Jesus say to the man who was bedridden with palsy, “Son, be of good cheer; thy sins are forgiven!”

In high indignation the Scribes said each to the other, “This man blasphemeth.” They were justified in this accusation, unless this man was God! Perhaps no single incident in the life of Christ more thoroughly manifested His personal assurance of His own deity than this simple, quiet, sincere statement: “I forgive your sins.”

To summarize the subject briefly and to give in concise form the strongest evidence of the deity of Jesus that the natural mind can receive, we present the Gospel narrative which tells how Jesus intruded into the very holy of holies when He set Himself up as an object of human worship. This is a point which is frequently ignored but the historical record cannot be disputed: Jesus accepted the worship of man in the days of His flesh.

The people of Israel understood that the ultimate sin was idolatry. They often disobeyed but never forgot the high demand of their law that they should exalt Jehovah as God and worship at His footstool, for He alone was holy. Indeed, Jesus recognized this principle. In the fourth chapter of Luke, we read the account of His contest with Satan in the wilderness. When the devil offered Jesus all the kingdoms of the earth, and promised Him sovereignty over them in exchange for His worship, Jesus answered and said, “It is written ‘Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and Him only shalt thou serve.’“ In the light of this, it is difficult to understand His complacence in the episode recorded in Matthew 28:9, where we read, “And behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and took hold of His feet, and worshipped Him!” It has been argued that it may have been proper for the apostles to worship Christ on that occasion because He had been raised from the dead and the situation was entirely changed. But if we read with care, we see that Jesus received the worship of men throughout His earthly ministry. This He did before Calvary, and on one occasion, He even went out of His way to invite that worship. This instance is presented in the ninth chapter of John.

You will remember that the account begins with a story of a blind man, one whose eyes had never seen the light of day.

The apostles raised a question concerning the cause of this blindness, conceding that it was the effect of sin.

Jesus corrected their harsh and erroneous judgment, explaining that the man had been born that way in order that he might be- come a testimony to the mighty works of God which should be wrought through him. Whereupon the Saviour made clay, anointed the eyes of the blind man and ordered him to wash in the pool of Siloam. When the man obeyed this strange command, his eyes were opened and perfect sight was given to him.

Naturally the man who had been healed went about testifying to the mighty power of the man Who had given him vision, and he sang His praises with fervent delight. He was giving his testimony in the temple, and this greatly distressed the Pharisees who hated Jesus. These subtle debaters sought to entangle this simple fellow in a theological controversy concerning the nature of Christ. They climaxed their argument with the statement: “Give God the praise; we know that this man Jesus is a sinner.” The man whose sight had been re- stored didn’t know enough theology to argue; so like a sensible fellow he contented himself by giving his testimony.

Incidentally, this is the one argument that the enemy cannot answer. This is the one proof of the power of Jesus to which the unbeliever cannot reply. When the Pharisees made their charge against Jesus, (which, by the way, they were unable to sustain in open court when they had Him on trial) the heal- ed man was out of his element. But he quickly recovered the mastery of the situation with these words, “Whether He be a sinner or no, I cannot say. One thing I know: that whereas I was blind, now I can see!”

This is the unanswerable argument. The redeemed of the Lord should never cease to say so, for the testimony of an accomplished fact is the finest evidence we can present. The Pharisees were unable to reply to evidence in the living form of a man who had been benefited

by Jesus. Therefore they excommunicated him and cast him out of the temple, hoping to silence his lips.

In our day, of course, this would not matter.

On more than one occasion I personally have been threatened with denominational discipline and excommunication by the unauthorized bishops who seek dominion in ecclesiastical spheres. Such threats have never affected my conduct in any way.

For if one pulpit should be closed to me, ten thousand more are waiting! I began my ministry preaching on the streets, and wherever two thoroughfares cross, leaving room for

a soapbox, a pulpit awaits me. If I desire so to do, I can worship. preach, and Praise God there on the pavements.

Through Jesus Christ we can call upon God wherever and whenever the need or the fancy strikes us.

It was not so, however, before Calvary. To the Jew, the temple was the means of access to God. Therefore, when they cast out the blind man from that temple, they cut him off from the worship of Jehovah. The poor fellow went out, bewildered and amazed at the harshness of the treatment accorded him by ecclesiastical leaders. He wondered what he would do with no means of approach to God. Jesus, knowing what had happened to His witness, sought him out.

When He found him, He said, “Dost thou believe on the Son of God?” The man who had been blind and whose sight had been restored inquired, “Who is He, Lord, that I might believe on Him?” Jesus, Who knew all that was in the heart of man, undoubtedly noticed the emphasis on the word “Lord” in the man’s reply, and said to him, “Thou hast both seen Him and it is He that talketh with thee.”

Whereupon the delighted fellow cast himself down before Christ and worshipped Him, saying, “Lord, I believe.”

This kindly act of Jesus in this episode demonstrated His full consciousness of His own nature. In effect He is saying to the excommunicated man, “If they will not let you worship God in the temple, worship Him in Me here on this city pavement.”

In all of this, Jesus was probably anticipating the future events portrayed in chapters five and seven in the Book of Revelation. There the Spirit of God showed to the Apostle John a preview of a coming day when multitudes of people, out of every nation, and tribe, and tongue that this world has ever known, shall bow before the throne of the Lamb of God and worship Him. This homage is offered because of a salvation which He bought for them with the shedding of His own blood.

So the Saviour, in the days of His flesh, brought comfort and hope to one humble believer, by allowing him the holy privilege of being one of the first of that eternal company who shall worship Him. The conclusion of all this mounting mass of evidence is inescapable. The man Jesus Christ, whose Person graces the pages of the New Testament, was the God Jehovah whose mighty works are written in the earlier portion of the Bible. Well may we join in the coronation hymn, happy to unite with the angels who fall prostrate at the name of Jesus.

He is the only God we can know here and the object of our worship both now and hereafter. The deity of Jesus cannot be disputed by those who accept this clear Biblical statement, namely, Jesus was Jehovah!

CHAPTER III

The Pre-Existence Of Jesus

problem of the origin of God is shrouded in mystery so deep and impenetrable that the mind of man THE staggers in its very approach to the bewildering subject. The flippant and smart-aleck attitude of modern infidelity never deviates from its established pattern in sneering at this great problem.

The common approach to this question is generally stated in words like this: “If God created everything in the beginning, who created God?” Of course no man of intelligence would raise such a question, and the wise believer will waste neither breath nor time answering such a palpable quibble.

When confronted by this blatant query, you need only answer: “My friend, I will tell you who made God on condition that you will promise not to ask who made that fellow! For if I tell you who made the fellow who made God, you will want to know who made him, and we will find ourselves on a mental merry- go-round with no place to get off. We have to postulate something as a point of beginning. You evade the issue by erecting a nebulous figment of mental imagining which you call ‘nature.’ Suppose I should ask you in your own exact words “if nature produced this universe, who made nature?’ and we would be entangled in a verbal bout that would not lead to any finality.

Since I have to start with something that will satisfactorily account for the intelligence manifested in the physical creation, I accept the clear revelation of a God Who is a Person, Who is self-existent and eternal, and Who, hence, had no beginning.” There is no legal reason which compels us to answer the infidel concerning problems concerning which he cannot answer us!

This whole mystery of the person of God and the impossibility of the human mind comprehending Him or His nature, reminds me of an episode which occurred in my ministry almost thirty years ago. I had been engaged by the Zyante Indian Commission to make a survey of the Indian tribes in the northern California mountains, for the purpose of

finding a strategic location for the establishment of a mission among them. Among my instructions, I was directed to seek for an Indian of sufficient interest and intelligence who could be trained into a leader for his people. A long way back in the woods I found a man whom I thought would fill these requirements. His name was Will Snow, and he was a forty-year-old babe. That is to say, he had never been out of the mountains where he had been born. He had never seen an electric light, any kind of a power craft, a railroad, or an elevator. The common things of urban life were undreamed of in his simple manner of living.

With the consent of the Commission, I took him down to the city of San Francisco, where I kept him for ten days or two weeks. During that time I made him acquainted with the alleged wonders of so-called civilization. I could fill a volume with the humorous record of that strange trip, but the one thing that I remember most vividly was his experience with the ocean. The largest body of water which this Indian had ever seen was Clear Lake. His people journeyed down to the shores of that lake every year when the blackfish were running, to lay in stores of smoked and dried meat for their winter supply.

When we had been in San Francisco two days, I took him out to Cliff House and let him stand on a site overlooking the Golden Gate. He watched the ocean vessels coming and going and stared away to the far horizon under which the Pacific Ocean disappeared. We walked down a trail to the beach and strolled toward the San Mateo line. As we were walking side by side this bewildered Indian turned to me and asked, “How big is this lake, and what is its name?”

I answered, “It is not a lake, Will; it is an ocean. Its name is Pacific Ocean.”

He nodded and asked, “How big is it?”

Of course I was stuck. I couldn’t tell him in terms of miles, area, and depth. That would mean as little to him as astronomical figures. So I built up a background of understanding by asking, “You know how big is Clear Lake?”

He nodded and said, “This is bigger.”

“Yes,” I said, “Can you put in your mind ten Clear Lakes?” After a moment he said, “Maybe.”

“Can you think one hundred Clear Lakes all in one place?” He shook his head and said, “Too much. You got that much in Pacific?”

I laughed and said, “One hundred Clear Lakes taken out of the Pacific Ocean would be like one drop of water taken out of Clear Lake.”

He made the characteristic Indian sign of astonishment and asked, “Who drinks it all?”

Again I laughed and said, “Nobody drinks it, Will; it is salty.”

He didn’t say that he didn’t believe me, but he walked down to the water’s edge, stooped down, scooped up a handful and tasted it. He spat it out with a wry face, looked at me as though I were playing a game on him, walked twenty yards up the beach, and tasted another mouthful. He repeated this action four or five times. Still apparently suspicious or unconvinced he walked out in the water until he was knee deep in the surf, and tasted it out there! As he turned to come back to the beach, an incoming wave hit him. When he was finally safe on the sand, bedraggled and soaked, he had found out that the ocean was salty farther out than he cared to go. Of course I had to take him back to the hotel to dry him out, and not one word was said as we rode back to the city.

When our visit was approaching its close, I said to my Indian friend, “Will, tomorrow we go back to the mountains. What would you like to see all over again before you leave?”

Without hesitating he said, “Wanna see the Ocean.”

Right after lunch, we started for the beach, and I noticed that Will was carrying a paper-wrapped parcel. I thought nothing of it at the time, presuming it was lunch. He was always hungry as the average Indian generally seems to be, and the only time he didn’t have two apples in his pocket was when he had three bananas or four oranges.

Arriving at the beach we sat down for fifteen minutes and watched the surf roll in. Not a word was said until I suggested, “We had better go now. We have to pack and leave for the mountains tomorrow morning.”

My Indian rose to his feet, unwrapped his package and revealed a pint jar with a rubber and a screw top. Keeping his eye warily on the incoming waves, he stooped and filled his jar from the shallow water. As he returned, screwing down the lid tightly, I asked him, “Will, what are you going to do with that pint of salt water?”

Solemnly he held it up to the light and said, “When I go back to my people and tell them all the funny things I have seen, maybe they gonna believe, maybe not. But when I tell them about Pacific Ocean, how big, and how salty,

they gonna say ‘Will Snow, he went away good Indian; come back big liar.’“ I swallowed my laughter long enough to say, “What are you going to do with the jar of water?”

He held it up and said in triumph, “Gonna take it back and make them believe.”

I have thought of this incident a thousand times. This simple son of the woods thought that he could get a conception of the Pacific Ocean into the minds of those who had never seen or heard of it, by the display of a pint of salty water! It is true, of course, that the jar was full of Pacific Ocean; but there was an amazing lot of ocean left over.

This is exactly our difficulty when we try to explain the being and nature of God to the finite mind. My little pint mentality is so full of God it can’t hold another fact or thought. But when I have filled that mind with all of God that it can contain, there is still the unfathomable, unlimited expanse of God’s being and nature that I have not yet touched.

Hence the only thing that a reasoning and reasonable man can do is to accept the revelation that God has made of Himself, taste of His sweetness, experience His grace, and keep himself free from spiritual trespass.

There are some spheres in which it is presumptuous for a man to force his ideas and opinions. Not the least of the kindnesses and graces of God to men, is the fact that He stooped to express Himself in terms that the finite mind could comprehend. Since the natural man is not capable of climbing Godward by so much as one step, the gulf that exists between God and man can only be bridged if God comes all the way down. This He did when He took upon Himself the flesh of a man and walked the earth in human form.

This was the background of the simple statement of Christ, “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath made Him plain.” This is the literal meaning of that statement “declared Him.” To declare is to manifest, or to bring out into the open, with a practical demonstration which results in comprehension. No living human who knows the gospel record can honestly say, “God is beyond the reach of my understanding.” All we have to do is accept the God which is Jesus Christ and the full and complete revelation of the heavenly Father will ultimately be made through Him. So we turn to the record of revelation depicting the nature of God and we find that pre-existence had no beginning and that God has always been in being. This, however, can only be said of God. The angelic orders which surround and serve Him were all created for their holy offices. The very heaven in which He dwells was formed by Him to be His eternal habitation. The myriad stars inside sidereal space, the flaming suns, and their accompanying planets all had a beginning in time according to the plan of God. The earth and all it contains suddenly came into being when it suited the good purposes of His will to call them forth out of nothing. Of God alone can it be said, “He always was.”

One of the unanswerable evidences of the deity of Jesus Christ is found in the fact of His pre-existence. The birth of our Saviour in Bethlehem of Judea was not His origin. We shall show later that this was His incarnation. His origin is shrouded in that same mystery that baffles us when we inquire into the beginning of God. This is the consistent record of the New Testament statements concerning the man Jesus Christ. Let us remind the reader what we said in a previous chapter, namely, we are not entitled to any conception of Christ which is contrary to the description and evidence in the New Testament.

Turning to the Gospel of John, we find the pre-existence of Jesus stated in John 1:1-4: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him; and without him was not anything made that hath been made.

In him was life; and the life was the light of men.”

There is no question of the identity of the person to whom John refers under the designation “the Word.” John says the Word was in existence with God and that He was God. In his own commentary upon this paragraph, John writes in the first general Epistle, Chapter 1, verses 1-3: “That which was from the beginning, that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we beheld, and our hands handled, concerning the Word of life: (and the life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare unto you the life, the eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us) ; That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you also, that ye also may have fellowship with us: yea, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ.” Here John identifies the Word as being an incarnation of the Godhood, the Son of the Father, Who came to earth bearing the name “Jesus Christ.”

As a further identification of this pre-existing Word, we have the larger illumination of Revelation 19:13. This chapter of the prophetic Book deals with the coming again of Jesus Christ, and it uses several names commonly ascribed

to the Saviour, such as Lamb, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Jesus, and the Word of God. The exact verse which we have cited reads as follows: “And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.” There can be no question as to how and when this vesture was dipped in blood: we only need to remember that His name is also the Lamb. The Lamb of God that took away the sins of the world had this in common with every lamb of the sacrifice—His efficacy was in the shedding of His blood for the remission of sins. Thus we have in the prologue to the Gospel of John a statement that before the time implied in the first verse of Genesis, Jesus the Son of God, Who is also called the Living Word, was in existence with God, as God, sharing His nature and glory from all past time.

Lest it be considered that such a claim to deity springs from the enthusiasm and adoration of the apostles who loved the man Jesus, let its hasten to show that Christ made this claim for Himself. We will read one such instance in John 5:17-18: “But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh even until now, and I work.

For this cause therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only brake the sabbath, but also called God his own Father, making himself equal with God.” There is no way of escaping the significance and exact meaning of this declaration of the Saviour. We should also weigh the suggestive conduct of the people of Israel. Deeply incensed, they sought to slay the man who claimed that He was the veritable equal of God, and had observed the works of God in creation.

We cannot take time to analyze this entire fifth chapter of John, so we pass on quickly to the second assertion of Jesus on this subject, which we find in John 10:32-33: “Jesus answered them, Many good works have I showed you from the Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

The Jews answered him, For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.” Modern scholars may argue, as they frequently do, that Jesus Himself never claimed deity. Certainly the Jews of His day did not so understand His utterances. It was because they did so clearly comprehend His claim that they said, “We stone you for blasphemy: because, being a man, you make yourself to be God!” Equally definite is the significance of the words of Jesus in John 12:44-45: “And Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me.

And he that beholdeth me beholdeth him that sent me.”

Adding one avowal to another, the Son of God then stated that His Father had sent Him into the world, and those who saw the visible Son were looking at the Father who sent Him! Every reader is familiar with the fourteenth chapter of John, and the bewilderment of the disciples over the strange teaching of Jesus. It was for that reason that Philip presented his sincere request and received a definite reply. Read again John 14:8-9: “Philip said unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and dost thou not know me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; how sayest thou, Show us the Father?”

An honest reader cannot escape the intended conclusion. When Jesus said, “He that hath seen me bath seen the Father”; he certainly avowed His deity in the strongest words that man could use.

Go back and read that paragraph again and then consider this illustration: Suppose I should say to a company or congregation who had been listening to me lecture from night to night, “Would you like to have the President of the United States address you tomorrow night?” They would undoubtedly reply with enthusiasm, “We would.” (They might even say that any change would be for the better!) What do you suppose would happen if I were to answer them in these words: “What, have I been speaking to you all these times and you know me not? He that hath seen me hath seen the President of the United States. How sayest thou then, ‘Show its the President?’“ What do you suppose the congregation would reply? Probably some deacon would rise and say, “You people hold him and I’ll ‘phone for the wagon!”

I recently had the great pleasure of shaking hands with Napoleon Bonaparte. At the same time I had the added joy of meeting Alexander the Great and the Duke of Wellington. In shaking hands with these notables, I had to reach

through iron bars, and I noticed that they had mattresses on the walls as well as on the beds! Sad as was the mental lapse of these poor mortals, I have never met anyone either inside an asylum or wandering at large, who was so crazy he thought he was God! But here is a man who said to His most intimate followers, “You don’t need to ask to see the heavenly Father. Look at Me and you see Him.” When we study the high-priestly prayer of the Saviour, we again meet His avowal of pre-existence. Consider John 17:5: “And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.”

It has been said that even though a man had no high repute for veracity throughout the days of his life, he would be inclined to tell the truth when he faced death and the prospect of meeting God. This does not apply to Jesus, as falsehood was so foreign to the nature of the living Christ that He bore as one of His names, “Truth.” He is not only the Way, and the Life, but is the Truth; and no false statement ever came from His lips. This gives added weight to the fact that as He faced death by crucifixion, He addressed His heart in prayer to the heavenly Father. In those very words of communion, He claimed to have existed as God, with God, sharing His glory before the earth was created. If preexistence pertains to God alone, Jesus Christ was God, and deity is indeed the proper term to apply to His person.

One of the consistent and oft reiterated declarations of the Pauline vocabulary defines Jesus as “the image of God.” We find this descriptive sentence in II Corinthians 4:4: “In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them.”

There is a hidden meaning to this dictum which can be best understood in the light of the broader statement in the second chapter of Philippians. A great and tremendous argument has sprung up over the doctrine which is called the “kenosis.” Due to the appearance of that word in this paragraph and its translation “emptied,” much has been written concerning the humiliation of Jesus when He came in the form of a man. Note Philippians 2:5-11: “Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, But emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient even unto death, yea, the death of the cross.

Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name: That in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

The major argument has been centered about the exact meaning of the word “emptied.” What did Jesus lay aside when He took upon Himself the flesh of a man?

Some say He laid aside His divine nature and was hence purely and exclusively human in the days of His flesh.

Some say He laid aside His divine attributes, and thus was limited by the weakness of a human nature.

Others say that He laid aside only His divine glory, the return of which He prayed for in the seventeenth chapter of John in the scripture before cited.

We shall show in the course of this study that Jesus did not lay aside His nature, and forsook none of His attributes when He was incarnated. We cite this paragraph merely to call your attention to the one strange and significant word which is used repeatedly in the scripture. in the Greek text, the word is “morphe” and is the basis for our modern scientific term “morphology.” This science deals with the gross bodily structure of the living creature and is in contrast to histology, which is the science of the microscopic structure of the cell. The word “morphe” occurs twice in this Philippian paragraph and is both times translated by the English word “form.” The sixth verse says that before Christ came to the earth He existed in the “morphe” or bodily substance of God; that He laid aside and took upon Himself the bodily substance or form of a servant, fashioned in the likeness of human morphology.

We would not cause the reader to stumble by the introduction of this term “bodily substance of God.” We use it because there is no other clear expression in human language to convey this exact meaning. The Holy Spirit caused Paul the Apostle to say, “Jesus existed in the morphe of God.” Of course we do not know exactly what this means. We are led y

to understand from revelation that God is a person capable of acts of individualit and sovereignty; we cannot conceive of intelligence apart from personality, nor can we grasp the fact of personality apart from some sort of bodily substance.

Our difficulty here is rooted in the tact that we are wont to conceive of all substance as physical matter. We fail to grasp the fact that spiritual substance may be as real as physical matter. The angels, for instance, have bodies formed of some spiritual material which is outside the reach of human understanding.

In the resurrection the believer in Christ receives a body which is literal and real, but which is not made of physical substance. After the resurrection, our Saviour manifested a body composed of translated flesh and bones, which was capable of passing through walls and locked doors into a sealed room. This body was not restricted by the influence of gravity. When it desired to it could exercise sovereignty over different, common, earthly factors. We are so tremendously ignorant about all things beyond the world of the senses that we are only capable of a stumbling approach to a subject which bewilders our darkened human mentality. So we just take what is written, and believe that. Whatever the “form” of God may be, Jesus existed in that “form” before He took upon Himself the “form” of a man.

We do not mean, of course, that God has two arms, two legs, eyes, ears, nose, and a mouth such as we possess. If God had that kind of a body, it would never have been necessary for Him to have been born as a babe in Bethlehem. But we do insist according to the Scripture, that God is not some nebulous gas permeating the ether of space in a pantheistic imminence.

He lives in a literal place called heaven.

He has a throne which He can share with His Son. He has mobility, intelligence, and sovereign authority; hence God is a person.

So Paul brings to us this revelation from the Holy Spirit which states that the Jesus Who died on the cross for the sins of the world, existed in the substance of God; which visible form He laid aside for the purpose of redemption through His death. This certainly establishes beyond any possible question the pre-existence of Jesus.

This fact is stated with equal clarity in Colossians 1:15-18: “Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; For in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him; And he is before all things, and in him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence.”

There is a slight difference in the various translations of the word here rendered “creature” or creation.” The King James Version of the New Testament text states that Jesus is “the first born of every creature.” The American Revised Version says “He is the first born of all creation.” An exact rendering of the Greek text would put it in the clear words of the Moffat Translation, “born first before any creation.” So with the paragraph of Colossians still clear in your mind, summarize the statements of Jesus made in that amazing presentation.

First, although God is invisible now, Jesus was in His exact image.

Secondly, before any of the creation was formed, Jesus was in existence.

Thirdly, every physical or spiritual entity, together with all substance and structure, were created by Jesus, and were to be used for His own purposes.

Fourthly, He antedates everything that has existence.

Finally, it is He who holds the physical universe together.

This is what we mean when we speak of the pre-existence of Jesus. How well assured are we of salvation and eternal happiness, when our destiny lies in the hands of Him Who created the heavens and the earth! Since He had no beginning and can have no end, the life which is hid with Christ in God is as eternal and enduring as is the nature of God. If Christ had pre-existence, if He possessed the attributes and powers of God before His incarnation, He is a wonderful Saviour indeed!

Suppose we let God have the last word on this subject. The opening chapter of the Hebrew epistle sets forth the preeminence of Jesus above all things that are, that have been, or that ever will be.

Speaking of the Son of God, this great chapter says in verse 3: “Who being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;” Even a brief analysis of those stupendous statements is sufficient to cause the heart of the believing person to literally sing with joy. According to the text, Jesus was and is the brightness of God’s glory and is the exact presentation

of God’s person. But more significant is the allegation that the man who purged our sins and sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high, did so while he was upholding all things by the word of His power! Quite evidently then, in His self- emptying Jesus did not surrender His complete authority. When did He purge our sins? This was accomplished when Christ in human flesh shed His blood on the cross at Golgotha.

While so doing, He continued to uphold all things by the word of His power! Having purged our sins, He then returned to sit on the right hand of the Majesty on high.

In this first chapter of the Hebrew epistle, God speaks of two spiritual orders. He addresses the angels and calls them spirits, ministers, a flame of fire. But in the eighth verse when God speaks to the Son He says, “Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.” So when the heavenly Father speaks to the angels He addresses them as spirits. When He speaks to His Own Son, He addresses Him as Deity. Of course this is only logical, and should be expected. God is Deity, therefore His Son must partake of the same nature with all of its qualities, attributes and authorities. For this reason, God speaks to Jesus in the words which begin in verse ten: “And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands: They shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; And as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed; but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail.”

Let us turn aside from interpretation and human comments and let the Lord Jesus Christ, the object of our study, settle this question with a clear avowal of His own nature and eternal existence. This utterance we find in Revelation 1:8: “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.”

How happy is the lot of the Christian who understands that his salvation is rooted in the nature of Christ, and that it is therefore as eternal and enduring as is the existence of the Saviour Himself! When you came to the cross to find salvation through the merit and grace of the redeeming Lamb of God, you were not deluded by some imposter whose name and fame shall pass one day from the memory of men. Instead, you came to cast yourself into the capable and strong hands of the God Who not only created the earth, but Who died to be its redeemer. When the heavens and earth that make up the present order shall dissolve with fervent heat and melt away, the soul that is fixed on Jesus Christ will find itself unshakeable, immovable, eternally safe!

CHAPTER IV

P

The Attributes Of God As Seen In Christ

RESSING on from the study of the pre-existence of Jesus, we do not imply that we have exhausted that subject. The Word of God enumerates many other clear evidences that Christ existed with God before His incarnation, which instances we cannot afford the time to cite. We suggest that you make a complete analytical study of the pre-existence of Christ and summarize these evidences for your own blessing and benefit.

Urged on by the necessity of reaching a conclusion and presenting at least some of all the manifold types of evidence which establish the fact of the deity of Jesus, in this chapter we will note the manner in which Christ demonstrated the attributes that are peculiar to God alone, while He lived an earthly life.

The common English translation of Colossians 2:9 does not do full justice to the idiom of the Greek text.

Speaking of Christ this verse says, “For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.”

The eighth verse of ,this same chapter identifies the person here suggested by the specified name of Christ. The key word in this text is the Greek word “pleroma,” and it is an obscure Koine word which is hard to transliterate. The English editors used the word “fulness” which falls short of the understanding the ancient Greeks derived from this word. Sir William Ramsay and his equally learned colleague, Dr. James Hope Moulton, together with other distinguished archeologists, hold that the word “pleroma” should be properly translated as “attribute.” The idiom of the Koine differs from the Greek translation, so that to transliterate Colossians 2:9, we would read “In the body of Him dwelleth every attribute of the Godhead.” The verb “to dwell” is not in the past tense, but in the present tense, as is proper in speaking of Deity. Being beyond the timespace concepts that bound all things human, we cannot speak of God in the sense of past, present or future. Being the same yesterday, today and forever, the Godhead remains Deity in every phase of His manifestation in time. Hence, if the Colossians statement is true and can be taken at its face value, we have here the manifold suggestion that Jesus, in the mysterious emptying of the Philippian record retained the attributes of God and remained God during His entire earthly ministry.

I was lecturing upon this subject one day on a university campus where I spent a week presenting the subject of Christology.

At the close of the period a serious-minded lad came to me and said “I think you said more than you meant to when you said that every attribute of God dwelled in Jesus Christ while He walked the earth in the form of man.”

“Not at all,” I answered. “That is exactly what the Scripture maintains.” “In that case,” he persisted, “would not Jesus have manifested some of these attributes in His earthly life?”

“Didn’t he?” I asked. “Did he?” he insisted.

“No,” I said, “you make the case: didn’t he manifest any of these attributes?”

“No,” was the positive reply.

“You are as wrong,” I said, “as one man can be. In his earthly life Jesus Christ manifested not only some of God’s attributes, but while He walked the earth in human flesh He displayed the possession of every known attribute of deity!”

Before we present the evidence that supports this astounding statement, may we clarify the atmosphere by a few words of definition. One of the great weaknesses of the modern man is his woeful ignorance of his own language. He uses words in his common conversation, having a very vague idea of the exact connotations of those words. When we say “attributes” we have a broad idea of what the word implies, but how few of us could really give a comprehensive definition of the term. Think your own way through this simple question and decide what you understand by the word “attributes,” then let me offer this simple definition: “The attributes of God are those distinguishing characteristics of the nature of God which are inseparable from the idea of deity, and which constitute the basis and grounds for His various manifestations to His creatures.”

May I point out the importance of certain words in that definition. When we said that these distinguishing characteristics must be inseparable from the idea of God, we have offered a key to the understanding of the Creator. For instance, there are times when truth is spoken and righteous deeds are enacted by almost any man, but we cannot say that truth and righteousness are inseparable from the idea of man. There are many men in the world today to whom truth and righteousness are utterly foreign. Though occasionally manifested in human conduct, these noble characteristics are not inseparable from the idea of humanity. But you cannot separate your conception of God from righteousness and truth.

Therefore, they may be denominated as attributes of God. Again, there are times in which man is moved by charity and pity toward his fellowmen. Alas, there are many more occasions when he is pitiless and unmerciful to his fellow- humans. Therefore, pity and mercy do not constitute the basis and grounds of all human manifestations to each other. But these qualities are always seen in God’s dealings with His creatures. We must note that the attributes of God must not only be inseparable from our conception of deity, but they must actually form the reason for all His manifestations toward His creatures.

We call these physical characteristics of God “attributes” because we are compelled to attribute them to God as fundamental qualities or powers of His Being, in order to give rational reasons for certain constant facts in God’s selfrevelation. Again, we must pause to emphasize that word “constant.” The phenomena observed in God’s dealing with man are not arbitrary or capricious. The power of God is not affected by circumstances; the will of God is not diverted by opposition. As certainly as water from the highest mountain inexorably works its way to the nearest sea, so the nature of God flows in constant channels, the banks of which are His own revelation of His own Self.

These attributes have objective existence.

That is to say they are not mere names which are given to intangible phenomena to aid human conceptions and understandings. They are not the result of man’s attempt to account for certain actions which are beyond normal understanding.

The attributes of God exist as qualities objectively distinguished from the divine essence and from each other. When we speak of the deity of Jesus it should be almost sufficient to say that Christ was God because all of these attributes of the Godhead were manifested in the man Jesus in His earthly career.

As you search the New Testament, you will find that the Holy Spirit has incorporated this fact in the carefully constructed biography of the Son of God, which is the Gospel record.

Let us begin with the first attribute of God, as a simple demonstration of this fact. Once again it is necessary to clarify the issue by asking you to state your conception of that attribute. In a great many educational institutions, including some notable seminaries, I have asked the simple question, “What is the chief attribute of God?” I have never received the proper reply. Nine out of ten people will say “God is love.” That is true as far as it goes, but love is the fourth attribute of God, not the first. The tenth person will almost always say, “God’s chief attribute is omnipotence.”

This is a natural reply, but equally erroneous. There is something about the thought of unlimited power which thrills the

human heart, but the power is not God’s first attribute.

The chief attribute of God is Holiness!

In those words we have briefly set out the entire reason for the Gospel as it is preached through Jesus Christ. We shall return to that thought.

We ask you now to define to your own satisfaction the term ‘holiness.’ Here again is a common word often heard in the daily vocabulary of the average Christian, but do you really understand its meaning?

Holiness can be defined in the simplest terms as “self- affirming purity.” This is a thing which no human being now possesses or ever would possess. There are men who have on occasion manifested personal purity, but this impulse to decency generally came from some source or power outside of their own nature. This conduct was maintained only as long as the source of power was available to them. It was sporadic, temporary and all too rare in its appearance. But you cannot separate the two ideas of Almighty God and purity.

There are some things which the human mind is not free even to imagine. You cannot conceive of a triangle with four sides or a square that is made up of five equal sides and five equal corners. There is no such thing as a square circle.

Logic does not tolerate certain self-evident impossibilities. Therefore, you cannot conceive of a God who was pure most of the time. Also, the purity of God springs from the essence or nature of God Himself. Therefore we say, holiness is the chief attribute of God and is the impelling reason for all of His conduct and revelation toward His creatures. Not only does logic make this demand, it is also the clear, simple statement of the inspired Word.

In Psalms 145, verse 17, it is written “The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.” You will note that the righteousness and holiness of God are not seen in some of His ways and works, but are apparent in all that God does.

In the sixth chapter of Isaiah the prophet describes his vision of the Lord God upon His throne. The seraphims which surrounded the seat of God’s authority chanted a refrain each to the other in these astounding words, “Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts: the whole earth is full of his glory.” Of no earthly or created being could this be said.

There are some orders both angelic and human which reflect the holiness of God, or partake of its benefits by imputation, but no created being possesses a self-affirming purity: this is reserved for the Deity Himself.

Therefore, it is highly significant that in his famed address in the fourth chapter of Acts, Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost and reviewing the coming of Jesus, said in verse 27, “For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together.”

To this agrees the apostle Paul who in the Hebrew Epistle wrote in chapter 7, verse 26, “For such a high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens.”

Here is a strange commentary upon the nature and person of Christ. The Old Testament claims that holiness is resident in God alone and that this holiness is constant as part of the nature of God. The New Testament stoutly maintains that this “God-nature,” as seen through the possession of holiness, was in the child Jesus who became the High Priest and Redeemer.

There are many figures in the Scripture which maintain this same teaching. In the twelfth chapter of Exodus we have the historical record of the establishing of the passover lamb. Verse five begins with the statement, “Your lamb shall be without blemish.” Later, after Christ our passover had been slain for us, the apostle Peter wrote a great commentary upon this fact in chapter one of his first epistle where he said, “Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.”

You probably know the difference between a blemish and a spot. A blemish is something which is inherently wrong with the fabric itself. A spot is dirt which has been acquired by contact with that which defiles. Being incarnated by the miracle of the virgin birth, Jesus, the Son of God, was without blemish in His nature. He lived for thirty-three years among men in contact with a world of sin from which, suffering no defilement, He was also spotless. There was no way of estimating how many millions and billions of humans have been born into this earth since the creation of Adam and Eve, but it is safe to maintain with dogmatic assurance that the virgin born Son of God is the only one of whom it could be truthfully said, “He was unblemished and unspotted,” in the Scriptural sense of that word.

In other words, in the incarnation Christ retained that self- affirming purity which is holiness, and the life which he lived among men was a practical demonstration of the chief attribute of God. What other living man could have faced his enemies as Jesus did in John 8:46 and challenged them with these words, “Which of you convicteth me of sin?”

Would you challenge your enemies that way?

Personally I wouldn’t trust my friends that far. Some of them are honest enough to start telling what they know. The manner in which His enemies sought to meet His dare is written in Matthew 26, verse 59 and 60, “Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none.” The inherent purity of Jesus Christ was so perfect that not even perjured witnesses, paid to blacken His character, could prove to the satisfaction of a prejudiced court, one charge against His holiness.

So sure are we that Christ manifested holiness, we will make this offer. We stand prepared to pay one thousand dollars as a cash reward to any person who can prove conclusively that the man Jesus Christ was ever guilty of a selfish deed, a mean or unworthy act, or ever conducted Himself to the harm or hurt of His fellowman. Of course, we know in making that offer, that we are perfectly safe. We might as well have said a billion dollars for such proof, for none can ever be forth-coming. The Colossian statement that every attribute of God dwelled in the person of Jesus, did not exclude the chief attribute of holiness, and history is a vindication of that broad and startling claim.

The second attribute of God is justice, which may be defined as that principle which affirms the certainty of the punishment of wrongdoing. Justice is given as the second attribute of God because it is the guard and defense of holiness. All sin is an offense against the holiness of God. Therefore, if holiness is to be vindicated and God is to remain supreme, all rebellion against holiness must be ruthlessly stamped out and punished. Just as no orderly nation could survive without courts and penal codes, so the divine governments must be safeguarded with powerful forces. Very often, of course, the legal procedures of human government are diverted from true justice and perverted to political purposes. Therefore, justice is not an attribute of human government. It is not constant or inseparable from the thought of government. By contrast, it is resident in the very nature of God, so that errors of judgment and mistakes in its application are unthinkable in dealing with God. We do not mean that God is just or that He is ruled by justice in His dealings with men. Rather, we mean to say in the strongest possible terms, “God is justice.” For this reason, from the very beginning of His dealings with created beings, God has operated through the dictum, “The soul that sins shall surely die.” We shall return to this thought in a later paragraph; we merely call to your mind the long record of God’s conflict with evil which is engraved alike in Holy Writ and on the page of human conduct.

It may be said that the justice of God is implacable, it never fails, it must and always does operate.

Did Jesus manifest the attribute of justice in His earthly career? Indeed He did, on many occasions! At once there will come to your remembrance the record of a roused and angry Saviour with whip in hand cleansing the temple of God of the filthy and defiling racketeers who made a graft of the temple worship. With darkened brow and flashing eyes, He thundered out the sternest denunciation that human ears could comprehend. Jesus Christ was justice in direct operation guarding the sanctuary which stood for the holiness of God and the redemption of His people.

The third attribute of God is mercy. By way of definition we state simply that mercy is that eternal principle of God’s nature which leads Him to seek the temporal good and eternal welfare of those who have opposed themselves to His will. Very often the purposes of mercy arc attained at a cost of in finite sacrifice.

Contrary to the consistent vaporings of modernism which delights in the fable of the evolution of the God idea, the Jehovah of the Old Testament is manifested in all of His works toward men as a God of mercy. As we covered this point in chapter one we merely refresh your mind with this brief reminder. God does not manifest mercy, He is not swayed to the exercise of mercy, but mercy is an attribute of God. Hence we can say that God is mercy.

This characteristic of Deity literally directed the outpouring of the whole life of His Son, Christ our Saviour. A classical illustration of how Jesus manifested this attribute, is the record of the woman taken in adultery. When the stern and harsh guardians of the law demanded that she be stoned, Jesus defended her with the implied countercharge, “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.” When the self-convicted accusers had silently slunk away, Jesus said, “Woman, where are thine accusers?” Humbled and shamed before His holiness, she said “No man accuseth me, Lord.”

Debased as she was, she was conscious of the fact that although his own imperfection kept man from filing an indictment against her, the holiness of God was no bar to His charges against her conduct. But because God is mercy, He said to her, “Neither do I condemn thee; go and sin no more.” We notice that Jesus did not say, “Neither do I accuse thee.” Recognizing all that was wrong and unclean in her conduct, He Who was mercy, could say “I do not condemn thee.”

The reason for that is found in the fourth attribute of God, which is love. I do not think that it is necessary to define love. It is the source of all that is courageous and kindly in every human relationship. It is not astonishing that the unlearned and careless reader of the Scripture seizes upon the statement of John, “God is love,” and wrests that out of its

proper setting to make that his entire creed.

Because God is love, the Gospel works. I mean to say that this is the reason for all of God’s revelation of Himself to a lost and sinful age.

I believe that most of us have difficulty in clarifying our thinking concerning God and His grace because we have never reduced Christianity to a basic philosophy. Yet, this can be done in terms of such comparative simplicity a child should be able to comprehend it. An understanding of Christianity is resident in a comprehension of these attributes of God. Let us consider a philosophy of Christianity in a few short and simple sentences. We have said before that the chief attribute of God is holiness. It is a characteristic of holiness that, being purity, it can have no fellowship with sin. If God were unkind enough to take an unsaved, uncleansed, unredeemed sinner into His presence, the very holiness of God would consume and burn that vile wretch with a suffering more fierce than the fires of Hell could ever engender. So, because sin is an offense against divine holiness, justice, which guards holiness, has said, “The soul which sins must surely die.”

The word “death” in the Scriptures never means anything more than separation. We say that your body is alive because you are in it. But the minute you are separated from your body, your body is called dead. It is cut off from the source of life, hence becomes inanimate and decays. In exactly that sense, when a soul is separated from God Who is the source of all life, that soul is called dead. Hence, to guard the holiness of God from contact with defilement, divine justice says that the soul that sins must be “separated.”

But God is also mercy, and mercy desires to save the guilty sinner. Here we must note that no attribute of God can function in offense to any other attribute. They must all work together in a correlated harmony, functioning as one perfected and completed being. Therefore, as long as a soul is guilty of sin, even though mercy desires to save that soul, justice says, “You cannot. I guard the holiness of God,” and mercy cannot operate in opposition to justice.

The crux of the situation is reached when love says to justice, “I think I can solve this impasse. I will provide a substitute that will satisfy justice so that mercy can operate.” Here, then, is the mystery and wonder of what we call the Gospel. Certainly no human intelligence ever conceived a philosophy as profound as this. Because God is love, He Himself, Who was offended by the sin of man, incarnated Himself in the flesh of a man and did Himself die to expiate the sins of men.

When God had thus provided Himself as a substitute and sacrifice, divine justice said, “I am satisfied.”

Mercy then could operate because love had provided a means by which the sinner and his sins could be separated and dealt with individually.

Hence justice can now guard holiness by ostracizing sin from God’s presence, and mercy can save the guilty by bringing the separated sinner into God’s presence.

And all this comes to pass because God is love!

For this reason we have the unfathomable revelation of John 3:16, “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

I cannot understand what men mean when they talk about a simple Gospel. The revelation of the meaning or redemption as set forth in the New Testament is so profound and incomprehensible, we must accept it by faith; it is beyond the power of the human mind to grasp. But we can have some dim conception of the magnitude of the work of Christ when we learn that He was Himself the love of God saving the world, and that God who loves Him has His every interest bound up in the thing for which He shed His blood.

I came across a rather graphic illustration of this recently in a large city in New York State where I had been speaking to a mass meeting of persons interested in evangelizing military forces. You may know that prior to the assault on Pearl Harbor, the Gideons, through their Hawaiian chapter, had distributed to the men of the Pacific Fleet beautiful little white- bound copies of the New Testament. This work was finished some weeks before the fatal day of battle dropped so unexpectedly from the skies, so that each man of the fleet at least had had an opportunity to become acquainted with the grace of God through this work. One of my friends in Honolulu, Mr. Charles Peitsch, had presented me with one of the Pacific Fleet edition New Testaments, and I had it in my pocket as I was speaking that night.

Thinking the crowd would be interested in it, I told them of this work of distribution and displayed the white-bound pocket Testament.

When the meeting was over and I was greeting some friends by the platform, a man tarried to speak to me when

everyone else had gone. Rather diffidently he said, “Dr. Rimmer, I also have one of those little white Testaments.” He pulled it out of his pocket and handed it to me.

The instant I took hold of it, I saw that it was stained with an ominous brown stain so highly significant that no technician would need to ask the nature of the dye which had colored the cover and the pages.

I looked at him and said, “Oh, oh.”

He smiled sadly and said, “Yes, oh, oh. I had a son at Pearl Harbor who was on duty the morning the assault was launched. In the pocket of his blouse he had this pocket Testament. With his crew he worked his piece until he fell to the deck riddled through and through with machine gun bullets. When they notified me of the death of my son they sent me his personal effects, and among them was this bloodstained Testament.”

The man took the book back from my hands and very earnestly said, “Dr. Rimmer, this little book is very precious to me. Its pages are stained with the blood of my son!”

For a moment I hardly knew what to say, then I smiled at him and said, “Yes, God feels the same way about that Book. He loves the New Testament. Its pages are stained with the blood of His Son!” The man looked at me quietly for a moment, and then he began to smile. No sacrilege was intended or implied when he said, “Me and God, huh?”

I said, “Yes Sir, you have that much in common, a Book whose pages are stained with the blood of both your sons.”

This is one of the reasons that we can say that Calvary is effective for the salvation of men. It is the place where separation was made between sin and the sinner.

But you see that a comprehensive philosophy of Christianity is resident in the understanding and correlation of all of the attributes of God. To proceed with this study, let us note that the fifth attribute of God is truth. I know that it is considered smart by the pseudo-philosopher to echo the inane query of Pilate, “What is truth?” No one who understands the English language would have any difficulty defining truth.

We would merely say, “Truth is any conception which coincides with fact.”

This is inseparable from the idea of God. Therein is resident the assurance of salvation. There are men who under certain circumstances will tell the truth, and all men are presumed to be truthful unless their own interests are served by contrary conduct. But no normal intelligence can conceive of deity telling the truth part of the time and hedging by deceit in other dealings with His creatures. In offering men salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, the integrity of God is pledged as an earnest and a guaranty. God’s word of honor has been given that all who accept His Son as Saviour and Lord shall never perish. Since the honor of God is bound up in my salvation, I rest in warm, confident possession of a redemption which I can never lose because God is truth!

It will be noted that these five attributes of God all bear some relation to His moral being. All of the creatures whom God has formed, which possess sovereignty of conduct and understanding, must be dealt with by God on the basis of these five attributes. But because the more commonly recognized attributes of God relate to creation and are seen in the visible manifestation or works of God, they are emphasized in the thinking of men when they attempt to construct a philosophy of deity. But just as the five moral attributes of God were manifested in Jesus Christ in His life and conduct, so also the attributes of God which operate in relation to creation are all seen in the works of the man, Jesus Christ.

Some years ago I came across an apparent difficulty in the Scripture which gives a perfect illustration of this. A young lad who had been studying the New Testament asked, “Since the Jews were taught from early infancy to worship none but God and to bow to Him only, why did Nathanael apparently worship Christ the moment they first met?”

I had never thought of this matter and frankly told him so, and suggested that we make a study of it together. I got no light or help on the problem until some years later when I chanced to be in Palestine. You will remember that when they brought Nathanael to Jesus, the Lord said to him, “Behold, an Israelite in whom there is no guile!”

Without straining our sense of humor we might frankly admit that a guileless Israelite would indeed be something to behold.

Nathanael was quite properly taken aback by the apparent knowledge Jesus displayed of a perfect stranger, one whom he had never seen before. He said to Christ, “What do do you know about me? You have never seen me before.”

The answer of Jesus so astounded him that at once he bowed before this strange man and said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of God!”

That answer was phrased in these simple words, “Before they called you, while you were under the fig tree, I saw you.”

There seems to be no natural explanation for the problem raised by the action of Nathanael until you correlate the geographical positions of the two persons involved. There was nothing astonishing in the fact that Nathanael was under a fig tree. When figs are ripe that is where any sensible, intelligent man should be. I grew up in a fig growing country, and to my mind there are few fruits on this bountiful earth that can compare with a tree-ripened fig. I remember in my own boyhood days we had two enormous fig trees in our back yard which shaded the whole rear of the house. Many and many a time my friends would say to me, “I saw you yesterday up in the fig tree.” Of course they did. The only time I wasn’t in that fig tree was when so much of the fig tree was in me that there was no room for either of us in the other!

But I never counted it supernatural that my friends saw me in or under that tree.

The people of Palestine understand this mystery. Jesus and Nathanael were separated by a span of seven miles, when Jesus claimed to have recognized this stranger. That might be called keen vision, though it is scarcely within the bounds of possibility. You try to make out the visage of your closest friend at the distance of one mile and see what chance there would be of recognizing a stranger seven miles away. But slim as that possibility is, all natural explanations are ruled out by the fact that a hilltop intervened in the span of that seven miles. Jesus was on one side of this hill and Nathanael on the other. So, when this Jew, who knew the attributes of God, met a man whose eyes could pierce the living granite of an enduring hill and recognize a stranger on the other side, he said, “This is omniscience, omniscience is an attribute of God; hence, this is the Christ.”

Whereupon he bowed to worship the fact of deity thus displayed by Christ the Prophet and Redeemer.

Certainly Christ claimed omniscience and equally positively He demonstrated it. On one occasion He described the destruction of Jerusalem in terms so graphic that when, thirty-five years later, Titus fulfilled His prediction, the record of the disruption reads like the prophecy of its event.

It is written of Christ that He needed not that any should tell Him of man, He knew what was in man. Again and again He discerned the unspoken thoughts of His enemies as they sought to debate against Him, and laid bare their motives and secret plans.

He picked up the curtain of time and peered ahead into the future ages, describing events of the past nineteen hundred years and delineating others which have not yet come to pass.

Because He had omniscience, He could stand on a hill with the fallen angel Lucifer, and see all the kingdoms of the earth.

This power of unlimited sight and unrestricted knowledge concerning all things and everything is resident by nature in the person of God. No man can claim it, nor can any human demonstrate it. Hence we say that the attribute of omniscience was manifested

by Christ.

To show how he possessed the companion attribute of omnipotence would require an exhaustive presentation of the complete Gospel record. One of the great difficulties that men have in their attempts to understand the miracles recorded in the Bible is their insistence upon considering the fact at issue instead of the Person involved. For instance, when Paul asked Felix Agrippa, “Why should it be counted a thing incredible with you that God should raise the dead?”, the king’s answer would depend entirely upon which portion of the question was emphasized when Paul asked it.

If he emphasized the raising of the dead, the king would naturally reply, “Why should not this be counted a thing incredible? Romans have seen generations of people die, but all stayed dead.”

But if Paul emphasized the Person involved and said, “Why should it be counted a thing incredible with you that God should raise the dead?”, the issue becomes quite different. You cannot use the words “incredible” and “God” in the same sentence and remain logical. Not if the incredibility limits or restricts the powers and operations of God. Hence it is folly for men to seek explanation of miracles. A miracle is an orderly proceeding on the plane of a law that is higher than our present comprehension. But while there is much natural law that we do not yet know, God, Who is the Author of all law, cannot be restricted in His conduct by our limitations. So, when Jesus said, “All power (omnipotence) is given unto me in heaven and in earth,” we have an explanation that is satisfactory when we study the miracles which He performed.

God wrought them. Really, that is all we need to know. Never ask concerning a miracle, “Why?” Be content with the word, “Who.” Our philosophy of God should be condensed to three words, GOD IS ABLE. There are no

qualifications or explanations necessary to enlarge, enhance or develop that philosophy of God. It is sufficient for every crisis of life or thought that can possibly arise or perplex. It is true that there is much in the works of Christ that baffles human understanding. Yet, in the wider sense, Christ did nothing that was contrary to reason, or that did not follow a pattern dimly set forth in the orderly process of nature.

For instance, all wine is made from water.

The sun begins the process when it sends forth thermal units which expand surface water into vapor and make it rise as clouds. This vapor later condenses and falls upon the fields in the form of rain. The thirsty roots of the vine reach out and suck up this rain from the soil. In cooperation with the greater miracle of photo-synthesis, which is resident in a mysterious laboratory in the leaves of the plant, the sun, the rain and the vine together create a bunch of grapes. Men gather the crop extract the juice, fortify it and set it aside to ferment. Or, as in the case of the ancient Greeks and the other races in the time of our Lord, they drink it as sweet grape juice and called it by the common name of wine.

Here is a miracle of transmutation. The sun, the rain, the .vine and a factor called time, transmuting water into wine. Jesus, Who created the sun, the water, and the vine, and is Himself the master of time, disdained the use of this cumber-some apparatus and in a few seconds He Himself turned water into wine. This is far less astonishing than the fact that the vine can do it! For to say the least, Christ was possessed of supernal intelligence, while the creatures of botany operate only in obedience to laws which are fixed by that same intelligence.

In like manner, God can supply bread from heaven. In our own case it is in the form of wheat. In the case of Israel, it appeared in the form of manna. With the five thousand who shared the lunch of the tiny lad on the hillside in Palestine, it was a few soda crackers and some tiny sardines.

You see, the problem of miracles is not in the what or the how, but in the whom.

Now then, if all power is given unto Christ, and He manifests that power to the stupefaction of human mentality, there must be some reason for that operation. That reason is apparent when you read the New Testament Scriptures.

Christ wrought miracles to prove that He was God. Omnipotence is an attribute of deity. In His earthly life—since Christ the man still was God in human form—it was inevitable that He show forth the attributes of His heavenly nature.

I suppose that no idea of the revelation of God is harder for man to apprehend than the thought of omnipresence.

I personally feel very much like the little lad in the country who was attending Sunday School for the first time. The lesson that day was from the seventeenth chapter of Acts, and the teacher was speaking upon the thought, “God is not far from every one of us, for in Him we live and move and have our being.” She essayed the impossible in trying to bring to childish minds a comprehensive idea of the imminence of God. Frankly, I have always found difficulty in making plain to some person that which I do not clearly comprehend myself; but this teacher had great courage and was dealing with this wide subject.

This little fellow became lost in the demonstration and said rather impatiently, “Hey, wait a minute, lady, that don’t make sense. You’re trying to make it sound like God can be in two places at once.”

The teacher smiled and said, “That’s just what I do mean. He can be in a hundred places at once. He is with us wherever we go.”

The little fellow shook his head in puzzlement and said, “He is with which one of us wherever we go? If I go to my house and you go to your house, He can’t be with both of us at the same time!”

The teacher insisted, “Oh, but He can. That is because He is God. He can be, and is, everywhere at once.”

The little fellow was highly agnostic and persisted in his query, “Do you mean to say that He is here in this Sunday School, now?”

“Yes,” said the teacher.

“Then, what are the Methodists doing in their Sunday School without Him?” he asked.

The teacher laughed and said, “Why, He is there too.” Greatly distressed, he said, “You mean that He is everywhere at the same time?”

“That’s right,” said the teacher.

The little boy said, “While He is here in this church, is He in our barn?”

“Yes,” said the teacher, “He is in your barn.”

“Is He in our house?”

“Yes, He is in your house.”

“Is He in our cellar?”

“Certainly, He is in your cellar,” said the teacher; “He is everywhere.”

The little fellow laughed in triumph and said, “I knowed there was something fishy about this—we ain’t got no cellar!”

I think that typifies the average human inability to grasp the idea of the imminence of God. We say very glibly, He is not limited by the time-space concepts of a physical creation; God is Spirit, and is subject only to spiritual law.

And when we say that we frankly concede that we face a mystery too deep for our own comprehension. But this is a clear, indisputable fact of God’s self-revelation; that He is omnipresent.

Jesus certainly claimed this attribute of God when He said, “Wherever two or three of you are gathered together in my Name there am I in the midst of you.” The missionary in Africa, the Christian in China, the mountaineer in North America and the believer on the pampas of the sister continent of the south can all say at the same instant of time when they meet in the name of Christ, “Our Saviour is here with us.” That is imminence in the wider application.

The apprehension of this fact literally changed my ministry. When I was still young in the service I was pastor of a church in Los Angeles, and doing some study in an educational institution at the same time. My days and my nights were busy, and sometimes I think my sermons were woefully unprepared. A most dearly beloved relative by marriage, one whom we called Aunt Fanny, often dropped in to my church services to listen to my sermons. She was a devout and learned Bible student from whom I learned far more than she could have acquired from me. We went through a certain period when the epidemic of flu was abroad in the land, and I had had an amazing number of funerals to interrupt the routine of my week. I had been calling on the sick, keeping up my classroom attendance, burying the dead, and comforting the living. Sunday dawned with the necessity of preaching two sermons, neither of which was more than half prepared.

As I entered my pulpit that Sunday morning, I knew that my congregation would understand. They knew what a terrific week I had gone through and would be very sympathetic, and I thus complacently excused my woeful condition of unpreparedness. But just as we opened the service, Aunt Fanny came through the front door and started down the aisle. At once my conscience smote me and I said to myself, “I just do not have the nerve to preach as poor a sermon as this with that great Bible student sitting there listening in sympathetic criticism.” So I turned to my assistant and said, “Al, you keep the meeting going until I get back.”

The door of my study opened off the main auditorium, right at the end of the platform. I slipped in and took down the notes of a sermon I had been working on and which I had intended to present a month later. It was only half finished but at that it was far better than the one I had left on the pulpit. I worked desperately to polish that one up while the opening services continued. By hard and fast work I stepped back into the pulpit with a handful of notes, just in time to fit the sermon into the service where it properly belonged.

If I do admit it myself, I did pretty well in that emergency; and I had my reward when Aunt Fanny kissed me at the door and said, “That was a good sermon. It showed considerable thought and study. Of course, it will be a lot better when you do more work on it, as you probably intended to do; but it was good and I enjoyed it.”

I beamed with delight at the success of my stratagem as she turned away. But a half hour later, as I was walking home to lunch, old man conscience rose up and smote me hip and thigh with everything he had. He said to me, “You claim to believe that when the people of God gather together Jesus is in their midst. You are perfectly willing to preach an unprepared sermon with Christ in the audience, when you felt it wasn’t fit for Aunt Fanny to listen to. Whose ministry are you serving—Aunt Fanny’s or Christ’s?”

I tell you, my conscience got me so far under the juniper bush that I spent all that afternoon working on my evening sermon!

When the service was ready to begin, I played a little game with myself. I turned out the light in my study and pulled my big chair over in front of the door; I blocked the door open and said, “Now, Lord, you sit here in this easy chair where you can both see and hear.” That night I preached to that chair. It might sound childish to you, but I played that game for six months. I never entered my pulpit without pulling that chair in front of the door and inviting the Lord to attend the service. I preached to that chair, not to my congregation. It so transformed my ministry that within a few weeks I would not have cared if the King of England and the President of the United States and half the potentates of the world had walked in arm-in-arm to attend my morning service. I felt that if my message was good enough to present to Him Who is in the gathering wherever His people meet, no mortal ears could desire more.

I wonder how far that thought would go toward translating Christian theory into victorious living?

Do you practice the presence of Jesus Christ?

Is it an accepted and apprehended fact with you that Christ is with us wherever we go?

To enter into the full possession of this gracious fact would make our lives so pleasing to God men certainly could find no occasion for offense therein.

Add these things together: the five outstanding moral attributes of God, plus the three principal physical characteristics of deity, together with every other essence that makes up the Godhead was manifested by Jesus Christ in the years of His living among men. So the Colossian contention is vindicated —”It pleased God that in the body of Christ should dwell every attribute of the Godhead.”

If it is true that God is the sole, legitimate object of worship, the intelligent Christian will worship Jesus Christ as God and Saviour and honor Him as Master and Lord.

CHAPTER V

I

The Incarnation Of Jesus

F THE DEITY of Jesus is conceded, as it must be on the grounds of substantial evidence as presented in Holy Writ, the natural result of His self-emptying would be an incarnation rather than a birth. No matter what means God may have chosen to manifest Himself to man, the supernatural would become natural in connection with that event. Thus the birth of Jesus becomes the major mystery of biology, transcending in importance and significance even the creation of Adam and Eve. Reason can conceive how that Deity might for His own inscrutable purposes create an intelligent and sovereign creature, but logic staggers at the stupendous implications involved in the revelation that God became a man to advance the welfare of men! There are some things that have to be accepted purely on the grounds of evidence or revelation, apart from clarity of understanding. It is not to be expected that God could take an astonishing step such as the incarnation in obedience to natural biological laws. Hence, if there were no supernatural details connected with the coming of the Saviour, we would properly be skeptical concerning His power to save.

The New Testament contains a connected, documented, and authentic account of those supernatural events which did accompany the birth of the Lord Jesus!

The first of these we would group under the head of “certain angelic annunciations.” The primary announcement signifying that God was moving in an unusual manner to fulfill and accomplish a promised purpose which was made to Zacharias. We shall return to this interesting character later, as he had an important place in the startling events so soon to transpire. At this point we merely remind the reader that he was a priest, officiating in the temple of God, and that he was a man far advanced in years, but childless. According to the clear details as supplied by the historian Luke, while this priest Zacharias was fulfilling his office in the temple, an angel of the Lord appeared by the right side of the altar.

To the astonished priest the angel delivered a message of assurance, namely, that his wife, Elizabeth, would give birth to a child, and that his name should be called John. Instructions were committed to Zacharias as to the raising of the child after the strict requirements of the Nazarites, who were dedicated to God from the instant of birth. The promise was made that the coming babe would be filled with the Holy Ghost from the moment he left his mother’s womb, and that he should bring about a great revival in Israel. Furthermore, the angel assured Zacharias that his son, John, was to fulfill the promises of the ancient prophets and would be the forerunner for the coming Messiah. When Zacharias doubted the possibility of a couple who had reached the extreme age of himself and wife ever fulfilling this announcement, the angel pledged his personal honor by saying, “I am Gabriel that stand in the presence of God, and am sent to speak these things unto thee and to show thee these great tidings.”

In other words, the integrity of the messenger and the honor of the God who sent him were both concerned in the literal fulfillment of this promise. As a sign to Zacharias, Gabriel assured him that he should be dumb until the babe was born and named, that all men might know that God’s hand was in this matter. So, the first supernatural event in the incarnation would be the appearance of Gabriel to Zacharias and the annunciation of the birth of John.

The second angelic visit was made also by Gabriel to a virgin named Mary. Again the historian Luke assures us that Gabriel was on the definite business of God, under specific orders to bring a certain message concerning the fulfillment of centuries of prophecy.

The third appearance of an angelic messenger is recorded by Matthew, who tells us that Joseph, deeply troubled by the birth of a child which he knew was not his own, was visited in the night by a heavenly messenger who assured

him that Jesus was not a body that was biologically conceived in the virgin mother, but was the result of a direct miracle of the Holy Ghost. The purpose of the coining of Jesus was set forth in the statement of this angel, who said to Joseph, “Thou shalt call his name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins.”

There may be some dispute as to the nature of the second supernatural witness to the incarnation of God, which would be the star of Bethlehem, long famed in song and story. The naturalist will argue that it was a comet traveling its destined and mathematical course and which just happened to be visible at that time. Others explain the phenomenon on the grounds that it was a nova, and still others say a conjunction of constellations occurred in their natural orbits. Be that as it may, a star of such brilliance did appear in the heavens that certain gifted astronomers were able to follow it to the place where the young child lay.

There can be no such question, however, about the angelic chorus which made its appearance to the shepherds watching in the fields and bringing to them the first definite announcement that Israel received of the birth of Messiah. A great deal of tradition has been draped about the simple fact of the appearance of that chorus, which really only tends to emphasize the basic fact as stated. One of the quaint fancies of the modern day is that the angel chorus sang at the birth of Jesus. The Scripture nowhere states that this chorus did any singing. In the drama of the incarnation they were cast in the role occupied by the Greek chorus, who never sang, but who chanted in unison Certain words which explained to the audience the obscure points in the drama. So, while Joseph, Mary and Jesus were the principals who occupied the center of the stage of history, the wings were filled with a heavenly host which chanted in unison the now famous phrase concerning “peace on earth” to be ultimately attained by men of goodwill.

Accompanying that chorus, we have the fourth appearance of the angel of the annunciation (again presumed to be Gabriel) who spoke to the shepherds a message of good tidings and great joy. This promise was not limited to Israel, but was to be extended to all humanity. It is significant that the exact statement of the angel, “Unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour which is Christ the Lord,” follows the statement that the tidings are to be to all people. In other words, Christ was not incarnated to be the King of Israel or to sit upon the throne of David, but He came to be Saviour and Lord.

It is inconceivable that the hosts of heaven could be unconcerned with an event as important as the salvation of a lost race.

Equally certain, the angelic train which attended Jesus in His eternal state would hover near the scene of His incarnation. So we repeat that if and when God did incarnate Himself in human flesh, the supernatural must be naturally expected in connection with that event.

Unquestionably the greatest wonder of the appearing of Jesus was the supernatural conception. Christ had the unique honor of being earth’s first and only fatherless babe. The manner of His birth was as unprecedented as it has been unparalleled. It is quite safe to assume that never again will this miracle be repeated as long as human history shall continue. When a man-child was born without the natural biological process of human fatherhood, earth had seen the “new thing,” which the prophet Jeremiah had foretold.

The creation of Adam and Eve followed a distinctly different pattern. Adam was created an adult, having neither father nor mother. He came to inhabit a matured body which was formed out of the dust of the earth. In like manner, Eve also was created a woman, so that these two never had been born. But in the case of Jesus, nothing was created. He Himself being eternal, descended to earth to occupy a body which was formed in the womb of a virgin mother, thus testifying to the uniqueness of the life in that new body. So that the holiest and most astonishing miracle of all Scripture is the event of the virgin birth of the Son of God. In that statement there is no criticism of normal biological reproduction either implied or intended. Most Christians believe that the noblest human power is reproduction. It is given to man to share in the holy joy of the Creator when he brings into being living creatures in his own image and likeness. This indeed was the purpose of the original creation of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden. When the first man and woman came full formed from the hand of God, a distinct blessing was placed upon them for the purpose of perpetuation. Long before the fall, when man still glowed with the beauty of his pristine innocence, God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and make full the earth.”

There is a very sweet Hebrewism which speaks of children as “fruit of the body.” In all nature fruit is the end and the purpose of life. Thus the most hallowed relationship that humanity can know is that of a parent to a child. It matters not which parent is considered, as father or mother are equally willing to live and to die for their offspring.

Throughout all history men and women have sacrificed themselves and each other for the benefit of their children and have tasted deep joy in so doing.

There is a humorous story which illustrates this principle, one over which we long have chuckled. A group of

Midwest women had formed a sewing circle in a small country village, where they met twice a week for friendly conversation and indulgence in good works. They took into their companionship a young bride who had recently moved to their vicinity and who had been married less than a year. The rest of the women all had families, and they more or less adopted the younger newcomer. There was in their group a very elderly woman, sweetened by age and possessed of a charming wisdom, whom everyone called Aunt Martha. She was the arbiter in all disputes and her word was law in every case that she refereed.

It chanced on one afternoon as the women were busily engaged in their sewing, somebody started a discussion as to a woman’s highest duty. The question came up, “Does a wife owe more to her husband or to her children?” All of the women present conceded that the mother’s highest obligation was to her children, except the young bride who had no children.

Most ardently she contended that because of the wedding vows and the love each had for the other, a wife owed everything to her husband first and foremost. As the discussion was waxing warm they saw Aunt Martha turning in at the front gate. Somebody said, “Here comes Aunt Martha; we’ll let her settle the argument.” The young bride consented on condition that she could ask the question in such a way that Aunt Martha would not be prejudiced.

When Aunt Martha had placidly seated herself and had taken out her sewing bag, the younger woman said in a sprightly manner of unconcern, “Aunt Martha, we were just discussing an interesting question when you came in. We would like to hear your opinion about it.”

Aunt Martha smiled and said, “What were you talking about?”

The girl said, “If your house was on fire and you woke up in the middle of the night with the fire so far gone you could save either your husband or your children, which would you rescue?”

Without hesitation Aunt Martha warmly said, “The children, of course, my husband is no relation of mine!”

Perhaps most wives wouldn’t go quite that far, but all mothers would feel the strength of Aunt Martha’s position.

The most hallowed relationship humanity can know is that of a family bound together by the ties of love and mutual faith. So when we say that the virgin birth of Jesus Christ is the greatest wonder humanity has ever experienced, we are not minimizing parenthood, but rather exalting the miracle of the incarnation.

In the first section of this book we set forth at length the manner in which the law of Mendel illustrates the fact that the virgin birth of Jesus Christ is essential to our salvation. No human being could save the race from sin. God could not do it as long as He was isolated in the skies, but when God became man, retaining the power of His deity but assuming the companionship of the flesh, the salvation of sinners was assured.

Hence we say this is the most important doctrine in the broad field of Christology.

We recognize the fact that the idea of the virgin birth is a mental stumbling block to the natural man. But what fact of revelation is not obscure to the unenlightened mind? The things of the kingdom of God are made known only to the children of God through the medium of the Spirit of God. Hence it is folly to attempt to convince sinful men of the miracle of the virgin birth. Such men will not concede that God can accomplish beyond their comprehension. There is a strange and blind pride which obscures human understanding. We are so complacently content with the fixed horizons of our own great wisdom that it hurts our conceit to admit that there are some things beyond our understanding. For this reason, modernism seeks to trim off every revelation of God which cannot be fitted into a natural explanation, thus bringing the Christian faith to a unitarian level. Such people deny the miraculous and the supernatural as a matter of course. These words are not written in condemnation but in frank acceptance of a very natural condition. We do not expect fish and birds to comprehend each other any more than we expect animals to understand angels. As long as the mind of a human being is shadowed by sin and bound to the service of Satan, that person must expect to remain in mental darkness. We can only recognize the condition and deal with it accordingly.

For these reasons skeptics advance certain arguments against the doctrine of the virgin birth of Christ, none of which are able to stand so much as a cursory examination. The first and the commonest of these spurious arguments in refutation of the incarnation I met again on the floor of a certain presbytery some years gone by. A young man had appeared before our body for examination leading to licensure and ordination in the ministry. It may not be generally known, but no Presbyterian minister can be ordained until he has passed a rigid examination in theology, and has stated his unqualified acceptance of certain cardinal doctrines as taught in the Word of God and demanded by the discipline of the Presbyterian church. Among other things, he must affirm his faith in the inspiration of the Bible, the deity of Jesus, the virgin birth of Christ, His death and His resurrection from the dead. Whenever you meet a Presbyterian minister who does not believe in these cardinal doctrines, you have met a man who is either renegade to his ordination vows, or who lied for the purpose of acquiring his ordination.

Evidently the sponsors of this present candidate were dubious as to his chances of success in standing such an examination. The minister who presented him, himself an Auburn Affirmationist, moved that the young man’s credentials of graduation from a recognized seminary be accepted in lieu of an examination and that Presbytery proceed to license him.

At once a protest arose from the floor. The discipline states that such credentials may be accepted in place of an examination as to educational requirements; but that an examination in theology is arbitrary. And since the candidate had graduated from a seminary whose modernism bordered on infidelity, the majority of this Presbytery insisted on his examination in theology.

They dealt with the young man in a kindly spirit of brotherly consideration, but the farther the examination went the more apparent it became that the young man was not qualified to be a minister of the Gospel. He did not believe in an infallible Book, accepting only certain portions of the New Testament as credible and rejecting the Old Testament almost completely. He believed that salvation was purely a matter of education and had no place in his vocabulary for the word “regeneration.”

To clarify this point, I asked him if he would please explain what he meant by salvation. This was his answer, “When a person, through long study, comes to understand all that the death of Christ on the Cross meant for men, he is then a Christian.”

I said quite simply, “That makes it hard on me. I have been a Christian a quarter of a century and I still do not know all that the death of Christ includes and implies!”

Sweetly and blandly the young man replied, “Some people learn faster than others!”

There was no answer to that, I had to admit that he had me there!

Questioned as to the virgin birth, the young man stated flatly that he did not believe in it. As to the resurrection, he had a nebulous idea of a spiritual resurrection but, as a matter of course, did not believe in the physical fact.

When the examination was concluded, the examining committee refused to recommend him for licensure and ordination, and a bitter argument ensued on the floor of Presbytery. One brother, advanced in years and more advanced in skepticism, charged that this was a deliberate plan to embarrass this young man because it was known that he did not believe in the virgin birth of Christ. This minister, (an active pastor at the time) went so far as to say, “There are many in this Presbytery who do not believe in that particular fable. I myself am one who does not accept it.”

I asked the brother, “How then did you become a Presbyterian minister?”

His answer was, “I did accept it in a general way when I was much younger, but have since become educated and no longer hold my previous belief.”

Once again I asked, “Do you mind telling us just why you do not believe in the virgin birth?”

“Not at all,” he said. “I don’t believe in that doctrine because it is only found on two pages of the New Testament; Matthew and Luke are the only ones who ever mention it.

In all the writings of Paul he never introduced the question of the virgin birth. Peter never mentions it in his writings and Jesus was utterly ignorant of any such suggestion. You never find it in a single sentence or statement uttered by Jesus Himself.”

“Then tell us,” I asked, “what do you teach and preach?” “The Sermon on the Mount,” was his instant rejoinder, “that’s enough Gospel for anyone.”

“Not for me,” I answered, “because I don’t believe in the Sermon on the Mount!”

If I dropped a bomb in the company, it could not have created more excitement. Somewhat bewildered, this brother asked, “What do you mean when you say that you don’t believe in the Sermon on the Mount?”

I answered, “I don’t believe that Jesus Christ ever uttered the words that you call the Sermon on the Mount.”

Greatly astonished, he said, “Whyever not?”

“Because,” I said, “it only occurs on two pages of the New Testament. Matthew and Luke are the only men who ever mention it. Paul never talked of the Sermon on the Mount; Peter says nothing about it.

James, John and Jude are equally ignorant of it. Now, following your line of reason, if Matthew and Luke lied about the virgin birth, why should I believe them concerning the Sermon on the Mount?”

Needless to say, the only result of this discussion was an increase in the uproar. But thus, graphically, we set

before you a principle which you do well to contemplate. Who has the wit and wisdom, the insight and spiritual authority to decide which part of the New Testament text is historical and which part is incredible? It seems to me to be a case of all or nothing. If Matthew and Luke are credible historians when they record the event of the crucifixion, or record the Sermon on the Mount, it is crass and arbitrary skepticism to reject their evidence on other points which assail your personal prejudices.

Furthermore, it is not true that Paul never mentioned the virgin birth of Christ. In the fourteen Pauline epistles, the inspired apostle calls Jesus the Son of God scores of times. Never once does Paul refer to Joseph, the husband of Mary! May I suggest a humorous illustration of this principle. Read any of the Pauline epistles, substituting the name of Joseph as the father of Jesus wherever Paul names God as His progenitor. Such a technique, for instance, would make chaos of the Roman epistle. Paul would thus begin his dedication to the Romans: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of JOSEPH, concerning his son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; and declared to be the Son of JOSEPH with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:” Read the entire first chapter that way and see how much help the Scripture is to those who need grace and salvation.

Beloved and hallowed passages of this Roman epistle are turned into errant nonsense, if Joseph was the father of Jesus. If you do not believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, the next time you are in trouble and you cite Romans 8:28, remember to put it this way: “For we know that all things work together for good to them that love JOSEPH, to them who are called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.”

Or, when deep trouble comes upon you and you again seek the consolation of this exalted chapter, begin your reading with verse 31. Remembering now that you do not believe in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ, and that Paul never mentioned this miracle, be careful to read in this fashion: “What shall we then say to these things? If JOSEPH be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay anything to the charge of JOSEPH’S elect? It is JOSEPH that justifieth.”

There is no need to go farther with such arrant nonsense as this, but these few illustrations will serve to show the folly of wresting the Scripture. Paul and Peter, James and John, Mark and Jude, together with every other writer of the divine Book, do mention the virgin birth of Christ. You will find it specifically stated in such terms as I have here suggested, at least thirty-five times outside of the four Gospels. Hence, our skeptical friends are wrong in their contention that Matthew and Luke are the only ones who set forth the teaching of the virgin birth of Jesus.

I hasten to assure you that even if that were so, I would still believe in this doctrine. Matthew and Luke did not write their personal conclusions or opinions. Like all other writers of the Scripture, they wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. If any one writer of the New Testament passages stood by himself in a clear-cut statement of fact, I would stand upon the record of that one witness. The integrity of the divine Author is behind His amanuenses, and the insult of unbelief is not directed against Matthew and Luke, but against the Holy Ghost who inspired them to write.

In addition to this, we cannot lose sight of the fact that logic and reason demand a miracle in connection with the incarnation of God. No unprejudiced, open-minded person who is capable of the evaluation of evidence would give more than passing thought to this first argument of infidelity; namely, that Matthew and Luke are the only New Testament writers who mention the doctrine.

The second objection advanced against the fact of the virgin birth is equally spurious. This is the assertion that it is a fable, as proved by the prevalence of such stories so consistently met with in heathen myths in far antiquity. As far back as the times of the Chaldeans there were fables of men who were half God and half human. The folklore of the Greeks, and the mythology of the Romans, abound in such quaint tales. The skeptic says that the Jewish people, surrounded by such fables, invented one of their own to conform to the thinking of their contemporaries; hence, the virgin birth of Jesus Christ is a Hebrew myth conforming to the pattern of such tales in all ancient systems of worship.

The refutation of this childish argument is self-apparent. The first point is that the Jews could not have invented the myth of the virgin birth because they still do not believe in it! Indeed, this is the one great obstacle in the Hebrew mind to the acceptance of the Christian revelation. Their ideas of God as a Spirit are so circumscribed and unyielding they cannot concede the freedom of God to operate outside the limits of rabbinical instructions. More than any other

Christian premise, the Jewish religion rejects the story of the virgin birth.

One need not be deeply advanced in the long and bitter history of the Hebrew people to recognize the fact that they are not particularly concerned with conforming to the opinions and beliefs of their neighbors. They are known in all history as an arbitrary and stiff-necked people who will suffer tortures rather than surrender the tiniest item of their faith, and who will die rather than embrace a belief that seems contrary to the interpretations of their law. Hence the argument that the Jews were anxious to conform to contemporary heathen accounts and to adjust their religion to such demands is unscholarly and unhistoric.

The more important refutation of this argument, however, lies in the very manner in which it is stated. It is true that all ancient religions did possess a number of stories of demigods who had, on occasion, visited mankind for his alleged benefit and blessing. The explanation of this fact is found in the first promise that was made concerning the virgin birth of Jesus. This takes us back to the Garden of Eden, when Adam and Eve were standing in the shadow of expulsion therefrom. After the sin and the subsequent fall of man, divine justice, to safeguard holiness, pronounced a curse upon all who had any connection with that sin of rebellion. The man, the woman, and the very earth were to participate in the punishment of that curse which, however, was primarily directed against Satan. Before God pronounced the doom of punishment upon the sinning couple, to Satan he said, “I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed.

It shall bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise His heel.”

There is an exact and strange significance in those words “seed of the woman.” It has often been pointed out by capable biologists that mammalian “seed” is always in the masculine. It is for this reason that a child bears his father’s name and not his mother’s. For this reason, inheritance and descent are reckoned through the male line. Therefore, if a human person occurs on the earth who is “seed” of the mother instead of the father, every basic conception of biology is overthrown. It is quite evident that Adam and Eve understood this in a dim sense of the word, for when Cain was born, Eve gave to this child that name, which translated means, “gotten,” or “acquired.” Her statement was “I have gotten the man, even Jehovah.”

So the first promise of a redeemer from the effects and consequence of sin was made when but two people were alive upon the face of the earth. As their race multiplied and was spread widely over that section of the earth, they carried this promise with them. Each generation passed on to the following the holy hope that some day the seed of a woman would appear to be the redeemer of the race. As time fled by and His coming was delayed, the impatient hearts of longing man invented these myths, saying that He had come. To the skilled ethnologist the universality of belief in basic myths held by widely isolated peoples, is clear evidence of some historic fact as a premise for that widespread belief. In this case, the premise is an original revelation.

To the parents of all humanity, a great promise was made. Spreading from father to son over multiplied generations, as men journeyed from place to place they carried the tradition in a garbled form.

Hence, to clarify the record the prophets of Israel were divinely inspired to restate the premise of the virgin birth, as they did from time to time. But the universality of belief in the idea clearly argues a primitive revelation, and sustains the fact of the virgin birth instead of mitigating against it!

The third general objection is one which we hear largely in educational circles. We are glibly told that this is the student’s objection to the Christian faith, in that it implies belief in a biological miracle; and the student mind does not believe in miracles.

Incidentally, let us point out that this is not true. When we find this argument advanced by students, they are invariably quoting the faculty! It is, then, a faculty objection rather than a student argument. In the course of time a student body becomes a mental echo of the general trend of faculty thinking. Hence, skepticism on a campus is nothing but the reflection of the attitude of mind of the instructors. Students do believe in miracles in some form or other. No man can account for the appearance of humanity, apart from the miraculous.

May I illustrate that statement with this stark choice which faces every thinking, reasoning person. There are but two theories to account for the presence of man on the planet Earth. One of these, the Mosaic theory of creation, demands belief in one miracle, namely, the specific, fiat creation of Adam and Eve. Again we define a miracle as “an orderly proceeding on the plane of a law higher than our present comprehension.” If we accept the fact of creation, we concede that once God operated with an expression of His sovereignty to set in motion a system of reproduction that has never varied in human history. To this premise there is one single exception, and that exception is the virgin birth of Christ. This means, then, that we frankly concede a miracle to start the generation of the race called human.

The only other alternate theory is that of organic evolution. To accept the theory of creation, we must have faith enough to believe in one miracle. To accept the dogma of organic evolution, we must have the stupendous credulity

which will enable us to believe in millions, aye, even billions of miracles! To make that plain, let us remind the reader that evolution does not offer any intelligent account for the origin of life. It begins with life already here and postulates a weird and fantastic process of transmutation from one sort of life to another. The study of biology is a fairly exact science. It is only in the interpretation of the facts observed that biologists cease to be scientific. Among the observed phenomena which recur with such frequency as to be accepted biological laws, there is the strange fixity of species.

Between every two species there is a line of demarcation that is fixed, impassable, and unalterable. The crossing of that line to produce subsequent and higher species by evolution, would be an act of transmutation. This has never been observed in the process of occurring, nor has it been demonstrated by acceptable evidence to have occurred in any past time.

It is true that within the limits of every species there is a tendency toward mutation, or variation. This, however, is not organic evolution. That would imply transmutation, and the subsequent rise of new species from simpler underlying forms.

Wassman has demonstrated that if it were possible for one species to transmute to another, it would require a minimum of seventeen hundred mutants or variants for the transmutation of any species into the next higher. Since it is generally conceded that the vital life period of earth’s history, embracing all geological time, has witnessed a probable maximum of one hundred twenty-five million species, to account for the appearance of man by organic evolution we would have to multiply that number by the mutants required for each transmutation. This would give us 212,500,000,000 miracles which we would have to accept to have an intelligent belief in the theory of evolution! Every transmutation would be a violation of natural law. Each one would be a miracle, in that it transgressed the line of demarcation that safeguards a species and keeps it within its fixed, predestined, and divinely determined limits. I fail to see how the natural man can scoff at the faith of a Christian who believes in one miracle of creation, when the unbeliever accepts multiplied millions of miracles to justify his violation of every known law of biology and every evidence of paleontology, and to cling to the exploded myth of evolution.

Hence it is folly to say that students cannot believe in a biological miracle. The birth of every normal babe is miraculous, to the extent that it is not comprehended within known human law. In my own researches in embryology, I have dealt largely with and have elsewhere written of the mysteries of the mitotic process. In an exact sense of the word, mitosis is always a miracle. It, too, is an orderly proceeding on the plane of a law higher than our present comprehension.

Some time ago I was speaking to one of the greatest medical authorities in my wide acquaintance, the well known Dr. Addison Bernizer, of Charlotte, North Carolina. In the course of the conversation I asked this eminent physician if he believed in the virgin birth of Christ. With specific, earnest, emphasis, he said “Certainly I believe in the virgin birth of Christ. After thirty years of medical practice I find the normal birth of an average child a mystery so profound that my human mind can give no adequate explanation for it. Long ago I decided that until I could thoroughly comprehend the amazing wonder of natural birth, I would have to accept the greater wonder of the incarnation of Jesus Christ purely on the grounds of faith and the statement of evidence inherent in the record of His coming.”

Any man of science whose decision was untrammeled by prejudice and willful skepticism could properly echo that sentiment.

In the study of human reproduction, we note that when the somatic count of chromosomes is halved to the reproductive count and the process of mitosis begins, every embryologist faces an orderly proceeding for which no living authority can give an intelligent explanation.

So students in the sciences deal with miracles with every turn of the focusing screw of their compound microscopes!

Miracles are no stumbling block to God or to those who know Him. Hence, the Scripture boldly and clearly records two biological miracles. They are both recorded and summarized in I Corinthians 15:45 where we read: “And so it is written, the first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.”

Careless readers hence speak of Jesus as “the second Adam.” This is neither specific nor exact. Jesus is never called the second Adam, but is always referred to as the last Adam. If there had been a first and a second, there could be a third, a fourth, a tenth, a thousandth, a millionth; but the exact phrase, “the first Adam and the last Adam” speaks of a process which began and terminated with finality.

The first Adam was a biological miracle, in that he had neither father nor mother. But from Adam to Christ no human graced this earth through any other process than that of generation or natural reproduction. Then, when the fulness of the time had come and God was ready to redeem the promise made to Adam and Eve and the seed of the

woman was about to appear, another miracle was performed. The last Adam came into the earth with a mother, but with no human father. So then, without equivocation or apology, the Word of God answers the faculty objection which is only reflected in the skepticism of the student, by acknowledging the miraculous.

There were two miracles—Adam and Jesus—and both of them speak of specific creation!

The fifth and final common argument against the credibility of the virgin birth is the misstatement often heard that the genealogies of Jesus in the New Testament definitely name Joseph as the father of Jesus.

It is astonishing to see that lengthy pamphlets and semi learned arguments have been written by professional atheists to set forth proof of this alleged fact. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The genealogies in Matthew and Luke do not connect Joseph with the birth of Jesus. In the genealogy of Matthew, for instance, the writer departs from his fixed phraseology to call attention to the lack of relationship between Jesus and Joseph, and to thus denote the peculiarity of Jesus’ birth. Beginning with Abraham, Matthew uses the verb “begat” as follows: “Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; ..” and continues the use of this verb to Jacob, who was the father of Joseph. But, in verse 16 of the first chapter of Matthew we read: “And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.”

So, after using the word “begat” thirty-nine consecutive times, Matthew uses a different phrase to account for the coming of the Saviour.

In all that long record of normal human birth, not once did Matthew fail to use the term “begat.” But when he came to the relationship between Joseph and our Lord, Matthew violates his own vocabularly to definitely state that Joseph and Jesus were not related, except that Joseph was the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus.

In normal language that would mean that Joseph was the stepfather of the child, Jesus. That being so, who was his father?

Luke also follows this same precise and scientific accuracy in the genealogy he presents in his third chapter.

Matthew started with Abraham and brought that genealogy down to the days of Jesus. Luke began with the time of Christ and worked his way back to Adam, who was formed by the hand of God. In beginning his record of this long line of human reproduction, Luke says, “And Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was of Heli.” The critic very conveniently deletes those three words “as was supposed,” and thus, by wresting the text, claims that Luke clearly stated that Jesus was the son of Joseph. To do this, however, the critic must ignore, repudiate and deny all the preceding record of Luke, namely, chapters one and two and the first twenty-two verses of chapter three. Indeed, the very verse which precedes the statement that Jesus was supposed to be the son of Joseph, states the refutation in these words: “And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.”

Infidelity, however, can only progress by ignoring, warping, or misrepresenting the fact at issue. Hence this is no embarrassment to the critic. But a child who is capable of reading the clear statement of the Scripture would be able to refute the argument that the genealogies, as given in Matthew and Luke, definitely named Joseph as the father of Jesus.

In fact, as far as I know, there are only three occasions in the New Testament record where Jesus is ever called the son of Joseph. The first reference is found in John 1:45 where Philip went after Nathanael and said unto him, “We have found him of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write, Jesus of Nazareth the son of Joseph.” This first occasion is a clear illustration of the danger of a new convert telling more than he knows to be a fact. Philip had been a follower of Jesus less than twenty-four hours! Philip had not yet had time to learn the facts of the incarnation, and to him Jesus was merely a prophet, one who had been foretold by the Old Testament Scriptures. Therefore, out of his ignorance and untutored, childish belief, he did call Jesus the son of Joseph.

The second occasion is recorded in the fourth chapter of Luke. On one of His return visits to Nazareth, the city where He had grown to manhood, Jesus was greeted with such unbelief as made it impossible for Him to work miracles acceptably. While there these unbelievers called Him Joseph’s son.

The third occasion follows this general pattern, as the story is given in the sixth chapter of John. The Christrejecting murderers, who later conspired to demand His life of the Roman court, cried out against His teachings of deity.

They sought to refute His own testimony that He came from heaven, by saying, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph,

whose father and mother we know? How is it then that he said, he came down from heaven?”

It might be significant to put those three cases together and remind the modern Christian who does not believe in the virgin birth of Christ, of the questionable company in which He finds Himself.

The only people in the lifetime of Christ who ascribed the parentage of Jesus to a man named Joseph were one ignorant believer and a group of willful, rebellious, Christ-rejecting unbelievers. That would be rather tough company in which to be found, and I prefer to take my stand with all the writers of Holy Writ, and share their belief in the doctrine of the virgin birth.

This gives rise to the query often heard, “If it is true that Jesus was not the son of Joseph, why then do we have two genealogies, and how can you account for the discrepancies between these two?”

In fact it has been argued that the gross and apparent discrepancies in the two genealogies refute the accepted theories of inspiration, in that they form contradictions in the record. The apparent discrepancy is found first in the introduction of Joseph’s genealogy by Matthew. This writer begins with Abraham, and shows that Joseph was a descendant of David through Solomon and Rehoboam. Matthew states that Jacob thus descended from David and was the father of Joseph. Now then, if Joseph is not the father of Jesus, why did Matthew bother to give his life of descent?

Once again we find that to understand any Scripture you must consult all Scripture.

When we look to the ancient prophecies and the history of Israel, we find that Matthew gave Joseph’s genealogy to prove that Joseph could not have been the father of the Messiah!

In the eleventh verse of the first chapter of Matthew, we read, “And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon.” The name Josias is the Greek form of the Hebrew name “Coniah.”

Concerning this man Coniah, or Jechonias, there is a grim passage in Old Testament writings. Coniah led the children of Israel into idolatry. You will remember that he was the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, and was in power in the days when Nebuchadnezzar carried away the last of Israel into the captivity of Babylon. Because of his sin in leading Israel into idolatry, God pronounced upon Coniah a curse, as is recorded in the close of the twenty-second chapter of Jeremiah, in these words: “Oh earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord. Thus said the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.”

This prophecy, of course, was known to Matthew, who was versed in all of the Messianic Scriptures. Now, according to this fiat of God, no descendant of Coniah can occupy the Davidic throne and fulfill the Davidic covenant.

Yet, of Jesus, the angel Gabriel said to His mother, Mary, “He shall be great and shall be called the Son of the Highest, and the Lord God shall give to Him the throne of His father David; and He shall reign over the house of Jacob forever.”

This angelic prophecy could never be fulfilled without violating an immutable decree of God, if Jesus were the son of Joseph and, hence, a descendant of Coniah It is for this reason Matthew includes the genealogy in his record. He wants to show that Jesus was not the son of Joseph, and therefore there was no legal bar to His claim to being the Messiah.

Luke, on the other hand, gives the genealogy of Jesus through His mother, Mary. Matthew states that Joseph’s father was named Jacob. A discrepancy has been imagined because Luke begins by saying Joseph was “of Heli.” Note that the Greek text does not say “son of Heli,” and the proper reading is “son-in-law.” Heli was the father of Mary, who was the mother of Jesus. Messiah must have a Davidic ancestry. Hence Luke traces the descent of Jesus’ mother back to David, through the branch of Nathan, the son of David, on whose line there was no curse and no bar to the Davidic throne.

There is, therefore, no conflict, no contradiction, and no ground for the general claim of error. These arguments spring from the ignorance of the objector, and his lack of knowledge of the text and history of the entire Scripture. It is safe to say that no argument can be advanced, concluded, or schemed against the doctrine of the virgin birth, which can stand the light of historical and intelligent investigation.

We have thus dealt with the negative phase of the question to clarify the atmosphere before presenting the positive proof of the fact alleged. There is no evidence against the Scripture doctrine of the incarnation of Christ. Let us now look to the abundant evidence which supports the fact at issue.

CHAPTER VI

The Psychology Of The Virgin Birth

T

O INVESTIGATE the proof offered in substantiation of a fact that is affirmed, several different lines of inquiry must be followed. But when the evidence derives from the testimony and conduct of reasoning creatures, the best avenue of approach is to consider the psychology involved in their conduct.

Let us first establish beyond controversy that a fact is alleged, and then proceed to its demonstration.

The clear record of the historical documents called the New Testament, written by accredited witnesses who participated in the events of which they write, is the best evidence that intelligence could demand, accept, or receive.

The most concise statement of the incarnation of Jesus is recorded by one of these writers in the Gospel of Luke, beginning with the twenty-sixth verse of this first chapter. To refresh your mind, we set before you here the simple, brief, condensed and clear account in Luke's own words: “And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, to a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David: and the virgin's name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that are highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women. And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary; for thou hast found favour with God. And behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall over-shadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” It is impossible to read these words and come to any other conclusion than that Jesus was born before Joseph and Mary were married.

The narrator thus specifically states in language that admits of no other interpretation, that the mother of Jesus was a virgin, engaged to be married to a man whose name was Joseph.

To this statement of Luke, the record of Matthew agrees in complete detail. Matthew's testimony to this event is put in these simple words: “Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.” It is true that Matthew speaks of Joseph as a “husband,” and that the angel refers to Mary as a “wife,” but this can be consistently accounted for under the Hebrew law of betrothal, which we shall consider a few paragraphs hence. Note now that Matthew also states that His mother Mary was engaged to be married to Joseph, but that before this marriage was consummated, she was discovered to be with child by the action of the Holy Ghost.

The testimony of these two writers coinciding upon this fact, can be boiled down to this basis: An angel appeared to a young unmarried woman by the name of Mary, who was engaged to a man named Joseph. The angel saluted her with a gracious benediction, on the ground that she was to become the mother of a Saviour whose name should be called Jesus. The angel further specified that he should be called the Son of the Highest, thus testifying that He derived his incarnation as well as his origin, from Almighty God. When Mary questioned the biological possibility of an unmarried virgin maiden becoming the mother of a child, the angel specifically stated that the miracle would come about by a direct operation of power from the Holy Ghost, and that for this reason the holy thing which should result from this miracle wrought by God, would properly be called the Son of God. The statement that “nothing is impossible with God,” is certainly not open to dispute or debate from those who know anything about the omnipotence which is an attribute of the Deity.

With this thought clearly before us, let us examine into the psychology of the affair. It is impossible to say too much about the psychology of the virgin birth, as motives, as well as conduct, must be considered to properly evaluate this evidence. The Hebrew law of betrothal constituted a binding, legal contract between the parties concerned. In

ancient Israel when a man desired to marry, his parents made the arrangements with the parents of the girl. After an agreement was reached, a contract was signed which constituted a statement of intent and the pair were then legally betrothed. Since this was a stringent contract which neither party could break except for the cause of adultery, couples officially engaged were referred to as husband and wife; but the law demanded that a year must elapse between the signing of the contract and the actual marriage ceremony. During that year the girl dwelt with her parents and the man with his, and they never met except under the eye of an accredited chaperon.

So, when the evidence states that Jesus was born while Mary and Joseph were still espoused, it is clear that the birth occurred during that year that the contract of engagement must run.

This contract could be voided only for adultery, in which case the stern law of Israel applied. Every possibility was covered in the series of enactments both Levitical and rabbinical which safeguarded the chastity and honor of the Chosen People. This law stated that if a virgin engaged to be married to a man were discovered to be with child, the man should denounce her before the Council. The officiating priest must then conduct an examination, direct the search for evidence in confirmation, and pronounce the sentence of judgment. The offended lover was to cast the first stone in the subsequent execution, in which all of the community were forced to join.

The exact wording of the basic law in this case was as follows: “If a virgin espoused to a man is found to be with child, he shall denounce her before the council, and they shall stone her with stones till she die; and thus shall ye put out sin from among the people.”

Now apply this rigid law to the conduct of Mary, in the light of our knowledge of psychologic reactions. Here is an engaged woman not yet married, who discovers that she is to become a mother. She knows the law, that if this fact becomes known she will be denounced, tried, condemned and executed. Aside from the legal penalty involved, natural womanly modesty would cause her to conceal the fact of her pregnancy.

How did Mary go about hiding this fact? As soon as she was certain that the angel's promise was true, she hastened to her cousin Elizabeth and publicized her condition!

Who was Elizabeth? Why, she was the wife of the officiating priest Zacharias. He, in turn, was the official who would have to conduct the examination and pronounce the sentence of condemnation.

I do not hold with the general theory that no woman can keep a secret; but I do know that it is rare indeed that a woman even desires to keep one from her husband, especially an interesting bit of family gossip like this.

Is this the action of a guilty woman? Mary, the unwed, knowing she is to be a mother, runs to the fountainhead of law and judgment to proudly brag of this fact.

The science of psychology (which deals with human reactions) would scorn the very suggestion of guilt in connection with such open unashamed conduct.

Still considering the psychology of the virgin birth, we are reminded of the law of Israel concerning the place in their society of illegitimate offspring. This law is covered in the twenty-third chapter of Deuteronomy, and was bolstered and fortified with numerous rabbinical interpretations. This law stated that an illegitimate child could not become a member of the congregation of Israel. That means that it was cut off from public worship, or service in the temple. The next statement of the law was that it required ten generations to purify the line of an illegitimate offspring, but that his descendants were forever cut off from the priesthood, or the service of God. Remember that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, came to be the Saviour of men, and that the Hebrew epistle is built upon the fact of the high-priestly office of Jesus Christ.

In the days of His flesh, although He knew the law, He stood in the synagogue to read the Word of God and to teach the people as One having divine authority. Indeed, the teaching ministry of God has earned for Him the universal name of “The Great Teacher.” Although He taught only of God and man's duty toward Him, He lived under the law of which He Himself was the Author, in perfect obedience to its every demand.

If Christ were not the virgin born Son of God, then we must cross out every written word of His utterance, cast aside the Hebrew epistle, and search for another priest. For He certainly was born before His mother was wed and according to Deuteronomy 23, is thus excluded with all of His descendants from the service of God! Of equal importance in studying the psychology of this matter is the character of the couple involved. Recall again Matthew's plain story, which is recounted in amazing language. This dramatic episode is depicted in words so delicate as to offer offense to none, and yet is told so plainly it admits of no misunderstanding.

Consider first the mother. She was a virgin with all the connotations that that word implies. Also, she was a maiden of Israel, one who had been reared in a pious home. It is quite evident that she was steeped in the Messianic hope and was deeply learned in the Word of God. We are not guessing or theorizing when we make such statements; they can

be abundantly substantiated by analysis of that psalm of Mary, which is called the Magnificat.

When the angel Gabriel announced to Mary that she was to be the mother of Messiah, without thought or preliminary preparation she opened her mouth and began to speak. Let those who consider that Mary was a wanton, note her instant reaction to the statement that she was about to become the mother of the expected Redeemer. She begins with the startling words, “My soul doth magnify the Lord.” Is that the natural innate cry of a guilty heart?

This psalm consists of eleven verses in the New Testament record, but in those eleven verses Mary cites from memory twenty-three separate Old Testament Scripture passages which, in their original form, consist of twenty-six verses. Weaving them into one of the most magnificent utterances ever to fall from human lips, she testified to the fact that, since the mouth speaks out of the fullness of the heart, her mind was saturated with the Word of God. It is proper at this point to pay some attention to Joseph. He certainly has a right to be heard. So much honor has been paid to Mary that the character of Joseph has been somewhat neglected in the study of these events.

He must have been a most unusual man! Certainly, in picking a step-father for His Son, Jesus, God did not choose at random. Joseph was a righteous man. He also was learned in the Scriptures, and under ordinary circumstances did obey the law of God, even at the cost of personal happiness. The nobility of Joseph's character is testified by his amazing consideration. Even in our days and times, it would be very difficult to find a man who had every reason to believe that he had been foully dealt with, who would conduct himself with such restraint and kindness as Joseph displayed. In spite of the fact that he, being human, naturally concluded that he had been basely betrayed by the woman he loved, he desired to save her from scandal and from certain death.

It is evident that he was by nature restrained and temperate.

Instead of flying into justified indignation and hastening to obey the law in accusation of his sweetheart, he spent days and nights in prayer and meditation upon his perplexing problem. He was trying to figure out some way to break the marriage contract without denouncing the woman whom he presumed to be guilty of adultery.

Certainly the conduct of Joseph cries aloud in the strongest terms his complete separation from the act and fact of the conception of the child Jesus. His devout fidelity to the law would not permit him to condone the situation; his love for Mary made him desire to save her from condemnation and death. While he was in this attitude of despair and bewilderment, the heavenly message was given to him, testifying to the miracle by which a virgin woman was to bear this child. Because he, too, believed God, he hastened at once to make special preparations for a legal ceremony. But to safeguard any misconceptions, the historian here records that though the ceremony was then concluded, the marriage was not consummated until after the birth of Jesus.

Remember now that we are considering only the psychology of this matter. In the light of your knowledge of that peculiar science, I would like to have your answer to this question. Is it reasonable to presume that so godly a couple as this would be the parents of an illegitimate child? Or, perhaps I should say, would such pious and godly people naturally be illegitimate parents?

Still pressing our inquiry into the psychology of the matter, let us turn our thought for a moment to the conduct of Mary at Calvary. The sad and tragic history of man contains many dark and somber pages, but no single record of human suffering can compare with that black hour when the Lord Jesus died for the sins of the world. Surrounded by a railing and jeering rabble, all of whom thirsted for His blood, He died untended and alone. The little company of friends who stood in the vicinity of Golgotha were so far away they could offer little comfort, and no help, to Him. Perhaps the most tragic group ever assembled at an execution is described in those words that tell of the little band of faithful women who stood afar off beholding, among which band was His mother, Mary.

Informed early of the fact of her son’s arrest, Mary had followed Him as closely as she could press in all of the events of His trial and condemnation. She saw Him spat upon, buffeted, beaten and jeered. She saw him scourged, mocked, and crowned with thorns. Her heart broke when He staggered under the weight of the heavy cross, and her flesh also cringed when the lash fell upon His. After His torture and condemnation, Mary followed along as closely as the guard would permit, to the place of execution. When they arrived at Calvary, this mother stood there and watched while they spread her son out upon a wooden cross and spiked Him to its beams with iron nails. As those cruel spikes pierced His palms, undoubtedly she remembered them as they were in babyhood, patting her cheek as she cuddled and caressed the child Jesus.

Every memory of His boyhood flooded her mind when they held Him up against the sky to die.

Why did they treat Him so? Let the record speak.

Caiaphas, who conducted His trial, condensed the indictment into these few words, “We have a law, and by our law He ought to die, because being a man, He said He was the Son of God.” Never lose sight of this in all your studies of Christology.

They crucified Jesus Christ for just one offense,

namely, He claimed that God was His father. This constituted blasphemy under the law of Israel, and by that law, if His claims were not true, He well deserved to die.

Among the mob who surrounded that cross, Mary knew the truth of the matter above and beyond any other person. If Jesus were not the Son of God, she becomes the most despicable parody on womanhood that degrades the pages of history. I do not mean so much in connection with the fact of the birth of Jesus, although that would be bad enough.

Joseph says, “This is not my child.” The critic says, “He is not virgin born.”

Then the only other conclusion is that He was the nameless fruit of his mother’s sin, and she was a drab of the gutter.

But, far worse is the fact that if this were so, the mother stood with her mouth shut and allowed a son to be tortured and slain to save her own reputation!

No psychologist will concede the possibility of such conduct.

Perhaps it is poor policy for a man to write on the psychology of motherhood.

Men can know little of this deep subject, for no man has ever been a mother.

And yet men can speak upon this theme, for most men remember a mother. We all agree with the basic philosophy of Kipling’s famed poem, “Mother o’ Mine.” We also know that if we were hanged on the highest hill or drowned in the deepest sea, there would be one whose love and compassion would follow us to the bitter end.

In the light of this certainty, we can distil one unadulterated fact from all past human history. No mother would have stood in silence, as Mary did, to save her own reputation, if her son was being tortured and slain in defense of a lie she could refute.

Beyond question, Mary could have stopped the crucifixion at any point. Before the Sanhedrin, or in the Roman Court, she could have stepped out and said, “I will name this man’s father.” That would have blasted the claim of Jesus to deity, would have forced Him to retract His contention, and thus His life would have been spared.

The only explanation of the silence of Mary is that Jesus died for a fact clearly stated. He was the Son of God. Joseph or no other man had any remote connection with the birth of the man Jesus. It was an incarnation, if the proofs of psychology can be accepted.

Finally, in this connection, we have the testimony of the prophet Simeon and the prophetess Anna. Eight days after the birth of Jesus, He was carried by His parents, according to the law, to be dedicated in the temple. Being the first-born, He must be presented to God and a sacrifice of the turtle doves or young pigeons must be made.

At that time there dwelt in Jerusalem a man whose name was Simeon. He was noted for his piety and devoutness, and for the fact that the Holy Ghost rested upon him in the ministry of the things of God. The Holy Ghost had revealed to this man that he should not die until he had first seen the Christ of God. On the day of the presentation of Jesus, Simeon was led by the Holy Ghost into the temple, and when Christ was presented in obedience to this ceremony, Simeon took the child in his arms and praised God, saying, “Mine eyes have seen thy salvation.” His paean of praise went far beyond anything a devout Jew might be expected to express, for he said that this child should be a light to lighten the Gentiles and should become the glory of the people of Israel. Then Simeon, still filled with the Holy Ghost, turned and blessed Mary, the mother, and Joseph the step-father. It is quite evident that the Holy Ghost must have slipped here, if Jesus was not the virgin born Son of God! I mean no disrespect in the exact wording of that statement, for the Spirit of God had inspired the writing of the law which condemned the illegitimate child and barred him from presentation in the temple. Yet, here the Holy Ghost, through the prophet Simeon, brings a specific blessing upon the guilty man and woman, if the virgin birth of Christ is a myth.

At the same time, in the service of the temple, there was an elderly widow who dwelled there serving God both day and night. When she saw the child Jesus in the company of Mary and Joseph, this prophetess also gave glory and honor to God, recognizing that now was born the One Who should some day be the Redeemer of all Israel.

The summary of these things is an inescapable conclusion that in the light of psychology at least the virgin birth of Christ is an attested fact. To question it is to admit a prejudice which can be rooted only in ignorance, as there is no evidence to refute the sober, clear, concise history which the Gospel presents.

We do not mean to intimate that all evidence of the virgin birth is thus inductive or psychologic in nature. There is abundant and positive proof to support the fact alleged, the base of which evidence would be resident in the positive promises of God. We have already introduced the significance of the primal revelation and promise in Genesis 3:15. Reverting to that to further develop its importance, let us remember that the promised Seed, who is to derive life from the woman

instead of the man, was destined to suffer under Satan and to conquer him in the end. That is to say, though the Devil should bruise the heel of the Seed, the Seed should crush the head of Satan. It is extremely significant thus to read in Hebrews 2:14: “For as much then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.”

Now, add to this the words of I John 3:8: “For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.”

This Seed, Who was to come in human flesh in order that He might destroy the devil who has the power of death, is identified by John as the Son of God:—He was manifested to destroy the works of the devil.

Of course, that destruction is not yet complete, but that fact is clearly dealt with in Romans 16:20. Here Paul salutes the church with the great, comforting, and war-like promise— “And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly!”

The final stroke of doom does not come upon the enemy of men until the church of Christ, which is His body, is complete, and can share in that ultimate triumph.

So, when God promised to a sinful race a redeeming Seed coming through a woman, identified as the Son of God and the destroyer of Satan, we are limited to the one man, Jesus, in searching for one who can fit in that picture.

No inquiry of this nature could progress far without considering the great and most outstanding prophecy of this event recorded in the entire Old Testament. This, of course, would be Isaiah 7:14, where the prophet writes: “Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”

We all understand that the word “Immanuel” means “God is with us.” Here is a clear-cut prophecy concerning the coming of the Redeemer, which has been a great embarrassment to every enemy of Christianity and every foe of the Saviour Himself. It is the fashion to argue that the word “virgin” in the Hebrew text merely means a young woman, and has nothing to do with chastity.

This is a deliberate falsification or, at best, a misstatement of fact.

What sign would there be to a nation in a young woman becoming a mother? That has happened so many millions of times in past history no man can estimate their number. This birth is to be one that will startle the world, and give evidence of the fulfillment of a covenant of God! Also, it shall result in a person so holy, men shall look at him and say, “God walks among us.”

Nor will it do to say that this promise of a coming Son, who was to be a sign, was made to King Ahaz and was fulfilled in his day. This is the common refutation of modernism, and is based upon a following verse which says, “For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.”

No intelligent and honest student of Scripture would have to seek far to find the explanation of this apparent difficulty. The commonest law of interpretation is that every text shall be studied in the light of its context. Hence, we go to the opening verses of the seventh chapter of Isaiah and get the historical background and setting for this prophecy. We thus remember that in the days of Ahaz, who was king of Judah, the king of Syria and the king of Israel formed a military alliance to exterminate Judah, and then laid siege to Jerusalem. Ahaz, whose capital was the fortified city of Jerusalem was deeply concerned and stirred. He knew that he could not prevail against the combined might of Syria and Israel, and, in deep distress, he walked the paths of the city meditating upon his plight.

To answer his prayers, God sent the prophet Isaiah to him with a message. The Lord instructed Isaiah to take ,with him his infant son, Shear-jashub, and meet the king by .the upper pool. Here Isaiah intercepted Ahaz, and told him’ to be of comfort and courage: that God would be his help and his defense. Seeing the disbelief on the face of the king, Isaiah continued by saving, “The Lord also instructed me to say, Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.”

But the despondent king replied, “I will not ask, neither will I test the Lord.”

Now, note the impasse. God had sent a message to Ahaz which the king is reluctant to obey. To help his faith, God then offered a sign which the king said he would not accept. Therefore, the prophet turned from Ahaz and spoke to the entire nation of Judah saying: “Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also?

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign.”

To whom now is Isaiah speaking? To Ahaz? No. Ahaz has said, “I will not take a sign.” Therefore, the prophet

interpolates a message to the entire nation, saying, “The Lord will give you a sign.” Then he uttered the significant promise of a virgin born Redeemer.

At once Isaiah turned back to the problem of Ahaz. Remember that he had been instructed to take with him his own toddling son, Shear-jashub, who at that time was about one and one-half years of age. You see, there are two children in the seventh chapter of Isaiah, one named Immanuel, the other named Shear-jashub. Placing his hand upon the head of his own tiny son, Isaiah then said to Ahaz, “Before this child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.”

History certainly vindicated that astonishing prediction of the prophet Isaiah. Before his eighteen-months-old son had reached the age of the conscious knowledge of the difference between right and wrong, Syria and Israel had been overrun by the Assyrian conqueror, and the domain of Ahaz was thus saved.

But not for more than seven hundred years was the other prophecy fulfilled!

It is quite evident that we have a disagreement between authorities here, for Matthew, in writing about the birth of Jesus, specifically said, “Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet saying, Behold a virgin shall be with child and shall bring forth a son and shall call his name Immanuel, which being interpreted is ‘God with us.’“ It seems to be a matter of a choice of authorities. Matthew said that the birth of Jesus was a complete fulfillment of the specific prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. The infidel says there is no connection between the two. I think I would be pardoned if I accepted Matthew, an eye-witness, who had personal knowledge of the facts involved, as a better source of evidence than any modern scholar who was born nineteen hundred years too late to know what he was talking about.

There is another definite and conclusive prophecy of the virgin birth which I have never heard an infidel attempt to refute. This is the famed passage in Jeremiah 31:22. This chapter deals with a prophecy of Israel’s restoration and the subsequent rejoicing of the nation. It goes on to a promise of the coming of Christ and the new covenant that will be made with the people of God after His coming. In announcing the advent of the Redeemer Jeremiah states: “How long wilt thou go about, O thou backsliding daughter? for the Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall compass a man.”

That this is a message to the entire Hebrew race is evidenced by the prophet’s phrase “backsliding daughter.”

Frequently in Old Testament utterances the Jews are thus denominated. But the promise that by a specific creation a new event shall transpire, one which earth had never before witnessed, is a definite statement of the coming of the Saviour.

His coming shall necessitate a specific creation, for a woman shall produce a man (Jeremiah 31:22).

Certainly this would be a unique and unprecedented phenomenon; that a mother should be the father of her own babel This is the significance, however, of Jeremiah’s strange and perplexing prophecy. It can only be understood and interpreted in the light of later history. God redeemed this promise when Jesus was born in accordance with this prophecy.

There is a strange tendency upon the part of many modern writers, to draw proof of the probability of the virgin birth of our Lord from various fields of biology. Direct cell-division, as in the case of certain protozoa, or the phenomenon of parthenogenesis, so often seen in insect reproduction, are cited as parallel cases proving the virgin birth of Jesus to be scientifically credible. All of this is beside the point, and such arguments are most unfortunate, to say the least.

The simple fact of the matter is that the birth of Jesus Christ was a miracle: and there is no comparable occurrence in nature. It has pleased the Creator to establish many quaint and fascinating methods by which the various orders of living creatures reproduce their kind, but none of them are of the same nature as the method of the incarnation of Christ. Nowhere in the natural order does the Holy spirit “overshadow” the insects which operate by parthenogenesis, for instance, and in the case of a queen bee, the action and help of the male bee is necessary to begin the process.

We weaken our case when we attempt to bolster it with such far-fetched illustrations. The evidences which support the fact of our Lord’s remarkable advent need no help from outside sources, they are sufficient in themselves! It is far wiser to simply state the case, admit that the virgin birth of Jesus was a miracle, and rest upon the clear word of God. We have then, as positive proof of the virgin birth of Jesus: The definite, direct and specific promises of God: The supernatural events which accompanied the birth of Jesus; The clear testimony of the angel Gabriel; The unmistakable statements of Matthew and Luke; The psychology of the parties involved; The conduct of Mary at Calvary, And the claims of Jesus Himself!

What evidence can be produced at this late and remote time in history that will warrant our rejection of so weighty and credible a list of evidence?

Let the critic answer.

We know of none.

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Saviour and Redeemer of man, can be accounted for solely on the grounds of an incarnation, which implies the virgin birth.

CHAPTER VII

T

The God-Man

HUS we come to the consideration of one of the most unfathomable mysteries which ever confronted the human mind. This is the problem of the two natures of Jesus Christ.

In this present study, which of necessity must be both simple and concise, we should deal with the reality of each nature, as well as with its perfection. Thus, when we approach the study of the humanity of Jesus, we are forced to concede its actuality.

Through innumerable revelations of Himself, made by His intimates and derived from His own utterances, we deem it proper to speak of “Jesus Christ the man.” In fact He so called Himself with consistent regularity, as is recorded twenty-seven times in the Gospel of Matthew alone.

This biographer states that Jesus referred to Himself as “the Son of man.” This name was derived from the Old Testament text, and was an appellation which the God of Israel used to designate certain of his prophets. Hence Jesus, in His prophetic office, would be quite likely to assume this name.

The most common occurrence of this high designation is found in the prophecy of Ezekiel, beginning with the second chapter. When this notable priest was commissioned as a prophet, we have God speaking to Ezekiel in these words: “Son of man, stand upon thy feet and I will speak unto thee.”

“Son of man, I send thee to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that have rebelled against me.”

“Moreover he said unto me, Son of man eat that thou findest; eat this roll, and go speak unto the house of Israel.” “Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with my words unto them.”

“Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel, therefore hear the word at my mouth and give them warning from me.”

“But thou, O Son of man, behold they shall put bands upon thee, and shall bind thee with them, and thou shalt not go out among them: And I will make thy tongue cleave to the roof of thy mouth, that thou shalt be dumb, and shalt not be to them a reprover: for they are a rebellious house.”

It is highly significant that in addressing Ezekiel as “son of man,” God emphasizes the fact that he was divinely called and commissioned to go to the children of men as God’s specified representative. In so going he was to exercise no originality, but was just to utter the words which God gave him to speak. These words were to be a warning of judgment to come, if immediate grace and forgiveness were not accepted on God’s own terms.

This prophet was to suffer persecution, arrest, imprisonment and pain, under all of which he was to remain dumb, allowing human conduct to constitute the basis of its own judgment in the wrong done against him.

Eighty-two times in this one prophecy, Ezekiel is thus denominated the “son of man.” Since his ministry thus anticipated with an amazing exactitude the later ministry of Christ, it is no wonder that Jesus adopted the name to Himself. He taught an equally rebellious Israel in His day concerning the highway that would lead to salvation, if they would walk therein. The meaning of the name is literally, “a commissioned prophet,” and is highly significant on the lips of Jesus in the light of many New Testament passages.

In the third chapter of the Ephesian epistle, Paul specifically states that the Christian Gospel was made known unto men in New Testament times by a definite revelation from God, just as in other ages certain facts of God were revealed unto the sons of men. Thus God’s will was made known to the race through His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. So then, all of the prophets who did the work and the will of God, could properly take the name “Son of man.”

Collectively they are called in New Testament writing, “the sons of men.” These are they who received the revealed will and word of God and passed them on to men. But it must be one living in human flesh, and representing God to men, who could be properly called, “Son of man.”

Thus Jesus testified to the reality of His human nature, when He used this term designating a commissioned

prophet as a personal description of Himself.

All who knew Jesus bore equally definite testimony to the reality of His humanity. John the Baptist, in announcing the coming of the Lamb of God, said “This is he of whom he said, after me cometh a man which is preferred before me and he was before me.” At the same time, the Baptist testifies that He was also the Son of God, but puts his emphasis in the first instance upon the humanity of Jesus, calling Him a man!

In Peter’s famed sermon on Pentecost he also addressed these words to the nation: “Ye men of Israel hear these words, Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know.”

In the following verses Peter hastens to announce also the preexistence and deity of this “titian,” but he does not scorn to use the term that denominates humanity in speaking of Jesus.

In like manner the Apostle Paul, writing to his beloved son Timothy, speaks of the one acceptable channel of approach to God in these words: “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus who gave himself a ransom for all.”

Of course the apostle later presses on to the higher conclusion that Jesus Christ is both God and Saviour, and calls Him specifically by the names which pertain to deity, for he also emphasizes the fact that Jesus Christ had a humanity which was definite and real.

This is further evidenced when we recognize that Jesus possessed the two essential elements of a human being.

He had a material body and a rational soul. I am not attempting to clarify the inscrutable, I am merely accepting a fact of revelation which gives us great comfort and hope and enhances our certainty of salvation. It strengthens our faith when we remember that Jesus Christ is a high priest who can be touched with understanding of our infirmity, because He Himself passed through every vicissitude of human experience. He knew the weight and burden of a body of flesh, which must have been an added weariness to a spirit that had functioned from eternity in the form and substance of God. The keen operation of His mentality, in addition to His responses to human need, showed Him to be a reasoning being, and marked the depth and expanse of the greatness of His soul.

He was moved by the common principles, and exercised all of the powers, that are normal to humanity. He tasted of every tragedy that the average human being is called upon to undergo, and He knew every joy that is within the scope of human possibility to experience.

For instance, to show in a practical manner that Jesus Christ possessed a normal human nature, we read in Matthew 4:2 that when He had fasted forty days and nights He was desperately hungry. So then, the human nature of Jesus knew the weakness and suffering that comes from lack of food. No hungry human who takes upon his lips the ancient prayer: “Give us this day our daily bread,” is speaking to a God who is devoid of understanding of that basic cry.

In John 4:7 we read that as He journeyed the dusty roads of Palestine His body experienced a great and overpowering weariness. Although they were within a few hundred yards of Sychar, He sat on the curb of the well to rest and recover His strength, while His more hearty disciples pressed on to the village in pursuit of food. Tired by the long journey, and worn by the heat of the day, the human Jesus said to the woman of Samaria, “I thirst, give me to drink.” Prophetic, perhaps, were these words; and once again a very human and suffering Saviour cried from Calvary’s tree—“I thirst.”

On that occasion He could not go on from that basic and universal human need to offer to men the water of life; He had to be content to suffer there in the agony of thirst, that His blood might be the fountain that should alleviate all future human suffering.

Because He was distinctively human, Jesus was also under the need of sleep. Perhaps the saddest words that ever came from His lips, were spoken when Jesus stood in the gathering dusk and said, “The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the son of man hath not where to lay his head.”

Many were the weary nights that He wrapped Himself in His mantle and lay on the hospitable ground under the canopy of kindly stars to refresh His wearied body.

Jesus Christ manifested also the very human tendency of love for His own kind. Sometimes He fell in love at first sight, as in the case of the young man in the tenth chapter of Mark. Talking to this rich young inquirer, Mark says, “Then Jesus beholding him loved him.” On other times the love that Jesus manifested in a human sense came from years of fellowship and companionable association. Thus we read in John 11:5, “Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.” Here was a home which had undoubtedly entertained Him often. Whenever His program permitted, He turned to the shelter of that abode in Bethany, and refreshed His spirit with the companionship and communion of other human

beings, whom He had learned to love.

The natural human instinct of compassion was depicted in the career of Jesus. In Matthew 9:36 we read, “But when He saw the multitude He was moved with compassion on them, because they faltered, and were scattered abroad as sheep having no shepherd.”

Even more significant, perhaps, is the fact that Jesus was capable of manifesting anger, and on more than one occasion was moved by this strong force. Reporting how His enemies sought to charge Him with violation of the law, because He healed a suffering human on the Sabbath day, Mark states, “And when He had looked round about on them with anger be grieved for the hardness of their hearts, He said unto the man, stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other.”

The classical example of the manner in which Jesus could be moved by anger, is unquestionably recorded in the episode of the cleansing of the temple. With flashing eyes and stern words of denunciation springing from His lips, He plied a whip with an arm made muscular by a score of years in a carpenter’s shop. Men fled in terror, both from His whip and from His denunciation, unable to face the anger which they knew to be justified because of their misconduct.

And thus we read that Jesus as a man, feared, groaned, was made perfect through suffering, wept tears of bitterness and anguish and, more than anything else, frequently had recourse to prayer. Every principle that actuates humanity was His motive at some time or another, except selfishness and sin; and He exercised every power that is normal to the human being.

We do wrong when we minimize the manhood of the Master, in order to exalt the deity of Christ. There is room and place for both of these great principles, which can be correlated with the aid of Scripture and some spiritual understanding.

The man Jesus was subject to certain laws of human development. In the bewildering passage of Luke 2:52, the statement is made that He grew both in body and in spirit. We can understand the bodily growth of a babe that came by a supernatural conception, but it will ever remain a profound mystery to the clouded human intellect that Jesus grew also in spirit.

The spirit which inhabited His earthly body must have been derived from His basic nature and the most intelligent and enlightened student of Holy Writ confesses himself baffled before this enigma. But the Word of God further states that Jesus, while growing, also learned. In the same passage in Luke He learned wisdom; in Hebrews 5:8, He learned obedience. This statement brings us once more to a point where we are faced squarely with a confessed limitation of the finite mind in its attempt to grasp the infinite. We can only presume that for the purposes of redemption, and in order that He might be able afterward to say that He had shared every experience of humanity, the human Jesus went through a very normal development.

This process, however, was divinely accelerated to such a point that at the age of twelve He knew more of the things of God than the learned leaders of Judaism.

Every earth-bound mortal who finds himself in the deep and bitter experience of temptation can take comfort from the human Jesus. It is said of Him in Hebrews 2:18 “For in that He Himself bath suffered being tempted, He is able to succor them that are tempted.” This principle is applied to the mediatorial work of Christ. Note Hebrews 4:15, 16, where the Spirit of God says, “For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.”

Again the fifth chapter of Hebrews tells the weary and oppressed that Jesus can have compassion on the ignorant, can reasonably bear with them who slip in the way, for that He Himself felt the pressure of infirmity bearing upon Him. This is the exact significance of the second verse of that chapter, which continues to deal with the priesthood of Jesus Christ.

It is a startling thought, indeed, that Deity would deliberately subject Himself to a cycle of life in a body which could suffer, withstand temptation and taste of all the deep despair which characterizes man’s battle against the powers of the Devil.

This humanity of Christ was also illustrated in the fact that as a son, He was made perfect through this very suffering. In Hebrews 2:9, 10, we have this mysterious and perplexing statement: “But we see Jesus who for a little was made lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings.”

Jesus Christ, who is the forerunner of all who are saved, has entered into Heaven in His priestly character; seated at the right hand of God, He holds out an encouraging hand to every tempted human, saying, “I also lived in a body of flesh; endured every kind and degree of temptation that mortal man can feel. Because I trusted in a Heavenly Father and spent my life following His will, I prevailed, I conquered, I ascended. That same course of victory is open to you who battle against evil in My Name and by My power.”

We can thus dimly sense a little of the underlying reason for the humanity of Jesus; a fact which no intelligent Bible student would seek to set aside. It was demonstrated in the face of all history when Christ endured physical death in agony and shame. Volumes have been written about the suffering Saviour, but no book has ever said more than Luke said in this one short and simple verse, “And being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground.”

Jesus Christ knew the salty taste of pain. He had a body whose every nerve was racked with an anguish which parched His throat and dried His lips, so that He cried out from the depths of His suffering, “I thirst!”

The spirit of modern man cannot endure an inquiry into the anguish of Jesus which lays bare all of its ghastly details. We can only say that Deity does not die and is not subject to pain, but God brought Himself exquisitely near to the entire human race when He Himself suffered a physical death in torment indescribable, that He might be the companion of all who would thereafter walk through the dark valley of its grizzly shadow.

So we say, as to the human nature of Jesus, it was real!

That reality cannot be questioned if we remain true to the evidence.

There remains, then, only the consideration of its perfection.

There is no other word which would suit a descriptive statement of the humanity of Christ. We use the word “perfect” with all of its common connotations and in accordance with your understanding of that term. Perfection is so rare that our modern proverb, “No man is perfect,” is accepted as axiomatic. This, however, is not quite true—the man Jesus Christ was perfect. This was inevitable in view of the fact that His body was supernaturally conceived.

Following the evidence presented by Matthew and Luke, and the statements illuminating the miracle which we read in the epistles of the New Testament, we can understand how the Son of God could rise above the limitations of the flesh and a human nature, and live a life that was perfect and sinless in all things.

This perfection is manifest in the manner in which Jesus was free from the inherited depravity and from actual sin. That He was thus sinless is shown by every evidence, both actual and inductive, which can be derived from the New Testament text.

In the first place, although He advocated a holy, unswerving obedience to the divine law, Jesus never offered sacrifice for Himself. Indeed, He could not! He who came to be the Lamb of God needed no lamb. The Iamb of the sacrifice was offered to cover the sins of the worshipper and must itself be unspotted and unblemished. If, therefore, a lamb needed a lamb to make it acceptable to God, there would be neither beginning or ending to the cycle of confusion ensuing. No other person who lived within the circle of the law of Moses could ever say, “He needed to offer no sacrifice for sin.” But this man could, although he was born a Jew and lived a Jewish life under a Jewish law in a Jewish land. To the end of His days, He never offered sacrifice for sin.

It is equally interesting to note that Jesus never prayed for forgiveness. He often sought the face and the presence of His Father in holy communion, but when He prayed, He talked to God as an equal and a fellow. To the disciples Jesus gave the admonition: “When ye pray, say, Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors.” These words He never uttered for Himself. He owed no debts—either moral, spiritual or physical. None need pray for forgiveness unless their conduct is offensive toward God and violates His holiness.

Such action can certainly not be charged against the human Jesus, which evidences beyond question that His humanity, though real, was perfect.

It is equally startling to note that Jesus taught the necessity of regeneration for all except Himself. In John 3:7 the Saviour used the strongest, most imperative word in the vocabulary of His day when He said, “Ye must be born again.”

Jesus did not recommend regeneration as an admirable experience or a commendable experiment. He didn’t say—“you ought to be” “you should”—or, “you would like it.” He used the conclusive finality of the word “must” when He talked of regeneration for every human on the face of this earth.

The imperative necessity of regeneration applied with equal force to the eleven faithful apostles and the base and treacherous Judas. Mary, the mother of Christ, together with all of the noble, courageous and loving band of women who

at tended Him in His lifetime, watched His death and conducted His burial, equally needed regeneration.

But Jesus Christ was never born again, nor was He under the necessity of this means of permanent redemption from sin. That which is imparted to the Christian by regeneration, was inherent in Jesus by nature.

This naturally resulted in perfection, regardless of the form or substance in which Jesus was clothed at any cycle of His experience. He is the same yesterday, today and forever. Hence, while human, He was the perfection of humanity, as He was perfect in all things pertaining to His career.

So conscious was Jesus of His human perfection, that when He stood surrounded by His enemies He boldly challenged them to produce proof of any error in belief or conduct of which He had ever been guilty. This is a startling act, when we remember that His teachings went contrary to the accepted trend of rabbinical interpretations. Again and again the tyrannical hierarchy of Israel charged Him with violating the law of Moses. On each such occasion He cited the law and showed Himself to be the only one of the group who fully comprehended its intentions and its applications.

His life was an open one and nothing that He did was done in secret. He shouted His criticisms and comments from the housetops. The very hills re-echoed His astonishing teachings. Shrewd doctors of the law studied His every word and deed under the keenest scrutiny that hate could provide, hoping to find legal accusation against Him. No other life that ever lived could have withstood that microscopic examination, but Jesus Christ emerged from the crucible of that survey with reputation untarnished and character unblemished. Truly, the humanity of Christ was as perfect as it was real.

The life of Jesus depicted an ideal that has never since been achieved. There have been holy and godly men who have astonished the world with the unselfish plane of sacrificial living which they achieved by following the example of Jesus, but none has yet come up to the ideal set by His conduct.

Nineteen centuries of more or less constant progress have lifted the levels of living among civilized people by many notable degrees, yet after those long years the life of Christ is still recognized as the perfect moral pattern for all ages and all races. Even the godliest of the saints of Christ who live today cannot walk the highway of holiness which He daily trod. The humanity of Jesus was perfect.

This can probably be explained by the fact that He possessed a human nature that apparently found its personality through union with a divine nature. Thus, perfection was the inevitable result. We do not mean to say that there was confusion between, or amalgamation of, the two natures of Jesus; we admit (as the Westminster Confession maintains) that the two natures of Christ were not converted into one. It was inevitable, however, that since Jesus did have the nature of God, both before and while He temporarily possessed the nature of man, the force, and strength, and power, of His eternal Being should have been reflected through the natural life that He lived.

It is difficult to find words to express that which is confessedly incomprehensible to the human intelligence.

When we talk about the second nature of Jesus, it sounds as though we are exalting one above the other. It is equally confusing to say, “The other nature of Christ.” Therefore in presenting any study of the two natures, the simplest way out of the dilemma is to say, we turn now to a survey of the second portion of the subject. For as certainly as Jesus had a human nature, which was real and perfect, so also He manifested and displayed deity in a parallel existence.

There are many men who are gifted with various talents which they exercise in close co-operation. There are men who live two lives, one open and the other concealed from the sight of their fellowmen. The two talents may not be exercised simultaneously, and two lives may not be lived identically.

Christ rose above every limitation of time and sense and did possess two natures which were manifested and exhibited simultaneously. In a previous chapter, we have covered the field of the reality and perfection of the deity of Jesus, so now we merely remind ourselves that Jesus in His earthly life possessed and advertised a knowledge of His own deity. We repeat here the classical illustration which is found in John 14:7-11: “If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.

Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake.”

If Christ could thus say, “He that hath seen Me bath seen the Father,” He must have been actuated by a keen sense of this phase of His nature, and also supremely conscious of His identity as God. Throughout all of His ministry the man Jesus exercised, manifested and displayed divine powers and prerogatives. As creation’s Lord, He commanded nature and twisted the forces of earth, sky and sea into obedience to His commands. Thus He exercised the powers of God. While He walked the earth in flesh He accepted the worship of men, in some cases inviting that homage. In so

doing, He usurped the prerogative of God. This was possible only to One Who had a serene sense of His own supernal person and who felt that God was not only in Him, but that He Himself was God. So we conclude this thought by stating that the Scriptures clearly teach that Jesus had two natures. Each one was unaltered in essence and possessed its normal attributes and powers. At the same time the Word of God insists with equal clarity that Jesus was a single undivided person and asserts that in Him these two natures were vitally and inseparably united. But since this union of the two natures was accomplished without conversion or weakening of either, Jesus Christ cannot be spoken of as God and man. The only proper descriptive title history can apply to the man Jesus Christ, is to call Him the God-man.

In all of His teaching and ministry, Jesus never speaks of Himself in the plural, as did God in the creation of man.

He makes no differentiation of “I” and “thou” in the conversations concerning Himself and God, but recognizes a unity of personality existing between the Father and the Son. He assures us that God became flesh, instead of saying that God came in the flesh. Thus, single personality resulted that was inseparable from the fact of deity, yet manifested in a perfect humanity. All the attributes and powers of both the natures of Christ are ascribed to the one Jesus. And the works and dignity of the unique Saviour are ascribed to either of the natures, or both.

Hence we face a paradox: The God-man existed before Abraham: But was born of a woman in the reign of Augustus: The Jesus Who wept, hungered, suffered and died: Is the same yesterday, today and forever.

A divine Saviour redeemed us from sin on Calvary: The human Jesus is with His followers to the end.

Put all of this together and it adds up to this significant sum: The value and the efficacy of Calvary are rooted in the fact that Jesus was not a Man-of-God, but was the God-man.

Somewhat bewildered by this presentation, you would probably like to ask the writer, “Do you comprehend this mystery?” I would answer the question with a simple and direct, “No.” It is for this reason that I believe it. I accept and worship a Jesus whom I do not understand, for this is His greatest evidence of Godhood.

It is axiomatic that no container will hold anything beyond its capacity. I need a God whom I can worship and serve, who is greater than my mentality. If I could understand God, He would then be no bigger than my intellect, which is far too puny for me to worship. Hence the classical statement prevails: “If we could understand God, we wouldn’t need God.” It is largely because God is far above and beyond the grasp of any human reason that I am convinced of His reality and supernal power. I lose myself in the immensity of a sufficient Saviour, Who is so much greater than I that I can with confidence and trust cast myself upon His mercy and grace.

So I thus accept the Jesus of the New Testament, Who is the Christ of history, the Son of God and the sufficient Saviour of men.

CHAPTER VIII

M

The Magnificent Prophet

ANY poetic names are ascribed to Christ in the Scriptures. Many divine attributes are attributed to Jesus and every holy office is conferred upon Him. In the full revelation of God to man, which is made through God the Son, three specific offices are apportioned to Christ, all of them synchronizing to produce the final, complete and effective salvation. In the orderly operation of these offices, man is redeemed, the earth and all physical creation is released from the bondage of sin, and God is exalted, in that His Will becomes supreme in every sphere of existence.

These three offices, commonly set forth in the Scripture as being the channels of Christ’s work for lost men, denominate Him to be prophet, priest and king. They are set forth in that exact order because the prophet must do his work before the priest can function, just as the priest must be a forerunner in preparation for the reign of the king. So the prophet prepares the heart of man for the office that the priest shall perform, and the priestly office, in turn, makes men fitted to be citizens in the kingdom over which Jesus shall reign.

As in all of the works of God prophecy is limited to deity, hence prophecy is always the voice of God. Satan has made many attempts to counterfeit the miracle which God has continually wrought in His dealings with men, but all efforts to prophesy, apart from the Spirit of God, have been deceitful and have ended in failure. The words of a prophet are never his own.

With a unanimity that is convincing, these men who were the spokesmen for the Almighty, disclaimed originality. The utterances of prophets are never the production of their own thoughts or desires, nor do they express the considered and orderly opinions of men who derive their conclusions from observations of current events.

The prophet always quotes from a higher source, often speaking quite contrary to his own beliefs and desires. Generally he is so opposed to the current pattern of thought in his own generation that he risks his very life in speaking.

Classical illustrations of this principle will be seen in such experiences as were endured by Jeremiah and Ezekiel, who suffered bondage, persecution and ostracism for refusing to conform to the current assertion of their age. These men thus had a foretaste of the bitter cup which Jesus drained to the dregs. Having aroused the animosity of the leaders of their nation and being martyred because of their fidelity to God, the prophets of old were also fore-runners of the apostles, who also earned death by insisting on uttering the words of Jesus, which opposed the teachings of men. So prophets and apostles shared with Christ the penalty of obedience to God and His word.

It is significant that the theme of all prophecy is Messiah and His coming Kingdom. The prophets of Old Testament times only touched upon Gentile nations and their affairs as these had some bearing upon the history and economy of Israel. In turn, they spoke to Israel only of God’s will for her, warning her of punishment for disobedience, assuring her of the coming of her Redeemer, and promising her restoration upon repentance.

Old Testament prophecy climaxed with the writings of Malachi.

After Malachi there came no prophet until the days of John the Baptist. To this strange character it was given to be the greatest of all forerunners, as he could point directly to Jesus Christ, Who fulfilled all prophecy.

From Moses to Malachi, every prophetic finger was pointing to the distant day when One should come. The holy pleasure which all prophets must have coveted was given to John, namely, that of seeing the prophecy fulfilled. John could lay hands upon the fleshly accomplishment of two thousand years of prophetic utterances and say, “This is the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.” It is significant that Malachi spoke of the coming of John. In the first verse of his third chapter, this man, who was the last of the Old Testament forerunners of Messiah, definitely said: “Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, . . .”

Thus, the last Old Testament prophet speaks of the first New Testament prophet who, in turn, directs his every interest and attention to Him Who is the sum of all prophecy and Himself the greatest of all prophets.

Leaving that thought for a later development, let us remind the reader that the prophet was not a mere foreteller of future events. It is true that much of the work of prophecy was concerned with unveiling histories and scenes not yet formed in the womb of time, and it is also true that the ability to foretell was one of the tests of the properly and divinely commissioned prophet, but this was incidental to the major purpose of the ordination of a prophet. Above all else, he was an inspired interpreter and revealer of God’s will to men. Primarily, the prophet was a teacher. He was God’s representative to God. God’s will and purposes must be made known to humanity in a form that human intelligence could apprehend. Hence capable instructors were trained by the Holy Spirit to receive and pass on certain revelations which involved God’s plan, to those who comprehended these prophetic utterances. In every age, God has had some such means of communication between Himself and His creatures.

All prophets in Old Testament times were teachers, and all of those who made God known to the world were honored by the title, “Prophet.” For this reason, when Abimelech, misled by the faint-heartedness of Abraham, appropriated Sarah to himself, God’s spirit warned this Semitic king of the danger of his trespass against another man’s wife. And in the dream through which God spoke to this monarch, He said, as we read in Genesis 20:7: “Now therefore restore the man his wife, for he is a prophet: and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live.”

This is the first mention of the office in Old Testament writings, and opens up a vista of the dignity and power of that office. Being a prophet, Abraham could pray for one who needed restoration and thus assure him of forgiveness and continued life.

According to Psalm 105, verse 15, all of the patriarchs were prophets. Concerning the care that God exercised over Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the Psalmist said, “He suffered no man to do them wrong, yea he reproved kings for their sakes saying, Touch not mine anointed and do my prophets no harm.”

This teaching ministry continued through men chosen for that purpose until the Old Testament type of prophecy climaxed in John the Baptist. Of him, Jesus said that he was more than a prophet, he was the messenger whom Malachi had foretold. The Saviour also stated that that type of prophecy would end with the ministry of John. Note His exact words from Matthew 11:10 to 13: “For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist; notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.

And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffcreth violence, and the violent take it by force.

For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.”

The New Testament teachers, while sometimes denominated prophets, had a totally different mission to perform, and operated under another ministry. In I Corinthians 12:28 the order in which the servants of the church are to be appreciated is set forth in this significant manner: First, apostles; Secondly, prophets; Thirdly, teachers.

After that, in honor and dignity, come those who can work miracles, then those who have the gift of healing; those who are gifted in helping the weak, those who are fitted to govern and last, and least of all, those who have the ability to speak with divers tongues.

The difference between the prophet and the teacher is a fine one, and requires considerable study before it can be made clear. The teacher is the one who, by earnest study, comprehends the doctrines of the Word of God and has skill and ability in instructing others. This gift, by the way, is never separated in Holy Writ from the pastoral office. The New Testament prophet, however, is one who has spiritual insight into the deep and hidden things of the Word and can bring them forth in plain, comprehensive terms; making them discernible to others who lack this gift of insight. Hence, the Ephesian epistle says that the church of Jesus Christ is built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Himself being the chief cornerstone.

Some of these apostles were also prophets in the sense that the New Testament used that word. A classical illustration would be the claim of Paul in Ephesians 3:3, 4 where the apostle states: “How that by revelation he made known unto me the ministry as I wrote a little while ago in a few words; Whereby when ye read ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ.”

Returning then to the Old Testament type of prophet, God did foretell that the last and greatest of such prophets would one day appear. He would be authorized by divine unction, bringing with him a salvation that should be made available to men who would be obedient to that prophetic revelation. The words in which this promise is incorporated, were uttered by Moses in these significant verses: “The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; According to all that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.

And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all 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.”

You will note that this prophet, like all who came before him, will disclaim originality. He will not be an original teacher, but will bring a revelation from God. This is apparent when God says of this coming prophet, “And I will put my words in his mouth and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” This was the authority for the statement of Jesus, “The words which I speak are not mine; they are the words of the Father which sent me.” The Mosaic prophecy also contains the equally important statement that any human being who will not hearken unto God’s words which the coming prophet shall speak, will answer to God for this offense.

It is self-apparent that Jesus is that prophet whom Moses foretold. In the first place the Mosaic statement was that he shall be a prophet “like unto me.” The experience of Jesus paralleled in a strange fashion the personal history of

Moses. I marvel that the people of Israel, who know the Old Testament text, can consider the life of Moses and be blind to the fact that Jesus is their expected fulfillment of God’s promises to them.

Both Moses and Jesus were born when Israel was in bondage. In the days of Moses the nation was enslaved to Egypt; in the days of Jesus they lived on their knees by the sufferance of the military might of Rome.

When Moses was born, his life was in dire jeopardy, as Pharaoh had commanded the death of all male children.

In a strange harmony to this experience, Herod ordered that every male child under two years of age should die, in the hope that he would thus exterminate the King, whose coming threatened his reign.

The life of the baby Moses was spared when he was adopted by the royal family of Egypt. Jesus was also preserved alive when His father and mother fled with Him to that same land of Egypt.

Moses left the court of Egypt to offer himself a saviour to his people; even as the Scriptures state of Christ—”out of Egypt have I called my Son.” When Moses offered to fight the battles of his people they cast him out, saying, “Who made thee to be a prince and ruler over us?” The rejected leader lived from thence on ostracized from his people in a far country. How plainly we see in that experience the forecasting of the time when Christ, offering Himself a Redeemer of Israel, would be rejected and slain, ascending to that “far country” to await the time when their eyes will be opened to their need of Him. And just as Moses came back, armed with the miracle working power of God, to redeem Israel from physical bondage, so Jesus will return to save Israel from spiritual blindness and their rejection of God. Certainly He is the prophet like unto Moses, in that He has the authority of God in every word that He speaks.

Solemnly God says to the earth today, through the pages and paragraphs of the New Testament scripture, “The words which my prophet would speak are my words, and if ye heed them not, I will require it of you.”

With this thought in mind, let us note that the prophet of old commonly operated through three methods: teaching, predicting and miracle-working. The first of these methods is illustrated in II Chronicles 15:3 where we read: “Now for a long season Israel hath been without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without law.”

There was chaos, anarchy and civil war in the land where God was not known to the people.

A classical instance of the predictions uttered by prophets, is the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah. Here the Spirit of God looks through the eyes of Isaiah to a day some seven centuries later, when the Man of Sorrows should become acquainted with grief, as He expired for the expiation of the sins of men.

All of the prophets who taught and foretold were given occasional power to work miracles which should be to Israel the sign of the prophet’s commission. Such an historical instance is recorded in II Kings, the sixth chapter. After Elijah had been translated to heaven by means of the whirlwind, the cloak of teaching authority was promised to Elisha.

As Elijah and Elisha journeyed to the place where his translation was to occur, they tarried for a brief time at Bethel, there a group of the sons of the prophets greeted them, warning that Elijah was soon to be taken away into heaven. Fifty of these men journeyed with the two prophets to watch the translation from a safe distance. Afterwards, when the authority had descended upon Elisha, he organized the sons of the prophets into a school for study of the things of the Spirit of God. Evidently, the student body grew with enormous rapidity, for the younger men came to the prophet one day complaining that the place where they were dwelling was too small. With his consent and accompanied by Elisha they all journeyed down to the river bank to cut timbers to build themselves a new dormitory. As one man was whacking away, not knowing that the head always comes off a borrowed axe, he was distressed to see the valuable tool fly away and fall in a deep spot of the river. When he ran to tell his master of his misfortune, Elisha calmly strode to the place, cut down and cast in a small stick, and the iron axe-head floated to the top, where they easily put forth a hand and took it up.

There is no natural explanation for this miracle. The ingenuity of man can strain every conceivable mental device and wrest the words out of their natural meaning, but we cannot evade nor avoid the clear impression that something happened there which was contrary to the normal operation of known natural law. This is no wonder to those who know God. Simply, in all cases where miracles are performed, they constitute God’s signature, and testify to His cooperation in t he occurrence.

They also act as credentials for the person who performs he miracle.

Now note how in all of these three spheres of the prophet’s operation, Jesus Christ was supreme. He certainly was a teacher such as the world never before had known. Consider these Scriptures: (Matthew 4:23) “And Jesus went about all Galilee teaching in their synagogues and preaching the gospel of the kingdom and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.”

Here the three methods of the prophetic function coincide in the one single text. He taught a strange and new doctrine to the people of Galilee, which He called “the Gospel of the Kingdom.” Therein He revealed to them the plans of God concerning the salvation of the earth, and taught them the new revelation—that God loved sinners. In so doing, He foretold the coming kingdom and authenticated His right to make these utterances, as a prophet, by many miracles of healing.

But the first statement in this short verse is that Jesus Christ was a teacher, entering into the synagogues with authority and confidence.

Note also Matthew 5, which chapter begins with these words: “And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: and when he was set, his disciples came unto him: And he opened his mouth, and taught them, saying,” From here on Matthew records the words of that lesson which Jesus taught. We call it the Sermon on the Mount, but it is far more than a sermon.

The word “preach” is not mentioned in the text itself; rather the word “taught” is used.

The so- called Sermon on the Mount literally constitutes a textbook of God’s will for men, and Christ’s dealings with and for them. If a man could really apprehend that course of instruction and translate those teachings into daily living, every blessing and grace that the soul could taste would be His, as a natural result.

In this case, Jesus taught a lesson, or wrote a textbook, so vast, far-reaching and profound in its depths, that men today still find new meanings in these phrases.

This is in exact accord with the statement of Matthew 7:29, “For He taught them as one having authority and not as the scribes.”

Of course He did!

Here was a man who derived nothing from human opinion and who built none of His conclusions upon the teachings of other men. He came as The Prophet whose mission was to utter the very words that God had given to Him. For that reason there was weight and power in His words, which manifested themselves in a serene, unshakeable authority which no other teacher ever possessed.

At the close of His public ministry, Jesus still considered Himself the supreme teacher. In Matthew 26:55 He reminded the arresting band of the dignity of His position when He said: “Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me.”

The authority of Christ as a teacher was recognized in His day even by those who did not receive Him as a personal Lord. This is evidenced when in the third chapter of John a member of the Sanhedrin approached Jesus and said, “Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that thou doest except God be with him.”

All of the Gospel writers lay great emphasis upon the teaching ministry and authority of Christ, and each of them emphasizes His power and authority in purveying such instruction. They also recount the impact of His teachings upon he rabble who heard, and tell us that such men stared at each other in wonder and said, “Never man spake like this!”

Even at this distant age, men of the widest learning, even though they have not accepted the Saviour as a personal Redeemer, delight to honor Him by calling Him, “The Great Teacher.”

He should have been!

He was the custodian of the greatest message and the deepest lessons humanity ever contemplated. He came from heaven divinely commissioned of God to instruct the earth in all things needful for man’s salvation; He qualifies under this definition as a prophet.

Turning our thought to the second method by which the prophet fulfilled his commission, we see Jesus as an unparalleled predictor. That He did often prophesy coming events is clearly stated in the Gospel records, as for example, Matthew 16:21. It would be very natural for Matthew to record this event because, having heard the prophecy, he lived to see its fulfillment. Note again these words: “From that time forth began Jesus to show unto His disciples how that he must go into Jerusalem and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.”

This prophecy He repeated some months later when He said, according to Matthew 20:18: “Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death, And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.”

It is not given to the natural man to know the time, the place, nor the manner of His death. I rather fear that if most of us knew the exact time and place where our death was to occur, we would be far distant from the place at that particular time. Unless, of course, we knew with the certainty that Jesus showed that our death would endure but for three days.

Most of us, wearied with the labor and burden of living, might look forward with some pleasure to a threeday nap, if we were certain that we would arise strengthened, refreshed, with a life that was henceforth enduring.

So this Prophet who foretold His own demise, specifying the time, the place and the manner thereof, could look beyond the grave and predict an event concerned with Himself after He had died. Certainly no prophet could do more than that!

Going beyond His own personal interests, Christ the Prophet gave an amazing demonstration of His powers of predicting in what we commonly call, “The Olivet Discourse.”

If we took just one sentence out of that great prophecy and read these words: “And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.” we would have an instance of the prophetic functioning in that one illustration. When Jesus uttered these words, the might of Rome had clamped iron manacles upon the province of Judea, and a rebellion against this awful power was utterly unthinkable under those circumstances. Yet Jesus could clearly envision those clays in the near future when “Titus, the Housebreaker,” would invest the city and bring the horrors of ancient siege upon the inhabitants thereof.

This Olivet discourse had intrigued the wonder of all students of Scripture from the times of the church fathers until the present hour. The utterance was called forth in reply to three questions which were asked by His disciples when Jesus made an apparently casual forecast. Sitting upon the slope of Mount Olivet, they were surveying the grandeur of the temple and its building, when Jesus said with startling suddenness: “See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.”

Sometime later the disciples asked Him a three-fold question, saying “Tell us (I) when shall these things be, and (2) what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and (3) of the end of the age?” Note those three questions and keep them clearly in mind when you read the Olivet discourse. The answer to the three-fold query is woven into one complete account by the historian Matthew, and it requires considerable discernment to correlate each portion of the answer to the proper division of the three-fold question.

Some of these predictions have to do with the destruction of Jerusalem; others are prophetic descriptions of the signs that shall accompany the coming again of Jesus. The balance of the prophecy has to do with the physical catastrophe of the end of this age and the preparation for the new world that shall be.

It is a principle pertaining to the interpretation of all prophecy, that a prophecy can only be accredited after its fulfillment. Hence we will ignore for the moment the predictions of Jesus concerning His return and the end of the age, since these events have not yet come to pass. But the fulfillment of His prophecies concerning the destruction of Jerusalem are written for all then to read. As long as that record stands there can be no contradiction of the simple statement that Christ was the greatest of all prophets, predicting events with clarity and definite certainty and having history vindicate His claim.

As to the third and highly important consideration, the working of miracles to authenticate His claims, Jesus was certainly supreme among prophets. We would establish this point by simply saying, “We cite the Gospel according to John.” I think most readers are familiar with the fact that the common word for miracle does not occur in the Greek text of the entire Gospel of John, and yet this writer describes more miracles wrought by Jesus than do the synoptic historians. The Greek word translated “miracle” in our English version of the Gospel of John, could be translated perhaps more clearly by the word “sign.” However, this is purely incidental, as the miracles were wrought for signs, and the signs must consist of miracles. So thoroughly established was the principle that the prophet should work miracles to establish his credentials, that the Jews plainly said to Jesus, “What sign showest thou that we may believe?”

Jesus Christ inaugurated His ministry by a miraculous work, which was a sign to the people. The first eleven verses of the second chapter of John bring us the account of a wedding in Cana of Galilee. When the unexpected arrival of thirteen additional guests put an embarrassing strain upon the punch bowl, the mother of Jesus, who seemed to have been an informal hostess at the celebration, turned to her great Son for help. In obedience to His command, water turned into wine. The account concludes, “This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory, and his disciples believed on Him.” I used the common translation of the King James Version retaining the word “miracles” in place of the more literal word “signs,” because this reading is familiar to the modern age; but the significant word in the text is

“beginning.” This word implies a continuing process. You cannot use the word legitimately to describe or define a single or consummated event which occurred once and was never repeated. The word “beginning,” means that something started, continued and carried on to a later consummation. This verse also tells the purpose of miracles and defines their result. Miracles, or signs, were wrought by the prophet Jesus “to show forth His glory,” and resulted in men believing in Him! John used the right word when he said, “This beginning of miracles did Jesus.” As you read through the Gospel of John note how many times he records these signs and wonders which men call miracles, which were enacted by the prophet Jesus.

In John 4:46-54 the inspired writer describes the healing of the nobleman’s son at Capernaum.

In the first sixteen verses of chapter 5, the eyewitness, John, tells of the healing at the pool of Bethesda.

In the next chapter, verses 1 to 16, the historian tells of the miracle of the feeding of the five thousand with the lunch of the young lad, and adds the engrossing detail of the twelve baskets of super-abundance which were left over from the five small soda crackers and the few sardines.

In this same chapter, verses 16 to 21, John, who was there when it happened, told how the prophet walked upon the water, manifesting in this sign His power over the elements that make up the deep.

He then comes in chapter 9 to tell of the healing of the blind man who had never seen the light of clay until Christ gave him sight.

If we were limited to just one of the many signs and wonders wrought by the Saviour to establish His right to the office of prophet, I think we would do well to center our attention in the eleventh chapter of John. No person who ever has been saddened by the rude visitation of death in his own home, can fail to thrill with sympathy and understanding to the greatest drama ever recorded in human writings and which was enacted in the little home at Bethany. Of the many intimates who surrounded the Saviour none were more beloved by Jesus than Lazarus and his two sisters. While the Prophet was absent on a teaching mission, Lazarus sickened and died. Although removed by three days journey, Christ knew the situation and told His disciples at the instant of Lazarus’ death. Making a leisurely journey back into Judea in spite of the danger of a popular uprising against Him, the Prophet came to the broken home and was greeted by the sorrowing sisters. Martha said to the Saviour, “Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died. But I know, that even now, whatsoever thou wilt ask of God, God will give it thee.

Jesus saith unto her, Thy brother shall rise again.”

Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

She said unto him, Yea, Lord: I believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should come into the world.”

Thus Jesus seized upon the sorrow and heartache of that bereaved couple to give to the whole world forever, while time shall be, the most astounding, clear-cut and soul-stirring promise the race ever had. Other teachers had hoped that there might be a life after death.

Other leaders had looked forward to the possibility of learning more about another world when they left this one. But this teacher, who was the prophet from the other world, was the first to state with assurance that those who believed in Him and accepted His message, were utterly immune to death. Having left this incomparable promise in the record for all men to read, Jesus then went forth to the grave of the dead Lazarus and by His spoken command, raised him from the dead.

A host of witnesses saw this miracle. They also saw the completion wherewith the power of God always works.

Though Lazarus had been dead three days, and his body had already begun to melt away in the process of dissolution, when the dead man walked forth from his tomb, his cheeks were red with the flush of health, his step was firm and assured, and his eyes flashed with intelligence and understanding.

In all history no comparable miracle attested the commission of any prophet whom God had appointed; but Jesus continued this manifestation of power to the very end of His contact with men.

After He died and was raised from the dead, He met some of His disciples on the shores of the sea of Galilee.

There the risen Christ repeated the miracle of the miraculous draught of fishes. When Peter saw this work re-enacted, he cried out with conviction and certainty, “It is the Lord!”

Thus Jesus emerges from an analytical examination as the most magnificent of all the prophets who have been the servants and mouthpieces of God. Doing all that other prophets had done (and doing it better) He went beyond the

accomplishments which the Holy Ghost had wrought in other men. He made a revelation of God which established Him as the supreme teacher.

He predicted the growth of Gentile world powers, the collapse of Gentile world dominion, the return of Israel to Palestine, the last great war, His own return, the resurrection of the just and the subsequent thousand year reign: and all history will yet pour itself into the mold formed by His words.

As there were three methods through which the prophetic office functioned, so there were three phases to the work of Christ the Prophet. The first of these was His preparatory ministry in the enlightening of man before the Advent. The most precise and comprehensive way in which we can cover this thought is to say that all preliminary knowledge of God in any age came through Christ. The New Testament states that revelations concerning God were made in olden times by men in whom the spirit of Christ did function. Remembering that Jehovah is the preincarnate name of Jesus, and that Jehovah was always the mediator between Heaven and the denizens of earth, you at once see how all past prophecy must be accredited to Jesus.

Through Adam He taught the first of our kind, when He walked and talked in the garden.

To Adam He prophesied the certainty of disaster if the dicta of God were violated., In Adam He wrought his first miracles with humanity; first when He created him from the dust of the earth and, secondly, when He redeemed him by the blood of a lamb.

So, from Adam to John, such knowledge of God as alleviated the darkness of man’s fallen state, came through the preparatory ministry of Christ, the magnificent prophet.

The second phase of His work was the earthly ministry during the incarnation. While it is true that in His life He was led by the Holy Spirit, as were the Old Testament prophets, He had the sources of all knowledge within Himself.

Again and again the prophets of old could say, in the words of Ezekiel, “The word of God came unto me saying, Son of man take up a burden”; after which the prophet would deliver the message that God’s spirit had sent to him. But never did Jesus Christ say “the word of God came to Mel” He was the Word of God! Thus, in this instance, His magnificence is manifest by His supremacy as the Word, over those who merely received the words of God. The third phase of the prophetic ministry of Jesus consists of the guiding and teaching of His church since His ascension into Heaven. This ministry, of course, is conducted through the New Testament apostles and ministers in fulfillment of the promises made by Jesus, as recorded by John and Luke in their gospels, and in the Book of the Acts.

He promised that when the Holy Spirit came to the earth, He would teach His followers everything they needed to know, but which they were incapable of comprehending until His resurrection gave to them a basis of understanding.

The ministry of the apostles is significant in that it shows how they developed the germinal ideas given to them

by Jesus, and continued to receive fresh revelations from Him after His ascension. To illustrate this astonishing thought, read Galatians 1:11-12, where the apostle Paul, who had never met Jesus in the days of His flesh wrote, “But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.”

Thus Paul, who never had shared the earthly ministry of Christ was, nevertheless, in such close fellowship with the Holy Ghost, that he could receive revelations concerning the Gospel from Jesus, and thus transmit them to men.

To climax your thought concerning the magnificence of Jesus the Prophet, note how He surpassed every grace, message and gift distributed through those who had preached Him. In so doing, He made God known to man, and revealed Him as no other ever had done.

Moses revealed God to Israel, who had forgotten the very name of their Creator.

Isaiah revealed God to Israel, who had lost the sense of His holiness.

Hosea revealed God to Israel when they had abandoned the knowledge of His love.

Jeremiah revealed God to Israel when they knew not His judgment on idolatry and sin.

Jesus Christ paralleled each of these great and matchless ministries before He transcended them by going on to the one thing which no prophet could do.

In John 17:6, Christ claimed to have completed the work of Moses when He said, “I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gayest me out of the world.”

Jesus completed the work of Isaiah when He said in John 17:11 “Holy Father keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me.”

Jesus completed the work of Hosea when He said in John 3:16 “God so loved the world ...”

Jesus completed the work of Jeremiah when He said in John 4:23 “But the hour cometh and now is when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.”

Having done all this, He then pressed on to the ultimate climax and conclusion. He revealed a new idea and a new attribute of God, when He taught His disciples in these incomparable words, “When ye pray, say, Father.”

To complete the magnificence of the prophetic office, the work of Jesus will end with the final and complete revelation of the Father to His saints in glory. When the body of Christ is completed by the regeneration of the last one who is to be saved by faith, the trump shall sound, the dead in Christ shall rise, and the living saints shall be translated to meet Christ in the air!

In that form, He shall Himself present His church to His Father and shall present His Father unveiled to His church, so that we see God and know Him as He is.

Magnificent, indeed, is that prophet who can fulfill all prophecy and bring God within the sphere of human comprehension.

CHAPTER IX

I

The Effective Priest

N APPROACHING a study of the second office ascribed to Jesus Christ, we again find it necessary to crystallize our thinking by some words of definition.

Generally, in the Old Testament revelation, the offices of prophet and priest are so radically different that they never coincide in the one person. The prophet acted as God’s representative to men, revealing God’s will, making His wishes known to His followers and teaching humans their duty to God. The priest, on the other hand, was a person divinely appointed to transact with God on man’s behalf. Thus, the priest is man’s representative with God, commissioned to this holy office by God. Exactly as every sovereign government retains the right to designate the ambassador from some foreign country who is acceptable to the home government, even so God has the last word in deciding who shall represent men at His court. Therefore, the priest must be divinely designated before he can fulfill his office and become the intercessor with God on man’s behalf.

You will notice that I did not use the word mediator, but rather suggested that the priest was appointed to “transact” with God. According to the clear statement of the New Testament Scripture, there is but one mediator between God and man . . . He being Christ Jesus Himself.

There is a difference between mediation and intercession, and the human priest was limited to this latter function.

The office implied two duties, the first being to offer sacrifice, and the second, to make intercession. In the orderly practice of the principle of atonement whereby, through the death of one, benefit and forgiveness could come to another, certain rules and procedures had to be followed to safeguard the custom from abuse. Not every man could effectively offer sacrifice. Certain men were commissioned to that office, which authority derived from God. But those who were thus appointed exercised the second duty, which was intercession. In the light of the Christian procedure so familiar to us, it is difficult to understand why a sinner who desires to turn away from his sin and find restitution with God, would need one to act in his behalf. The principle involved, however, was concerned with the offended holiness of God. Until Jesus Christ expiated sin and provided one eternal propitiation for its consequences, it was necessary that one capable of approaching the throne of Holiness should prepare the way for the guilty to approach. The principle is still continued in its heavenly application in that Christ, our High Priest, still lives to make intercession for us. But because we have this Priest, we need no other and can come boldly into His presence, making our wants known.

All of this is implied in the significant phrase, “one mediator.” Our High Priest now does more than intercede— He literally mediates.

It is the grossest folly to ignore the love of Jesus Christ, detract from His power and insult His willingness to remain the Saviour, by insisting that we need an intercessor between us and our mediator. If I need some other person to intercede with Jesus so that He will mediate with God on my behalf, it logically follows that my case would be strengthened if I knew one who could intercede with the intercessor, who would use influence with the mediator.

Before I had gone far in the practice of this philosophy, I would have such an unlimited string of mediators between me and God, my interests would probably disappear by attrition as they passed through these innumerable

channels.

But because Christ died for my sins according to the Scripture, and now sitteth on the right hand of God to make intercession for me, I can come directly to my Saviour, Who is the Son of God. He being seated on the right hand of God, sharing the Father’s throne, needs but turn His head to plead my case with God, who is the great Judge of all.

In response to the intercessory work of His Son, the Judge becomes my Father and we deal in the love and sympathy of a family relationship with all of my wants and requirements. My weaknesses are understood; I am strengthened by this close contact with God my Saviour, and my hope of salvation rests in the fact that I have but one mediator between me and God. But before Christ died to be our mediator, it was necessary that an order of men be commissioned to guard the way of approach to God, that it might not be defiled by careless, indifferent use.

To consider the background of the priesthood, let us note the example provided by God’s choice of Aaron to be the first high priest of Israel. To begin with, Aaron was divinely appointed. He seems to have been chosen primarily because of his natural ability, according to Exodus 4:14. You will remember the amazing events of the third and fourth chapters of Exodus, where Moses was called to be the redeemer of Israel. When God spoke to Moses, having attracted his attention by means of the blazing bush, He commissioned Moses to be the liberator of the enslaved tribes. Moses demurred, basing his refusal upon the ground that he was not an eloquent man, unable to make an acceptable speech to a public gathering.

It is somewhat amusing to note how many people in our generation are reluctant to serve God because of their embarrassment on this same point. They all think that their excuse is fresh, unique and original, never knowing that almost four thousand years ago a man refused the call of God on the grounds that he was not a fluent speaker.

Whereupon God said that He would give Moses a spokesman in the person of his brother, Aaron. There seems to be an error here because of the fact that Aaron was the older brother. In all the family polity and conduct of public affairs in olden times, seniority ruled. The first born son had the pre-eminence in all things. So closely was the rule of primogeniture obeyed that a younger son could only become possessed of dignity or honor with the consent of his elder brother. Since Aaron was three years older than Moses, it follows that he should have been the leader and Moses the spokesman. But in every age God does seem to work with men according to their natural ability.

All of the gifts and talents that any human possesses are derived from God, Who giveth to all individually as He Himself sees fit. So, the first priest was accredited by God and ordained to fulfill an office for which he had apparently been born, as a distinct recognition of a natural gift.

When we turn to the fourth chapter of Exodus, we find from verses twelve to fifteen that Aaron was afterwards set apart by special orders and consecrated through certain ceremonies. There was a two-fold purpose in this public acknowledgment of Aaron’s divine call. The first was to impress upon the newly elected priest the sanctity of his office, and the holiness of the powers thus delegated to him. The second purpose was to impress upon the people, whose representative he should be with God, the high and holy privilege that was theirs in having a personal ambassador in the court of heaven.

The third outstanding principle in the commission of Aaron was the direct manner in which he was appointed to perform the sacrifices. In Leviticus 1:5-9, the first office of the priest is impressively emphasized with certain rigid, unchanging rules concerning the manner in which the blood should be shed for the purging of sin. The Aaronic order of the priesthood was thus distinguished by becoming the only group in all Israel fitted to fulfill the primary office of the priesthood and shed blood for the remission of sin.

Next, we note how the duties of the priesthood were rigidly defined. The first nine chapters of Leviticus deal with the laws of offerings and sacrifice, dividing all of the broad field of human trespass and failure into sections, each one requiring a different type of redemptive sacrifice.

All of this now being concluded by special divine commandments, the ninth chapter of Leviticus tells how the priesthood was formally initiated. At once we see one of the many reasons why Jesus was never named a priest after the order of Aaron. As Aaron and his sons stood on the threshold of their entrance into the greatest calling that ever dignified the service of man in the years before Christ, they also had to make a sin offering for themselves, and a burnt offering to cover their own trespass and failures.

This being done, they then had to sacrifice a peace offering to establish harmony between themselves and God before they were fitted to enter into His service. But Jesus Christ, being come a high priest of good things that are yet to be, needed no sin offerings for Himself; and being at eternal peace with God, His Father, was beyond and above these personal ceremonies. More of that we shall see later, we just emphasize this significant fact —the priest who stood between God and man, bringing men into God’s presence and making God’s grace and kindness known to man, himself needed a mediator to cover his shortcomings with the God in Whose presence

he served.

It is significant that God has safeguarded the priesthood in every past age by discouraging originality in its service. Thus the tenth chapter of Leviticus carries the strange story of Nadab and Abihu, the two sons of Aaron who thought they ought to “pep up” the service of the tabernacle and introduce a few original ideas. To give the congregation added thrill and perhaps to show the older men how this thing should be done, they appeared before God with strange fire and unauthorized rites, which the Scripture says God had not commanded them to perform. A fire leaped out upon them and devoured them; thus, instantly, the hand of God was stretched out by punishing violation of the rules of this priesthood.

On another occasion deliberate rebellion against the priesthood was punished in a similar dramatic manner. It would be wise at this point if you would stop and read the sixteenth chapter of Numbers, particularly verses twenty-eight to thirty- five, to help you in your study of that chapter.

The theme of this chapter { Numbers 16:1-50 }is: THE HISTORY OF SPIRITUAL REBELLION I. The rebellion of Korah: vs. 1-3.

(1) The ring-leaders named. vs. 1.

(2) Famous followers and associates. vs. 2.

(3) Their motive: envy of Moses and Aaron: coupled with spiritual pride. vs. 3.

II. The forbearance of Moses. vs. 4-11.

(1) A great man’s first reaction. vs. 4.

(2) His stern warning to the rebels. vs. 5.

(3) The proposed test. vs.

6-7.

(4) The grave warning and charitable plea of Moses. vs. 8-11.

III. The stubborn rejection of a gracious plea: vs. 12-14.

(1) The rejection of conciliation. vs. 12.

(2) The reason for rebellion reiterated: malice and envy of Moses. vs. 13-14.

IV. Moses demands that the issue be settled: vs. 15-19.

(1) The righteous wrath of Moses. vs. 15.

(2) The test established. vs.

16-18.

(3) The challenge accepted. vs. 19.

V. The intervention of God: vs. 20, 21. Judgment and Justice prepare to operate.

VI. The intercession of Moses and Aaron. vs. 22.

VII. Rebellion punished. vs. 23-26.

(1) Separation of guilty from the innocent. vs. 23-27.

(2) The act of God: a two-fold purpose a) To vindicate His servants. vs. 28-30. b) To destroy the wicked. vs. 31-35.

VIII. The memorial erected to safeguard the priesthood. vs. 36-40.

IX. Rebellion resumed. vs. 41.

X. The inevitable result. vs. 42.

(1) God observes and condemns the sin. vs. 42-45.

(2) Moses and Aaron again intercede. vs. 46-48.

(3) The frightful cost of rebellion. vs. 49-50.

The priesthood thus jealously guarded by God was afterward confirmed by a miracle which occurred in the sight of all Israel. The seventeenth chapter of Numbers continues the story of what happened after the rebellion of Korah and the two hundred fifty accomplices. The dissidents among the horde remained recalcitrant and returned on the following day to charge Moses and Aaron with mass murder in the destruction of the two hundred fifty. Instead of being angered by the vicious and unjust charges, Moses and Aaron hastened to the tabernacle to plead for God’s mercy upon these men

who were so hard of heart that even judgment did not avail to affect their rebellion.

Once more, however, justice acted, and before atonement had been made for this continued rebellion, most of the rebels were slain. For in that day, as in every day since, “the wages of sin is death,” and wrongdoing cannot be condoned by a God of justice.

So, to settle this issue, the seventeenth chapter of Numbers tells of the strange device that God commanded to demonstrate once and for all the divine commission of the Aaronic priesthood. All candidates and aspirants to the office of the priest were instructed to bring their staves and lay them before God in the tabernacle at the close of that day. The staff that each man carried in the wilderness wanderings was a formidable weapon, and a credible help to a weary man.

It was used somewhat in the fashion of an alpenstock in modern mountain climbing, and was often used as a two-handed cane or crutch upon which a tired man could lean. It was a most handy weapon of defense when used against any enemy, man or beast. These staves were made from any handy material, but, of course, each man sought for the hardest and toughest wood, knowing that his life might some day depend upon his staff. It chanced that Aaron’s staff had been made from the limb of a dead almond tree. It had been seasoned over the years, trimmed and shaped to his own individual grasp and was as dead as wood could become. Together with the other candidates for the priesthood, Aaron laid his staff among the rest and departed. In the early morning they all returned to the tabernacle to reclaim their staves. To the astonished gaze of the entire company, Aaron’s rod contained green leaves, buds, blossoms and ripened fruit. In the twelve hours of the night, the power of God had caused a dead limb to fulfill the complete twelve-months cycle of a living tree, producing leaves, buds, blossoms and fruit. Thus a two-fold lesson was taught to Israel. First, that Aaron’s call to the priesthood was authentic in that it was established by this miracle. Secondly, that all the power of the priesthood derived from God, Who was thus able to bring life from that which was dead.

In this extensive demonstration we have sought to illustrate an eternal principle that never has been changed.

If you have a Priest today, He must be one Who has been divinely appointed, primarily because of natural ability.

Your Priest also had to be set apart by special orders and through certain ceremonies.

He alone can be appointed to make sacrifice for you and His duties also are clearly defined.

At some specific point in actual history, His Priesthood was officially begun.

He follows His orders, which are predetermined in the ancient councils of God; rebellion against His authority means death for you.

You may know that you have such a Priest if His calling has been confirmed by a miracle.

Apply each of these tests to the person and work of Jesus Christ, and you will find that He has failed in none!

We come then to the second phase of the study. The first was that the priest must be divinely appointed. The second, that he is commissioned to transact with God on man’s behalf.

Again continuing our study of the Aaronic priesthood, we see how the work of Jesus was foreshadowed even in this order of which He was not a part. In the thirteenth(sic) chapter of Exodus, we have the place and manner appointed in the establishment of the altar, which is told of in the first ten verses. Nowhere else could the particular service of atonement be transacted as long as that altar was in existence. Twice daily incense must be burned upon that altar; and once a year the sin offering should be made there that atonement might be made for sins which the people had committed in the year that was past.

Having thus shown that the primary duty of the priest was to apply sacrifice in such fashion as to procure vicarious atonement, the sixth chapter of Numbers, verses 23 to 27 logically follows with the statement that the priest is now prepared to bless and capable of blessing the people. The gracious benediction which Almighty God gave by direct command to His priests in that day is still used by the Christian world, because of the dignity and grace of its sonorous passages. But Aaron could not say to the men of old— “The Lord bless thee and keep thee: The Lord make his face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace,” until he had first shed the blood of atonement to cover the sins of the people. But following atonement, it was right and proper that the blessing of God should be expected, and this blessing was given to the priest to administer to those who had come to deserve it through no work or merit of their own. You see, it has always been an eternal principle that the blessings of God may not be earned: “Not by works of righteousness which we have done,” said Paul, “but by

His own grace He saved us.” Thus every blessing that comes to those who are perfected by the blood of Christ comes because of the blood of that Lamb. And blessing always follows the establishment of a right relationship with God. Having thus transacted with God and received a blessing for the people, the priest goes on to his next power— that of interceding for sinners. We have already considered this principle in Numbers 16:22 where Aaron and Moses, though greatly distressed personally by the uprising of the people, yet found the greatness of heart and the grace of spirit to fall on their faces and intercede for those who had done this wrong.

While recognizing that Jesus’ priesthood was not after the order of Aaron, we nevertheless note that the higher priesthood of Jesus, which embraced all lesser orders, again paralleled this historical precedent. It was upon an altar, predetermined as to geographical site and fore-ordained as to time, that the Son of God offered Himself as a Lamb to secure expiation of sin.

Having so done, He has then brought the blessing of salvation with all of its benefits, to offer to all men everywhere. Even while dying a death of violence and pain, He interceded for sinners. The human ear never heard words of magnanimity that equaled the passionate plea of the dying Jesus—”Father, forgive them; they know not what they do.”

Lest we be accused of fanciful interpretations, let us remind you that the entire epistle to the Hebrews is written upon the theme, “Jesus Christ, our High Priest.” There used to be considerable argument about the authorship of this book. Happily, this has been settled by the recent discovery of the Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, which have established beyond question the traditional view that Paul the Apostle wrote the Hebrew epistle. Five times in that letter, Paul speaks of Jesus Christ as Priest, and twelve times designates Him as “The High Priest.” Every form and ceremony of the Aaronic priesthood, pointed to the coming of the great High Priest, even Jesus Christ.

The heart of the epistle is the ninth chapter. The climax of the priestly office in Israel came on the Day of Atonement, when the high priest went through certain ceremonies of cleansing and purification. Garbing himself in clean linen garments of snowy whiteness and taking in his hand a brazen bowl containing the blood of a new sacrifice, the high priest went behind the veil of the tabernacle, or temple, and entered into the holy of holies where the Schechinah glory of God dwelt above the mercy seat.

Interceding for the sins of the people, the high priest left the blood upon the mercy seat and retired back through the veil.

No other person could enter the holy of holies except the high priest, and he could do so but once a year. His approach to the mercy seat was guarded by the most rigid procedure and by the most inviolable rules that ever surrounded a holy office.

This ninth chapter of Hebrews uses this ancient custom to teach us that the Holy Ghost was thus demonstrating that the way into the holiness of God’s presence had never been opened to man through the ceremonies of Israel. The balance of the chapter then sweeps on to the illuminating statement that Jesus Christ came to earth to become a high priest of “good things” yet in the future which should be acquired through His body instead of through physical buildings. By His own blood He accomplished what all the blood of animal sacrifices had never been able to perform.

With His own blood He entered into the Holy of Holies in heaven, and made of Himself a sacrifice on God’s mercy seat, which bought for His followers an eternal redemption. Never again shall a high priest enter behind any veil to perform any offering for the sins of any people and obtain any result by this conduct. All the breath that mankind could blow on ashes dead and cold could kindle no spark therein. Jesus Christ has fulfilled every figure of the priesthood; and He remains today the only intercessor between God and man who has power to prevail with God on man’s behalf.

The Hebrew epistle demonstrates the superiority of the priesthood of Jesus over that of any order of priest the world has ever known or can know. This idea is developed most extensively in the seventh chapter of Hebrews, although it has been previously suggested by a broad introduction of the idea in chapter five. It is a progressive argument, stating first that the priesthood of Melchisedec was superior to that of Aaron and that the priesthood of the Son of God, while after the order of Melchisedec, is vastly superior to him and his services.

Jesus cannot be a priest after the order of Aaron. Christ was born out of the tribe of Judah, which produced kings and not priests. Only from the tribe of Levi could the priestly line derive. Let us remember that as we come to a later study of this thought. But Melchisedec was king of Salem and priest of the one High God. Therefore, Jesus can fittingly minister after the order of Melchisedec, He being the King of Heaven and the Son of the One High God. Again we note that the Aaronic order provided priests for Israel only. We should never lose sight of the fact that all of the blessings and promises that God made through Moses were for the Jews alone. Since there is nothing in the law of Israel for the Gentile nations, they in turn, have never been under that law which was given specifically to the Jew. Hence, the priest of the Aaronic order never ministered for Gentiles. If a man born outside of the tribes of Israel desired the benefits of the priesthood, he had to become a proselyte to Judaism and become adopted into the tribes before the priesthood could function for him. But Melchisedec, a Gentile, was the universal priest.

He was divinely appointed to transact for all men everywhere, regardless of race, condition or color.

Note also that the Aaronic priesthood was temporary. It was to endure only for the span of the reign of the

Mosaic system. The people of Israel have no priests today. A poor substitution called “Rabbis” occupy the place which the priests once possessed. The law of Moses being done away in the cross of Christ, the Aaronic priesthood, of necessity, passed away with it. But Melchisedec represented an eternal priesthood. There is no record of its historic beginning, it functions eternally through Jesus Christ, the last priest of that order.

Profound mystery has long enshrouded this man Melchisedec, and speculation has woven an obscuring mark of tradition around this fascinating character. There is a difficult and ambiguous passage in the Hebrew epistle which is one of the hardest sentences in the Greek manuscript to properly translate. In speaking of Melchisedec, this passage, as we read it in common translation of the King James Version, states that Melchisedec was “without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but made like unto the son of God, abideth a high priest forever.”

In transliterating this verse into a more common English vernacular translation, we must first note that the word “descent” literally means pedigree,—or genealogy. I believe that the marginal reading of your Bible will show that point.

Holding this thought in mind, we will make an historical survey that will lead us to establish the authority for a transliteration which should clear up this difficulty. Many amazing, ingenuous and interesting books have been written about Melchisedec, the most of which we now learn are not founded on fact.

Some writers have presumed that since he had no father nor mother, he must have been an angel.

Others have said that since he was a universal priest, he must have been a theophany of Jehovah, even going so far in their imaginative interpretations as to identify him with the angel of Jehovah of the Old Testament text.

Others have said that since he lives forever, he must have been God Himself!

We are indebted to Dr. A. A. Sayce, famed archeologist of the British Museum, for final illumination upon this subject. While working among Hittite sources, Dr. Sayce uncovered the historical facts of the background that taught us the truth concerning Melchisedec. His city of Salem was the ancient scat of the eternal religion called monotheism. We must remember that God has not left Himself without witness in any age, and that from the time of Adam to the present hour, there has been a remnant of humanity who remembered His Name and kept alive His worship on this earth. It is true that that remnant has fluctuated in size. In the days of Noah, it had shrunk to the pitiful company of eight, while in our day it is probably safe to state that more people believe in the one true Holy God than ever worshipped Him in any previous generation.

In the ancient world the worship of the one God has always centered in the one city. In the days of Melchisedec the city was called Salem.

Later races called it Jeri-Salem and this, in turn, gave way to the present name, Jerusalem. It has never been a big city but it has wielded more influence upon the history of the earth than any other city ever founded by the hands of man. Battles have raged about it, armies have plowed across it, it has been destroyed and desolated again and again, but for some strange reason it always arises like a phoenix from its own ashes to become more revered and to exercise a wider influence after each resurrection.

In its early history, we now know it was a city inhabited entirely by priests and their families. They had a strange economy and a more peculiar polity. It is difficult to describe their form of government, as it was unique. We might call it a despotic democracy, or say that the ruler was a benevolent despot. Our difficulty is that we have no parallel type of government.

Salem was ruled by a king whose authority was absolute. In every case, the king was also the high priest of the monotheistic faith. These king-priests kept alive the worship of God, and taught His name to many of the ancient races.

When a king in Salem died, democracy functioned. All adults, men and women, gathered to vote for a successor to the throne. After this election, democracy retired into the background and the king ruled without check upon his wisdom or power. In electing a new king, the priestly families of Salem followed two inviolable laws. The first of these was: the candidate must be characterized by piety. The godliest man in the community was the most logical candidate for the throne. It sounds quaint in modern ears to say that politicians had precedence in exact proportion of their godliness and religious fervor, but we warned you in the beginning of this paragraph that Salem was unique!

The second rule that must be observed had to do with genealogy. No man could be a candidate for the throne in Salem who was related by birth or by marriage to any royal family, living or dead. The people of Salem were so anxious and determined that they would never have a traditional and hereditary dynasty fastened upon them that they adopted this rigid rule. If the man’s pedigree was tainted by relationship to royalty, he could not be king nor high priest in Salem.

Now correlate these facts to the ambiguous and admittedly difficult passage of the seventh chapter of Hebrews.

The plain implication of the text is that the king of Salem was not king by inheritance; he received his throne neither from father nor mother, because he was without royal pedigree.

His office of priest and king had neither beginning nor end: he established no dynasty. But one, and one only “Melchisedec” ever graced the throne in Salem.

Like the eternal

Son of God, he had an abiding priesthood that never passed away. Hence the reference “without beginning and without end” refers to his dynasty, not to his physical life.

There is an amazing sense of satisfaction and a blessed feeling of stability that comes to him whose priest is not temporary, but eternal. We who bask in the strong defense of the High Priest, Jesus Christ, occupy a position which angels might well envy. Our priest cannot be displaced by death, He has died once, but lives again.

Our High Priest is in no danger of neglecting the sacrifice which keeps us fit for the Holy Presence of God. Once and forever He sacrificed Himself.

Our High Priest is not one who by His own failure or fault made forfeit the right of entering God’s presence to intercede in our behalf.

He is the holy and sinless Son of God; He shares that presence and from it He can never be cast out.

Therefore, as long as Jesus Christ our High Priest lives, we live. No system of religion, no method of the practice of faith can convey the comfort and assurance, or transmit the strength or power that comes to the Christian who rests in the finished work of Jesus Christ, and approaches God through Him Who is our High Priest.

Hence Paul writes the Hebrew epistle to tell the people of Israel that all of their forms and ceremonies are void and dead, and their priesthood has passed away. They too are limited to such help as they will accept from Jesus Christ, the one Mediator between God and man.

It is a self-evident fact that Israel has no priest today.

Rabbis, of course, are not to be confused with priests, nor could they ever qualify as such. In the first place, to be an acceptable priest according to the law of Moses and the direct commands of God, the candidate must prove by genealogy that he is of the tribe of Levi. No living Hebrew can prove today from what tribe his ancestry came. Since the year A. D. 70, when Titus destroyed Jerusalem, these records have all been lost, and no Rabbi has the remotest idea from what tribe his ancestry sprung. Unless the genealogical records of ancient Israel are preserved somewhere and may later be discovered, there is no hope that a new priestly order can be erected in Israel, in accordance with their own law.

Why is it then that Israel has no priest? Because Israel has a priest.

Although Jesus Christ was born after the flesh from the tribe of Judah and the family of David, He is a priest after the order of Melchisedec. So far does this order exceed the Aaronic priesthood, that Abraham, the father of all Israel, was proud to pay tithes and offer spiritual homage to the great Melchisedec. Therefore, any Jew should be equally willing to offer homage to Him Who superseded Melchisedec and Who carries on His type of priesthood into eternity.

Again we note that Rabbis are not priests, for priests had as their first duty the offering of the daily sacrifice and the shedding of the blood of atonement. There are no lambs slain on the altars of Israel today. No turtle doves are offered in the ceremony of redemption, when the first-born grace Hebrew families. The scapegoat is forgotten by them, and the ashes of a red heifer have not sprinkled the unclean. For, lo, these scores of generations the only blood ever shed in the ceremonies of modern Israel, is that of a cock.

It is a quaint and significant coincidence that in New Testament texts, the cock stands for the rejection of Jesus. It was the crowing of this bird which signaled the three-fold denial of Messiah by Peter in the day of Israel’s rejection.

Why does Israel no longer have a lamb?

Because they have a lamb!

The Lamb of God Who took away the sin of the world died for Jew and Gentile alike. He made of His blood one eternal, complete and efficacious offering, which makes it unnecessary that a lesser gift shall ever be offered to propitiate the holiness of God. The priests of Israel always served without salary. I am sure this excludes Rabbis from inclusion in that holy office!

Thus we see a strange historical anomaly. Israel, who for long was the depository of monotheism, lives in rebellion against the very God whose name she kept alive for thirty-five hundred years. She has no land, she has no government, she has no priest, she has no sacrifice, and she will never possess any of these until she turns in repentance and faith to the great High Priest, the Lamb of God, Who will give her back her land, but who will remain her Priest forever.

We must not fail to note, however, in exalting the High Priesthood of Jesus Christ, that there is also an earthly priesthood which serves under the Lord Jesus, and which was specifically established by Him. I do not refer to the false claims of an ordained priesthood resting upon dubious tradition, which is not established by history, and which is clearly contradicted by the plain statements of the Word of God. It is amazing to note how many people in our modern and enlightened age still consider the Apostle Peter to be the “rock” upon which the church of Christ is founded. By them

Peter is presumed to have been the first of a new order of priests, the successors of which are alone able to transact with God in man’s behalf. Such people have apparently missed the writings of Peter himself. In the first general epistle which came from the pen of this great and holy apostle, Peter himself deals with the question of the “stone” upon which the church of Christ is founded. In the second chapter of I Peter, he writes that all of us who have tasted of the grace of the Lord, have come to a living stone rejected of men but chosen of God, and hence precious. Having established the fact that Jesus Christ is Himself that stone, Peter then says to those who believe in Jesus: “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.”

Note the significance of that. Peter says that he is not the stone which is the foundation of the church of Christ— Jesus is that Stone!

Peter says that he is no man’s priest, but that every believer in Christ becomes his own priest, making his own spiritual sacrifices to God directly through Jesus Christ.

In the ninth verse of this same chapter, Peter introduces this same thought when he says, “But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people, that ye should show forth the praises of him who has called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.”

Priests do not need a priest to act on their behalf. All believers in Jesus Christ, those who have been purchased by His blood, have become a royal priesthood. The entire generation which springs from Jesus is ordained to this priesthood, each for himself!

In case you think Peter may have exceeded his authority, read the words of the apostle John, from verses five and six in the first chapter of the Revelation. His startling statement is put in these exact words: “Unto him that loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood and hath made us kings and priests unto God forever.”

Thus John the Apostle joins with Peter the Apostle to instruct all believers in Jesus Christ;—that having been washed in the blood of the Lamb, they need no priest between them and their Redeemer. Each man is a priest and can transact for himself through Jesus the One Mediator, directly with God. This is the testimony also of the heavenly host as witnessed

by John in the fifth chapter of the Revelation. Here the inspired apostle, borne up by the Holy Spirit, saw the saints in heaven and heard their heavenly song. John records that song in the ninth verse of this fifth chapter of Revelation, thus admitting us to the scene that he saw. These are the words of John: “And they sung a new song, saying: Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.”

Here, then, is abundant verification of the bold and startling teaching advanced by Peter and John, the apostles of Jesus. The saints in heaven who have achieved their close position through the shed blood of Christ, acknowledged that all of like faith with them are priests unto God, and shall some day reign with Him upon this earth.

That priesthood is an unending possession, for in the twentieth chapter of Revelation, after the Spirit of God showed John the resurrection of the justified who lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years, he described in the sixth verse the condition of those who were privileged to participate in that first resurrection. This is his description of them: “But they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.”

Hence we are bold to state that even though Christ is our High Priest, the only Mediator that is now or ever will be required between God and man, we nevertheless are each of us ordained to the high and holy office of priest, to transact with God on our own behalf. This, of course, becomes possible because our transactions are conducted through Jesus Christ, our High Priest.

When we realize that Christ died and rose from the dead that He might present His blood on the mercy seat of God to buy salvation for us, our hearts indeed thrill with an amazing hope. But when we enter into the blessed fact that He then sat on the right hand of God, sharing His throne; and there became our advocate and High Priest with the Heavenly Father we thrill with an unshakable assurance. Well may those who have Christ for a High Priest, echo the ancient words—”Hallelujah, what a Saviour!”

CHAPTER X

The Eternal King

O

F THE three offices of the Son of God, the last that He shall occupy in the completion of His ministry toward man is that of King.

From the time the first prophet of Israel dipped his pen in the ink of inspiration to write of the unfolding of the complete plan of God, every prophetic utterance has been directed to a coming “day.” All Scripture may be likened to a lamp that gathers divergent rays of light and focuses them in illumination upon one significant point.

Necessarily, the narrower the point of focus, the more brilliant the illumination. Hence, when we say that the prophecy covering more than four thousand years of time all coincide on a period called, “A Day,” we must expect brilliance, clarity and brightness from such illumination.

That day is not only the theme of the Old Testament prophets, but it also forms the major melody in the song of the New Testament passages, just as the fruit of every Old Testament suggestion ripens in the New Testament revelation.

If the prophets of the older order stood alone in their writing of a coming “day,” and if Jesus in all of His teachings said nothing to authenticate their utterances, the skeptic might be pardoned his critical attitude. The fact of revelation, however, is contrary to this possibility. In all of His teachings, the Lord Jesus emphasized the utterances of the prophets and added to their descriptions of that coming “day.” Inspired by His example and being further directed by the Holy Spirit, each of the New Testament writers continued this flow of prophecy concerning that “day” when God’s dealings with men should climax in the establishment of the perfect earthly government.

This progressive revelation of an event yet to be witnessed is cumulative. As each prophet in turn received a picture of that future event, additional details were entrusted to him. This new material he added to the outline received from his predecessors and passed on an enhanced description of a coming kingdom to those who came after him. The picture of the reign of Christ, which the combined Scripture offers, is as though a mighty portrait had been painted by a score of masters. One man sketched in the outline, determining only the shape of the face; the next man added the salient features, establishing in this manner a suggestion of nationality. Others, in turn, drew in the details which lifted the portrait from a flat outline to a living representation of what seemed to be a living face.

Thus the “day of the Lord” grows from a mere mention to an outline, and passes from that to the splendor of a full revelation.

The cumulative revelation of the kingship of Jesus ends with the panorama of the Patmos vision, which finishes the portrait and sketches with brilliant illumination the minor details of that “day” when it shall finally dawn.

It is not too much to say that the office of Christ as King, and the drama of His coronation, constitute the focal point of history. Every major event of Scripture seems connected either directly or indirectly with that great and coming “day.” Without straining the suggestion of types and figures, we can say with conservative certainty, that certain events in the history of the patriarchs were prophetic of the climax of all history. We know that this is so because the New Testament plainly links these events as prediction and fulfillment.

For instance, in the days of Noah, when sin and uncleanness possessed the earth, man had degenerated to such a separation from God that every imagination of the human heart was evil without exception in the sight of God. Since no government can exist by the toleration of rebellion against its sovereignty, God can permit outrage against holiness to reach a certain level, but cannot tolerate a violation beyond that point. When organized sin rises to the place where it can challenge the moral sovereignty of God, the stroke of judgment can no longer be withheld. But we can never forget that every purpose of God is merciful. The chastisement of the guilty is to awaken their consciences and to arouse in them a sense of need. Being thus aroused, it is the hope of God that they will turn to Him for mercy and pardon, and thus find salvation. So in every judgment wherewith God has cleansed the earth, a way of escape has ever been provided for those who would exercise their sovereign choice, and use that means of redemption.

In the days of Noah the specific means of providential delivery was a boat. Because of His own foreknowledge, God knew the number of refugees from wrath who would avail themselves of this salvation. And when He handed to Noah the exact, detailed specifications for the building of the ark, adequate provision had been made for all who would repent. It doesn’t matter, in establishing this principle, whether the redeemed remnant numbered eight or eight million.

The ark was there, available to all humanity. Those who perished outside of its sealed doors, did so only after the Spirit of God had exhausted every means of persuasion which He could use, without violating the moral sovereignty of the individual.

In exactly that same sense of the word, the Apostle Peter warns our age of a degeneration of religion that shall climax in worldwide apostasy. We do not expect the skeptical interpretations of our modern seminaries to concede this point. To them Peter was grossly ignorant, having had the misfortune to live in a dark age, when modern education was not available to enlightened men. Peter would probably reply that he was limited in his knowledge of coming events to such things as he had learned from the lips of Jesus; or had become possessed of by the direct inspiration of the Holy

Spirit! Confessedly, he could not compete with our modern instructors, who were educated on the campuses of Germany, under the brilliant Welhausen and the other mighty founders of modernistic interpretation. So this type of argument would be instantly rejected by men who are wise above that which is written. I presume that this would be no surprise to God, Who has suffered this scholarly repudiation of His revelations in every age in which He has dealt with man. Our modern skeptics are no smarter than those who perished outside the ark.

As Peter is careful to speak in words that admit of no misinterpretation, he tells us that in the days of the coming again of the Son of man, it is when infidelity has reached so frightful a crest that the true faith seems to have almost disappeared, that Jesus will come again. Just prior to His coming a flood of judgment shall be poured out upon the earth, when the fiery wrath of God is unleashed against all manner of iniquity. In that day, said Peter, only those who find refuge in the ark which is Christ, shall be redeemed from that devastating judgment. Thus Peter makes the ark to point to the time when the King shall come to fulfill all the covenants that remain, after the work of Calvary was completed.

To those who do not accept the authority of Peter, we can only offer the suggestion that Peter, in turn, also depended upon authority. There is nothing original or unique in Peter’s figure which makes the flood and the ark point to the return of Jesus. Christ Himself used this specific type to tell listeners of His day that He was destined to visit earth twice more. You will remember the words that Jesus said, “As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the coming again of the Son of man.” He then reminded His listeners in graphic terms of the Scriptures that they long had known— how the ark waited in vain for men to enter; the careless and sinful laughed and sang, they drank and they wed, they played, they worked, and they rested; until the first heavy rain began to fall. As the water rose about them, they remembered the ark and turned to the place where it had rested. Their decision, however, was made too late.

There are more than a score of such references in the parables and teachings of Christ. With a sadness that undergirded the joy of the glory of His return, He painted with somber and bitter colorings the fate of those who waited to accept Him until the day of mercy was past. Thus He tells of the foolish virgins, standing outside a sealed door with darkened lamps in their hands; upon their ears there fall the solemn words of doom, “Too late!”

The Saviour also used the grisly fate of Sodom as a forewarning of judgment to precede and accompany His return. He warned the cities that had rejected His testimony that even though Sodom and Gomorrah had been physically destroyed, leaving only the pitifully small remnant of redeemed to continue the memory of those terrible days, it would be even worse for the cities of Palestine in the day when He came again.

If it is true, as Jesus said, that His witness which was wasted in those cities, would have saved Sodom had it been expended there, how much more guilty is this enlightened and evangelized generation when it rejects the clear statements of Christ, and turns away from Him as a means of salvation!

Thus we are assured that the plagues of Egypt, which judged the land of bondage at the time of the Peoples’ redemption, will all be repeated in the plagues listed in the Book of Revelation.

The Israel which sang a psalm of deliverance by the Red Sea, have their melodies echoed in the song of the larger Israel by that greater sea which John envisioned.

Certainly, in the narrative which climaxes with the return of Christ, the glories of Israel are found in the framework and structure. The worship of God has ever centered in a city called Jerusalem. This was the capital city of Israel, the place where David and Solomon reigned. In exactly that same manner, when the King returns Who is to reign over the entire earth for God, there shall be a new Jerusalem erected; there shall be no Jew therein and the word “Gentile” will never be heard. But God, in the form of His Son, will reign from that city over a regenerated earth, in which the very animals are changed and converted into objects of love and friendship!

It is not too much to say that all nations of the earth furnish their share of this preview. And when the record is complete, earth will have no nations. All men shall dwell in that amity and brotherhood which comes to contented citizens who owe allegiance to the same sovereign and, hence, are bound together by the same patriotic ties.

This day, which the Scripture portrays, is called the “Day of the Lord.” It will be consummated when Jesus Christ returns to the earth which cast Him out, to be crowned as King. It is the coronation day of Messiah Jesus, as well as the day of the judgment of the Christ-rejecting earth.

We have seen Him as a prophet, and we find that in this office, He is supreme and complete.

We have looked upon Him as a Priest, and we find that He is efficacious to transact between God and man.

Now we see Him in His final and eternal state. He Who was the Redeemer of men, Who is our Mediator now, will continue from that hour of His return throughout all the ages that are yet to be, as Jesus Christ the King.

This is the only permanent government to which God can give His consent.

If one were asked to define history in a single sentence, he would be wise to say, “History is an unbroken record

of the failure of human government.” Almost any form of government would be perfect, if the governors possessed perfection. The tragedy of human failure is resident in the fact that no government can be more perfect than the administrators thereof. For this reason men long ago recognized the impossibility of perfect government through monarchies. I do not mean to imply that kings are necessarily bad.

Indeed, the grisly page of past events is often lightened by the transient appearance of kings who were good and godly, and who lived for the benefit of their people.

Such men, however, were followed inevitably by others who were characterized by selfishness and greed, and such bright spots are short and infrequent. Many monarchs who thought and planned for the benefit of their country, have seen their work frustrated and brought to naught because of the character of advisors and administrators through whom they had to deal. I would be perfectly content to live in an unlimited monarchy if both the king, his counsellors, and all of his officials were perfect, unselfish and holy. But because these three ideals have never been accomplished by a man, there is no hope that a human monarch could establish a kingdom that would be satisfactory to every individual within that realm; a government that would never change for the worse.

Under the press of certain circumstances in days gone by, tyrants were unquestionably necessary. The word tyranny did not originally connote oppression, but meant strength and plenary sovereignty. Many of the tyrants of old began their reign in benevolent form. They were gladly received by the people whom they redeemed from oppression and slavery. But in every case, such a reign degenerated rapidly, until the yoke of the tyrant was heavier upon his subjects than the chains from which he had loosed them.

We speak in our present age of democracies as though they were something completely new. That is not quite so.

Both Greece and Rome knew democratic and republican sway. Every form of government that political philosophers can conceive has been tried in the past; and found wanting. It is even so in the modern world. The evils of a democracy are unquestionably fewer and easier to bear than the tyranny and suppression possible under other forms of government. Yet that man would be blinded indeed to conditions as they are, who said that democracy had given the earth a perfect government in our day and time.

One of the oddest and most contradictory forms of dominion that history records is the reign of a dictator. I do not know of a single exception to the modern condition, namely, that dictatorships have always been established for benevolent purposes. Most of us can remember something of the condition of Italy before the rise of Fascism. The streets of her cities were crowded with beggars who lined the sidewalk in such droves that it was often necessary for the passing tourist to walk in the street. Visitors to Italy came away disgusted and aggrieved, worn out by the plea of beggars on every hand.

The populace eked out a poverty-stricken existence through labor that was hard, and under conditions that were bleak.

When Mussolini battled his way to power, he changed all this.

He improved the international relations of Italy with other countries, built up a foreign credit, and established factories throughout certain sections of his own land that brought a flood of prosperity to the sunny kingdom. As his prestige increased, he drove the beggars off the streets, put some of them to gainful employment, and erected sanctuaries and hospitals for those who could not work. A fervor of admiration for Mussolini swept over Italy, and the populace conferred upon him the familiar name, “Bountiful Benito.”

No country in modern times ever underwent as astonishing a transformation as did Italy in the first six years of Mussolini’s dictatorship. Every great rock on the countryside, every fence and barn along the highway, bore the painted inscription: “Viva Duce,” as the happiness of the people sought for expression.

Whenever he rode abroad cheering multitudes thronged the way, and beyond question he was the most popular man in Europe in his day. Every Italian to whom we talked, in all parts of Italy, was loud and sincere in his praises of the great dictator.

Contrast his golden period with the drabness of his lot at the moment this is written. His empire scattered, his armies defeated; an ally who is a worse foe than his declared and legal enemies ever could be, possesses the reins of authority, himself dethroned and arrested!

We saw the dictatorship of Mussolini pass through every phase which is common to the collapse of that type of government.

What has here been written of Italy, would apply with equal force to Germany, and with greater pertinence to Russia. Scripturally intelligent men have given up hope of erecting a perfect state of government through imperfect administrators. This is inevitable for two reasons: the first is that the earth is in a state of rebellion. Men forget the significance of the statement of Jesus—”All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.” Our Lord possesses the authority to delegate certain of His powers to chosen representatives, but no man has any authority either human or divine, to acquire for himself the power that belongs to Jesus Christ. Of all the instincts that sway men, and of all the glittering guerdons that attract them, none is more alluring than power. Men get drunk on power quicker and more often than they do on wine. Rare indeed in the history of human government is the person who could become possessed of unlimited power and remain normal, sane and serene in its use. Always the possessor of power abuses it and diverts it

from its natural end.

Power is conferred upon the creatures of God for the single purpose of making them capable of serving Him. When it is diverted to some other course or object, it becomes a curse to its possessor and inevitably destroys him.

The classical example is seen in the experience of Lucifer, the arch rebel, the chief enemy of God, and the malignant foe of man. It is folly to dogmatize about the details of Lucifer’s experience, as the Scriptures shed only occasional light upon the episodes of his career. We can state with assurance, however, because God has made this much plain, that this archangel was at one time elevated to such a place of power he was the most influential servant in the realm of God. So great was his authority, it bred in his mind a vicious ambition which moved him to attempt to usurp the government of the universe itself. He said in his heart, “I will ascend to the crest of the mount of the congregation of God; I will put my throne above that of the Creator; I will be the equal of the most high God.” Hurled from his high place by judgment upon this rebellion, Satan has been used of God to demonstrate an eternal principle. No creature can violate and abuse delegated power and not suffer therefor. But because of the malignancy of his nature, it has ever been Satan’s technique to tempt and destroy such humans as possess power, by inducing them to excesses in its use.

It is a tragic fact that few men can bear power with dignity and balance. They forget God when they feel strong in their own might.

So as long as the earth is in rebellion, and a usurper possesses the center of earthly power, it is pure folly to talk of a perfect form of human government.

The second reason that this is so, is a grisly fact called sinful nature. If it were not so tragic, it would be comical to watch the great thinkers and political philosophers of the earth tinkering with everything which is not the cause of our present failure! The collapse of government is not resident in inadequate codes of law. From the clays of Hammurabi to the present hour, men have sought to better their condition by making laws more stringent and all-embracing. If the time spent in concocting law and the money expended in printing it, could have been diverted in one generation to the evangelization of the lost, it would have gone far to spread the Kingdom of God in the hearts of men. Perfect laws cannot be drawn up by imperfect lawmakers! Even if they could, they would have to be administered by venal lawenforcers. Perfect laws interpreted and applied by imperfect courts would not redeem the world from its present tragic state.

It is equally fallacious to argue that our present trouble stems from a wrong system of government. We are on the threshold of new attempts to erect super governmental bodies, under the mistaken theory that anything which is big enough must work. With no attempt to change human nature, and utterly ignoring nationalistic ambitions, we are about to embark again on a “League of Notions” that is designated to become a more colossal “flop” than was the late lamented League of recent memories. But it is not systems of government which are wrong in earth’s present cycle.

Nor is it the set-up of social forces. In this sphere also we have seen every conceivable philosophy applied, from governmental paternalism to sheer communism. We have watched socialism have its day and break upon the rock of human greed. It is not true that all men are born free and equal. Some men are born under the tyranny of conditions which determine their maximum achievements for the balance of their days. Men are not born equal in the possession of gifts, and talents, and capabilities. Not all men can design new machines. Some have to build them. Not all men can paint matchless scenes, some have to buy them and support the painter.

If, by some miracle not presently comprehended, it were possible to divide the wealth of the world so that every living soul had an equal share of earth’s present treasure, within ten years I would again be as poor as I am today, and Rockefeller and Morgan would have re-achieved their present status. It is folly for men to hope to save the world by changing economic conditions, and tinkering with details. As well might a surgeon hope to cure a cancer by treating the headache which is one of its symptoms.

The thing that needs changing in this dark world is the sinful heart of man. Out of this dread fountain there stems all that is wrong in human relations. God has filled this earth with every good and perfect thing that man can need. He has provided it in such abundance that there is more than plenty for all. It is the selfishness and lust of the hearts of the few which result in hunger on the part of the many. There is beauty and grace in the entire creation, but the perverted heart of man twists these gifts of God into objects of lust and indulgence, violating the very purpose of creation.

The builders of the New World each are erecting their gossamer structures upon a rotten foundation. Share the wealth, and in a few years the few will have it all back again.

Revise political trends and give power to the oppressed, and they quickly become the oppressors!

The only hope for the world in the future is to change the nature of its inhabitants!

There are many today who talk about the indispensable man.

They say that the only cure for war and distress is for one man, possessing brains and genius for a perfect rule, to be given power to dominate all races.

To that principle we agree.

The hope of the world is in a world ruler, but that One must be omnipotent!

The people of God who believe the Scriptures and who know the completion of the magnificence of Jesus, have this hope to sustain their courage:—that Man is on the way! The day will dawn when such a King will arise, for Jesus is coming again. It is not in vain that men in all ages have dreamed of that time when the earth will have peace, happiness and prosperity for a long, unbroken span. Those who read the Scripture with faith and understanding know the length of that promised reign. For a thousand years, a Son of David will reign from a throne in Jerusalem. In His day and time war shall cease, and contentment shall be the lot of all who are privileged to share the prosperity and blessing of that golden millennium.

Search the pages of history, read the dreams of philosophy, choose from systems of economy the highest and best principles of each, mold these into one philosophy of government; and you are still far short of the perfection of the reign of that promised King who is the Son of God! Jesus is destined to reign for almost innumerable reasons.

There is a matchless description of this coming King encompassed in this brief paragraph: “. . . until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ: which in His times He shall show who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; which no man hath seen or can see: to Whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.”

Note from this description that He is called the blessed and only Potentate. I have frequently been moved to admiration of the unconscious honesty of the long succession of monarchs who have reigned in Great Britain.

Upon their seal or somewhere around the crest, on the foundations of their throne, or upon the coin of their realm, they have never failed to engrave these words, “By the grace of God, king.” Whether the sentiment is expressed consciously or unconsciously, it is the acme of truth. A human being, seated in a place of dominion, is there by the grace of God. The very breath which keeps him alive for the span of his reign, he draws by the sufferance of God. The food that he eats, the water he drinks, and the clothing that garbs his royal form, these he receives from the hand of God as certainly as does the humblest beggar of his realm. At any moment that it pleases the Almighty, He can unseat earth’s most powerful ruler and raise a humble unknown peasant in his stead. Men reign by the grace of God. But Jesus Christ is inherently royal.

Power was not conferred upon Him; it is His by nature. His sway cannot be interrupted by death—He met death once and put it under His feet.

No man fears a conquered foe who has been robbed of all its power. Far less need Christ the King contemplate the possibility of failure through death.

For He Who at present shares the throne of God, is destined to have one of His own. Indeed, this is the exact promise God made to Jesus when He said to His Son: “Sit thou on my right hand until I make thine enemies a footstool for thy feet.”

So the first statement in our text is that Jesus, in His royal aspect, differs from every earthly monarch, in that He is the blessed and only Potentate and possesses royal power by nature.

The second difference that the text emphasized is in His complete supremacy. The exact wording of the Scripture says, “All other monarchs shall some day do homage to him.”

In His day He shall show who is the King of kings and demonstrate who is the Lord of lords!

Such names speak of universal dominion. So vast is this earth, it must be divided into continents for man’s convenience. Such wide spheres as continents are still too extensive for man to handle, so we divide the continents into countries, and people them with various races and nations. No human being could prevail to reign over the entire planet.

But when Christ enters into His office as King, all other reigning sovereigns shall prostrate themselves before Him and surrender their dominions.

At the same time He shall not give up His sway over heaven, for Christ is a Potentate of sufficient ability to center the universe in Himself. So the text says, “He is the blessed and only potentate.” Because He is Himself a blessing, He is the source of all blessing to others.

Thus the magnificence of Jesus, when He appears as King, will dawn upon those who receive from Him every good and perfect thing that the wisdom of God is capable of conceiving for mankind.

Perhaps the most significant phrase in that text depicts King Jesus as a monarch Who alone hath immortality.

Immortality may be conferred on others from one who previously possessed it, but Jesus Christ alone has it to give. It

may be received by regeneration, but it is in Christ by nature. Immortality in Jesus’ own essential divine essence. Happy are those who are subject to such a king!

Then the text produces a paradox. It states that He dwells in unapproachable splendor. He is surrounded by a light which no man can approach.

Light is His habitation. Therefore hath no man seen Him at any time, and no man can see Him. Are we then to expect a king who shall forever remain invisible?

This cannot be, for parallel Scriptures state that Jesus shall come back to the earth in a visible and bodily form.

As the eyes of men saw Him departing from the Mount of Olives so also shall human vision apprehend His return. Such phrases at this, “They shall look upon Him Whom they have pierced,” and “Every eye shall behold Him,” clearly teach that the return of Jesus and His subsequent reign will partake of a reality apprehendable by the function of human vision.

How then can we understand this paradox? Perhaps by applying the illustration that is suggested in its very structure.

Our life today is derived from the sun. If the hand of God should blot out this glowing orb, within days life would disappear from the planet earth. But no man has approached the light of the sun. While it is the source of life, to draw near it is inevitable death.

It is equally true that no man can see the sun. You say, “I have seen it often,” but if you stop and think you will admit that you only saw its light, and only a tiny portion of a very small fraction of that! If you take one long look at the sun and really see it, you will never use your eyes again. No man can see the sun, and human flesh cannot bear its rays in close proximity.

In exactly that same sense, this paradox of Jesus may be comprehended.

He Who is the Sun of Righteousness, at present lights the world. Being enshrouded in glory and sharing the seat of God in heaven, Jesus is at present too effulgent for near approach. But when He comes again, being manifested in His Kingly office, wearing the body which arose from the grave, and which was seen and felt by men, He can be approached by all who form part of His court and domain. No earthly king can smile with the bright glory of the countenance of Him Who is the blessed and only Potentate.

He is indeed the King to Whom monarchs shall submit and the Lord Whom all other lords shall serve.

We do not mean to imply that the royalty of Jesus depends upon His return. He is a king now—howbeit a king in exile.

A usurper is temporarily seated upon His throne. This world does not belong by right to Satan, and some day its legal Lord will wrest it from the hand and power of its temporary ruler. It is only because of the grace of God that Jesus has not already returned, to assume His rightful place as the Son of David in the royal city of Jerusalem. He delays His coming until the Holy Spirit shall have had sufficient time to make an offer of mercy and grace to all who shall have the intelligence to accept Christ as Saviour, that they may afterward share in the glory of His reign.

In the meantime, He is home in His own country, sharing His Father’s throne, and busily preparing for His return with a conquering army of invincible might. So vast is the unlimited power of Jesus, and so magnificent is He in the application of that power, that He still has time to care for all His loyal earthly adherents while His Kingdom is being gathered and prepared.

So while we speak of our advocate in heaven, we occupy an enviable position.

If a British citizen desired to plead a case before his king and could choose any advocate in the realm, I am sure that that citizen would be content to rest his case in the hands of the heir-apparent. We who are citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven possess that priceless privilege. When we go to God our Father, we merely state our case to Christ, Who is the Crown Prince; and He transacts our business with God. Thus, you see, the three offices of Jesus coincide, overlap, and merge, in the office of the Advocate. He is the Prophet who makes God’s will known to men; He is the Priest who is divinely commissioned to transact with God on man’s behalf, and He is also the King whose power is unlimited, and whose will cannot be opposed.

If there is anything stated in the Scripture with clarity and certainty, it is this which Paul calls, “The Blessed Hope.”

Jesus Christ is coming back to this earth to rule and to reign.

The Coming King.

Chapter 4 of The Shadow of Coming Events by Harry Rimmer 1946.

Proverbs and ancient sayings are numerous and varied, and their value may not be considered great by some of the learned in our day. But many of them consist of the distilled experience of the human race for generations past, and there is some truth in most of them. None of these adages,

however, can be more practical and pointed than the simple sentence: “We live and learn!” Indeed, if we do not learn, living has missed its purpose.

In the present series of short studies on prophecy, the writer has reversed his former position on several points of Biblical interpretation. He has not changed his basic premise: to him the Bible is still the infallible Word of the Living God. “Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Spirit of God” is still his only theory of the origin of the Sacred Text. But he has changed his mind radically upon the matter of human deductions that are drawn from that Text. Only God’s Word is infallible — human understanding is subject to error and human interpretations may be far from the divine meaning.

But there is one point where all these years of study and research have not altered the writer’s view, and that is concerning the Scriptural doctrine of the second advent of our Lord Jesus Christ. From a child many of us have sung, “Jesus shall reign where’er the sun, Doth his successive journeys run,” but too few of us have ever searched the prophecies of the Bible to get an adequate and clear conception of just what that reign is to be and how it shall be erected. Quite clearly the text of the Bible unfolds a dominion for King Jesus which must be set up by God’s power, and over which Christ will rule supreme.

To this basic fact most schools of interpretation agree, but as to the nature of that reign and the manner in which it will be inaugurated, there is sad disagreement and confusion. A veritable Babel of tongues and theories bewilders the man of the world as conflicting schools of teaching strive to get their ideas accepted.

Why not wipe out all human interpretations concerning the prophecies, and just read what the Bible says on this matter? This short study is an honest attempt to do just that. After 25 years of Bible study and teaching, I sought honestly to empty my mind of all that I had been taught and had learned from godly and gifted men, and went through the Bible afresh. It could not be possible, of course, for any man, no matter how honest his intention or how definite his effort, to completely cast out all of his understanding on any theme. But I went on one premise, namely, God is honest!

Therefore His words must mean just what they imply. In giving a revelation to men, the primary purpose of the Heavenly Father was that we should understand Him. For that reason the words He sent must have carried the common connotations, and were intended to be explicit and clear. So we read the Bible as we would read history, a scientific treatise, or a financial report. That is to say, black means black and white means white.

Read thus, there is no ground for confusion. For instance, if the Bible says “Jesus is coming again,” we cannot claim that the sentence means that we are going to Him! Of course I believe that when the Christian dies he goes immediately to Christ in the glory —but how can I get that meaning out of the statement that Jesus is coming back to this earth? In other words, in the present study we shall deal honestly with the words of the prophecy.

Words are wonderful things. They open vistas to the mind of man that are utterly limitless. They break hearts, or cause the despondent to sing with joy. An announcement of a birth or the sad news of a death alike are conveyed by words. They are among our most wonderful possessions. But through the centuries they have stood for certain meanings, and a simple regard for truth demands that we treat words as they were intended to be dealt with. Even as God cannot say one thing and mean another, we also should be prevented by honor and integrity from “interpreting” His statements into the opposite of their reasonable and conceded meaning.

So away with commentaries, “Bible Helps” and editorial comments. What saith the Lord on this subject?

Plenty!

His Word contains an amazing amount of references to the Coming King. We shall just turn to the Holy Bible and read those words, and see what God has revealed to men.

It is far from flattering to the human ego, but the fact that we have made a sad failure of every attempt to perfect human government can no longer be ignored. Many and rosy have been the inspired dreams of altruistic men, but in every case the awakening has been rough and rude. Some of the finest plans that wisdom could devise have developed from the co-operation of gifted and brainy men, but all have ended in dismal failure.

The reason is not hard to find: sin has blanketed the conduct of men with fore-ordained disaster.

Any government or form of rule would be perfect, if its administrators were perfect! A king who was sinless and utterly unselfish would be a fine and acceptable sovereign, if he were surrounded and supported by ministers and officers whose sole ambition was to advance the peace, welfare and prosperity of the subjects of their realm. But with such sanctified personnel, an autocracy, a dictatorship, a republic or a pure democracy would be equally successful.

But we face the bleak record of human history convinced by human conduct that such will never be seen in the natural order of humanity.

The earth has seen all possible forms of government except one, and all have proved vain in the end. Thrones have tottered and kings have fallen — the council of the common people has frequently replaced the rule of the aristocrat, to prove equally despotic in the final form. Such is human nature!

Some weeks ago an excited Communist street orator was sounding forth in Columbus Circle, in my home city, and waxed eloquent in his detailed description of the Utopia America would become when “The Revolution” finally came. In his exuberant enthusiasm he finally said, “Why, brothers, after ‘The Revolution’ you’ll all eat strawberries and cream three times a day!”

A young fellow in the forepart of the crowd grinned and said, “But I don’t like strawberries.”

The orator flushed a deep red, and anger made his tones strident. Shaking his fist in the face of the critic, he shouted, “When we are running the country, you’ll eat strawberries, or else!”

The people who are down resent their oppression, and dream of the day when they will be on top, and can in turn oppress! To change the current of human conduct it is necessary to change human nature, and there is no way to do that apart from the Christian experience of regeneration. And the Christian is not interested in the vain attempt to erect a perfect human government, as he knows that God has said that such shall never be. So the Christian rests content in the blessed hope of the Coming King and the kingdom which He shall establish, knowing that earth’s golden age will dawn when Jesus comes back again.

I do not mean that we should not strive for betterment, or that we should not attempt to improve matters as far as we are able. The earth will be happier and conditions will be vastly better to the extent that Christian principles can be introduced into any form of government, but we are far outnumbered.

As fast as we make some seeming progress we find ourselves up against the innate selfishness of man, and all our hard-won gains go by the board.

We have seen in this very day the collapse of France, the once-proud democracy. Made soft by selfindulgence, corroded by Communism, her government undermined by traitors. France made one of the most pitiful and most complete failures ever recorded in history. Her natural greatness leached away by a growing infidelity, betrayed by her leaders, she lay beaten and crushed beneath the heel of a conqueror as pitiless and cruel as the ravaging Assyrians of old!

We have sat in horror and watched the murder of Czecho-Slovakia, the “baby republic” in the family of nations. Peaceful, industrious, prospering and happy, the land was overrun by a band of human wolves, and the people ruthlessly slaughtered and dispersed.

Almost within hours we saw this outrage followed by the rape of Poland. The thunder of the guns which blasted that government out of existence has hardly ceased to echo in our ears. The only reason that the shock of this dastardly outrage has somewhat dimmed, is the greater horror over the spread of savagery to all of Europe, the Balkan States, the Mediterranean world, and the vast continent of Africa!

So we watched every bulwark that humanity had erected for the safeguard of civilization blasted away, and conceded that it was only a matter of time until we found our own fair land embroiled in the world conflict. We armed ourselves for a battle we believed to be inevitable, and drafted our man-power to defend a diminishing Democracy with every resource at our disposal. And even as we thus prepared, we were conscious of the fact that Democracy is doomed!

In the third chapter in this series, we showed that God’s warning has fore-told that the last form of human government would be a League of Ten Nations, dominated by a dictator of such fierce character that he is called “The Man of Sin!” It is true that this League and the Dictator will be

overthrown and followed by a super-human government, but purely human rule shall culminate in bleak tragedy and despotism.

The trend to totalitarianism is apparent, even in our own United States. In the face of one emergency after another our Congress surrendered its powers and resigned its authority, until our government in practice became but a shadow of what it is presumed to be in theory. And this condition will increase as the days pass, until to all intents and purposes the bureaucracies which govern us now with a form of democracy, lay aside the mask and appear in their proper guise as masters. In any crisis, power tends to centralize in a strong man or in super-men. In war or in depression, in revolution or in disaster, the cumbersome machinery of democratic self-government must give way to the speedy efficiency of a centralized power.

Add to this black political picture the further fact that our other defences for civilization are equally useless, and the future looks tragic indeed. We have apparently relapsed into the sad state which God condemned when He said: “And even as, they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting: being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, hateful of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding (i.e. steeped in moral obliquity) covenant breakers, without natural affection, unmerciful: Who, knowing the ordinance of God that they that practice such things are worthy of death not only do the same, but also consent with them that practice them.”

Could there be a more accurate or more honest summary of the age in which we now live? The black indictment applies with equal force to individuals or to governments. Apply that horrible list of adjectives to some of the greatest powers on earth today and see how guilty the present generation appears.

“Murder, strife, deceit, covetousness, covenant breakers,” are among the milder specifications, yet they are such crimes as turn God against men. Who regards treaties as sacred in this “enlightened” age?

Who does not covet his neighbors’ fields, factories and possessions? Who gives his word and keeps it at any cost to himself? You will seek far to find an individual or a system of political rule which is absolutely innocent of the sins charged in that list!

Men fondly dreamed that the tide of barbarism could be held back by bulwarks of righteousness and ramparts of covenants, but civilization is all but buried beneath the flood of animalism that has swept aside these pitiful barriers. Education, philosophy, the “brotherhood of man” and all the roseate schemes for peace and understanding have been blasted away in the thunder of guns and the weird shriek of dive bombers. The sweet song of the new day has been drowned out in the wail of suffering women and the cry of orphaned and blasted babies. Never has the earth known a more pitiless deluge of blood and suffering than our generation has experienced. No longer do armed men in the field or in the fleet bear the first shock of battle — it is the aged and the new-born who pay with life and limb in the modern warfare of the “enlightened” and “scientific” age of atomic destruction.

All of this should have been expected. The prophecies of God’s Word consistently warned us of this very condition. But men who knew better, and who were utterly intolerant of any viewpoint but their own optimistic, Pollyanna plans, taught the world to laugh at the Bible and scoff at its prophecies, because such gloomy forecasts did not agree with the “new order” that men were bringing to pass. We who clung to the Bible and stoutly maintained its infallibility, were sneered at in public, persecuted by the apostate leaders of the great Protestant denominations, and called such names as “obscurantists” and “Fundamentalists”! Alas, we have lived to see our melancholy forebodings enacted into realities, and all of our warnings justified.

How I wish we had been wrong! By that I mean that I, also, would be ineffably delighted if peace and good-will could flood the earth, and the brotherhood of man be made a working reality. But since the Bible solemnly warns that such can never be, my natural realism forces me to acknowledge the vanity of the hope. I know that instead of improvement in the relations of men and nations, the situation

will wax worse and worse.

A few weeks ago I was on the program of one of America’s largest educational gatherings, and spoke several times to the thousands of teachers gathered in the convention. In one of my lectures to these educators, I called attention to this prophesied failure of human government. When the session was over, a professor sought me out and said, “Doctor, a few years ago I would have laughed at you and your views as expressed on the platform today, but now, alas, I am forced to concede the wisdom and truth of what you have said. Events have certainly justified you. But in the face of all this, what are we to expect? Is there no hope for a better age?”

“Indeed,” I replied. “There is more than just a hope. There is a positive promise, an assurance by God — that the end of the matter will be glorious. The same prophets who so accurately described the sad debacle of human hope and efforts, also have stated in clear and unmistakable words that our Lord Jesus Christ is coming again to reign over the earth. What sinful men cannot accomplish by their own efforts, Jesus will establish by His power.”

Then I told him in some detail the promises of God’s Word, and sketched for him the broad outlines of the blessed hope. But as I unfolded to him the teachings of the Bible, his skepticism gave way to impatience, and he dismissed the entire subject with the brusque remark — “I never heard of such nonsense!”

Thus ever human wisdom! The Word of God is vindicated again and again by the march of events, but still they scorn its light. -Not willing to have God in their knowledge” is as true of world-leaders today as it was in the days of the Apostle Paul, or in the generation of Noah. * * * In the preceding chapter of this series, we showed that in the puzzling imagery of Daniel’s words, two points emerge upon which we may rest with justified and dogmatic assurance. The first is Daniel’s statement that Nebuchadnezzar and his kingdom constitute the golden head of the image the king saw in his dream. The second point of unquestionable certainty is found in Daniel’s words: “And in their days of those kings shall the God of Heaven set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed, nor shall the sovereignty thereof be left to some other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.

Forasmuch as thou didst see that a stone was cut out of the mountain without the aid of hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver and the gold; the Great God hath made known unto the king what things shall come to pass hereafter.”

These words are clear and explicit and need no interpretation. Even as God revealed to Daniel and through him to the Babylonian king the fact that other monarchs and peoples should one day dispossess the Chaldeans of their dominion, so he also foretold that the last kingdom that our race would know was to be the “Kingdom of the Smiting Stone.”

Human government is to give way to a Theocracy: “the God of Heaven shall set up a kingdom . . .” Can words be any clearer than that? Scholarly dishonesty, so often applied with consummate ingenuity to the confusion of Christian understanding, cannot change the fact that the prophecy has to do with forms of government. The same exact, specific meaning that attaches to the word “kingdom” when a man named Nebuchadnezzar (or Cyrus, or Darius) is governing his fellow men applies to that identical word when it is used of the political dominion which God shall one day establish. “Kingdom” means the same whether it is attached to the qualifying term Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Roman, or Heavenly! Even as Rome once established political sovereignty over the races of antiquity, so God will establish a physical reign over the races of the future.

To make this matter clear and plain, let us examine the Scripture simply, briefly, and honestly. * * * The Old Testament prophets did foretell an earthly reign for Jesus, when He should come to bring this planet under the sway of obedience to God. And when we say “reign” we mean just what that word has always meant in connection with government. We concede, of course, that Jesus is now enshrined in the hearts of those who love Him and believe in Him as Lord and Savior, but this is not what the Bible

means when it speaks of this reign of Christ. For instance, read again the exact language used in the ninth chapter of Isaiah: “For unto us a Child is born; unto us a Son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will perform this.”

Let us take a close, analytical look at those familiar words and see just what they teach. Isaiah described an event which was historically fulfilled in part, through the miracle of the incarnation of Jesus. “Unto us a child is born” carries us back from our present era to that time of which Luke wrote, when the virgin mother brought forth her first-born son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn. The Child was born indeed, and all history was born anew in that event.

But more than a birth is implied in the following words, “a Son is given.” Here we have the manner in which the very love of God was demonstrated to men, when He gave His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. We know the Child of whom the prophet spoke: we recognize the Son in the person of the Savior.

He is clearly identified when the prophecy states that this coming One shall wear the names of deity and possess the attributes of God. He is called by the holiest names men can use when addressing God; names by which God revealed Himself to the ancients of Israel. For instance, we read in the tenth chapter of Deuteronomy: “For Jehovah your God, He is God of gods, and Lord of lords, the Great God, the Mighty, and the terrible . . .”

Or remember also that when God made Himself known to Abraham, it was in these words: “And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, Jehovah appeared to Abraham and said unto him; I am God Almighty; walk before me and be thou perfect . . .”

The significance of this cannot be missed. When the Child appears, and when the Son has come, He will be known by the name which God revealed to Abraham.

More than this, He is to possess that attribute of deity which makes Him self-existent! A human who can rightly be called “The Everlasting Father” is a strange son of Adam indeed! The mystery of this amazing paradox is easily understood after Jesus had come, and the God-Man had demonstrated His divine origin, nature and purpose. This He did in the miracles He wrought, the death He died, and in His triumph over the tomb.

Thus identified, note that the Coming One is to establish a literal reign. Isaiah uses the exact words, “Of the increase of His government . . .” “and the government shall be upon His shoulder.” The prophecy speaks of a throne, inherited from David. All men know that David had a human company over whom he reigned in a political and actual sense. David never was a priest; being of the family of Judah, he could not officiate in the worship of God. He had no “spiritual” kingdom, he governed the realm, made and enforced laws, levied taxes and commanded armies to defend his subjects and his possessions. Thus, if Jesus is to reign upon or from the throne of David, we must expect an earthly and physical reign.

It is almost comical to note the lengths to which denominational leaders, seminary teachers, and writers of commentaries will go to twist these words out of their natural meaning and “interpret” them to show that Christ only reigns in the hearts of men in a spiritual kingdom.

They tell us that the gospel is going to conquer gradually until all the races of the earth yield in love to Him, and universal peace and brotherhood result.

Then He will be reigning over the earth and all its inhabitants.

There are just three things wrong with this “interpretation.” The first is, we are not doing so well!

The missionary program has been feeble, inadequate and limited at its best, but now it is all but suspended by many Christian nations! The vast fields allotted to German churches are fallen into

neglect: the Scandinavian countries lie helpless and prostrate before a foe who leaves them no time or means for world missions.

Great Britain, engaged in a desperate battle for her very existence could spare neither men, funds nor equipment to extend her part in the gospel conquest. And America spends more every thirty days for cigarettes than she puts into missionary offerings in an entire year! After Russia deported God as an undesirable alien, and Germany turned to neopaganism, Christianity actually lost in the statistical columns. If Jesus has to wait for His kingdom until we mortal Christians convert the world to Him, that kingdom is so far in the future it staggers the imagination to contemplate that distant day.

The second error in this modern idea of a spiritual reign, brought about by the conversion of the heathen (who seem to prefer Mohammed to Christ!) is that Isaiah says it will not be established by human efforts! The prophet says—”The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will accomplish this!” When Jesus reigns in this world of men, His throne will be erected in spite of opposition and by conquest. More of that we shall see later, we now point out the fallacy of this modernistic interpretation. God is going to erect this kingdom, not men.

The third objection to this weird and un-Scriptural teaching is the fact that the New Testament warns us that in the days just before the kingdom of Christ begins, a dark period of apostacy is to sweep over Christendom. Hear the words of the Holy Spirit, as He solemnly warns through the pen of the Apostle Paul: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies through hypocrisy, having their consciences seared as with a hot iron: “This know also, that in the last days grievous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, truce-breakers, slanderers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.”

These grim words are further emphasized by the blunt statement of Jude, the brother of our Lord, who wrote in warning terms: “But beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.”

How then can we expect a gradual conversion of the whole world by the Gospel, when the very text of that Gospel describes the last days of our age in terms of apostacy and failure? Contemplating the termination of the age of Grace, Jesus Himself raised the question, “When the Son of Man comes, will He find the faith in the earth?” Add to this the clear implications of His parables of judgment, and the folly of the modern idea of the Gospel being a leaven which gradually but finally transforms the whole race of man, appears as self-evident. Jesus said that at His coming, tares and wheat would be growing together.

In the dragnet were to be seen good fish and bad, and so on through all of His grave warnings.

Lest you think I have taken one or two isolated texts to prove a point, let me hasten to remind the reader that we could fill pages of this short volume with such quotations. For instance, we have the solemn warning from 2 Thessalonians, chapter two: “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day will not come except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God; so that he asp God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God!” This record is further illumined by the statement made by Peter, in the second chapter of his Second Epistle, where the apostle be gins with the words: “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall

follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.”

From this premise Peter then develops a gloomy theme, using the balance of this Epistle to warn of apostacy and the judgment thereupon. And his only hope is that after that judgment, there shall come a new earth wherein shall dwell righteousness. Nevertheless he insists that failure and punishment shall mark the end of the Gospel era, not triumph and a spiritual kingdom. This obviates the common teaching which shows the Lord Jesus reigning as the result of a long missionary campaign.

And what shall we say of the entire book of Revelation? God closes this message to men with that fearsome warning of plagues and disasters, judgments and dooms, all of which shall come upon a sinful and Christ-rejecting earth. The only way to hold to the idea of a spiritual kingdom, dominating the hearts of the entire human race, is to deny any prophetic significance to the book of Revelation, and say that all of these “figurative” judgments have been fulfilled in past ages. This quaint but popular position is hard to sustain in the light of chapters 20, 21, and 22! As far as we know, there has been no event in past time comparable to the binding of Satan in the abyss! He seems quite active and free just now. The resurrection of the just has not yet occurred, nor has the great white throne been established for the last scene of judgment. The new heavens and the new earth of chapter 21 are certainly still future, as is the new Jerusalem. We are not yet in that restored Eden of chapter 22, and no intelligent and honest commentator can deny that some of this book is prophetic, and refers to future events. And if that is true, who is to say that the promised plagues and punishments, meted out to a generation who are enemies of God, are not also future?

At any rate, the idea that the gospel is to win the earth to Christ, thus fulfilling the promises of a kingdom and a reign for Him, are utterly un-Scriptural. We return to our premise, namely, the prophecies promise a literal, physical, earthly kingdom for the Lord Jesus.

What other kind did David have?

Jesus is to sit “upon the throne of His father, David.”

What other form of government is there?

“The government is to be on His shoulder.” * * * The Messianic prophecies are definite in the extreme, and it is sheer ignorance of the Bible or a willful desire to distort the Scriptures which makes men reject the teaching concerning His return. One of the clearest and most explicit of these Messianic promises is the eleventh chapter of Isaiah. To show the clarity of this revealed program, and something of the nature of Christ’s reign, let us make a simple analysis of that chapter. Such an analysis would develop in this fashion:

ISAIAH, CHAPTER ELEVEN

Theme: The Coming King and His Reign.

Writer: The Prophet Isaiah.

Date: About B.C. 713.

Occasion: To Encourage the People, in the Face of a Threatened Invasion.

1. The Coming Redeemer (verse one).

“And there shall come forth a living shoot out of the stump of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots.”

2. The Character of the Redeemer (Isa.11:2-5).

“And the Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord; and shall make Him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord; and He shall not judge after the sight of His eyes, nor reprove after the hearing of His ears: but with righteousness shall He judge the poor, and contend with equity for the meek of the earth: and He shall smite the earth with the rod of His mouth, and with the breath of His

lips shall He slay the wicked. And righteousness shall be the girdle of His loins, and faithfulness the girdle of His reins.”

3. The Nature of His Reign (Isa.11:6-9).

“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 fading together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the suckling child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand in the adder’s den. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain; for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.”

4. The Universal Extent of that Reign (Isa.11:10).

“And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and His rest shall be glorious.”

5. Victorious Israel Shall Be Regathered (Isa.11:11-14).

“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord will set His hand again the second time to recover the remnant of His people, which shall be left, from Assyria and from Egypt, and from Pathros and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea. And He shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four quarters of the earth. The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim. But they shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west, and they shall spoil the children of the east together, they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon shall obey them.”

6. Certain Geographical Changes to be Made (Isa.11:15-16).

“And the Lord shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with His mighty wind shall He shake His hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make men go over dryshod. And there shall be an highway for the remnant of His people, which shall be left, from Assyria; like as it was to Israel in the day that he came up out of the land of Egypt.”

Of course, a complete analysis of this prophecy is beyond the scope of so short a study as this one must be, but certain facts demand emphasis. It is frequently argued that all of these prophecies are figurative and cast in poetic expression and therefore must be interpreted into their actual meaning.

Even if that were so, a “figure” is a method of expressing abstract ideas by words which suggest pictures or images from the physical world. But an accurate and honest use of figurative language demands that the concrete figure used shall convey a true and correct conception of the abstract idea. Hence, it would be fundamentally dishonest for the prophet to use the terms “throne,” “government,” “reign,” and kindred forms, if the actuality of which he speaks is only a spiritual or mental sway.

Note first the accuracy of Isaiah’s statement concerning the genealogy of the Coming One. He states that out of the stump of Jesse, a living shoot shall emerge. The figure is taken from the culture of the fig tree, so common in the land where the prophet lived. If a barren fig tree is cut back, the wound covered with grafting paste and protected, out of the roots will spring up a new shoot which will be alive and fruitful.

We know that Jesse was the son of Obed, the grand-son of Boaz, and the father of King David.

Since the physical throne of Israel descends through the family of David, the House of Jesse then stands for the kingly line. “Jesse” flourished as long as a descendant of his line sat upon a throne. The last such king was the ill-starred Zedekiah, who violated his sacred oath, and, against the stern warning of the prophet Jeremiah, made a fatal alliance with Egypt. As a result the tragic two years of war followed, Zedekiah was compelled to watch the execution of his entire family by the sword, and he himself was carried captive to Babylon. Since then Jesse has been a “stump” and there has been no life apparent in the ancient tree.

But the roots remained alive, and God has promised that a new “shoot” shall spring forth from that slumbering stump. This can only mean that a king shall yet reign, of the lineage of Jesse, of the tribe of Judah and the family of David. Now consult the genealogy of Jesus, and confirm once again your knowledge of the fact that our Lord is of the family of Jesse, through His mother, Mary. So our first premise in the prophecy is established—the figure of speech does mean that another Hebrew king is yet to reign. All of this is both implied and stated in the first verse of Isaiah, in chapter eleven.

Incidentally, the identification of the promised king is aided by the fact that the name “Branch” is used elsewhere in Old Testament prophecies to portray Jesus the Messiah. Jeremiah uses this name, as does also Zechariah. In the book of Jeremiah we read: “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; and this is His name whereby He shall be called: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” We shall refer later to the Messianic application of this verse, we merely introduce it here to establish the fact that the Person known as “the Branch” is to bear names that are peculiar to deity. The holiest name of God is conferred upon Him by Jeremiah, and divine attributes, such as “RIGHTEOUSNESS” are ascribed to Him. So Isaiah and Jeremiah are in agreement and harmony on this point at least.

Many years later, when the remnant of Israel had returned from captivity and was engaged in rebuilding in Palestine under the government of alien powers, the prophet Zechariah also promised them that they would some day have their own king. He also called the Coming One by the name “The Branch”, and referred to Him as One who would be manifested as God. But even without this further light, we do not need to question the identity of this Coming King of Isaiah’s song; He is adequately described in verses two to five in this chapter of Isaiah.

Verse two tells of the source of His power, in these words: “The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him.” That is sufficient to establish His nature and accredit His Person, as we have had no human monarch since the age of the prophets who reigned in and by the power of the Holy Ghost!

Verses three to five tell of the application of this power which the Coming King shall make to the lives of His subjects, and this gives us a good idea of the quaintness of that reign. How odd a conception for human historians to contemplate; that a King shall use his vast powers for the poor and the meek, rather than for the rich and the powerful! Certainly we have not yet known of such a monarch!

Yet with all this, He is to smite where punishment is due, and His enemies shall perish by the very words of His condemnation. What a strange, yet awe-inspiring figure begins to emerge from the Scripture which tells of His character and His rule!

The picture grows more complicated and even more wonderful as we read of the nature of that reign. Verses six to nine tell us that even the wild animals of the earth shall be converted at His ascension, and shall revert to the conditions of life which prevailed in Eden. Imagine a King of such power that He shall change the very nature of ravening beasts! These wild enemies of man shall become his friends and pets, and the spilling of blood will cease during Christ’s rule.

Shall we try to evade the many difficulties which this idea raises in the modern mind, by the cowardly subterfuge of calling it all “figurative,” and therefore subject to any interpretation which shall fit the individual mind: or shall we face those problems honestly and seek to find further light upon them? If we decide on the former, as the easier way, we must be prepared to state what it is that the figure portrays. The most extreme contrasts are here pictured, as the lion and the fatling, the calf and the bear all sharing one bed! The lamb is the natural prey of the wolf: if they two “lie down” together now, the lamb is inside the wolf! The African hunter knows what splendid leopard bait the kid is, and here they are portrayed as being chums.

To effect such an amazing reversal of what we call the natural order, the very nature of these animals will have to be transformed. Indeed, the prophet goes so far as to say that babies shall play with serpents whose very names are now synonymous with suffering and death. If all of this is figurative, what does it picture? What is the fact behind the imagery?

But if the prophecy refers to an express condition, we may seek more light upon it. For instance, there is the forecast given by the New Testament, in Rom. 8:19-23, where we read: “For the earnest expectation of the creation waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creation was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who subjected the same in hope. Because the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.”

Add to these strange words the statement of Gen. 1:29-30, and we begin to see some sense in the prophecy of Isaiah, and have an inkling of the nature of the coming kingdom. At the end of the week of creation, Moses records that God said: “And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.”

Put these two together, and we have a basis of understanding. In the days of Eden, when man and all creation were strangers to sin, no creature slew another living thing for daily food. Because of sin, the rule was changed, and the creation has “groaned” under this bondage of death and blood ever since. But when Jesus returns, and the will of God is done on earth even as it is in heaven, the animal realm will revert to the dietary practices of Eden. So says Isaiah, and he speaks with the authority of the Spirit of God. What an age that will be!

Years ago, when all of my children were small, I asked my five-year-old daughter what she wanted for Christmas. Without a second’s hesitation, she said, “A baby lion!”

I wasn’t surprised, as all of her life she has loved all living things. Our home has been a sort of menagerie ever since I can remember.

Snakes and lizards, tame skunks, dogs, cats, horses, alligators and horned toads—we have had open house for and to them all. But a baby lion was going too far, so I said, “Well, darling, I’d like to get you one. But you know lions come from Africa, and we live in California. I can hardly go to Africa and get you one for Christmas!”

“You don’t have to,” my daughter replied. “There is a lion farm out near El Monte. We went there last week, and saw them all getting fed.

They had lots of baby ones, and I want one.”

I tried to reason. I said, “Dear, I’d like a baby lion myself. They are awfully cute, but the trouble is they don’t stay babies! In a few months it will grow so big it would scratch the furniture and tear up the rugs, and in a year or so it’ll want to eat us! Then we’d have to give it to the circus or shoot it, and we would be sad to lose it after we had raised it.

I can’t give you a baby lion for Christmas, but I’ll give you anything else you want.”

Quick as a flash she answered: “Then I’ll take a baby tiger!”

I knew that I was stuck—so I sat down and told her of an age that is to be, and of a Coming King.

I read her Isaiah’s great prophecy, and told her that the King, when He came, would change animal nature and restore the conditions that prevailed in the garden of Eden. When that had been accomplished, I assured her, she could have both a lion and a tiger, and a bear and a leopard as well. “A little child shall lead them” is a very definite promise, but before that can be so, a tremendous change must be wrought in the very wild beasts of the earth.

Can this transfiguration be brought about by the preaching of the gospel? Can it be effected by the practice of the “Golden Rule” or by adherence to the precepts of the “Sermon on the Mount”? The very idea is silly.

The “Brotherhood of Man and the Fatherhood of God” could conceivably reconstruct society — but by no stretch of the imagination can we claim that it would also metamorphose the ravening

beasts of the earth into friendly, grass-eating pets for the children! So we must either admit that Isaiah is prophesying a physical reign in a changed earth, or confess that we simply repudiate any belief in the authority of his words. In that case, we stand convicted of dogmatism and willful unbelief.

It is to be noted also that the further analysis pictures a universal domain. The words of verse 10 draw a sharp line of distinction between two groups of people. The phrase “the people” in Hebrew writings always refer to the children of Abraham: the rest of us are “the nations.” In the Hebrew text the original word is “goi” and in our English translation this word is rendered Gentiles, 30 times; heathen, 142 times; and nations, 373 times. The Hebrew word “am” is translated also by the English word nation, but it appears only 17 times in the Old Testament text. But “am” is translated “people” 1,835 times.

Occasionally it is qualified, as by the phrase “every people,” but when it is rendered “the people” it means Israel.

Thus the words of Isaiah convey a startling reversal of present governmental trends. World dominion rests in Gentile hands, and in most, if not in all great countries, the Jew is tolerated at best.

He resides by sufferance and by grace of Gentile permission even in his own land of Palestine, and that only in limited numbers sharply restricted by stern laws.

But when Christ triumphs, and His kingdom is erected, it will be centered in Jewish. or Hebrew interests, and the Gentiles shall seek shelter therein, and come by sufferance into the citizenship thereof!

How is this to be brought about by the ministry of the Gospel? Missionaries could labor another ten thousand years, preaching grace and redemption to all nations, but that would in no wise offset the trend of world rule. Something drastic and dramatic has to happen to fulfill these very exact words of God’s promise, and unless Isaiah really has revealed a future event, there is no conceivable way in which world dominion will be centered in a Hebrew line, city, or regime.

This cannot be brought about by the recognized abilities of the Jewish people in financial wizardry. Germany proved that. When enough wealth is concentrated in Jewish hands to make the effort worth while, some pragmatic and powerful robber will always rise to despoil them.

It cannot be done by a spread of Jewish culture. Hitler proved that also. As soon as enough Jews are in the teaching centers of a Gentile nation to effect the current of culture, it becomes unlawful for a Jew to hold a seat of learning any longer! The recent black tragedy of Europe demonstrated that.

And make no mistake about this point; there will always be Hitlers, Mussolinis and Stalins as long as man is in control and force is supreme. Our only hope is the blessed hope, that Christ shall return and transform the world by the power and authority which He shall wield.

The significance of the prophecy of Isaiah becomes even clearer as we ponder verses eleven to fourteen. When the reign begins, of which the Scripture speaks, the Jew will no longer be homeless and a wanderer. He shall not be scattered among all nations, tolerated in limited numbers in his own homeland. No, in that day the dispersed of Abraham’s seed shall be gathered together from all nations, and from every point of the compass. They are pictured as being victorious over their ancient enemies, and abundantly capable of self-defense if need be. A victorious, united, re-gathered people, they will be a nation once again, and will dwell by right in their own land. Words could not be plainer, nor could meaning be clearer. God has promised certain things in this prophecy, and all the “spiritualizing,” “interpreting,” or “allegorizing” of which crooked and deceitful teachers are capable cannot twist those concrete promises into any other meanings!

Especially is this so when we note that the eleventh chapter of Isaiah does not stand alone, but is supported by other Old Testament prophecies equally specific. We have reference to one such, in Jeremiah 33:15, which we have cited before. We repeat it here to refresh your memory with these words: “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; and this is His name whereby He shall be called: THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.” An honest exegesis of that verse will show certain plain facts to be the intended teaching of this promise. First, a King is certainly coming! Not in some mystical or spiritual sense, but He is to reign and prosper, and to “execute judgment and justice” in the earth. It is conceded that Jesus, of whom this

prophecy admittedly speaks, does reign, in a limited sense, in the hearts of His people. But has that resulted in the establishment of righteousness and justice in the earth? You know it hasn’t. Never have wrong and injustice been more strongly intrenched than at the beginning of this year of 1946. We have high hopes, of course, that they will be repressed and chained again. But even if they are, we are sadly aware from bitter experience that they will soon break forth again. Vicious power and lust for conquest cannot be educated out of human nature — only by regeneration can men be changed. The 20th century has witnessed the worst relapses into brutality that history has yet recorded, and after all these centuries of culture, teaching, philosophy and evangelism, we are farther from world peace and human brotherhood than we have ever been before. The reign of righteousness and justice will not be established by the slow leaven of the gospel. It waits for the revelation of the Mighty One who is to come!

The second inescapable fact in this text is that the Coming One is to be of Jesse’s House. “I will raise unto David a righteous Branch” cannot be misunderstood. Remember that Zechariah also wrote of Him at least two generations after the sad fate of Zedekiah, the last descendant of David who ever occupied a throne. None such has been crowned in any land since these words were written, therefore any fulfillment of them must still be a future event.

The third point to note is that this Son of David is to have a physical dominion. His execution of the administrative power is to be “In the earth.” So thus it is to be a throne in a literal and real sense, and its power is to be world-wide. Not in part of the earth, or in the land of Israel alone shall His authority extend; the entire planet is to be the sphere of His dominion. So the Lord who rules heaven now, will some day conquer and add the rebellious earth to His realm, and finish the mystery of sin by the conquest thereof on the scene of its long and evil record.

Then note the next item, that His reign will be characterized by the safety and security of the Jew. “In His days Israel shall be saved, and Judah shall dwell safely.” Surely that phase of world history is in the future!

This is a condition every Christian prays for, but when has it ever been? Review in your mind the sad history of the earth’s most persecuted race, and seek for a time when they have known security and peace!

For a brief day in Solomon’s rule prosperity was theirs, but the children of those who knew Solomon groaned in slavery, and knew the shock of battle and the dark grief which comes to the despoiled. For a decade or two at most the Jew has had an occasional rest from spite and suffering, but these periods have been few and short.

But a brighter day is ahead! When the Coming King establishes His government, it will be distinguished by this historically unique fact — Israel shall have peace and security for His entire reign.

Again authenticating Isaiah, Jeremiah clearly identifies this great monarch who is yet to be, when he says, “And this is His name whereby He shall be called, ‘THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.’ “ You will notice that your English version of the Bible prints this entire Name in capital letters. This is done to draw the attention of the reader to the sacred nature of the holy Name used in the Text. We translate the Hebrew word by the English form “Jehovah” in the American Revised Version; but the familiar form of the Authorized, or King James version, uses the term “LORD GOD.” The designation implying holiness, which is the chief attribute of God, is added to the Name in Jeremiah’s text, thus emphasizing the thought that a divine King is in view in the prophecy.

This section of Jeremiah is really a repetition of chapter 23, verses 5 to 8, and the message is thus repeated for additional confirmation. The form is similar in each enunciation of the prophecy, but the nature of the reign is stressed in the earlier utterance, and the deity of the King in the latter statement.

So in the former sentence the emphasis is on “and He shall reign as king and deal wisely.” This positive declaration obviates the possibility that the kingdom may be merely mystical or spiritual, it attests an actual physical domain.

Of course there have been many rulers who have manifested restraint, wisdom and benevolence in their practice of power. There have been kings who were godly and lived righteously, but the earth has yet to see such a King as this promise portrays. One who is righteousness rather than one who possesses or exercises it!

Vain and proud men have called themselves by high-sounding names, vaunting their own greatness. There have been many “Mighty and Universal Potentates,” “Kings of Kings” and “Lords of Lords” — but never has the earth seen a ruler who can be justly called “THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS”!

It is manifestly impossible to exhaust the list of Old Testament prophecies concerning the Coming King in so short and simple a study, these are picked almost at random from many. The Messianic Psalms themselves alone provide material for volumes of study. The words of Ezekiel by themselves make a complete case. The thrilling shout of Zechariah is quite sufficient to stir the heart and inform the mind, even if it stood alone. Added together, the voices of prophecy constitute an amazing body of divine promises, all of which justify us in looking for the redemption of God’s pledges and assurances, in the person of the Coming King. * * * No revelation, doctrine or system of teaching in the Old Testament can be fully comprehended until it has been correlated and integrated with the comparable records of the New Testament.

Together, the two books form the inter-locking halves of one perfect whole, and it is poor scholarship to decide any problem on the basis of half the evidence. It may be said that the seed of all New Testament truth is found in the Old Testament text. But if that is true, it is equally accurate to say that all truth revealed in the New Testament is concealed in the Old Testament. In a word, the flower of revelation which blossomed from Moses to Malachi has come to its fruit in the records from Matthew to Revelation.

Therefore there can be no contradiction between the teachings of these two sections of God’s Word, as one must merely complement the other.

The theme of the Old Testament is “Someone is coming.” Every prophet of the ancient times looked forward through time to the Coming One. Moses began the theme when he wrote, “The Seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head,” and Malachi closed the continued reiteration joined in by all the prophets, when he told of the Sun of Righteousness which should arise, with healing in His rays.

But the New Testament has two themes, both of them centering in one Person. The first theme may be “Someone has come!” This, indeed, is borne out by Philip, who sought out Nathanael with the startling greeting, “Come and see! We have found Him, of whom Moses in the Law, and the prophets did write!” He did indeed come, but the tragedy of His rejection remains as the vilest blot upon the page of human activities. Rejected, cast out, and crucified, He ascended back into heaven, from whence He had come.

Then follows the second theme of the New Testament, which may be tersely stated as “Someone is coming again!” Thus the entire Scripture centers in the Person of One who was to come, who did come, and who is coming again. He is the Coming King of Old Testament promise, and is the object of our present study.

For simplicity of study and ease of presentation, we divide the New Testament evidences into three classes. They are: (1) The purpose of His first coming; (2) the promise of His return, and (3) the nature of the Kingdom as set forth in New Testament statements.

Concerning the first body of evidence, there seems to be considerable confusion among preachers, teachers and casual readers of the Word. We often hear it stated, for instance, that “Jesus came to offer the Kingdom to the Jews. When they rejected it, He went to Calvary, and died for the sins of men. Had Israel accepted her King, He would never have died on the cross, but would have established the kingdom at that time.”

Nothing could be farther from the truth! Suppose we let the Lord Jesus tell us Himself, just why He did come. He has made that matter very plain and clear. Out of many references, we submit the following few as examples and guide to our decision. Let us start with Matthew 20:25-28. “But Jesus called them unto Him and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever shall be great

among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: EVEN AS THE SON OF MAN CAME NOT TO BE MINISTERED UNTO, BUT TO MINISTER, AND TO GIVE HIS LIFE A RANSOM FOR MANY.” Those words, even if they stood alone, are sufficient to establish the purpose of the incarnation.

They are simple and plain, and there is no ambiguity about them. Our Lord Jesus came with one purpose in mind, to die for the sins of a lost race, and to provide a means by which it might be reconciled to God. This fact becomes clear as we read also such words as the following: Luke 19:10, “For the Son of Man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.”

With a bluntness that intensifies their clarity, these words convey the primary purpose of Jesus in His coming to the earth in such simple and direct fashion as to allow of no misunderstanding. Especially is this so when they are read in the light of His general utterances, as in such citations as these: John 3:14-17.

“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.”

For this reason Jesus exclaimed, “And I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto Me’’; and the Apostle John explains this in his simple phrase, “And this He spake concerning the death He was to die.” Indeed, that death and its eternal purpose was never out of the thoughts of the Lord until it was fulfilled and His purpose thus consummated. Again and again He referred to “Mine hour”: and subsequent events illustrated in an overwhelming demonstration just what He meant by that phrase.

It could not have been otherwise, for so the prophets had foretold ages before He came. In such familiar verses as Isaiah 53:5, “But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was pierced for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon Him, and with His stripes we are healed”: we have a classical instance of such prophecies. From their abundant contents Jesus was able to say to His followers after His resurrection, “O foolish men, and slow of heart to believe, after all that the prophets have spoken!

Behooved it not the Christ to suffer these things, and to enter into His. glory? And beginning from Moses, and from all the prophets, He interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.” (Luke 24:25-27).

Certainly, it cannot be denied that all the writing apostles understood the purpose of Christ’s coming to have been accomplished at Calvary, for their testimony is unanimous on this point. John the Baptist utters this thought first when he says of Jesus, “Behold, the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world!” Those words came with especial significance to Jewish ears.

Being familiar with the sacrifices of the old dispensation, they knew that a lamb was of no avail until it was slain. From the lamb of the Passover to the offering of the Evening Sacrifice, efficacy and effect derived from the lamb, were resident in the fact that its blood was shed. There is a tremendous teaching behind the divine dictum, “When I, the Lord, see the blood, I will pass over you.” It is a recognized principle of biology that blood is, and must be, invisible if all is well with the organism. When blood is visible, it speaks of tragedy in the most certain terms. So when John the fore-runner called Jesus “The Lamb of God,” he was intimating that He came to be sacrificed on an altar.

With this view the Apostle Paul is in fullest accord, for in I Timothy 1:15 he makes a statement that may be called a summary of his entire teaching, when he says, “This is a true and faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation; that Christ Jesus CAME INTO THE WORLD TO SAVE SINNERS, of whom I am chief.”

Not to establish a kingdom, but to save the lost was the primary purpose of His first appearing.

Peter also joins his voice to Paul’s, and says in Acts 2:23, as he reproves the Jews who had rejected Jesus:

“Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.”

Thus, in the mind of Peter, the entire course of Christ’s life had been fixed in the ages past, and He came to die as the plan of redemption demanded.

The Apostle John sums it all up at the end of his life, in the simple but compelling words: “And we know that He was manifested to take away our sins.”

There is no need to multiply instances, the New Testament cannot be better epitomized than in the words of the angel Gabriel, who said to Joseph, the husband of Mary: “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call His name Jesus, for He shall save His people from their sins.”

It must be remembered that the apostles and the disciples did not recognize this fact at first, for we read in John 12:16: “These things understood not His disciples at the first; but when Jesus was glorified, then remembered they that these things were written of Him, and that they had done these things unto Him.” Undoubtedly the disciples believed that Jesus came to establish the promised kingdom, for after His resurrection their burning question was, “Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” [Acts 1:4-8 For the 1st of 3 phases or stages of the Kingdom set up by the Lord during His personal ministry see The ORIGIN AND PERPETUITY of the CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST and the Three Stages of His kingdom! –Ed.esn] In reply He told them that the time of the beginning of that kingdom was not to be known to men, as

God had kept that time in His own counsel.

If Jesus had “come to establish the kingdom” as is sometimes stated, make no mistake about it, He would have done so! When he does come for that purpose, He comes in power and glory, accompanied by legions of angels, and with authority to establish His will over the earth. He is portrayed in the appearing as slaying the wicked with the breath of His lips, and crushing all opposition with supernatural power. He did not fail in the purpose of His incarnation. He came to die for the sins of men.

To that end He pressed on, and by that means He made a way by which we can all be saved.

It is true, of course, that He did proclaim the kingdom; but He did so with the definite foreknowledge that it and He would be rejected. He also taught that there is a sense in which God may rule even now in the hearts of those who accept Christ as their Savior and Lord, but at the same time He constantly reminded His followers that He was to come again to erect a physical domain.

Such promises are almost too numerous to even list in so brief a discussion as this present one must be. But there are three types of Scripture that we must consider, even though very briefly, all of which taken together give us a clear and accurate picture of the teachings of Jesus on this matter. The first should be the direct statements of the Saviour, the second, His parables, and the third is the effect His revelations had upon the understanding of the apostles who heard Him, and who afterward wrote on these matters.

In the first series, we can take as an illustration certain sections of that portion that is called the Olivet discourse. This record begins in the 24th chapter of Matthew, and runs through to the end of chapter 25. The occasion was the prophecy that Jesus had made concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the woes that should accompany that tragedy. Some of the disciples asked Him privately (verse 3), “Tell us, when shall these things be? And what shall be the sign of Thy coming; and of the end of the age?”

This is a complicated question, and the answer is necessarily somewhat involved. The query is really three questions, namely: (a) When shall the destruction of Jerusalem be? (b) What shall be the sign of Thy coming? (c) What shall be the sign of the end, or completion, of the age?

In the discourse that followed this question, —or rather, series of questions,—Jesus foretold

events and referred to many portents. So it is essential, if we are to understand His meaning, that all through the following Scriptures, we keep in mind which of the three questions He is dealing with in each verse or series of verses. These two chapters of Matthew demand close and analytical reading. For instance, in verses four and five, it is manifestly certain that Jesus is speaking of His return, when He says: “. . Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in My name, saying: I am Christ; and shall deceive many.”

Equally certain is the significance of verses 26, 27: “Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, He is in the desert, go not forth: behold He is in the secret chamber, believe it not. For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be.”

(Since the coming of Jesus and the end of this age are bound up together in their time of fulfillment, the following verses now turn to the third part of the question, the end of the age, and the signs thereof. Thus verses 28 and 29 tell of the coming tribulation, the supernatural signs of the heavens, the darkened sun and the falling stars and the frightening phenomena of that time. He then returns to the question of His return in verses 30 and 31.)

So the record continues thus: “Then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”

It takes some weird mental gymnastics indeed to “spiritualize” such a plain statement as this!

Any reader, possessed of normal understanding, and actuated by principles of common honesty, must conclude that Jesus believed that He was to return to this earth in physical person. The language is such that simple integrity compels us to assume that Jesus meant these words to be understood in their usual connotations, and we have no right to read into them meanings that the speaker never intended.

His meaning appears plain enough in such further statements as verse 37: “But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.”

This statement is direct and plain, and leads to the equally clear statement of verse 44: “Therefore be ye also ready; for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh.”

These are a few of the many such utterances of the Saviour, all of them together making an unanswerable argument for His return. Of course, the multiplicity of promises is not the important point, as we would and should believe the Lord Jesus if He had made but one isolated promise on any matter whatever. But the case is much strengthened by the apparent fact that Jesus considered this matter so important that he repeatedly impressed it upon His followers’ minds, that they themselves might never forget its significance.

The second group consists of the parables which teach His return. After the direct utterances we have already noted, He began to illustrate His meaning by certain parables, for which He was justly famed. They formed part of His teaching method, and are the clearest, most illuminating illustrations any teacher ever used in any age. Two of them are given in Matthew 25, the Parable of the Ten Virgins and that of the Talents. The first pictures an oriental bridal party, waiting for the absent bridegroom.

The whole point of the story turns upon the fact that the bridegroom was NOT there; the bridal party was expecting him at any moment. So long did he delay his appearance, however, that certain of the bride’s attendants were caught napping when he did come! As a result of their unpreparedness, they were excluded from the wedding supper that followed the appearance of the groom. And the parable

closes with the solemn adjuration, “Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.”

The first requisite of an illustration is that the picture used shall convey an accurate sense of the meaning of the problem to be thus illuminated. A parable that was false in every detail to the fact at issue would be a sorry method of teaching, indeed. One of the most vital characteristics of Jesus’ parables is the complete and perfect sense of understanding they convey. So when He pictures His return in such a parable as this, it is inconceivable that He means something else than His return!

When He said, “The coming of the Son of man” He must have been using the meaning which the listener would derive from those words, or else He was deliberately deceptive. Jesus had no need of the sad subterfuge of apostate preachers of our day, who say one thing and mean another on the basis of “mental reservations.”

Even His enemies credit Him with extreme probity! So His acknowledged rectitude and veracity would obviate any such subterfuge as mental reservations; when He spoke it was “yea and amen!”( 2 Co1:20) So in all of the parables, when they are added to His direct statements, we have the confirmation of clear and unreserved illustrations, which further enhance the certainty of the promise that Jesus is coming again.

There is also the inescapable testimony of New Testament symbolism, which we should not ignore. One such instance is reported by Matthew following the Olivet discourse, and is repeated by all the synoptic writers.

This is the establishment of the sacred ordinance of the Lord’s Supper. The record is preserved in Matthew 26:26-30: 26) And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.

27) And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; 28) For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

29) But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

30) And when they had sung an hymn, they went out into the mount of Olives.

The climax of this paragraph, for the immediate study, is in verse 29. Here Jesus stated that He would no more drink of the juice of the grape, until He drank it with them in the kingdom! This certainly has a most concrete and material sound, and cannot be interpreted into a “spiritual” meaning by an impartial teacher. A man of average mental ability, reading this for the first time, would get from it the very idea that Jesus intended to convey; namely, that He still looked for a time after His death, when He would share physical pleasures with His disciples in a real and material kingdom. Mark also impresses this conclusion upon the reader when he writes of the establishment of the communion service, and Luke states that He said the same thing about the Passover feast.

This weighty evidence is made even more impressive by the solemn words of Paul, in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26: 23) For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: 24) And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25) After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26) For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s, death till he come.

Note the very careful and forceful manner in which Paul introduces this subject, claiming a special revelation as his authority for this teaching. It must be remembered that Paul was not in the

company which ate the Passover with Jesus, and any knowledge which he possessed of the events of that night would have to come from one who had been present. So he identifies his informant when he says, “For I have received of the Lord that which I also delivered unto you.” The climax of Paul’s utterance here is found in verse 26, that the observance of this Eucharist is to commemorate the death of Jesus until He comes back again.

This is a clear example of the New Testament symbolism, which reaches its complete development in the book of Revelation, although it is not wanting in Paul’s writings, and is prominent in Peter’s epistles and in the graphic words of Jude.

To summarize and trace the development of the current of New Testament symbolism, we may put it in this simple and highly condensed form: 1) The forces of evil are to increase in the world: 2) Until the state of the righteous will become almost too hard to bear: 3) Judgment and distress will then be poured out upon the rebellious earth: 4) Bring great suffering, and climax in supernatural portents in the realm of nature: 5) At the height of which the Lord Jesus Christ will appear suddenly, riding on clouds of glory. He shall bring with Him saints and angels, and shall establish the kingdom of heaven: 6) Into which He shall gather the elect, dismissing the wicked into the outer darkness. * * * This was most certainly the general belief of the apostles, who wrote the New Testament and left us our only record of Christ, and our only source of knowledge concerning this coming kingdom.

Therefore, since all of our evidence that such a kingdom is promised is derived from their statements, we have no moral, literary, or historical right to any conception of the nature of that kingdom which differs from theirs! This fact is frequently ignored by unscrupulous commentators and teachers. They derive their basic fact (that a king is coming and a kingdom is promised) from the historical documents of the New Testament, and then proceed to tell us that the writers were too ignorant to understand the nature of that kingdom! Or that they were mistaken in the meaning of the words of Jesus, when He promised to return.

Certainly, the apostles expected a physical and literal return of the Master whose risen body they watched enter the heavens. If there were no other texts than Acts 1:9-11, that would by itself establish the apostolic belief. These words seem clear enough: 9. And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

10. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel: 11. Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

How can we misunderstand words as unequivocal as these?

“This same Jesus” “Which was taken up” “Shall so come” “In like manner” “As ye saw Him go!”

The guileless apostles believed this promise just as they heard it. This fact is very clear, when we read again Peter’s words at the close of his great sermon to the people, 19. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sin., may be blotted out, when the

times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.

20. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: 21. Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

“God shall send Jesus Christ . . . whom the heavens must receive until...” It is not honorable to attempt to twist such plain statements into any other meaning than the writer intended to convey.

Even the most unscrupulous critic cannot deny that Paul held the view that Jesus was coming again in a literal and physical sense. Such statements as the following are clear: “So that ye come behind in no gift, waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ:” “Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come:” “For our conversation is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ:” “When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in glory:” “And to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead:” “For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus at His coming?”

“And to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels:” “When He shall come to be glorified in His saints:” These passages speak eloquently of the exact and express belief that Paul sought to make clear.

To him, the return of Jesus was a specific, literal, physical actuality. No better evidence of this can be offered than to submit his own words in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18: 13. But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

14. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

15. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

16. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

18. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.

James also believed this, as did Peter, Jude, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and the writer of the Hebrew Epistle, whom we believe to have been Paul. The language in which they state this fact is clear, express, unreserved and outspoken, and scholarly rectitude demands that we read their utterances in the exact connotations which they intended these words to convey.

It is of no avail for the unprincipled false teacher to plead that the phrase “coming again” is vague and ambiguous, and we cannot be shut up to one meaning for these words. The apostles spoke and wrote a language called “he Koine dialectos,” and while a few generations ago this vernacular form of Greek was not fully known, the researches of archeologists have given us a complete and comprehensive understanding of the New Testament vocabulary.

To apply this new learning to the problem of the manner of the return of Jesus, let us note one or two of the commoner Greek words used by the apostles to convey their thoughts on this theme.

The first word is the Greek verb, “coming”. This is “parousia,” and occurs 13 times in the New Testament text to describe the return of the Coming King. If you care to look them up, they are:

I Cor. 15:23; I Thes. 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; II Thes. 2:1, 8; James 5:7; 5:8; II Peter 1:16; 3:4; 3:12; I John 2:28.

This is a very common word in the Koine writings, being found often in papyrus records, on ostraka, and in all sorts of legal, official and personal communications. It always means to be present in physical person and bodily form. It is sometimes used specifically to denote presence after absence. Occasionally it means arrival, but can be translated “return” only if such meaning is implied or stated in the context. Such instances occur, as in 1 Cor. 16:17; 2 Cor. 7:6-7; and Phil. 1:26.

In the first instance Paul expresses pleasure over the “parousia” of Stephen, and other companions, from whom he has been separated.

In this case the word refers to an arrival, or return.

The second reference is Paul’s telling how he was comforted by the “parousia” of Titus, and again he means “return.”

The third citation informs the church at Philippi that Paul is returning to them, and he hopes there may be joy in this promised “parousia.”

The common meaning of the word is “personal presence.” It is so used in 2 Cor. 10:10, where the critics of Paul say, “For his letters are powerful and weighty, but his bodily presence is weak —.” The phrase “bodily presence’ is an English translation of “parousia.” The same is true in Phil 2:12, where Paul commends the believers for obeying the gospel in his absence, as much as they did when he was present.

Note this statement: I do not know of a single instance in either Scripture or the records of archeology, where “parousia” can be translated in a spiritual or figurative sense!

It always means bodily presence.

It would be both profitable and interesting if we had space and time to trace the development and growth of this word through the early centuries, but in so short and simple a study as this such a technical treatise would not be practical. So we will just note a few important points. Were the writing apostles justified in their use of this word, applying it to the personal, bodily return of Jesus?

According to the Patristic authorities, they certainly were.

The early Fathers used “parousia” to define the second coming of Christ, and they used the word in its accepted, common sense. Justin went so far as to call the incarnation of Christ at the time of His birth in Bethlehem, “the first ‘parousia’.”

After this, it is hard to mistake his meaning when he refers to the coming again of the same Lord by the same technical phrase.

Our Lord’s own use of the word is limited in the Gospels to just four instances, all of which occur in the Olivet discourse in Matt. 24.

Once the apostles use it there, when they say, “What . . . shall be the sign of thy coming (parousia)?” This in verse 3. Jesus then used the word to describe His return three times, in verses 27, 37 and 39.

From secular records, especially among early century Koine papyri, we could introduce almost innumerable instances of this word. Among the Oxyrhynchus Papyri, we note Number 486, 15: from the second century A.D. A certain woman, named Dionysia, was fighting a lawsuit before the Prefect of the nome in which she made her home. As the trial dragged on, she petitioned the Court for permission to return home, on the grounds that the care of her property demanded her “personal presence” (parousia) and she could not administer her estate while absent. This seems clear enough to settle the issue, even if it stood alone. But it is one of many scores.

One such is the record found in P. Petr. ii, 18: from the third century B.C. giving the account of a royal visit by Ptolemy to a certain district which had been taxed outrageously to raise funds for his entertainment during his “parousia” or presence in the region.

Or again, P. Gren. ii, 14-2; announces the preparations in the third century B.C., for the fete to be offered the governor upon his “arrival”— (parousia).

Such usage of “parousia” became so common and customary, that in time the word became a “terminus technicus” with reference to the visits of a king or ranking official. This being the case, we can understand why the New Testament writers came to use the Koine term to refer to the “parousia” of “King Jesus,” for whom the people were warned to make ready.

This word could not be misunderstood by

the people to whom the apostles wrote.

For a complete study of this evidence, we would refer the reader to such works as: “Light From The Ancient East,” by Adolph Deissmann; “St. Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians,” by George Milligan; “The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament,” by James Hope Moulton and George Milligan.

The summary of their researches into archeological evidences makes it very plain that the apostles of Jesus understood that His return was to be actual, physical, and real.

In a study of the vocabulary, a word of almost equal importance is the Koine “epiphany.” This word is used of the coming of Christ in human flesh at His incarnation, in 2 Tim. 1:10 where Paul speaks of God’s plan of redemption: “Which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, but is now made manifest by the appearing (epiphany) of our Saviour Jesus Christ —” Then the same writer uses this identical word to refer to Christ’s return, in 2 Thes. 2:8 — “whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and destroy with the brightness of His coming (epiphany) .”

1 Tim. 6:14, “That thou keep this commandment, without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing (epiphany) of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

2 Tim. 4:1, 8, “who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing (epiphany).”

“Unto all them also that love His appearing (epiphany).”

Titus 2:13, “Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing (epiphany) of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

Since this term was also used by the ancients who spoke the Koine to describe the arrival of royalty at a certain destination, Paul used it most naturally to denote both the incarnation, as being the first coming of Jesus, and the return of the same Saviour in His second advent.

Thus the prophets of the Old Testament and the writers of the New Testament combine their voices into one unified and harmonious prediction that a King is coming, who shall reign over the earth in righteousness and peace. What folly to seek to cloud this simple issue by attempting to obscure the picture with fruitless arguments as to the nature of that kingdom! And yet this is commonly done by teachers who exercise craft and guile to annul and bring to naught the Word of God. Such blind leaders of the blind stress a few passages of Scripture and completely ignore all of the balance. They tell us, for instance, that Jesus said to Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world.” It is quite true that Christ did so state, but the deception of such emphasis lies in the teacher’s neglect to point out that the preposition denotes origin, not nature!

The proper form is, “My kingdom is not from this world!”

Indeed, it is not! It is heavenly in origin, eternal in existence, and spiritual in essence! So said Isaiah, when he said, “The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will perform this.”

Instead of ignoring all of the Scripture which we have here cited, together with much more, why not honestly admit that the kingdom appears in New Testament descriptions in a two-fold character?

In Holy Writ Christ’s kingdom is both spiritual and apocalyptic!

The returning King will establish a very real domain, — which shall rule the earth actually and governmentally; but it will be characterized by its spiritual character. Men shall call it “The Kingdom of Heaven” because under this Sovereign the will of God shall be done on earth as it is in heaven, and the knowledge of the love of God shall fill the earth as the waters flood the seas!

“Even so, Lord Jesus: Come quickly!”

A King is coming.

To Him, hidden in the bosom of past ages, all the scattered rays of prophecy pointed.

In Him, manifested in the fullness of time, man received a revelation of the program of God, and saw converging rays of prophecy meet and find fulfillment.

Through Him, man has been reconciled to God, and saved from the consequences of sin and

rebellion.

With Him, when He comes again, will come a light that shall never grow dim and that cannot fade away. This light will be from the glory of the kingdom that is to come, and which is the theme and substance of all prophecy which is not yet fulfilled.

In the days of this Coming King, wars shall cease, peace and righteousness will be the rule of daily living, and then, but only then, will the brotherhood of man be an accomplished fact. And since there is no other hope of universal peace and lasting human betterment, we can only echo again the apostle’s prayer — “Even so, Lord Jesus, come quickly.” * * * The planet which cast Him out will yet see His triumph when He, in turn, casts out Satan, and fulfills the promises that every prophet has made from Moses to Malachi.

You may remember, in the tragic but fascinating history of the bonny land of Scotland, how many noble and courageous efforts were made to bring the beloved Prince Charlie back across the sea. Men of genius and heroism performed prodigies of valor to set their own prince back upon his usurped throne; but every attempt ended in failure, because they depended upon the strength and power of the flesh. The coming of Christ in His own day and time cannot be delayed nor prevented for any such reason. When Isaiah told of the return of Jesus he said: “Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. THE ZEAL OF THE LORD OF HOSTS WILL PERFORM THIS.” Thus, the return of Jesus does not depend upon the arm of the flesh. We are not destined to wait until the church shall convert the heathen and the entire world shall enter the formal fold of Christendom, before Jesus can reign. At His own time and at the hour that God Himself shall determine, Jesus shall ride forth from heaven with Michael to lead His armies.

He comes smiting the wicked with the sword of the Lord, blasting His enemies with His very breath, and none can withstand or hinder Him. Rest assured that when God’s hour strikes, Jesus will return. Then, a happy, regenerated earth will receive her King.

IN HIS DAY: Judah shall be saved and Israel shall return to her promised land: IN HIS DAY: War and strife shall cease, sin and want shall be no more; IN HIS DAY: Sorrow and pain will be unknown; IN HIS DAY: The heathen will all be converted, no man shall dwell in ignorance of GOD; IN HIS DAY: Nature will again unfold the splendors that characterized Eden; IN HIS DAY: The very beasts of the earth shall dwell together in amity and peace; IN HIS DAY: The knowledge of the love of GOD shall lave the earth; IN HIS DAY: Our long and ardent prayer, “Thy kingdom come,” will be answered at last.

Perhaps no song of the church has greater power to stir the spirit and thrill the heart than the one which reminds us: “Jesus shall reign where’er the sun Doth his successive journeys run; His kingdom stretch from shore to shore, Till moons shall wax and wane no more.”

Thus the magnificence of Jesus in His final unveiling will flood the earth in the last fulfillment of God’s promised blessings to men.

AMEN Got PDF? The Shayne Moses Project

* JOHN LAURENCE FROST MEMORIAL LIBRARY; Volume Six; THE MAGNIFICENCE OF JESUS: A TEXT-BOOK OF CHRISTOLOGY

BY HARRY RIMMER, D.D., Sc.D.; Copyright, 1943, by Research Science Bureau, Incorporated Printed in the United States of America; WM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING COMPANY; Grand Rapids, Michigan. Harry Rimmer (1890–1952) was an American creationist, evangelist and writer of anti-evolution pamphlets. He is most prominent as an early pioneer in the creationist movement in the United States. Read more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Rimmer [To which has been added "The Coming King" Chapter 4 of The Shadow of Coming Events by Harry Rimmer 1946.]

The 3 Stages of Christ’s Kingdom-ChurchBride Excerpts of works by Dr. Fred G. Stevenson, F. L. DuPont, J. R. Graves, L. L. Clover, G. E. Jones and C. A. Smith, etc.

Foreword “Divine prophecies being of the nature of their Author, with whom a thousand years are but as one day, are not therefore fulfilled punctually at once, but have springing and germinant accomplishment, though the height-fulness of them may refer to some one age.”-- Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626) [The Advancement of Learning, 2.3] ¶ And he said, So is the kingdome of God, as if a man should cast seede into the ground, And should sleepe, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring, and grow up, he knoweth not how. For the earth bringeth foorth fruite of herselfe, first the blade, then the eare, after that the full corne in the eare.

But when the fruite is brought foorth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come.

Mark 4:26-29

Preface The Kingdom of our dear LORD has a “trinity of fulfillment” in three stages, phases, parts or dominions; typified, initially by Moses giving the Law and setting up the Tabernacle, Joshua leading the Chosen into the Promised Land and Solomon building the Temple. Also in the three anointings of King David, the three agriculture-related pilgrimage festivals of Israel, and culminating in the three resurrections. This is realized in the offices of our founding Prophet, presiding High Priest and soon to return conquering King of kings: the LORD JESUS CHRIST. The Angel of His presence, the Holy Ghost, officiating as Comforter, Guide and Witness; Authorizing each successive church since Christ in perpetuity comprizing the present kingdom stage. [ Ge 9:27; Ex 14:19; 19:6; 23:14-17,20-21; 33:14; 1Sa 16:13; 2Sa 2:4; 5:3; Psalm 72:16; Pro 9:10; Ecc 3:1; Isa 2:1-4; 9:7; 11:2; 26:2,19; 42:1-4; 60:22; 61:1; 63:7-10; Eze 17:22-24; 47:1-4; Dan 2:35; 9:24; Zechariah 3:2, 9; 4:2-10; 6:12-13; Mt 3:10-13; 12:17-21; 13:33; 16:16-19; 18:17-20; 21:43; 27:51-54; 28:18-20; Mk 4:2629; Luke 12:32; John 1:31-34; 3:3-8; 14:16,26; 15:26; 16:7; 20:20-23; Ac 1:5-8; 2:1-4,14-42; 7:38; 8:14-17; 10:44-48; 15:7-8,14-17; 1Co 12:11-14; 15:20-28; Ga 4:26-27; Eph 1:3-6; 2:6,19-22; Php 3:20-21; Col 1:13; 1Th 4:14-17; He 9:23-28; 12:22-25; 13:10-16; James 5:7-8; 1Pe 2:9-10; 2Pe 1:11; 1Jo 2:20,27; 5:6-9; Re 1:20; 3:1; 4:5; 5:6; 6:9-11; 14:14-19; 20:115 ]

Introduction: KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD From Dr. Fred G. Stevenson’s Direct Answers to Difficult Questions

When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say

also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. -(Matthew 16:19)

“In what sense were the keys of the kingdom given to Peter?

Was it the giving of authority to establish the Samaritan and the Gentile churches? Do the true churches have these keys? How much authority do the keys give to the church?”

One of the very complicated and much discussed subjects of the Bible is the question of just what the kingdom of God (or the kingdom of Heaven) is. The view is taken here that there is no distinction to be made between the two. “The kingdom of Heaven” is an expression peculiar to Matthew.

The other gospels call the same body “the kingdom of God.” Scofield destroys his own evidence of a distinction between the two.

The kingdom is ultimately righteous men under Christ ruling the world in righteousness. This is to say it is the Millennial reign. But there are various steps or stages in the development of the kingdom before we come to the Millennium. This is where we must do some careful discerning to rightly arrive at the truth. The matter of multiplying kingdoms in the Bible does much to confuse the real issues, but it does nothing to clarify these issues. There has never been but one so far as the kingdom of God is concerned.

Let us note some steps in the development of the kingdom idea: (1) At Genesis 12:2, Abram is told that the Lord will make of him a great nation. At Genesis 17:6, Abraham is told that kings would come out of him. At II Samuel 7:16 David is told that his house and his kingdom is to be established forever. All of these promises are unconditional, but the time and circumstances of their fulfillment are conditional. This fact gives leeway for the steps enumerated in the following matter.

(2) To Israel coming out of Egypt, the kingdom would have been a good land flowing with milk and honey if they had walked with the Lord in obedience and faith (Exodus 3:7-8; Joshua 1:2-5). It seems to me the failures of the people kept the kingdom from being established at this time.

(3) To the Jews in Jesus’ day, the kingdom would have meant personal salvation and the inner circle in the church (Matthew 10:5-6). Here Jesus was not telling the apostles to abandon the Samaritans and the Gentiles to Hell; but, He was telling them to devote their energies to rallying the Jews to the church and kingdom cause at that particular and crucial time. From the beginning Jesus intended for the Samaritans and the Gentiles to have salvation and a position in the church, but it was to be after the Jews had made their decision as to Jesus and the church.

(4) Thus, to the Gentiles the kingdom message would have brought a more abundant salvation (Mark 7:24-30), and it would have brought them into the church, where there is equality. But

the church would still have been built around a nucleus of Israelites. In a way, it would have been much as it will be in the Millennium, with Israel serving as a great force for the evangelization of the world (Zechariah 8:22-23). Here, however, we are on the verge of going beyond what is written, so let us stop.

(5) To all who will meet the terms of the gospel today (the so-called Gentile church period) the kingdom message means salvation, and the knowledge, assurance, joy, and hope of that salvation (Romans 14:17). See also I John 5:13, which teaches that there is to be a knowledge of salvation to those who walk according to the New Testament rule in the church relationship.

(6) To Israel in the Millennium, the kingdom of God will be the inheritance of a good land (Isaiah 11:6-9). To them it will mean universal salvation at that time (Romans 11:26). Multitudes of other nations will also be saved and worship the Lord in truth (Zechariah 8:23).

(7) To the glorified church in the Millennium, the kingdom of God will mean their ruling with Christ during the thousand years (Matthew 19:28).

Now let us turn our attention to the subject of the circumstances of the giving of the keys of the kingdom of God. The story is aptly summed up in the statement from John 1:11, “He came unto his own, and his own received him not.” Those who received him not were the Jews.

(1) After Jesus began His public ministry, He went to the first Passover, which was held in Jerusalem. There He found that the Jewish religious authorities had turned the house of God into a den of thieves (John 2:13-18). He drove out those who were defiling the temple, hoping the Jews would see that He was the Messiah who was to come. Instead, they challenged His right to do what He had done. He went back to Galilee with a burdened heart because of the rebuff He had received from His brethren. He remained there and ministered to the common people for another year.

(2) He went back to Jerusalem to the Passover the next year. There He found the paralyzed man lying at the pool of Bethesda (John 5:1-16). Bethesda means in the Hebrew tongue “House of Mercy.” The man, utterly helpless, aptly pictured the spiritual, political, and economic condition of the Jewish people at the time, as they were in religious apostasy, and were in bondage to the Roman Empire. Jesus healed the hopelessly afflicted man to show the Jews He would heal them as individuals and as a nation if they would accept Him. They accused Him of breaking the law of Moses in that He healed the man on the Sabbath day. They did not understand that the Sabbath was meant to point them to the time when they would have rest in the Messiah from all their ills as a nation and as individuals. He went back to Galilee and ministered to the common people for another year. But there was a difference this time. He began to talk less and less about the kingdom of the Jews and He talked more and more about the church and the church age.

(3) According to the harmony of the gospels, Jesus ordained the twelve apostles during this year (Matthew 10:2-4; Luke 6:12-17). And, apparently, immediately afterwards, He preached the Sermon on the Mount, which is the great initiatory sermon to the church. He did many works of healing during this year, and He taught the masses of the people constantly.

(4) Some authorities believe Jesus did not go to the Passover the third year of His ministry. They believe at the time the feast was being celebrated in Jerusalem, Jesus was away to the north on the border of the Gentile world preaching the sermon on the bread of life. As soon as the feast

was over, the religious leaders from Jerusalem came seeking Jesus (Mark 7:1-6).

During this time, Jesus healed the Gentile daughter of the Syrophenician woman.

He began to talk about the church and the Gentile church age (Matthew 16:13-28). It was at this time that He gave the keys of the kingdom to Peter (Matthew 16:19).

Now let us talk briefly about the giving of the keys of the kingdom of Heaven: (1) The keys of the kingdom were given to Peter (Matthew 16:19) merely as a spokesman, an apostle, and a representative member of the church. Notice that Jesus addressed the whole group of disciples (Matthew 16:13). It was only because Peter was quicker to answer than the others that Jesus then addressed him individually. I, for one, am not strong on “apostolic authority” except such as inheres in an ordained preacher of today.

(2) The keys of the kingdom were really given to the church as such (Matthew 18:17-19; John 20:22-23; Acts 1:8).

The keys of the kingdom of Heaven are given into the hands of the real churches of Jesus. They give power and authority to bind and loose in the church relationship. What the church binds and looses becomes effective only as they act within the letter and the spirit of the Scriptures. At Matthew 18:17-18, the binding and loosing that are done in Heaven are expressed in the future perfect tense in the Greek text, indicating that the Lord does His binding and loosing before the church gets its binding and loosing done. This suggests to us that the Lord’s church roll might be pretty widely variant from ours sometimes.

The binding by the church involves exactly what is involved in the great commission given at Matthew 28:19-20. The loosing by the church is the same as that at Matthew 18:17-18.

The Establishment and Perpetuation of a Kingdom THE ORIGIN AND PERPETUITY OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST. An excerption out of "It’s ORIGIN," We shall now proceed to the discussion of the subject, as it is presented in the Scriptures. The phrase “kingdom of God,” or “kingdom of heaven,” is used in several senses in the Bible: to indicate 1. God’s universal empire. Ps. 103:19; cf. 1Chronicles 29:10-12, et al. 2. The ancient commonwealth of Israel, is called the “kingdom of the Lord.” 2 Chronicles 13:8. This kingdom was organized under the immediate direction of Moses, as a political power among the nations of the earth, and was composed of all the members of national Israel, the regenerated as well as the unregenerated. 3. The ultimate residence of the people of God, and the triumphant and glorious reign of Christ as their King. 2 Timothy 4:18; Matthew 7:21; 8:11; 25:31-34; Acts 14:22; 1 Corinthians 15:49-50, [and] 4. This phrase “kingdom of God,” and “kingdom of heaven,” also refers to the spiritual government organized by the Lord Jesus Christ, during His personal ministry on earth.

-- chps. VI-X

by F. L. DuPont, circa 1881-1901 A.D.

CHAPTER VI. As Supreme King and Lawgiver, He has given to His subjects all laws, rules and regulations, necessary for their government.

It is to this last application and use of the term “kingdom,” as found in the Sacred volume, to which we now desire to direct the reader’s attention. Our next argument is therefore based upon those Scriptures which represent:

X. The Organization of the Church of Christ, Under the Form of “the Setting Up” Or Establishment of A Kingdom.

Let it be borne in mind in the consideration of this argument, that in the beginning, the Church at Jerusalem and the Kingdom were co-extensive, but after the organization of other churches, the kingdom became enlarged to the extent of embracing all those churches within its boundaries, and so today, the Kingdom of Christ embraces all of the Churches of Christ, no more, and no less.

1.

Prophecies relating to the “setting up” of this kingdom.

“And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be

destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.” Daniel 2:44.

Notice: that the prophet foretells— 1. That a kingdom shall be “set up.” Then this kingdom had not been in existence before. It was not a kingdom “restored,” but “set up,” established, founded— something entirely new and distinct from all others.

2. The “God of heaven” was to do this work, not some man, or set of men.

3. It was to be . . . . . “set up. . . . . . in the . days of these kings.”

By reference to the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, and its interpretation by Daniel, it will be seen, that there were four great empires to follow each other in regular succession. These empires were: (1) The Babylonian. (2) The Medo-Persian. (3) The Macedonian. (4) The Roman Empire, as we learn from the pages of history. It was in the days of these Roman Emperors, as all biblical scholars are agreed, that this kingdom was to be founded.

4. It was to “break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms” and it was to “stand for ever.”

2. Fulfillment of this Prophecy.

1. Did the “God of heaven” appear on the earth at this time?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” John 1:1-14. “Of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever,” Romans 9:5. “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest In the flesh,” etc., 1 Timothy 3:16. “But unto the Son, he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever.” etc., Hebrews 1:8. “This is the true God, and eternal life,” 1 John 5:20, et mul al. Thus it is shown, that Jesus Christ, was the “God of heaven,” our Campbellite and Unitarian friends to the contrary, notwithstanding.

2. Did the God of heaven “set up a kingdom,” at this time? Proofs: What did John the Baptist say at the beginning of his ministry? “Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” Matthew 3:2.

What did Jesus say at the commencement of His ministry? “Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matthew 4:17. a. When did Jesus begin to preach? After His baptism and temptation, and just after John was cast into prison, Matthew 3:16; 4:1, 12, 17. b. What did he say about the “kingdom” at that time? That it was “at hand.” c. What did He mean by the expression, “at hand?” Near by, close, in reference to time. This is the meaning of enggike, everywhere in the New Testament, when used with reference to time; as, “behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners,” Matthew 26:45-46; Luke 21:8, 20, 28; Romans 10:8, et mul at. d. Was this the “kingdom of grace?” No, for that kingdom had been in existence thousands of years—ever since the days of Abel, at least.

3. What statement did Jesus make concerning this kingdom?

“The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.”

Luke 16:16.

1. Logical statement. a. What was “until” John? The “law and the prophets.” b. When was John? Just before Christ. c. What was “since” John? The “kingdom of God.” Therefore, this kingdom of God did not exist prior to John, or during the ministry of John, it was “since”

John.

2. Logical statement. a. The “kingdom of God” spoken of here, is something entirely different and distinct, from the “law and the prophets.” b. Men were saved during the dispensation of the “law and the prophets.” c. Men were saved during the dispensation of the “law and prophets,” by entering the “kingdom of grace.” d. Therefore, this “kingdom of God” spoken of here, is something distinct from the “kingdom of grace,” or salvation.

3. Logical statement. a. Note the fact, that the “kingdom of God” is preached. It is here, men hear and know of it. b. Those who hear and heed the preaching, enter it. c. Therefore, it must have had a visible and tangible existence, else men could not have entered it.

First Syllogism. (a) The “kingdom of God” was preached since the days of John, and men entered it. (b)The “God of heaven” was to set up or establish a kingdom, and Jesus Christ is the God of heaven. (c) Therefore, the kingdom of God was set up, established, or organized by Jesus Christ.

Second Syllogism. (a) Entrance into an organization can be effected only, when such an organization exists. (b) Men entered the kingdom in Christ’s day,—before Pentecost. (c) Therefore, the kingdom existed in Christ’s day,—before Pentecost.

4. The kingdom suffered violence in the days of Christ.

“And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.” Matthew 11:1213.

The great German commentator Meyer, comments on this passage, thus: “Jesus now continues His testimony regarding John, and in order to prove what He had just said of Him in verses 10, 11, He calls attention to the powerful movement in favor of the Messiah’s kingdom, which had taken place since the commencement of the Baptist’s ministry. . . . It is taken possession of by force, is conquered. . . . In this way is described that eager, irresistible striving and struggling after the approaching Messianic kingdom, which has prevailed since the Baptist began to preach; it is as though it were being taken by storm. . . . Such is now the character of the times, that those of whom the Biazetai holds true, achieve a speedy success, in that, while they press forward to join the ranks of my followers, they clutch at the approaching kingdom as though they were seizing spoils, and make it their own. So eager and energetic, (no longer calm and expectant) is the interest in regard to the kingdom. The Biastai are, accordingly, believers struggling hard for its possession.”

Rotherham, in his Emphatic translation, and also Wilson in the Emphatic Diaglott, translate, “the kingdom of heaven is invaded, and the invaders seize upon it.”

Thayer’s Grimm-Wilke’s Lexicon defines Biazo; “to use force, to apply force; tini, to force, inflict violence on one; the Act, is very rare and almost exclusively poetic.* In Matthew 11:12, the kingdom of heaven is taken by violence, carried by storm, i.e. a share in the heavenly kingdom is sought for by the most ardent zeal, and the intensive exertion. The other explanation, the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence from its enemies, agrees neither with the time when Christ spoke the words, nor with the context; cf. Fritzche, De Wette, Meyer, ad loc . . . In Matthew 11:12 those are called Biastai, by whom

the kingdom of God Biazetai, i.e., who strived to obtain the privileges with the utmost eagerness and effort.” Thus, the meaning of the passage is clearly settled by the ablest biblical scholars and critics. *[J. R. Graves considered John Baptist as part of "the kingdom of heaven" that had "suffered violence." See Seven Dispensations; Part III, Eschatology, Chapter 2 below.

Also Henry Morris Bible Notes: "When John the Baptist came preaching the kingdom of heaven, he also came condemning sin and urging repentance and baptism to a new life. Some responded positively, but more reacted violently, as is often true when the gospel is preached. Those who react against the gospel would destroy the kingdom of heaven if they could, but must settle for destroying as many of its servants as they can. John himself was soon put to death, as was Christ and eventually the apostles, as well as multitudes of Christ’s followers through the centuries. John was not the last of the Old Testament prophets, as some have thought, but the first of the New Testament prophets." Also in John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible, covering all bets he adds: "or of the Gospel's suffering violence by the persecutions of its enemies opposing and contradicting it, reproaching it, intimidating the professors of it, and seeking to take away the life of Christ, the great subject of it:"-esn] 1. Logical statement. (a) What “suffered violence,” or was “invaded?” The “kingdom of heaven.” (b) How long had it “suffered violence,” or been “invaded?” “From the days of John the Baptist.” (c) When was John? Just before Christ.

2. Logical statement. (a) What prophesied “until” John? The “prophets and the law.” (b) What was “since” John? The “kingdom of heaven.” (c) Then this “kingdom of heaven,” must have been something entirely different and distinct, from the “prophets and the law,” since the Saviour puts them in such striking contrast to each other.

3. Logical statement. (a) What “suffered violence, and was forcibly seized by the violent,” or “was invaded and seized by the invaders?” The “kingdom of heaven.” (b) An “invisible kingdom of grace” cannot suffer violence, or be seized upon by force. (c) This “kingdom of heaven” did suffer violence and was invaded by the force of which Jesus speaks, therefore, it was not the invisible kingdom of grace.

4. Logical statement. (a) This “kingdom of heaven” was invaded, as an institution entirely new and distinct from any that had previously existed. (b) Those who “invaded,” or entered this institution, were Jewish men and women, who were at that time members of the old Jewish church. (c) This “kingdom of heaven” then, must have been something entirely different and distinct from the old Jewish church, since these people could not have entered an institution of which they were already members.

First Syllogism. (a) Violence cannot be exerted upon an institution which does not exist. (b) This “kingdom of heaven” did suffer violence while Christ was upon the earth—before Pentecost. (c) Therefore, this “kingdom” existed during Christ’s personal ministry on earth—before Pentecost.

Second Syllogism. (a) People cannot enter an institution of which they are already members. (b) Members of the old Jewish church did enter this kingdom.

(c) Therefore, this “kingdom of heaven” was not the old Jewish church.

CHAPTER VII.

5.

The kingdom “shut up” during the personal ministry of Christ.

“But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.”

The Emphatic Diaglott translates “neither enter yourselves, nor permit those approaching to enter, Rothenham translates, “For ye are not entering, neither those about to enter are ye permitting to enter,” Matthew 23:13. Meyer says on this verse, “the approaching kingdom of the Messiah, is conceived of under the figure of a Palace, the doors of which have been thrown open in order that they may enter. But such is the opposition offered to Christ by the Scribes and Pharisees, that men withhold their belief from the Messiah who had appeared among them, and show themselves indifferent to the righteousness necessary, in order to gain admission into the kingdom from which they are consequently excluded. They thus shut the door of the kingdom in men’s faces, . . . who are endeavoring to obtain admission,” 1. Logical statement. (a) What rebuke was given to the Scribes and Pharisees? They would not “enter” the kingdom of heaven. (b) If there was no kingdom to enter, was this rebuke just? Certainly not. (c) Therefore, the Saviour justly rebuked these Scribes and Pharisees for not entering this kingdom.

2. Logical statement. (a) These Scribes and Pharisees were leading members of the old Jewish church, at the time that the Saviour thus rebuked them. (b) If the Christian Church or kingdom was a continuation of the old Jewish church, how could they enter an institution to which they then belonged? (c) Therefore, there must have been a kingdom in continuation of the old Jewish church.

3. Logical statement. (a) What else did these Scribes and Pharisees do? By their influence and example, they prevented others from going in, who were desirous of entering into this “kingdom of heaven.” (b) If there was no “kingdom” into which they could enter, how could they keep these “others” out? (c) Therefore, there must have been a kingdom in existence at that time,—during the personal ministry of Christ,—and before the day of Pentecost.

4. Logical statement. (a) These Scribes and Pharisees, as well as the other Jewish men and women, were members of the Jewish church at the time Christ uttered this rebuke. (b) If the Christian Church was a continuation of the Jewish church, how could they keep these people out of an institution of which they were already members? And how reconcile this idea, with the declaration of the Saviour in the fifteenth verse? “ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” (c) Therefore, the Christian Church is not a continuation of. the old Jewish church.

First Syllogism. (a) A rebuke to men for refusing to enter an organization that did not exist, was a manifest injustice, not to say an absurdity. (b) Jesus did rebuke these Scribes and Pharisees for refusing to enter this “kingdom.” (c) Therefore, if there was no kingdom in existence at that time into which they could enter, Jesus was clearly unjust and absurd in thus rebuking them.

Second Syllogism. (a) There was a kingdom in existence at the time Christ was speaking, and it was the duty of these Scribes and Pharisees to enter it. (b) They refused to enter it themselves, and did all they could to keep others from entering it. (c) Therefore, Christ was perfectly justifiable in thus rebuking them.

Third Syllogism. (a) The charge of injustice against Christ, in rebuking the Scribes and Pharisees for not entering this kingdom, is little short of blasphemy, and can arise only from an erroneous and unscriptural doctrine. (b) But the doctrine, that Jesus had no kingdom at that time into which they could enter, makes the charge unjust, because it was an utter impossibility for them to enter an organization which had no existence! (c) Therefore, the doctrine of the non-existence of the Church or kingdom of Christ, during His personal ministry on earth, is erroneous and unscriptural.

Fourth Syllogism (a) To charge Jesus Christ with rebuking a people for not entering an organization of which they were already members, is to charge Him as being guilty of an absurdity, and can only result from an erroneous and unscriptural position. (b) But the doctrine that the Jewish church and the Christian church is identical, would make Christ to be guilty of this absurdity, since these people were already members of the old Jewish church. (c) Therefore, the doctrine that the Jewish church and the Christian church is identical, is erroneous and unscriptural.

6.

The “Publicans and harlots” entered into the kingdom, or Church of Christ, during His personal ministry on earth.

“Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.” (“Yet you, having seen it, did not afterward repent, so as to believe him.”—Em. Diaglott.) Matthew 21:31-32; cf.

Luke 3:12; 7:29-30.

1. Logical statement. (a) Who were the “publicans and harlots”? Jewish men and women. (b) What did they go into? The “kingdom of God.” (c) Then there must have been a “kingdom of God” in existence at that time, for them to “go into.” (d) Also, this “kingdom of God” must have been something entirely different and distinct from the old Jewish church, since they could not “go into” an institution of which they were already members! (e) People enter into the “kingdom of grace,” or are saved, the moment they repent and believe. (f) These publicans and harlots had repented and believed during the ministry of John, and had been baptized by him, Luke 3:12; 7:29-30. (g) Therefore, they were already members of the “kingdom of grace”—saved, at the time Christ said they were entering this “kingdom of God,” and hence, this “kingdom” they were then entering, was something entirely different and distinct from the “kingdom of grace” or salvation.

First Syllogism. (a) Publicans and harlots, as live, active, visible men and women, could not have entered a nonexisting, invisible church or kingdom. (b) They did enter this “kingdom of God.” (c) Therefore, the kingdom or church of God, was an actual, visible church or kingdom of God,

composed of live, active men and women, during the personal ministry of Christ on earth.

Second Syllogism. (a) Christ could not have said, that the “publicans and harlots” went into this kingdom “before” the chief priests and elders, if the Church or kingdom of Christ was identical with the old Jewish church, since the chief-priests and elders were already members of the latter. (b) But they did go into this kingdom “before” them. (c) Therefore, this church or kingdom was not identical with the old Jewish organization.

Third Syllogism. (a) These publicans and harlots had entered the “kingdom of grace”—had been saved as well as baptized, through the ministry of John. (b) They were entering this “kingdom of God” during the ministry of Christ. (c) Therefore, this Church or kingdom of God, is something distinct from the “kingdom of grace.”

7.

The Kingdom of God is come unto you.

“But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.” - Mat 12:28; Luke 10:9-11; 11:20.

1. Deductions. (a) From Matthew 12:28, et al, we learn that Jesus cast out devils during His personal ministry on earth. (b) He declares that this was an evidence that the “kingdom of God” had come unto them. (c) If it had “come unto them,” they did not have it before, First Syllogism. (a) If Jesus cast out devils, the “Kingdom of God” had come unto them. (b) He cast out devils during His personal ministry. (c) Therefore, the Kingdom of God was in existence during the personal ministry of Christ.

Second Syllogism. (a) The “Kingdom of God,” had come unto them,—was not among them prior to this time. (b) The Jewish church was among them at that time. (c) Therefore, the “Kingdom of God” and the old Jewish church were not identical.

CHAPTER VIII.

8.

The Kingdom of God is among you.

“And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation.” (“With outward show.”

Margin, and Em. Diaglott.) “Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.” (“among you,” Margin, Em. Diaglott, and Rotherham, “in your midst,” margin of Rev. Version), Luke 17:20-21 “Entos, within, inside with Gen. Entos humon, within you; i.e., in the midst of you, Luke 17:21; others, ‘within you’ (i.e., ‘in your souls’), a meaning which the use of the word permits, but not the context,” Thayer’s Grimm-Wilkes’ Lexicon.

“In the midst of them the Messianic kingdom was, so far as He, the Messiah, was and worked, cf.

Luke 11:20, Matthew 12:28, among them. . . . If others have explained ‘entos humon,’ by ‘In your souls,’ there is, it is true, no objection to be raised on the score of grammar; but it is decidedly opposed to this, that ‘humon’ refers to the Pharisees, in whose hearts nothing certainly found a place less than did the ethical kingdom of God,”-Meyer.

Deductions.

1.

The “Kingdom of God” was in the midst of the Jews. The Saviour said so.

2.

They did not know it, and were therefore, looking for something else.

3.

Hence, it was not the old Jewish church, but something entirely different and distinct from it.

First Syllogism, a.

The kingdom or Church of God was in the midst of the Pharisees, and they had not recognized it. b.

They did recognize the old Jewish church, of which they were leading members. c.

Therefore, this “kingdom of God” was not identical with the old Jewish church, but something distinct from it.

Second Syllogism, a.

The “Kingdom of God” was an institution in the midst of the Jews, at the time Jesus uttered these words. b.

This was during the personal ministry of Christ. c.

Therefore, the Kingdom or Church of God was in existence during the personal ministry of Christ, and before Pentecost.

Third Syllogism. (a) Jesus said that the “kingdom of God” should not come with “outward show,” that is, its establishment should not be accompanied with a great noise and parade, or be distinguished by extraordinary outward or visible demonstrations, verse 20. (b) But the “day of Pentecost” was accompanied with such a noise and parade, and was distinguished by such outward and visible demonstrations, Acts 2:1-3. (c) Therefore, the kingdom, or Church of God, was not established on the “day of Pentecost.”

Fourth Syllogism. (a) Jesus said, that the people should not say, “Lo here, or Lo there!” (Gr. idou! idou!) that is they should not be astonished, or express their amazement at the signs and wonders accompanying the coming or establishment of His church or kingdom, verse 21. (b) But the people were “amazed” at what they saw and heard on the “day of Pentecost,” and expressed their astonishment by saying, “Behold,” etc. (Gr. idou! the very word Jesus said they should not use on the occasion of the establishment of His kingdom), Acts 2:1-12. (c) Therefore, the Church or kingdom of God was not established on the “day of Pentecost.”

Thus we see from the express statements of Jesus Christ Himself, that the idea, that the Church or kingdom of God was established or “set up” on the “day of Pentecost,” is without the slightest foundation in the Word of God! 9.

The Kingdom to be taken away.

“The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof,” Matthew 21:43. Read from verse 33, to the end of the chapter.

DEDUCTIONS (1) The Church or Kingdom of God was first established among the Jews, as a people.

(2) As a people, they rejected it, John 1:11-12.

(3) In the parable it is said, that “He sent His servants” to the husbandmen, vs. 34.

The twelve were first sent out, and commanded to “go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand,” Matthew 10:5-7; cf. Luke 9:1-6.

(4) Then “He sent other servants more than the first,” vs. 36. This was fulfilled when He sent forth

the “seventy,” and told them to preach. “the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you,” Luke 10:1-11.

(5) “Last of all He sent His Son,” etc., vs. 37. “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,” Matthew 15:24. “Now, after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye, and believe the gospel,” Mark 1:14-13.

(6) When they had rejected it, it was “to be taken from them and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof,” vs. 43. “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold and said, It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you; but seeing ye judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, Lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth,” Acts 13:46-47, cf. Matthew 28:19-20.

(7) Since it was not the Jewish church that was taken from the Jewish people and given to the Gentiles, the “kingdom of God” was not the Jewish church.

(8) The Jews as a people, were in possession of this “kingdom of God” at the time the Saviour was speaking, else it could not have been “taken away” from them.

First Syllogism. (a) The Jewish church was never taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles. (b) This “kingdom of God” was thus taken away. (c) Therefore, this kingdom of God was not identical with the old Jewish church.

Second Syllogism. (a) Christ could not have said, “this kingdom shall be taken” from the people whom He was addressing, unless it had been in existence at that time. (b) But He did make such a declaration. (c) Therefore, this “kingdom” was in existence at the time Christ spake, and hence, before Pentecost.

10.

It was not a worldly, but a spiritual Kingdom.

“Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a King, then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king.

To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world,” etc., John 18:36-37. The word translated “servants” in verse 36, is the same word exactly that is translated “officers” in verses John 18:3, 12, 18, 22 and in many other places, and “officers” is put in the margin of the Rev. Version, and is the translation given by Rotherham and the Emphatic Diaglott.

Deductions.

1.

Christ’s kingdom was not a worldly kingdom, nevertheless it was a kingdom in the world, composed of men and women chosen out of the world, John 15:19; 17:14, 16; 8:23. It is a spiritual kingdom not political or secular.

2.

As a King, He had subjects—servants or officers—who were ready to fight for Him, Matthew 26:5152.

3.

As a King, He gave laws for the government of His subjects, Matthew. 5th to 7th, and 18th chapters.

4.

He confessed to Pilate that He was a King, and had come into the world for this very purpose!

5. His kingdom was not the Jewish church or nation per se, for it was the “chief priests and elders” of this church, that were His most inveterate enemies, and were the immediate cause of His death. And if this was the institution of which the Saviour claimed the spiritual head-ship, then we have the marvelous spectacle, of a body committing spiritual suicide by cutting off its own head, and yet

continuing to live!

6.

The Jewish kingdom was a secular power, but the kingdom of Christ was a spiritual institution.

First Syllogism. (a) A King without a kingdom is not really a King. (b) Jesus said He was a King when He stood before Pilate. (c) Therefore, He had a kingdom at that time.

Second Syllogism.

(1) Five things are essential to a kingdom:(a) A King; (b) subjects; (c) laws; (d) territory; (e) power, or authority.

(2) Jesus was (a) a King; He had (b) subjects; He gave (c) laws; He possessed (d) territory; He had (e) power, or authority, John 17:2; Matthew 28:18, et al.

(3) Therefore, He was a King and had a kingdom while He was on earth.

Third Syllogism. (a) Christ’s kingdom was “not of this world,”—not a secular or political kingdom, else His servants would have fought to prevent His deliverance into the hands of His enemies. (b) The Jewish kingdom was a secular or political institution, and were constantly engaged in fighting with their enemies. (c) Therefore, the kingdom of Christ and the Jewish kingdom were not identical.

11.

The executive management of the affairs of Christ’s Kingdom transferred to the Apostles.

“And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Luke 22:2930. Rotherham and the Em. Diaglott translate “Diatithemi,” by the word “covenant.” instead of “appoint.”

“Diatithemi,—to place separately. dispose. arrange. appoint. (1)To arrange, dispose of one’s own affairs, i.e., of something that belongs to one; with dative of person added, in one’s favor, to one’s advantage; hence, to assign a thing to another as his possession, Luke 22:29.” (Thayer’s Grimm—Wilkes’ Lex.) DEDUCTIONS (1) The Father had appointed or covenanted unto the Son a kingdom. “I have set my King upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree,” Psalm 2:6-7.

(2) As Supreme Ruler in this Kingdom, He had a right to make such arrangements for its future management, and such disposition of its blessings and honors, as He saw proper.

(3) This He did by appointing the future management and control of the affairs of His kingdom, to his disciples as a body, (and not to any one of them, as the Catholics falsely claim), and distributing the honors of His kingdom to them equally.

(4) While He did this, He still retained His kingship and sovereignty in it—they were to “Sit at my table in my kingdom.”

(5) In the final triumphant consummation, they were to “sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” This was to be their especial prerogative. “Do not ye judge them that are within?” etc., 1 Cor. 5:12. “Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world,” etc.? I Corinthians 6:2-3.[ Matthew 19:28; Daniel 7:22 -esn ] First Syllogism. (a) A person cannot appoint or covenant to another, that which he himself does not possess. (b) Jesus did appoint or covenant a kingdom unto. His disciples.

(c) Therefore, He possessed a kingdom while He was on earth.

Second Syllogism. (a) Jesus appointed a kingdom unto His disciples, as His Father had appointed unto Him. (b) These disciples were in real, actual possession of His kingdom after this appointment, and ate and drank, and exercised ecclesiastical power therein. [ cf. Luke 22:16; 24:41-44 -esn (c) Therefore, Jesus was in real, actual possession of His kingdom during His personal ministry on earth, Third Syllogism. (a) The kingdom, or Church in which the Apostles ate and drank, and in which they exercised ecclesiastical authority, was not the Jewish kingdom or church. (b) It was the same kingdom that had been appointed unto Jesus Christ by the Father. (c) Therefore, the Church, or kingdom of Jesus Christ was not the old Jewish church or kingdom.

CHAPTER IX.

12.

Argument Based Upon Those Scriptures Which Represent the Church or Kingdom of Christ As A Body, of Which He Is the Head.

“The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” Ephesians 1:18-23; cf. 1 Corinthians 12:12-28; Ephesians 1:18-23. 4:12-32; Colossians 1:18-24, et al.

DEDUCTIONS (1) The word “church” is used in this, and kindred passages, by a figure of speech called “synecdoche,” to represent the church institution, or church organization. It does not mean that Christ is the “head of the church” only “at Ephesus,” or “at Colosse,” nor does it mean that He is the Head of a great big, universal church, composed of all the lesser churches, or of all the saved taken together, for there is no such an institution. But the word “church” is used in these passages, just as we use the word “oak” in the sentence, “the oak is the monarch of the wood,” or the word “eagle,” when we say, “the eagle is the king of birds.” We do not mean one particular oak or eagle, nor yet, an oak composed of all the oaks in the world, or of an eagle composed of all the eagles in the world. There is frequent use of this figure of speech by the inspired writers. For example: “The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib,” Isaiah 1:3. The inspired penman did not mean just one special, or particular “ox” and his “owner,” or one particular “ass” and his “master,” Neither did he mean one big, universal ox composed of all the oxen on earth, owned by one big, universal owner composed of all the owners on earth, etc. But the word “ox” is used as a representative of the class or species of the oxen, as distinguished from all other animals, and so of the other words in the quotation, The word “church” is thus used in the above passages.

(2) “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church,” evidently means, that the dominion and government and control of all things in the church was given into his hands. When was this done? “Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He was come from God, and went to God,” etc., John 13:3. “All things are delivered unto me of my Father,” etc., Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 3:35, 17:2. “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth,” etc., Matthew 28:18, et al.

1. Syllogism. (a) Dominion, power, government and control, cannot be exercised over a non-existent Church or kingdom. (b) Jesus possessed and exercised this dominion, power, government, and control, during His personal ministry on earth. (c) Therefore, He possessed a Church or kingdom, over which He exercised this dominion, power, government and control, during His personal ministry on earth.

13.

Christ is Called a Bridegroom, and the Church a Bride.

“Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease.” John 3:28-30. [cf. Genesis 2:21-25; 2 Corinthians 11:2-esn] DEDUCTIONS (1) Christ is here called a “bridegroom.”

(2) A bridegroom is impossible without a “bride.” The church is the bride of Christ, Ephesians 5:22-32 et al.

(3) Moreover, John says, “he that hath the bride, is the bridegroom.” Present tense.

(4) The bridegroom was to be taken away from the bride. “Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?— And Jesus said unto them, can the children of the bridechamber mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the day will come when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then they shall fast,” Matthew 9:14-15.

(5) John rejoiced, that he could “hear the bridegroom’s Voice,” while he was here on earth.

(6) Christ must; “increase”—His kingdom must be enlarged!

(7) John must “decrease.” His followers must become fewer and fewer in number. They must be taken to increase the kingdom of Christ. He was sent to “prepare a people for the Lord.” The Lord was taking this people whom He had prepared, therefore his “joy was fulfilled.”

First Syllogism. (a) A bridegroom without a bride is impossible. (b) Jesus Christ was a Bridegroom while He was on earth. (c) Therefore, He had a bride while He was on earth.

Second Syllogism. (a) Jesus Christ had a bride while He was on earth. (b) The Church is called the bride of Christ. (c) Therefore, He had a Church while He was on earth, Third Syllogism. (a) The children of the bride-chamber were to mourn when He was taken away. (b) The members of the old Jewish church did not mourn—on the contrary, they rejoiced. (c) Therefore, the members of the old Jewish church, were not members of the bride-chamber——the church of Christ, i.e., the two churches were not identical.

14.

This Bride or Church of Christ Is Called a City.

“And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.”...“Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God. . . . And the wall of the city had twelve foundations,

and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb,” etc., Rev. 21:2-27.

DEDUCTIONS 1.

John saw the bride, or church of Christ. under the figure of a “City.”

2.

Carrying out the figure,—in the construction of this city. John saw the “twelve foundations.”

3.

Recorded in these foundations, were “the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb,” thus showing that they were the first, or original members in the foundation of His church.

4.

Paul also taught that the Ephesians (one of the churches to which John wrote, Rev. 2:1), had been “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself, being the chief corner— stone,” etc., Eph. 2:20.

5.

If they were the “foundation stones” of this city, it did not have an existence prior to the time they were placed in the foundation As to when that was done, see Mark 3:13-19.

“And he goeth up into a mountain, and calleth unto him whom he would and they came unto him.

And he ordained twelve.” etc. “And of them he chose twelve, whom, he named apostles,” etc., Luke 6:13-16.

First Syllogism. (a) A city cannot exist before laying the foundation. (b) The “calling” or ‘ordination” of the “twelve Apostles,” was laying the foundations of this city. (c) Therefore, this city did not exist before the calling or ordination of the twelve Apostles.

Second Syllogism. (a) The Church or bride of Christ is called a “city.” (b) The calling and ordination of the twelve Apostles, was laying the foundation of this city. (c) Therefore, the calling and ordination of the twelve Apostles, was laying the foundation of His church.

15.

The Gospel of the Kingdom Was Preached By the Saviour During His Personal Ministry On Earth.

“Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.” Mark 1:14-15.

(1) The kingdom of God has a “gospel.” Evaggelion, the word translated “gospel,” is thus defined. 1. A reward for good tidings. 2. Good tidings. . . . In the New Testament specially. (a) The glad tidings of the kingdom of God soon to be set up, and subsequently, also of Jesus, the Messiah, the founder of this kingdom, Mark 1:14-15, et al.

“After the death of Christ, this term comprises also the preaching of (concerning) Jesus Christ as having suffered death on the cross, to procure eternal salvation for men in the kingdom of God, but as restored to life, and exalted to the right of God in heaven, thence to return in majesty to consummate the kingdom of God; so that it may be more briefly defined as the glad tidings of salvation through Christ; the gospel.”

Thayer’s Grimm-Wilke’s Lex. Jesus proclaims the “good news,” the “glad tidings,” that “the kingdom of God is at hand.”

(2) “The time is fulfilled.” The prophecies which foretold the establishment of the kingdom, e.g., Daniel 2:44, by the “God of heaven,” are fulfilled.

“And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people,” Matthew 9:35.

1. Logical statement. (a) The kingdom of God has a gospel.

(b) A non-existent organization could not have a gospel. (c) Therefore, the kingdom of God was a real, literal, existing institution.

2. Logical statement. (a) The prophecies which related to the establishment of this kingdom, could not have been “fulfilled” while it was still non-existent, (b) But these prophecies were fulfilled, while Christ was here on earth. (c) Therefore, the kingdom was in existence during His personal ministry on earth.

16.

This Gospel of the Kingdom Is To Be Preached To All Nations As A Witness Before the End of This Dispensation.

“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Matthew 24:14. See references.

Deductions.

1.

John the Baptist preached this “gospel,” Matthew 3:1-12; Mark 1:1-5; John 1:6-15; 3:36.

2.

Jesus Christ preached it, Mark 1:14-15, et at.

3.

The Apostles preached it, Mark 6:12; Luke 9:2-6.

4.

The Seventy preached it, Luke 10:1-20.

5. We preach it. No other people do!

6.

When this “gospel of the kingdom” shall have been preached in all the world—“among all nations”—then shall the end of this “age” come.[Mt. 24:14] 7.

The wonderful revival of interest in missions began among the Baptists in England, in the year 1792. In view of the fact, that we have “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, we are under peculiar and special obligations, to preach this gospel of the kingdom to all nations. None others can!

1. Logical statement. (a) A commission to preach “this gospel of the kingdom,” when there was no kingdom in existence to preach,. would be a commission to preach a falsehood. (b) Christ commissioned the preaching of such a gospel. (c) Therefore, the kingdom existed when Christ gave this commission, since He could not and would not commission the preaching of an untruth.

17.

Is Based Upon the Line of Distinction Between the Church and the World, Drawn

by Our Saviour, During His Personal Ministry on Earth.

“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain. . . . If ye were of the world, the world would love his own; but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you,” John 15:16-18. “I have manifested Thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world,” etc. “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world,” John 17:6, 16. “My kingdom is not of this world,” etc. John 18:36.

DEDUCTIONS (1) In these passages, Jesus Christ, draws a line of distinction between His disciples, and the rest of mankind, whom He called “the world.”

(2) This distinction is based upon moral or spiritual qualifications, and is as clearly defined, as the distinction between Himself and the “world.”

(3) He declares, that he has “chosen them OUT of the world,” and “ordained them, that they should go and bring forth fruit.” This was done when He called them out and ordained them apostles, as

recorded in Mark 3:13-19, and Luke 6:13-16.

(4) This choosing out, or separation from the world, was clone shortly after He entered upon His ministry, and was just as complete a separation from the world, as that which exists between His Church and the world today.

(5) As regards the religious standing of men in the world they may be either in the “Church,” or in the “world,” either in the “kingdom of God,” or the “kingdom of Satan.” But as regards their moral or spiritual state before God, they are either the “servants of righteousness,” or the “servants of sin”; either the “children and heirs of God,” or the “children and heirs of the devil,” Matthew 6:24. Admission into the “Church” or “kingdom of heaven” however, does not depend exclusively on moral qualification.

Immoral men have, and will enter the Church. See 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; John 6:64, 70, cf. Matthew 8:21-23; 13:36-43.

First Syllogism. (a) Men cannot be “in the Church” and “in the world” at the same time.—Jesus. (b) The disciples were not “in the world,”—they had been “chosen out” of it.—Jesus. (c) Therefore, they were in the Church.

Second Syllogism. (a). These disciples were “in the Church” during the personal ministry of Christ on earth. (b) Men cannot be in an institution of this kind that does not exist. (c) Therefore, the Church was in existence during the personal ministry of Christ on earth.

18.

Christ Taught By Parables, That His Church Or Kingdom Was An Entirely New and Distinct Institution, From Any Which Had Preceded It. “No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse.” {new: or, raw, or, unwrought} Matthew 9:16.

DEDUCTIONS 1.

“Old garment,” evidently the old Jewish church.

2.

“New cloth.” evidently a new system of church government, rites, ceremonies. etc.

3.

Therefore, the church or kingdom of Christ, was not the old Jewish church reformed, or “patched up.”

“Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.” {bottles: or, sacks of skin, or, leather} Matt. 9:17.

1. “Old bottles,” old Jewish church organization.

2. “New bottles,” new church organization.

3. “New wine,” new doctrine, new practices, etc.

4. “Both are preserved,” these new doctrines, new practices, new ordinances, etc., belong to an entirely new and distinct institution, and they are both to be “preserved”—perpetuated.

CHAPTER X.

19. The Church Was Complete and Perfect in its Constitution and Organization, the Members Enjoying and Exercising All the Rights, Privileges and Immunities, of Membership Therein, During the Personal Ministry of Christ on Earth.

Let us again define a Church: “A Church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers, associated together in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel; observing the ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, and exercising the gifts, rights and privileges, invested in them by His Word.” Bap. Con. of Faith.

Or take another definition, which, with a very little explanation, any Baptist would endorse: “A visible Church. of Christ, is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached,

and the sacraments duly administered according to Christ’s ordinance, in all those things that are requisite to the same.” Dis. of M. E.. Church, S. If we understand by the phrase “faithful men,”— believing men and women, and by the term “sacraments,” the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper merely, without any saving efficacy, we can readily accept this definition of a Church.

Now let us apply these definitions, and see whether’ there was such an institution under the personal ministry of Christ.

Deductions.

1. Here was a “congregation of faithful men,”—believers. “And His disciples believed on (eis, in) Him.”— John 2:11. “For the Father Himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God,” etc., John 16:27-31, cf. John 17:8, 14-20, et al.

2. They were “baptized believers.” John the Baptist was sent to “prepare a people for the Lord,” and while engaged in that work he said, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance; but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire,” Matthew 3:11. Here it is declared that the same persons John baptized “with (Greek en, in) water,” Christ was to baptize “with (Greek, en) the Holy Ghost.” Accordingly, we find the Saviour calling their attention to John’s baptism, just before His ascension, saying, “For John truly baptized with water (ebaptisen hudati, immersed in water); but you shall be baptized (en pneumati hagioi) in the Holy Ghost, not many days hence,” Acts 1:5. From the second chapter of Acts, we find that the twelve disciples were the ones who were baptized in the Holy Ghost, and hence, they were the ones whom John had baptized in water.

Additional weight is given to this argument, if any such weight were necessary, when it is remembered, that an essential qualification for an apostle to be selected in the place of the traitor Judas, was that he should “have companied with them all the time the Lord Jesus went in and out among them, beginning from the baptism of John,” Acts 1:21-22, cf.

John 1:35-37.

3. “Associated together in the faith and fellowship of the gospel.” They “companied” together during Christ’s ministry.

4. “In which the pure Word of God is preached.” See Matthew 5, 6, and 7 chapters; Luke 6:20-49; John 14, 15 and 16 chapters, et mul al. Surely if the “pure Word of God” was ever preached on this earth, it was preached by the Lord Jesus Christ, during His personal ministry on earth.

5. “And the ordinances rightly administered.” (a) Baptism. “And after these things came Jesus and His disciples into the land of Judea, and there He tarried with them and baptized,” John 3:22. “When, therefore, the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (though Jesus Himself baptized not, but His disciples,), John 4:1-2. (b) The Lord’s Supper. “And He took bread and gave thanks, and break it, and gave it to them, saying, this is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me. Likewise, the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which is shed for you,” Luke 22:19-20, cf. Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22, 26; 1 Corinthians 11th chapter. Certainly this ordinance was observed as a Church ordinance. The Psalmist David had foretold, “I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the congregation (ekklesia) will I praise thee,” Ps. 22:22. The Apostle Paul quotes this language, and applies it to Christ; “For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare Thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the Church (ekklesia) will I sing praise unto thee,” Hebrews 2:11-12. According to Paul’s interpretation and application of David’s prophecy, Christ was to “sing praise in the midst of the Church.” When was that prophecy fulfilled? Matthew and Mark say, at the close of the supper,

that “when they had sung an hymn, (margin, psalm), they went out into the Mount of Olives,” Matthew 26:30; Mk. 14:26. This is the only place in the New Testament, where Jesus Christ is ever said to have engaged in singing, and we find that He sang in the “midst of the Church!”

Hence it follows, as clear as the noon-day sun, that He had a Church during His personal ministry on earth!

Syllogism. (a) Christ was to sing, and did sing “in the midst of the Church,” David and Paul. (b) He sang at the close of the institution of the “Lord’s Supper,” Matthew and Mark. (c) Therefore He had a Church at that time—during His personal ministry on earth.

6. Exercised discipline in the Church, “And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of Heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.”

Matthew 16:19. “Keys” are symbols of authority, and the Saviour here bestows upon the disciples power to receive and expel members, and exercise authority in the Church, as His executive body on earth. Not to Peter alone, but the entire twelve. See John 20:19-23, et al. When a contractor builds a house, he does not deliver the keys until the building is complete. They were to exercise discipline in the Church or Kingdom. so as to maintain peace and fellowship.

“Moreover, if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it to the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church. let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. Verily. I say unto you. whatsoever ye shall bind on earth. shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven.”

Matthew 18:15-18.

Thus it is seen that the Church was the Court of last resort among those disciples.

7. They met together for the purpose of engaging in prayer and the worship of God. “These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women and Mary, the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren,” Acts 1:13-14.

8. They transacted Church business, by electing Matthias to the apostleship in place of the traitor Judas.

“And they prayed, and said, Thou Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast’ chosen. That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles,” Acts 1:24-26. Jesus had previously told them, “That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything, that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father, who is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together In my name, there am I in the midst of them,” Matthew 18:19-20. Also any action they performed in their capacity as a Church on earth, should be ratified “in Heaven,” Matthew 18:18.

It is asserted by our Campbellite friends, that the action of the disciples in electing Matthias to the apostleship was unwarranted, and that he was never recognized as an apostle, because forsooth, his name is not mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, in connection with their work; and this, too, in the face of the declaration of their divine Master that their action should be ratified. The mere fact, that the name of Matthias is not mentioned subsequently, is of no force in disproving his claims to the apostleship, for neither are the names of some of the other apostles mentioned after this time, e.g., Andrew, Bartholomew, Thomas, Philip and Simon Zelotes.

On the other hand, the inspired penman Luke, declares that their action was the fulfillment of a prophecy in the Psalms: “Let his dwelling be desolate, and let no man dwell therein; and let another take his office,” Acts 1:20; (Rev. Version, Em.

Dia., Rotherham, and margin of A.V.) And he further declares that “he was numbered with the eleven apostles,” verse 26. And that he was in truth and verity an apostle, equal with the others, is seen from the fact that he was. with them on the day of Pentecost, and received the baptism of the Spirit on that occasion, Acts 2:14. If Matthias was ever rejected, and Paul was the one chosen to fill the place of Judas, as our Campbellite friends teach, surely Luke would have recorded so important a fact. But he has not said one word intimating such a procedure. Nor does Paul In any of his writings, ever hint of such a thing, although he frequently speaks of himself in connection with the other apostles. But it is characteristic of the advocates of error, that they are compelled to flatly contradict the teachings of the Scriptures, in order to maintain a false and unscriptural creed.

20.

The Church of Christ Is Represented Under the Figure of a “Wife,” Beloved of Her Husband.

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ. is the head of the Church. . . . Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word, that He might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” etc., Ep. 5:23-33.

DEDUCTIONS (1) The relationship existing between Christ and His Church is here represented under the figure of that bond of love, which unites the husband and wife.

(2) He declares, that as “the husband is the head of the wife, so Christ is the Head of the Church,” and therefore, “as the Church is subject unto Christ, so the wives should be in subjection to their own husbands in everything,” cf. 1 Pet. 3:1-6. For a Church of Christ to acknowledge the authority of any one else, except her Divine Lord and Master, by rendering obedience to other than His divine commands, is simply to confess herself an “ecclesiastical harlot!”

(3) He further exhorts the husband to love his wife, “even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.”

(4) Paul declares that the object which prompted this love, was “that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might cause it to stand by his side,” (Greek, Em. Diaglott’, et mul al) “a glorious church,” etc.

Just. as a bride stands by the side of her husband at the altar, when the marriage ceremony is being performed, arrayed in spotless white, indicative of her pure and unsullied virtue and innocence, so time redeemed church, when she shall have been completed, is to stand by the side of her Divine Husband and Lord, clothed in the robes of spotless righteousness wrought out for her, and hear those blessed words of joy and gladness, which are to unite her to Him, to enjoy His presence, and share His glorious inheritance forever. John, in the Apocalyptic vision beheld this glorious consummation, and thus describes it: “Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they who are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb,” Rev. 19:7-9, cf, Matthew 22:2-14,. 25:1-13; Rev. 21:2-9.

(5) Prompted by the love Christ bore for His church, “He gave himself for it,” i.e., He died on the cross for her salvation.

It would have been impossible for Paul to have used the above figure, as it is used in this passage, if the Church as an institution, had not been in existence at the time Christ died for it. As an illustration, take the passage, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,” etc., John 3:16. It would have been impossible for God to have loved the “world” at all, if there had been no world in

existence to love, and in like manner, it would have been impossible for Christ to have loved the “Church,” if there had been no Church in existence to love. And just as it would have been impossible for God to have given His Son to die for the “world,” if there had been no world in existence for which to die, so it would have been impossible for Jesus Christ to have given Himself for the “Church,” if there had been no Church in existence for which to make this sacrifice.

First Syllogism. (a) A husband cannot “give himself,” that is, die for a wife, who does not really exist. (b) Jesus Christ as such a “husband,” “gave Himself,” i.e., died for His Church, while He was here on earth. (c) Therefore, the Church had a. real existence while He was here on earth.

Second Syllogism. (a) A husband cannot love a wife, so as, prompted by that love, he would die for her,. who does not really and actually possess a wife for which to die. (b) Jesus Christ, as such a “husband” “loved the Church.” and prompted by that love, He died for her. (c) Therefore, His Church had a real, actual existence prior to His death!

And so, in whatever light the subject is presented by the inspired penmen, whether viewed under the figure of a house, temple, tabernacle, bride or wife, or whether presented in its real character as a Church or Kingdom, it has been proven over and over again, by Scripture and logic, if it is possible to prove anything in this world, that Jesus Christ had a Church while He was on earth, and that it was organized or established under His personal supervision and direction, and thus He accomplished one of the principal objects of His mission in this world!

Christ came to Earth to set up a Kingdom THE WORK OF CHRIST IN THE COVENANT OF REDEMPTION; DEVELOPED IN SEVEN DISPENSATIONS. An excerption out of Part III, Eschatology, Covering the Period from the Birth of Christ until the Final Consummation. Christ’s Redemptive Work Finished and GOD “All in All” as it was in the Beginning. Earth the Home and Heaven of the Redeemed -- chps. 1-2 by J. R. Graves, 1883 A.D. “I claim that liberty which I willingly yield to others – in subjects of difficulty to put forward as true such things as appear to be profitable, until proved to be manifestly false.”--- Hervey

INTRODUCTION.

... upon the study of the prophecies of Christ fulfilled and unfulfilled we give our readers the eloquent remarks of Dr. Bonar, of Scotland,...

MAN'S thoughts about the future and the unseen are of little worth. They are, at best, but dreams—no more than the blind guesses of fancy.

They approach no nearer to the truth than do a child's conjectures regarding the history of some distant star, or as to the peopling of space beyond the outskirts of the visible creation.

But the thoughts of God respecting the future are precious beyond measure. They are truth and certainty, whether they touch upon the far-off or the near, the likely or the unlikely. They are disfigured with no miscalculations; for they are the thoughts of the great Designer regarding his own handiwork. Of however little moment it may be for us to know what man thinks about the future, it is of vast moment for us to know what GOD thinks of it. However few these revealed thoughts of God may be, yet they ought to be estimated by us as above all price. They are the thoughts of an infinite mind; and they are the thoughts of that mind upon a subject utterly inaccessible to us, yet entirely familiar to Him who sees the end from the beginning, and whose wisdom has pre-arranged the whole.

These thoughts of God about the future are what we call prophecy; and, in studying prophecy, we are studying the thoughts of God—the purposes of his heart. Of these his secrets, he is not unwilling that we should be partakers; nay, he has spread them out before us—he has recorded them for our use; and deep must be the guilt, as well as incalculable the loss, of those

who turn aside from such a study; who will listen with some interest, perhaps, to man's ideas of what is coming to pass upon the earth, but never think of inquiring what is the mind of God. . . . . . . . . .…

We know how sadly many are fettered with prejudices upon this subject, and haunted with the idea of the presumptuous nature of the study. But surely the mere fact of prophecy forming a part of the Divine revelation is quite sufficient to satisfy us of the lawfulness, nay, the strict duty of studying it, not only in its general heads, but in its most minute particulars.

"Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy of this book," are the words of encouragement; and though we had not another similar text in Scripture, that single one would be enough for us. I confess that not only do I not sympathize with, but I do not at all understand, the principle or reason of this prejudice; nor is it very, easy to trace it to any thing like a Scriptural or rational source. Surely no one can think of maintaining that the mere futurity of a thing renders it unprofitable, and stamps with the charge of rashness any attempt to investigate it minutely. Yet this is the only conceivable meaning of the objection. And if so, how foolish—how sinful is it when calmly weighed! For the unlawfulness or unprofitableness of our inquiries into any subject consists not in the matter being either past, present or future, but simply in its not being revealed.

It would be just as wise to bar all minute search into Scripture history on the ground of its being past, as it is to inhibit all minute inquiry into prophecy because it is future.

The fact of God having revealed so many particulars regarding the future settles the whole question as to the duty of every believer to examine these. It is as plain as truth can be, that no investigation, however minute, can be called presumptuous, so long as it restricts itself to what is written; nay, the more minute, the more accurate it is likely to be, and therefore more accordant with the mind of the Spirit. The presumption is all the other way. It is the presumption of closing the ear against the voice of God—the presumption of professing to decide how much of God's Word may be studied with safety, and how much ought to be neglected as mysterious and unprofitable.

Will the reader consider well these Scriptures?— Deut. 29:29; Isa. 45:11; Mark 13:23; Luke 24:25; Matt. 16:3; 24:25; 2 Peter 1:19; 3:17; Rev. 1:3; 19:10; 22:7, 10.

FRIDAY MORNING OF THE WORLD'S WEEK.

CHAPTER I The Incarnation of the Second Person in the Trinity as the Son of God, fulfilling the exact Predictions of the Prophets ages before the Event—Demonstrative Evidence of the Authenticity of the Scriptures—Christ came to Earth to set up a Kingdom—The Kingdom set up in the Days of John the Baptist, and both He and Christ in the Kingdom.

THE Anthem of the Angels, which broke upon the deep darkness of the moral night, which had settled down upon the whole world, as Thursday's sun sunk behind the dark cloud of a ritualized and perverted Christianity, announced the day-break of a brighter dispensation to be ushered in by the personal Advent and incarnation of the Second Person in the Godhead, as the Son of God. He came to fulfill the prophecies concerning himself, and to inaugurate a new era by setting up a new institution—a visible kingdom—on this earth, as prophets and holy men had predicted during the ages past.

Predictions of the Prophets As demonstrative proof of the authenticity of our Holy Scriptures it may not be amiss to refer to some of these here.

Moses, fourteen hundred and thirty-one years before the event, foretold that a Divine Prophet would be raised up unto Israel in coming ages, of which he was a type, and that he who heard not the voice of that Prophet would be cut off. (Deut. 18:18-19.) This Prophet was none other than the Son of God, and made by the oath of God a Priest forever, after the order of Melchisedec.

It was foretold by Isaiah seven hundred and fifty-eight years before the event, that he was to be born of a virgin: Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel "—God with us.—Isa. 7:14.

It was foretold by Micah seven hundred and ten years before, that this wonderful event would take place in the insignificant town of Bethlehem of Judea: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephrata, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me who is to be ruler in Israel, whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."—Mic. 5:2.

The very age of the world in which the Son of God, as the Messiah of Israel, was to appear, was pointed out by the holy men of old as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The dying Jacob, in blessing Judah, sixteen hundred and eighty-nine years previously, said: "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be."—Gen. 49:10.

The obvious meaning of this is, that Judah should retain the supremacy among the tribes, and should yield it to no other. History verifies this. Judah maintained its nationality despite the dismemberment of the kingdom, and the seventy years of captivity, and, at the coming of Messiah, still retained its national institutions and laws, soon after which they ceased forever; which should be convincing to every Jew and Gentile that the Messiah of Israel appeared shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem.

It was foretold by Daniel six hundred and three years before the event, that Messiah should appear in the days of the Roman empire—the kings of the fourth universal empire—and should himself set up a kingdom on earth.

(See Dan. 2:40, and onward.)

"And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise. . . . And in the days of these kings [i. e., of the fourth kingdom,] shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever."

The four kingdoms represented by this image as confessed by all commentators, were: 1.

The Babylonian, under Nebuchadnezzar; 2.

The Medo-Persian, under Darius; 3. The Grecian, under Alexander; 4.

The Roman, under the Caesars. All these have forever passed away, never more to rise; and therefore, the period when Christ, the God of heaven, should set up his kingdom is passed; and, unless he did set it up in "the days of these kings"—the life-time of one of the Roman emperors—this prophecy is evidently false: for if it was not then fulfilled, it never can be fulfilled. The attempt of some modern theorists to make it refer to the kings of ten kingdoms symbolized by the ten toes, in order to place the setting up of Christ's kingdom in some far, distant age, is groundless; for it must be evident to all that the toes, with the legs and feet of this image, have, with the Roman empire in all its parts, forever passed away. It is a conceded fact that this prophecy was understood by the Jews, and by the Romans themselves, as one that would be fulfilled in the days of the Caesars; and Virgil, in a beautiful Eclogue, manifestly based upon the prophecy of Isaiah, wrote as though it was to be fulfilled in the Consul Pollio.

"Now the virgin returns, now the kingdom of Saturn returns, now a new progeny is sent down from high heaven. By means of these, whatever reliques of our crimes remain shall be wiped away, and free the world from perpetual fears.

He shall govern the earth in peace with the virtues of his Father."—Ecl. iv.

Daniel foretells the exact time when the promised Messiah should appear, and the time when he should be cut off, with all of which dates we must suppose the Jews of that age were perfectly familiar: "Know therefore, and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks; the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after three-score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself; and the people of the Prince that shall come shall destroy the city, and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined."—Dan. 9:25-26.

So well satisfied was the Jewish nation that the time was at hand when the Messiah was to appear, that it was already upon the very tiptoe of expectancy when his herald, in the wilderness of Judea, announced his approach.

It was foretold that he was to be a lineal descendant of the royal family of David—who should reign as king on the throne of David:

"And there shall come a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots."—Isa. 11:1.

"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will rise up unto David a righteous Branch, and a king shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth." —Jer. 33:15.

"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulders; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this."—Isa.9:6-7.

Instead of "Everlasting Father," read "Father of the Everlasting Ages," which better agrees with the original, for it is evident that he could not be both Son and Father at the same time, or any time, and no being could literally be an "Everlasting Father," or an "Everlasting Son," since the very terms involve a contradiction.

Now these things specifically prophesied of Christ, of which we must look for the fulfillment in connection with Jesus of Nazareth, before we are justified in claiming him as the promised Messiah and our Saviour: 1. That he was born of a virgin. This is established by the testimony of — 2. That he was of the family of David. This is proved by his genealogy as given by Matthew.

3. He did set up a new religious organization, which he called the Kingdom of God—of heaven—his kingdom.

4. He honored the law of God in all its preceptive requirements by a sinless life.

5. He satisfied the violated law for his people by suffering its penal sanctions.

These two last prophecies concerning him all Christians freely and joyfully concede. The only question before us for discussion is, "Did Christ set up a religious organization which he called his kingdom, in the days of the Caesars?" If he did not, then we are warranted in rejecting him as the Messiah of Israel, and the Saviour of lost men.

Daniel 2:44-45 had declared that this fact would be accomplished in the days of the Roman Caesars, as we have already noticed, by the God of heaven himself, in person, and not by agencies, angelic or human. In the 44th verse it is stated that the God of heaven would set up a kingdom, which is explained in the 45th verse to be by his own sole and personal agency; "Thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands," which certainly must mean that he did not do it through created agencies, but directly; and if so, the kingdom must have been set up during his personal ministry. But Christ himself declared that he would build his church, and, therefore, it must have been founded before his ascension.

Now, unless we can find an organization called the "kingdom of God and church of Christ," set up during the three years of Christ's ministry on this earth, and unlike any organization that had preceded it, we are compelled to discredit the declarations of the prophets as well as that of Christ himself. Those who deny that the institution we call church, and kingdom of Christ, was established by Christ himself while on this earth, though they may be his professed friends, are, practically, the enemies of Christ and Christianity.

The Kingdom set up in the Days of John the Baptist Let us see what proofs there are of the establishment of a new religious institution during this period: Luke tells us that the first proclamation of his kingdom was made in the fifteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, by a commissioned officer of the King named John the Baptist.

Mark tells us that this proclamation was the beginning of the Gospel Dispensation, and if so, John was a true Gospel minister. He was officially commissioned by Christ himself. In proof of this, Mark 1:2 refers to Malachi 3:1 "Behold, I send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me; and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the Messenger of the Covenant, whom ye delight in; behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts."

No one will question that it is Christ who speaks here. Christ (Matt. 11:10) acknowledges that John was his messenger, i. e., apostle, and he was therefore as truly a Christian minister and legal and valid officer of the government as any other commissioned officer subsequently appointed. His baptism, therefore, was in all respects equal to, and as valid as any other officer Christ subsequently commissioned, whatever may have been the design or the formula with which he baptized. He baptized in every respect as Christ commissioned him, and this divine commission made his acts valid, though he himself was unbaptized. We may as well set aside the baptisms of the seventy, or of the twelve apostles, as that of John's. To do so would evidently be to "reject the counsel of God against our own souls." In John's first address to the multitude he declared that the kingdom of heaven was "at hand," literally, "has approached," which means it was then and there present. There must have been a sense, therefore, in which this was true. It was there authoritatively. John was a commissioned officer of the kingdom. He was officially charged with a message from its King.

He was authorized to proclaim the terms on which pardon could be procured and citizenship secured in the kingdom, and demand submission to the coming King.

Christ, immediately after his baptism by John, made the same proclamation: "Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven has approached"—the verb is in the perfect tense. It was then present in the person of its king as a government. When he received the people prepared

by John, the kingdom was present in all that was essential to constitute a kingdom, viz., a king, subjects, government, which implies laws and locality.

These subjects, together with John, received Christ as their king as well as Saviour; and they professed a hearty acquiescence in his authority as king of this kingdom, which, they understood by the prophets, he was to set up at his coming. The day that Christ received the disciples of John, he certainly possessed the "Bride," and therefore John could, in truth, say, as he did, when he saw his disciples following Jesus, "He that hath the Bride is the Bridegroom." This term, like the "Lamb's wife," is but another name for his church; and I feel justified in saying that, at this exact point of time, in the first week of Christ's ministry, he had a visible church, and that it was composed of all who had believed on him as the Christ, and had received him as their Saviour and King. John certainly was among this number, and was, therefore, in the kingdom, or church, of which he certainly was an officer.

Meaning of Church / Kingdom I am here using church and kingdom as synonymous terms, and it is evident that this body of disciples John called the "bride," is referred to as the "kingdom of God," "of heaven," "of Christ," by all the evangelists; but so soon as like bodies of disciples were multiplied they were called churches of Christ, and no one of them "kingdom of God, or Christ." The explanation of this is easy. The churches of Christ are the constituencies of his kingdom—each church being the unit or integral part of the kingdom—and all the churches under one divine constitution and the sole headship of Christ, constitute the outward visible form or manifestation of Christ's kingdom on earth.

"Jesus Christ has a kingdom on earth and he has churches, but each one is an integral portion of his kingdom." (A. P. Williams, D. D.) "The church is the visible earthly form of the kingdom of Christ, and is the divine organization appointed for its advancement and triumph. Organized and governed by the laws of the invisible King, and composed of the subjects of the heavenly kingdom, who, by the symbol of fealty, have publicly professed allegiance to him—the church [i. e., churches] fitly represent the kingdom. Hence the apostles, in receiving authority to establish, under divine inspiration, the form and order of the church, received the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Wherever they gathered disciples they organized a church, and at their death they left this [i. e., these] as the distinctive and only visible form of the kingdom of Christ on earth." H. Harvey, D. D. "The Church," pp. 24, 25.

To make this plain to the most common reader, let me illustrate: Provinces, not individuals, are the constituents or parts of a kingdom, and these are the executives of the kingdom. A kingdom may consist of only one province. So the kingdom of Christ—"of God," "of heaven"— during the ministry of John and Christ, consisted of but one church, constituted of that body of

baptized disciples which Christ received, from John, and those disciples which were added to them from time to time during Christ's ministry. This stage of the kingdom was the blade of the mustard seed just appearing, but it was his ecclesia-assembly, church-as well as his kingdom. The accepted definition of a Christian church is, a body of Scripturally baptized disciples accepting Christ only as their Redeemer, his sole authority for their government, his teachings for their faith, and administering the ordinances as he delivered them.

Church Meetings Before Pentacost It was quite sufficient to have found the church the day it was called into existence, but it is denied that it was ever assembled while Christ was on earth. I think that several gatherings of this church are mentioned, directly or indirectly, by the evangelists.

The first full church meeting—a gathering together of his disciples into one place for general instruction—is recorded by Matthew 5:1 "And seeing the multitude, he ascended a mountain, and having sat down, his disciples came unto him, and he opened his mouth and taught them, saying."

These disciples were not the twelve apostles, nor yet the seventy merely, for they had not yet been chosen from the whole body, but the multitude of his disciples.

"The disciples, in the wider sense, including those of the apostles already called, and all who had, either for a longer or a shorter time, attached themselves to him as hearers. . . The discourse was spoken directly to the disciples," etc.

(Alford, Com. in loco.)

Here, then, was a real church meeting; a visible assembly of men, possessing certain qualifications called from the oklos (multitude) for a specific purpose, and this is the essential signification of ecclesia in Greek. We may add, an organized assembly, since they recognize the supreme authority of Christ over them. At this first general meeting of his disciples, which soon after he named his ecclesia-his assembly, church—he instructed them touching their individual Christian duties, and clearly indicated their mission as his assembly—church.

"Ye are the light of the world—a city set on a hill. Let your light so shine that men, seeing your good works, may glorify your Father who is in heaven."

This I consider Christ's first great commission to his church, and by which he made it the great missionary agency for the Gospel enlightenment of the whole world; for it was of the whole world, he constituted his church to be the light.

Here was a church, of which Christ was the living present Head, and the source of all law and government; but as yet there were no commissioned officers, since the apostles, nor the seventy, were chosen for some time after this. (See Matt. 9:9.)

The second general gathering together of his disciples into one place was by a special summons. Luke 6:12 thus records it: "And it came to pass in those days that he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God. And when it was day, he called [summoned] his disciples [the whole body of them] to him. And having chosen from them twelve, whom he called also apostles. . . And having come down with them, he stood on a plain, and a company of his disciples [not all in this instance] and a great multitude of people from all Judea, etc. And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples and said, Blessed are ye, poor ones; for yours is the kingdom of God."

Those disciples at this time alone composed the kingdom of God, and it was indeed literally theirs, being entirely of them.

"After this (Luke x.) Christ appointed seventy others [officers], and sent them, two by two, before his face into every place whither he himself was about to come."

It is not much to infer that after these two general meetings of the whole or main body of the disciples, and the appointment of officers, that his disciples would understand Christ should he call them his assembly—church—and as constituting the kingdom which, as Messiah, he was to set up on this earth. This was soon formally announced: "And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this Rock—a stone—will I build my assembly—church—and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever thou

shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven," etc. Matt. 16:18-19.

There was a kingdom and a church in existence at this time, but not as separate organizations; for the kingdom included the church and the church composed the kingdom.

Soon after this the Lawgiver delivers to his church the fundamental law for dealing with all personal offenses among the members, which has never been modified or abrogated; and the giving of this law, and the express mention of the body of his disciples as a church, puts it beyond all question that there was an organization at this time, since laws imply and necessitate organization.

The third general meeting of the brethren of his ecclesia was after his resurrection, where, at a place he appointed before his death, he met more than five hundred brethren at one time. (1 Cor. 15:6.)

The number with Christ as witnesses of his ascension is not told, but it seems that one hundred and twenty, upon their return, held a church meeting in an upper room in Jerusalem, where they, by popular vote, elected Matthias to fill the place left vacant by the death of Judas.

The body of brethren which Christ had three times gathered into an assembly, and had designated as his church, and spoken of as his kingdom, the Holy Spirit expressly calls a church, after the ascension of Christ. We have not the slightest intimation that there was the least modification made in its organization, much less that a new and unheard of body was originated by the apostles. To that organized body of disciples which Christ left, the three thousand were added by baptism on the day of Pentecost; and it was to the church then existing that the saved were added daily for some time afterward.

(Acts 2:47.) The closing days of this period were marked by great activity, since it entered with the zeal of a new convert upon the work assigned it by its risen Head. The Gospel was preached, converts baptized in large numbers, and the Lord's supper observed, the doctrine of the apostles steadfastly adhered to, and brotherly love abounded. Let this be borne in mind, that before the days of Pentecost and the great revival that marked those days, a church was in existence, and that no church was organized during the days of Pentecost nor afterwards in the city of Jerusalem, and that the body of disciples gathered by Christ constituted his kingdom prior to his ascension.

CHAPTER II The Kingdom of Christ set up during his Public Ministry — Exposition of Matt. 11:12, Kingdom of Heaven suffereth Violence, etc.— Of Luke 16:16, All Men Press into the Kingdom of Heaven—Of Matt. 11: 11, The Least in the Kingdom of Heaven Greater than John—Of the Lord's Prayer, "Thy Kingdom Come"—Objections Answered.

THESE passages at the head of this chapter, which I propose to explain, have been quite universally misinterpreted and misapplied by Protestant expositors, and their views generally adopted by Baptists. Why the former should be the fact is easily understood when it is remembered that these passages clearly teach, if it is allowed that they teach any thing specifically, that the Kingdom of Heaven and the Church of Christ were primarily set up during the ministry of John the Baptist and Christ, and this directly militates the theory of Protestants, that the church was established in Eden, or, at least, in the family of Abraham, and that the old Jewish Theocracy was the real kingdom of Christ, and embraced the church. But why intelligent Baptists should accept this, and contend for the universal invisible church of the Protestants, is more than passing strange!

Let us carefully examine these passages, to ascertain their literal teachings, and be willing to accept them: Matt. 11:11 : "Verily I say unto you, among them that are born of woman there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist; notwithstanding, he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."

There are few passages that has called out a greater diversity of opinions, or wilder ones, than this and the verse following it. To the English reader they do present insuperable difficulties.

The plain statement is that no one born of woman was greater than John the Baptist. It does not say a greater prophet, as some interpret it, and if it did, it is not in any sense true, for John was not a prophet—he was "more than a prophet." The burden of the prophet's messages was the

events that were to come to pass in the future, but John was sent to announce and make manifest the King of his people. John was a preacher of righteousness, and the first apostle of the Christian Dispensation, and his preaching and ministry were the beginning of the Gospel of the Kingdom of Christ.

But Christ, John's Master and King, was born of a woman, and can we believe that he intended to say that John was, in any respect, greater than himself? Certainly not. So far, the way is clear. But one exception is made, an exception of either one individual or one class of persons: "Yet he that is least in the kingdom is greater than he." To whom can this refer if we accept this translation? Christ was by no means "the least" in the kingdom of heaven, but the greatest, being King over all. Nor can we believe that he intended to say that the least saint or infant that was then in Paradise was greater than John; for it could not have been the truth. Nor, that the youngest child or most ignorant publican or harlot then in the kingdom, or who would hereafter be in the kingdom, was greater than John; for this was not, and could never be, in any sense, the fact. How, then, must the declaration be understood? We must evidently refer to the original. The term, mikros, is here translated as an adjective in the superlative degree, though it has not this form in the Greek, but the comparative, and, if used as an adjective here, should be translated " less; " but this does not, in the least, remove the difficulty. To render it "least" the translators are compelled to translate the comparative degree as a superlative, and nothing is thereby gained. If it can be claimed that one degree of comparison is used for another in this place, why not as well, and far better, claim that mikros is used adverbially, qualifying "is," and not any person or class of persons, and the more so, when the sense positively demands this construction? Admit its adjective form, but give it an adverbial signification, and it will then read: "Notwithstanding he that is later in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."

The Herald preceded the king. Christ was manifest to Israel later in point of time than John; therefore, I understand him to say, that while John was greater than any man who had preceded him, nevertheless, he himself was greater than John. John, speaking of Christ, said: "He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear."—Matt. 3:11.

"There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose."

—Mark 1:7.

This is he of whom I said: "He that cometh after me is preferred before me, for he was before me."—John 1:15.

"Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom ; but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice; this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease. He that cometh from above is above all; he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth; he that cometh from heaven is above all."—John 3:28-31.

This translation of mikros makes Christ speak the truth, and also makes the statements of John coincide with those, of Christ. If mikros were nowhere else in the whole range of Greek literature used adverbially, it evidently is here. The facts compel us to so read it. Both John and Christ were therefore in the kingdom.

"And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force."— Matt.

11:12.

By some, the phrase "kingdom of heaven" here is explained to mean "heaven above"— ultimate glory; and the phrases "suffereth violence" and "take by force" to mean violent exertions, etc. Some interpret the passage to teach that, for a Christian to pass through this world, overcome all obstacles, and reach the climes of "everlasting deliverance," requires the most violent efforts of vigilance, persistent fightings, etc.

This may be true in fact, but not taught by the passage. Why should Christ say that it has been so difficult to get to heaven "from the days of John the Baptist," implying that it has only been difficult since his day? What was there in his preaching that obstructed the way to heaven? This interpretation is hardly admissible.

Other expositors, and perhaps most public teachers, explain that the "kingdom of heaven" here means "the grace of salvation," and "suffereth violence" means "the seeking of religion" by the sinner; and "taking it by force" alludes to the violent exertions of spirit, soul and body, on the part

of the sinner, in "getting religion," as the operation is called by Arminians.

Then the passage would teach that "from the days of John the Baptist until now," it has been a most difficult affair to get religion, requiring such efforts of soul and spirit as often to throw the body into the most violent contortions, convulsions, spasms and protracted comatose state. But why so difficult, and why all this bodily effort required since the days of John the Baptist, and not before? Have not sin and Satan, the human heart and the demands of God been the same in all ages? If the introduction of the Gospel Dispensation (which is a day of increased light, giving us the meridian sunlight for the reflected light of moon and stars, the substance instead of the types and shadows) has made it more difficult, then has it not been a blessing, but a curse to the race. This interpretation can not, with any show of reason, be countenanced.

What, then, does it mean? I offer the following as agreeing in all points with the other teachings of God's Word: By the phrase "kingdom of heaven" here, I understand that visible institution which Christ came to set up on this earth; and the phrase "suffereth violence" means to do violence to, to outrage, to treat in a ruthless and violent manner. The Greek writers use biazomai in no other sense; e. g., "biazesthai ten gunaikan, to force a woman." (Al. Pl. 1092, and al.) It never means to treat kindly, or to press toward or into in a friendly manner. By the phrase "take it by force" I understand "to destroy, make havoc of." The verb harpazoo primarily means to "tear, snatch, ravish away;" secondarily, "to seize and overpower, overmaster." I translate the whole passage: "From the days of John the Baptist until now the visible kingdom of Christ has been violently assailed, and its enemies have sought to destroy or overpower it."

This passage, properly translated, determines three facts: 1.

That Christ's visible kingdom was at that time—in the first year of his ministry—in existence; and 2. That it was most violently opposed and sought to be destroyed by its enemies; and 3.

That this kingdom has been continuously in existence "from the days of John the Baptist until" this day. This passage is conclusive proof that the kingdom of Christ has been in existence from John's day until this, since it could not have been constantly assailed unless it has continuously existed.

If it is asked, "Why was not the 'kingdom of heaven' and church of Christ assaulted before the days of John the Baptist?" I answer, For the best of reasons: neither existed before, and therefore the theory that they existed in the days of Abraham or Moses is false, as is the modern theory of those who teach that they did not exist before the days of Pentecost, and were then set up, not by Christ, but by men after his ascension.

A kindred passage to the above with equal force sustains my position, and is obscured by our versions: "The law and the prophets were until John; since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it."— Luke 16:16.

If it is claimed that "kingdom of God" here means "the grace of God," or "the gospel of salvation," why should Christ declare, by implication, that it has been preached only since the time of John the Baptist, when the gospel was preached to Abraham (Gal. 3:8), and the grace of God was known to all the Old Testament saints as well as to us? Christ certainly meant the visible kingdom he had set up in their midst!

"The kingdom of heaven" was not preached before the days of John the Baptist, because it did not exist before. Will any one, familiar with the manner in which John and Christ and the gospel they preached had been treated by the overwhelming majority of the Jewish nation, say that it was true that all men pressed forward in their eagerness to embrace the gospel, and to become the disciples of Christ? How, then, could an Evangelist say, "He came to his own, and his own received him not"? ( John 1:11)—i, e., his own people, the Jews.

Read the context in which this very passage stands, and mark the bitter opposition of the Pharisees that called it forth, and remember this sect embraced by far the larger portion of the better class of the Jews: "And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these things; and they derided him."— Luke 16:14.

They had charged him with casting out demons by Beelzebub, the prince of demons (Luke

11:15), and Christ declared that of that generation the blood of all the prophets that had been shed from the foundation of the world would be required; and the chapter closes his lament over Jerusalem, that had universally rejected his teachings.

But there is nothing in the Greek text to justify the translation, "press into it,"* but the text is against such a rendering. The preposition eis (into) before an accusative preceded by a verb implying violence or hostile intent, should be translated "against." Now, biadzoo, from the noun bia,— force,— always implies violence,— hostile intent,— as to overpower, constrain, do violence to. I, therefore, translate the phrase, kai pas eis auteen biazetai, and every one assaults, or violently opposes it.

Translated thus, this passage is in accord with its context and all the other teachings of Christ. The blood of John the Baptist had been shed, and they were even now thirsting for Christ's own blood. After a public ministry of more than three years, notwithstanding all the mighty miracles he had performed, assisted as he was by eighty efficient missionaries, all endowed with the power to work miracles in his name, and their ministry confined to the narrow limits of Palestine,— smaller than one of the States of this Union,—his disciples amounted to but a few hundred. Not one of the cities or towns of Palestine, not even the village of Bethlehem, where he was born, "the least among thousands of Israel," or that of Nazareth, where he was brought up, nor Capernaum, in which his mightiest works were done, was converted by all his preaching and his miracles; but, so far from pressing into his kingdom, they rejected him as an impostor, and even sought his life. The declaration of John, that "No man received his testimony" (John 3:32), and of Christ, "strait is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it" (Matt. 7:14), agree with the translation, "The kingdom of heaven is preached and every man is violently opposing it." I, therefore, conclude that (1) the kingdom of Christ not only existed in the days of John the Baptist, but, (2) he was himself recognized by Christ as a member of it.

Objections To This View Answered.

With respect to the time of the setting up of Christ's kingdom, foretold by Daniel, there is a strange contrariety of views held upon this subject. 1. By Protestants generally, that Christ had a church and Kingdom from the days of Abel, or at least from Abraham until now. 2.

By others— Campbellites universally—that the Christian Church and Kingdom were not set up until the Pentecost, since Christ taught his disciples, while he was with them, to pray, "Thy Kingdom come."

3. By others —generally "Adventists"—that the Kingdom has never yet been set up, and will not be until Christ's second Advent. 4. Others regard the Kingdom of Christ as an invisible something— the spiritual reign of Christ in the hearts of his people. These antagonistic theories and the passages forced into their support I will briefly notice.

Had Christ a Church and Kingdom before his Advent, A. M. 4004?

I have, in Part II. of this work, shown that there was no Church organized in Eden, or by the Covenant of Circumcision in the family of Abraham. But to close all controversy on this point forever I submit this conclusive proof: This axiom will be admitted by all, that What is already in existence, God nor man can bring into existence.

All anti-Catholics will admit the force of this axiom against the doctrine of transubstantiation. Christ exists ; he can not therefore be brought into existence—be duplicated, much less multiplied a million of times.

Daniel, interpreting the king's dream, (Dan. 2:42,) declared that "in the days of these kings [i. e., the Caesars] the God of heaven would set up a kingdom." If Christ's kingdom was then in existence, and had been since the days of Abraham or Adam, and was to continue to exist, the God of heaven could not bring it into existence. Therefore, until "the days of these kings" the God of heaven--Christ—had no kingdom on this earth; and if no kingdom, then no church, since there can be no kingdom without one or more churches, as there can be no human kingdom without a province or provinces.

1. "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven."

Those who urge this objection manifestly do not comprehend the petition. This prayer was taught the disciples, who were at that time citizens of Christ's kingdom, and none save the children of God by adoption can pray this prayer. It is to be addressed, not to Christ, but to the Father; and the petition is that His kingdom, not Christ's, might come, and his will be done in this earth as it is in heaven. This prayer has never yet been answered; but it will be, and then this earth will be a heaven—none but the sinless will inherit it. We are not to pray that this condition of things may take place in this Dispensation, nor in the next, for the Scriptures specifically inform us that it is not to be fulfilled until the seventh day of the World's Week, earth's great Sabbath, when "Christ's redeeming work is done," and a new heaven and a new earth are created, in place of this, which the redeemed alone will inherit, and dwell therein forever. (See Ps. 37 and Rev. 22) It was for this glorious consummation of his Redemptive work, Christ taught his disciples then and now to pray, at which time he would give up the kingdom to God, even the Father, when all things will forever be as they were before sin entered the world, and the whole universe will be under one undivided reign. (1 Cor. 15:24-29.)

This, then, is a very comprehensive prayer, little suited to the understanding of children, if it were proper for them to use it; and certainly no unregenerated person can say, "Our Father,"—"Abba Father,"—Our Father who art in heaven. The reader can see that the petition does not teach that Christ's kingdom had not then come, but it is a prayer for the earth to become a heaven, and be returned to its original condition in the government of the Godhead.

Let there be no misunderstanding of this point, i. e., that Christ had at this time "set up" his visible kingdom, called "the kingdom of God," "of heaven," "of God's dear Son," and that at this time, and during his ministry on earth, that body of disciples who received him as their Saviour and King, and which he called his Church—assembly—was the visible and outward form and manifestation of his kingdom. (See Drs. Harvey, Buck, Williams, et mul. al.)

2. The Spiritual Theory—"The Kingdom within us."

There are those who hold and teach that the kingdom of God, spoken of in the New Testament, so far as it is on earth and in relation to us, is the reign of grace within us, and their main text is Christ's declaration recorded by Luke 17:21: "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation; and neither shall they say, Lo, here! or there! for lo, the kingdom of God is within you."

The difficulty arises from a wrong translation. Christ did not say the kingdom was within those wicked Pharisees, but as the Revision has it, "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you."

This rendering of entos, humoon, "among you," is supported by the best critics.

"On this interpretation, the best commentators are agreed, and adduce examples of this use of entos." (Bloomfield.)

"My kingdom is among you, not within you." (Alford.)

¶And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: {with…: or, with outward shew} Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. {within you: or, among you}--[ Luke 17:20-21 KJB and the translators notes—Ed.]

Just as consistently might Christ have said, "My church is within you;" for evidently the subject matter of that conversation was concerning his visible kingdom. The Pharisees had asked him when his kingdom would appear, which was the kingdom that both he and John had preached as "at hand"—i. e., then present; and he had replied to them that the kingdom of God comes not with observation, i. e., outward show, pomp or splendor; with such external appearances as to attract men's attention or admiration. So silently had it been set up, and so unlike any kingdom of this world, that they could not comprehend it.

I regard this as an explicit declaration that his kingdom was then existing, and on this earth.

3. Another passage urged against the visibility of the kingdom is Christ's declaration before Pilate: "My kingdom is not of this world," etc.

This expression can not be construed to mean that his kingdom was not in this world. He had said to his disciples before this: "Ye are not of this world, but I choose you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you."—John 15:19.

It was in the same sense that Christ's kingdom is not of this world. In the form of its government, in the character of its citizens, in the purity of its principles, and in its aim and its mission it is wholly unlike, and infinitely above all human kingdoms. Yet it was upon the earth, and he required every disciple to enter it.

4. Another much used passage is: "For the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit."--Rom. 14:17.

(Revision.)

This evidently means nothing more than the peculiarities or characteristics of the kingdom— or churches—of Christ do not consist in observing distinctions in meats and drinks, etc., hence the injunction in Col. 2:16 : "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holiday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days."

But the end and aim of the kingdom of Christ are to promote righteousness, joy and peace in all its subjects upon earth. When the last Napoleon accepted the crown of Empire he remarked, in the hearing of the representatives of the nations, "THE EMPIRE IS PEACE." All understood that to maintain peace would be the end and aim of his government.

Haldane, that eminent expositor of Romans, says: "This imports that the service which belongs to the kingdom of God, and which he requires from all his subjects, does not consist in abstaining from, or in using any kind of meats. Men are peculiarly prone to cling to externals in religious worship. It is, then, of great importance to attend to this decision of the Holy Spirit by the Apostle Paul. The distinction of meats has nothing to do in the service of God under the New Testament."

The kingdom of God is characterized by righteousness, joy and peace ; and these are the aims and natural fruits of it.

5. Christ's declaration to the Jews is used to support the theory that the old Jewish nation was the true kingdom of God and church of Christ visible.

"Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."—Matt. 21:43; 8:12.

It is claimed from this passage that the old Jewish theocratic government and the church and kingdom of Christ, are one and identical, and opposed to the idea of the recent setting up of the kingdom among the Jews, since the natural inference is that they had, for a long time, been in possession of it and had abused it. I am willing to grant the Jews had been, for ages, in possession of the typical kingdom of God, which was but the shadow and type of the real and true visible kingdom which Christ set up; and that they had misused and abused it, and their guilt was, therefore, as great as though they had so treated the real, and this typical kingdom was taken from them; but this is not the meaning of this passage. The real kingdom was given to the Jews— set up in their midst—and all its first citizens were composed of Jews. Christ came to his own, and his own, as a people, received him not; but they put his Messenger to death, abused his servants, and finally murdered the Son and Heir. It was to be taken away from them and given to the Gentiles. This same sentence was again pronounced, by Paul and Barnabas, against the Jews at Antioch: "Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said: ‘It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you; but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.’"— Acts 13:46.

Who can doubt that this has been literally fulfilled for eighteen hundred years past, and is fulfilling before our eyes to-day? God has sent upon them judicial blindness, "given them the spirit

of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, unto this day."

(Rom. 11:8.) If there is a Christian church in America, or the world, composed entirely of this people, I have not heard of it; nor does the Holy Spirit move the hearts of Gentile Christians to pray for the Jews.

6. THE WILD, GRAFTED INTO THE GOOD OLIVE TREE. Great use is also made of Paul's olive tree illustration in support of the theory that Christ did not "set up" a new, but reformed an old church, which had been composed of Jews for thousands of years previous. We invite attention to the careful reading of the passage and its entire connection: "For if the casting away of them [the Jews] be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be but life from the dead? For if the first fruit be holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root be holy, so are the branches. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakers of the root and fatness of the olive tree, boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. Thou wilt say then, the branches were broken off that I might be graffed in. Well, because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standeth by faith. Be not high-minded, but fear; for if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he spare not thee. Behold, therefore, the goodness and severity of God; on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness; otherwise thou also shalt be cut off. And they also, if they abide not in unbelief, shall be grafted in; for God is able to graff them in again. For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature, into a good olive tree; how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits, that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved; as it is written: There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob; for this is my covenant with them, when I shall take away their sins."—Rom. 11:15-27.

The idea that Paul meant the old Jewish nation, without doubt the most wicked that existed on the whole face of the earth, was the real church of Christ and kingdom of God, was conceived for the express purpose of supporting infant baptism. By all these it is claimed that the "good olive tree" represented the Jewish church from the days of Abraham to John the Baptist; and that, by the ministry of Christ and his apostles, the old church was reformed, the unworthy members put away, and only worthy ones received, etc. Now, for the sake of argument let it be granted, to see if it lends the cause of infant baptism and church membership the semblance of support. Why were the branches broken off? Because of unbelief. Then we learn that only those who exercised personal faith legitimately belonged to the old church--"the good olive tree;" for the reformation consisted in the breaking off all in unbelief. The new or reformed church consisted only of such as professed personal faith; for all who were grafted in stand by faith. According to this exposition the churches of both the Old and the New Dispensation are churches of professed believers only; no infants were or can be taken in upon the faith of their parents or sponsors.

Thus we see the very passage brought forward to sustain, most signally overthrows the whole theory of infant baptism!

But this is not the correct exposition of this passage. The good olive tree does not represent the literal family of Abraham, or the Jewish nation, because faith was not an essential condition of membership in either the one or the other; nor has the Jewish nation been in existence for the past eighteen hundred years so that Gentiles could be grafted into it; nor is it true that the Gentiles are ever to be grafted into it. It can not, therefore, be said that the good olive tree represented the Christian church under the Old Dispensation; for in no sense did such a church exist. The first Christian church ever gathered was composed of believing Jews, and Jews only. The first gathering was the "root" of the whole tree—the "first fruit" of the lump.

(See Lev. 23:16; Neh. 10:37.) Now, into this tree the Gentiles have been grafted by faith since the gospel was first preached in the house of Cornelius, while the unbelieving Jews have been rejected, and the kingdom taken from them.

Permit me to illustrate this by a simple diagram:

J.D. represents the Jewish Dispensation. C.C. is where, at the preaching of John and Christ, the church and kingdom of Christ were set up. The first church was composed entirely of Jews, and the church and kingdom continued exclusively with the Jews seven years after the ascension of Christ, when Cornelius sent for Peter.

D.J. marks the time when Jerusalem was destroyed and the Jews dispersed among all nations.

The kingdom and church can then be said to have been taken from them and given unto the Gentiles. The "root of the good olive tree and the first fruit" were believing Jews only; and "the first fruits" of the Christian church were Jews only; and the tree with its branches, and the "lump"—the Jewish nation—is not unholy in God's sight and forever cast away. It was because of unbelief the Jews were broken off, and it was by faith that we Gentiles have been grafted in; but the day is coming when the Jews will, by faith in Christ, again be grafted in and become a part of the kingdom, even the first dominion of the kingdom of God's dear Son. The reader will see that these so oft quoted passages afford no evidence that the church and kingdom of Christ, and the Jewish Kingdom before Christ, were one and the same, but contrariwise.

From these Scriptures we learn several important facts, viz.: 1. That the blindness to gospel truth that characterizes the Jewish race since the apostolic days has not been accidental, but is a judicial punishment for their inexcusable rejection of Christ and the gospel, offered them by the apostles.

2. That this blindness is not universal, but only "in part." Here and there a Jew is grafted in; but a real conversion is a rare occurrence; and, while there are entire churches of almost all other nationalities, if there is a church of this people on earth I have never heard of it.

3. That this blindness is only for a season—"until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in."

This "fullness" means after the full number of Gentiles Christ designs to save in this Dispensation, or the full time appointed for the gospel to be preached unto the Gentiles before the Second Advent, or it may include both ideas; but it does not mean until all the Gentiles, severally and individually, receive the gospel. Christ explains it in Matt. 24:14 : "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

4. We learn also, that, when the fullness of the Gentiles shall have been brought in through the preaching of the gospel, the Jews—all the Jews who survive the slaughter of the second conquest and sack of Jerusalem by the forces of Gog, King of the North—will embrace Christ and be saved; and, by faith, be grafted into the good olive tree—the true kingdom of Christ—with the multitudes of believing Gentiles, and thus, in Christ, constitute "one new man."

5. Finally, we learn that, when the Jews thus universally receive Christ, and are saved, the influence of the event will be like awakening the whole Gentile world from the dead.

Says Haldane on this passage: "But if the casting away of the Jews was such a blessing to the world, their recall will be a blessing unspeakably greater. It will occasion a revival among the Gentile churches from a dead and almost lifeless state, which will resemble a resurrection.

The numbers then converted will be as if all the dead had risen out of their graves. The Divine Dispensations being at that period so far developed, and the prophecies respecting the rejection and restoration of the Jews so fully accomplished, no doubt will any longer be entertained regarding the divine origin of the Holy Scriptures. A great additional light, too, will be thrown on those parts of them which at present are most obscure; so that, in the providence of God, the result will be an unexampled blessing both to Jews and Gentiles."

So far from its being understood by the apostles that the kingdom of Christ—or, as it is elsewhere called, the "kingdom of heaven," "of God"— was not to be set up on the earth until after the Second Advent, they understood themselves to be in possession of it, and members of it:

"Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which can not be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear."—Heb. 12:28.

The expression "we receiving a kingdom" is equivalent to we having received a kingdom, as the context shows: Echomen charin—"let us hold fast the favor by means of which we may serve God acceptably," etc.

The receiving of the kingdom was the distinguishing favor which Paul exhorted the brethren to hold fast; and they certainly could not hold fast what they did not have in possession.

There are several passages used by Adventists, and those they have converted to their views, to prove that the kingdom has not yet been set up, and will not be until Christ returns to this earth.

Among these the following: And in the days of these kings will the God of heaven set up a kingdom," etc.—Dan. 2:44.

And the kingdom, and the dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting one, and all dominions shall serve and obey him." —Dan. 7:27.

And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here which shall not taste of death till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power."—Mark 9:1.

With reference to the first passage they claim that "these kings" refer to the ten kings symbolized by the "ten toes" of the image. Let it be granted the legs and feet symbolized the Roman empire, it has confessedly passed away, never to reappear. An empire may, and, I believe, will appear, embracing all the territory of these four kingdoms, but it will no more be Roman than Persian,—it will be Russian. The kingdom must have been set up in the days of the Caesars, or this prophecy must remain forever unfulfilled.

The second passage refers to the kingdom in the Messianic Dispensation, when Christ and his saints will rule over all the earth.

These and other kindred passages refer not to another and different kingdom, but to a different and more glorious administration of his present kingdom.

The little stone which the king of Babylon saw cut out of the mountain without hands (Dan. 2), continued until it became a great mountain and filled the whole earth. How unlike a little stone this earth-filling mountain!

And let the reader bear in mind that this self-same stone continued to exist and to increase all the time until it became a mountain. The Messianic Kingdom under the personal reign of Christ will not be, in any sense, "a little stone" or "a grain of mustard seed."

Touching the last, Christ fulfilled the promise when he took Peter, James and John into a high mountain and in vision showed them the character and glory of his future kingdom. Peter understood that this promise was fulfilled to them in that vision. (2 Pet. 1:18.)

I conclude with this: If the kingdom was set up in the days of the Roman emperors,—during the ministry of John and Christ, as I have certainly demonstrated,—then it was not set up before nor since their day. * We submitted some years since our translations,—i. e., Matt. 11:12, Luke 16:14-16,—to Prof. J. R. Boise, D.D., LL.D., of Morgan Park Theological Seminary, Chicago, and this was his reply:

"Your questions suggest a new, and, to my mind, more satisfactory interpretation of Matt. 11:12. I think the clause may be rendered literally : the kingdom of heaven is treated with (hostile) violence, and violent persons are trying to ravage it '—harposonsin, used, de conatu. This meaning is certainly in keeping with the classic use of the words, and also with the verses following."

Touching the passage in Luke 16:16, he says: "The ordinary use of the words does seem to me more naturally to denote the violence of hostile forces; that of the scribes and Pharisees, which resulted in the crucifixion of our Lord. Nor can I see that this interpretation is inconsistent with the context, particularly that which follows in Matthew. That eis with the accusative may mean "against," is unquestionable. Kai pas eis auteen biazetai (Luke 16:16), may certainly, so far as the Greek is concerned, be rendered, 'every one is violently opposing it.' In this remark our Lord may have had in mind the rich and powerful, the leaders of society, and this thought may naturally have suggested the parable of the rich man, (Vs. 19-31.) This view of the verses in question is adopted by Lightfoot, Schneckenberger, and Hilgenfeld."

"THE CHURCH: PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE"

By L. L. Clover, D.D., Th.D. President Emeritus of Louisiana Missionary Baptist Institute and Seminary Minden, Louisiana.

Published by Louisiana Baptist Press; P. O. Box 916 Minden, Louisiana. Printed in The U.S.A. Copyright 1974, by L. L. Clover, D.D., Th.D. All Rights in This Book Are Reserved.

Introduction God created the world for His own glory (Genesis 1:1).... Man was made and God placed him in charge (Genesis 2:15). It seems that a wonderful future should and would have been man's to enjoy; but Lucifer, the great angel of light, and his host of followers had become the Devil and demons; and they did not want to lose control of the world. But they did want to defeat the plan of God; hence the design upon man (Genesis 3:1-7).

After the fall, there came the curse, not only upon man, but upon the whole creation as well (Genesis 3:14-24). It is well to remember that God could have done any one of several things; but for reasons known only to Him, it pleased Him to set forth a plan of redemption, a buying back of that which was lost to the Devil.

Even as He pronounced the curse, He instituted the hope (Genesis 3:15). Then in Genesis 3:21 the plan is seen, not explained, but in action. Just to what extent Adam understood God's plan of redemption is not known, but that he taught it to his children is made clear in Genesis 4:36 and Genesis 8:20. Everything God has done since the fall, has worked toward a greater revelation and promotion of that plan. See Galatians 4:4.

Since the fall of man the activity of the Devil has not ceased, as is revealed in Genesis 6:5, which states: "And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

Then in verse 7 God says: "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth."

But because the plan of God is not to be defeated in verse 8 it is stated: "But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord."

Noah preserved a seed in the blood-line of the promised Savior.

It was in accordance with this plan that God called Abraham (Genesis 12:1). God gave to Abraham a more complete revelation of His plan of redemption. With him He established the Covenant of Grace by faith (Genesis 17:1-8). As a result of, and in keeping with this promise, the seed of Abraham grew into, a multitude (Exodus 1:7). As the plan unfolds it is seen that God raised up a nation of the seed of Abraham to whom He could give a law, establish a system of worship; through whom He could keep His name before the world and bring the promised seed, the One who was to pay the price of redemption.

In Exodus 3:10 God is seen calling to Moses. This great man of God, the perfect type of Christ, was then sent to deliver Israel from bondage, and bring them into the land which -was given to them through their father, Abraham (Genesis 13:14-17). Still, in the furtherance of His plan, God called His people together at the foot of Mt. Sinai and gave them the law that was to rule them as a nation, direct their spiritual life, or system of worship, and point them to Christ, the promised seed that saves (Exodus 19:17 and Galatians 3:24). This was essential because the law had no power to save (Romans 3:20).

There are those who try to make Israel a part of the church; that is, they try to begin the church with Abraham. No one should think of Israel as a part of the church, but as a type of the church. Especially is this true of the tabernacle (Acts 7:38; Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Peter 2:5; Revelation 5:10; Hebrews 8:5). Then just as the assembly of Israel and the tabernacle were types of the church, so was the offering a type of, or a shadow of, Christ on the cross.

God had a plan to redeem man and the creation; the Devil, however, stood in direct opposition to that plan. Jewish history, therefore, is the record of one sad tragedy after another; but in spite of the many spiritual failures, the division of the nation and the captivities, the Jews were brought back into the land of promise that the promised seed might be born (Galatians 4:4).

When the time, God's time, had come all the devils and machinations of hell could not block the coming of the promised seed. Everything in providence from the fall of man had been in preparation of this great event. The birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ completely revealed to the world God's plan of redemption.

The student is not to forget that Jesus' coming into the world, dying on the cross, and rising from the dead marked the end of the law age and the end of the system of temple worship (Luke 16:16; Colossians 2:14-17). After the beginning of the new age, which is the "Church Age," the old system of worship which was symbolic types of shadows was no longer needed because the real thing had been revealed.

The church was neither an afterthought nor a parenthesis in the mind of God. It was in the mind of God from the beginning of His redemptive plan as Acts 15:18 reveals: "Known unto God are all of His works from the beginning of the world."

In Ephesians 3:9-10 it is stated: "And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ; to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church, the manifold wisdom of God."

This mystery is not, as some teach and believe, only that the Gentiles should have a chance to be saved, but the entire scheme of redemption, publicized or brought before the world, through or by the church, which had become God's special agency. Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown say of this verse, "The call of the church is no remedial afterthought, but part of the eternal scheme, which amidst manifold varieties of dispensations, is one in its end."1

The author is not unconscious of Ephesians 3:4-6 which says, "Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit, that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the Gospel."

Surely the Jews knew that the Gentiles were to be partakers of salvation. Isaiah 49:6 reveals that Jesus would save the Gentile along with the Jews. However they did not know that the law age was to come to an end, and the whole system of worship was to be replaced. Furthermore they were not aware of the fact there was to be a church, the body of Christ, composed of both Jew and Gentile, and that the Gentiles would be admitted even without circumcision, on the level with the Jew. Even Peter was not willing to go to the Gentiles with the gospel (Acts 10:10-28) until God introduced a vision; thus revealing that the Gentiles were to have the gospel and be a part of the body, the church. It is doubtful Peter ever fully understood the mystery (Galatians 2:11-13). [cf. II Peter 3:15-16.-ed.]

It is an interesting and worthwhile study to follow God's method of unfolding or revealing His plan of redemption. He used Adam, Cain, Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses, the nation of Israel, the law, the prophets, and finally, Christ, to whom all that had gone before pointed; then the very special instruments, the church and the New Testament.

The subject of this study is the church, the reason for the church, some descriptive titles of the church, the origin, nature, and future of the church. If the student is able to understand these things the author will have accomplished his purpose. -L. L. C. 1

Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Eerdman's Publishing Company. Grand Rapids, Mich., 1948. Vol. VI, Page 407.

Questionable Scriptures Examined So far as the often quoted Dana and many, otherwise, sound Baptists are concerned, the church is positively a local congregation on earth but when it reaches heaven it will, for no reason the author can see, become universal. This theory, it seems to the author, makes God to be inconsistent; the church, in the final analysis, to be a nonentity, and removes all hope for permanent rewards. The question is often asked, "If the church is to continue, or if there is a glory church, will each local church retain her individuality in glory?"

The writer believes each local church will retain her identity in glory, [cf. Isaiah 4:5—ed.] just as each individual will retain his identity. However, the writer does not believe that each local church will be a separate unit in glory. Each of the local churches coming together will form one great assembly; the body of Christ, the bride of Christ, the glorious ekklesia. This will be the fulfillment of Christ's plan for His church as revealed in Ephesians 5:25-27, which reads: "Husbands love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish."

Strong says of the church: "The church of Christ in its largest signification, is the whole company of regenerate persons in all times and ages, in heaven and on earth."1

Strong gives the following scriptures to affirm his argument: Matthew 16:18, Ephesians 1:22-23; 3:10; 5:24-25; Colossians 1:18; Hebrews 12:23.

Mr. Strong, however, presents another side of the church, or what he refers to as, "the local aspect of the church." Concerning this he says: "The Scriptures, however, distinguish between this in-visible or universal church, and the individual church, in which the universal church takes local and temporal form, and in which the idea of the church as a whole is concretely exhibited ...The prevailing usage of the New Testament gives to the term ekklesia the second of these significations, it is this local church only which has definite and temporal existence." 2

Dana says: "There are twenty-six passages in the New Testament in which the use of ekklesia presents reasonable grounds for differences of opinion in interpretation. That is to say, these passages may, with greater or less degree of plausibility, be made to conform to more than one theory of the church." 3

The writer does not believe any passage of scripture can be made to conform to the universal church theory.

These questioned scriptures shall be examined one by one to see how many of them, if any, will support the universal theory. First notice is given to Matthew 16:18, which declares: "And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

Strong and others use this verse to establish the mystical, invisible church. Some say its only reference is to the church in the institutional sense. These writers seem to have trouble connecting this verse to any particular church. The author asks why? It has been proven that Jesus instituted the first church during His personal ministry. Even Strong admits that during the personal ministry of Jesus: "There was a treasurer of the body (John 13:29), and as a body they celebrated for the first time the Lord's Supper (Matthew 26:26-29). 4

In addition to what Strong has said it is known; there was a body to which others could be added (Acts 2:47); they practiced baptism (John 4:1-2); they also had a rule of church discipline (Matthew 18:17). What more did they need to become a church? A church is a tangible thing, it exists or it does not exist. It is not a growth or a process of development from a germ or state of incipience.

There was a Church at the time Jesus spoke the words found in Matthew 16:18. Jesus Himself was the founder and builder of that church. Some seem to think this first church of Jerusalem could not be the object of this reference because within a few years it ceased to exist.

This, however, is a misunderstanding of the facts as the Bible reveals them. In Acts 8:1-4 it is found that this church, "scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word." Every true church has come from that first church. This is God's method of church propagation or continuance. It was a local church that Jesus built. It was this local church to whom He gave the commission. To this local church the Holy Spirit came, and through this church to all others. Thus Jesus built, and is building His church.

Matthew 18:17, shall now be examined. It declares: "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."

The reference in this verse is positively to a local church. It would be impossible to refer the erring brother to a universal, invisible church. Nov since this positively refers to a local church,

what reason is found to believe that Matthew 16:18 points to a universal church?

Next, Acts 7:38, is considered, which relates: "This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the Mount Sinai, and with our fathers; who received the lively oracles to give unto us."

Some use this verse to substantiate the Old Testament church theory, which is but a prop for the universal theory. Yet his verse does not, in any sense, establish an Old Testament church, neither does any other verse, because there was no such thing.

This verse no more proves the existence of an Old Testament church than the word ekklesia proves the Greek assemblies to be churches.

The Hebrew word "Qahal" meant congregation or assembly.

Qahal was translated ekklesia in the Septuagint because the two words means the same thing. So in Acts 7:38, it is the congregation or assembly of Israel; not the church, but the type of the church. [ cf. 1 Cor. 10:6, 11 -Ed. ] Hebrews 2:12 is a passage that is a source of trouble to many, and some say that the reference has nothing to do with the New Testament church. The verse reads: "Saying, I will declare thy name to my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto Thee."

This is a quotation from Psalm 22:22 and it does refer to the New Testament church. In Psalm 22:22 the passage is prophetic, and finds its fulfillment in Matthew 26:30. On this occasion there was a song service in the church, and Jesus was present. Since this is an irrefutable fact, why deny that this passage can have any reference to the local church?

Attention is turned to Acts 20:28 which reads: "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood."

This verse is a stumbling stone to many. They knew each saved one is a purchased one, redeemed, that is, bought back by the blood of Christ; so they say the church is made up of, and must include, all the saved on earth and in heaven. But this is an erroneous conception of what is taught in this verse. Though each saved one is a purchased one, it does not follow that each purchased one is a member of the church. This is a logical conclusion from the teaching of the New Testament as to the nature and function of the church. It is absurd to attempt to use this verse to establish the universal church. It is impossible for one to become a member of the church before salvation. After salvation church membership is optional or voluntary. Even Strong says: "The church, unlike the family and state, is a voluntary society. Membership in the church is not hereditary or compulsory." 5

In other words one is not born into the church, it is something to which one must present himself and ask for membership.

Furthermore, there are definite qualifications prerequisite to membership in the New Testament church. Strong admits this fact by saying: "The qualifications for membership.. are these: regeneration and baptism, i.e. Spiritual new birth and ritual new birth; the surrender of the inward and of the outward life to Christ; the Spiritual entrance into communion with Christ's death and resurrection, and the formal profession of this to the world by being buried with Christ and rising with him in baptism." 5

One must be saved, one must be received by the church, and one must be baptized before membership in a New Testament church. It is absurd to attempt to use this verse to establish the universal theory. It would be impossible for the bishops to oversee and feed the church of God if it were universal. and invisible. Break this verse down and it is found that "the church of God, which he purchased with his blood," is the church in which the Holy Spirit has made them, the subjects of Paul's address, bishops (tenders and feeders) of the flock. Now who were the subjects of Paul's address or who were the men to whom Paul spoke? In verse 17 of this same chapter it is revealed they were elders in the church at Ephesus. So, in this case, "the church of God which he purchased with his blood," is nothing more, nothing less, than the local church in Ephesus, and pop goes another universal bubble.

To claim the readers attention next is I Corinthians 12:28, which states:

"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles..."

The universal theorists say this verse can only point to a universal, invisible aspect of the church. They say this, it seems, because the verse does not apply to the church at Corinth. It is true that the verse does not apply to the church at Corinth. However, it teaches nothing that will uphold the universal theory. On the other hand its teaching strongly indicates the church is local.

It requires only a brief analysis to determine this truth.

What function could apostles, teachers, etc. have in a universal, invisible church ? They could not talk of it, teach it or anything of the kind. Their function strongly indicates the thing into which they were set (the church) was something they could assemble, to which they could preach and teach; a local congregation which is the church of the Lord Jesus Christ.

In Ephesians and Colossians the word ekklesia is found thirteen times. Some scholars say that in these letters is found a view of the church which is peculiar to these epistles, and that to only two of the thirteen instances can a local meaning be attached. One thing can be said, that in no instance can a universal meaning be attached, and the writer believes the local idea is attached to each of the thirteen references. Before going into a detailed study of these passages another theory is mentioned in which Paul uses the term "ekklesia" in these epistles to represent spiritual Israel.

Caution in using the term "spiritual Israel" is advised.

In Ephesians 1:22-23 it is stated: "And hath put all things under his feet, and given him to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all."

Here is given a rather lengthy quotation from the Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary: "Put all things under (hupetaxen) `put in subjection under' (Gen. 1:28; Ps. 8:6; I Cor. 15:27). Not only is He infinitely exalted (V. 21) but He has universal dominion. The original grant of it to man is realized for him in Christ, to the church for her special advantage. The Greek order is emphatic: 'Him (exalted and supremely glorious as He is) God gave as head over all things to the church. Had it been any one save Him, her Head, it would not have been the boon it is. But as He is Head over all things who is also her HEAD, all things are hers (I Cor. 3:21-23). He is over (`far above') all things in contrast with 'TO the church' vis., for her advantage. The former are subject; the latter is joined with Him in His dominion over them. 'Head' implies not only His dominion, but our union; therefore, while we look upon Him at God's right hand, we see ourselves in heaven (Rev. 3:21). For the Head and body are not severed by any-thing intervening, else the body would cease to be the body, and the Head cease to be the Head (Chrysostom). 23. which is (hetis) inasmuch as she is, His body His mystical body. Not merely figurative. He is really, though spiritually, the church's Head. His life is her life. She shares His crucifixion and His consequent glory. He possesses everything, His fellowship with the Father, His fulness of the Spirit, and His glorified manhood, not merely for Himself, but for her, who has a membership of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones (ch. 5:30). Fulness. The church is dwelt in and filled by Christ. She is the receptacle, not of His inherent, but of His communicated plentitude of gifts and graces." 7

This lengthy and perhaps confusing exegesis has been given, not that the author agrees perfectly with it, but that the student might have a more clear conception of that intricate relation of Christ to His church. The relationship of Christ to His church is spiritual, and in a sense it is ideal. In other words there is a spiritual and an ideal significance, as well as the institutional, attached to church. But, these significations are always secondary to, and never hide, the local idea.

These verses say three things about Christ: First, "All things have been put under His feet."

Second, "He is the head of the church." Third, "The church is His body." He is the Head of the church, and the church is His body. That much is clear, but the question arises among many, what constitutes His body? The amalgamation of all the saved of all the ages, regardless of what they believed or taught, is, or will be at some future time, the body of Christ is what the universal advocates would have the student believe. This is impossible because the New Testament teaches that the church, the body of Christ, is the pillar and ground of the truth.

The best rule of scripture interpretation is to let scripture interpret scripture, remembering that all scripture must harmonize. Now when this rule is applied here and this question is brought into the light of 1 Corinthians 1:2; 12:27, one will find that the body of Christ is the local church.

Perhaps some will object, saying, one head, many bodies. This objection will be offered because of a failure to understand that the language or the terminology is metaphorical. There are many metaphors to be found in the Bible; such as, "lamb of God," "bride of Christ," "body of Christ," "I

am the vine," "ye are the branches," etc.

Webster defines the word metaphor as: "A figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another by way of suggesting a likeness, or analogy between them, as the ship plows the sea, a volley of oaths." Even so, the words "bride" and "body" are applied to the church to reveal the close relation between the church and Christ.

That there is mystery involved in this relationship, the writer would be foolish to deny; but there are also many other mysteries that cannot be explained; for instance the omnipresence of God. God said of husband and wife: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be one flesh." (Ge. 2:24).

Paul speaking of this verse said: "This is a great mystery:" (Ephesians 5:32).

Jesus said: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

(Matthew 18:20).

Who can explain these things? Shall it be said that because our explanations are inadequate these things are not true? Think of a grape vine, row after row, vine after vine, each vine producing fruit, each fed the same food and from the same source: but each a separate and distinct entity complete within itself. The writer has never heard anything about a big universal, invisible, mystical grape vine. Jesus on one occasion referred to the fruit of the vine (Matthew 26:29). Does any person suppose He was referring to a big universal vine composed of all the little vines both wild and tame? The utter foolishness of this suggestion is plain, even to a child. Then why not see the absurdity of the universal church theory?

Looking next to Ephesians 3:10, these words are found: "To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God."

The George Ricker Berry interlinear, gives the following translation of this verse: "That might be known now to the principalities and the authorities in the heavenlies through the assembly the multifarious wisdom of God." 8

Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown say of the verse: "Through the church, the theater for displaying God's wisdom (Luke 15:10; 1Corinthians 4:9) the mirror in which angels contemplate it . . ." 9

What in this verse points to a universal church? Emphatically nothing! The verse simply tells the student that from eternity the Lord had chosen the church, the instrument through which, in this age, He was to work in the world. The mirror through which to reveal His great wisdom, power, and plan of salvation, even to the angelic host. Furthermore, this verse implies that great responsibility rests upon the church to maintain a oneness of teaching, a regulated system of doctrine and a strict adherence to the teaching of the New Testament. These thoughts lead the student back to 1 Timothy 3:15, which declares the church to be the pillar and ground of the truth. Anything less than that could hardly reflect God, in whom there is no variableness, neither shadow made by turning (James 1:17) to the world much less to the great angelic host.

This verse then, rather than promoting the universal theory, deals it a death blow.

Next to be examined is Ephesians 3:21, which states: "Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages world without end."

This verse is approached now to see if it has a universal connotation, or any significance other than the spiritual and ideal. It is to be noticed first, that this epistle was written to the church at Ephesus. It is possible that it was a circular letter (Galatians 1:2, Colossians 4:16) to be read in several churches. However, that makes little difference because they were each local churches. In other words Paul was addressing himself to the local church. With this thought in mind, reading nothing into the verse that is not there, not turning from the light shed by other passages, what can be found? Simply that the church is the personal instrument or organization, instituted by Christ Jesus; anointed by the Holy Spirit, ordained of God, through which God will keep His name, His glorious plan of redemption, and His system of doctrines before the world. Further-more, it is the agency or medium through which God will receive glory, ages without end. Now which church is it that is the object of Paul's address? Is it a

large universal, invisible church the Bible knows nothing about? No! Each local church is that particular church, the theater for the manifestation of that wonderful plan of salvation effected by Christ and offered to the people of this dispensation; the glory of which belongs to God and will be received by Him through the local church. Some seem to think the church will come to an end in the heaven age. This theory will not harmonize with the following verse of scripture.

Ephesians 5:23-32 reads: "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be unto their own husbands in everything . . . Husbands love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it: ...That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word . . . That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be Holy and without blemish . . . So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church . . . For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones ...

For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church."

There is some controversy as to the teaching of these verses.

Some insist Paul is using the husband-wife relation to show the Christ-church relation; that these verses prove the church is the bride of Christ. Others declare Paul is using the attitude of Christ toward the church to illustrate the attitude the husband ought to have toward the wife. Regardless of what the verses teach relative to these things, it in nowise changes some of the plain statements such as "Christ is the head of the church"; "The church is the body of Christ." There is an intricate and inexplicable oneness involved in both the husband-wife relationship and the Christ-church affinity which, even Paul says is a great mystery.

In what sense are to be taken the words "the church?"

Is it the institutional, the local, or the universal? Many say the universal, but Dr. L. D. Foreman has well said: "If these verses teach a universal church they also teach a universal wife." 10

Dr. Foreman believes the words "the church" are used here in the institutional sense, with which the author agrees, but the local sense is neither lost nor hidden. In fact, the local aspect of the church is very apparent in every reference to the church. But the age old question comes, which church is the bride of Christ?; of which church is Christ the head?; which church is the body of Christ? It can be answered with another question, i.e. of which wife is the husband the head? When there is an answer to the last question there can also be an answer to the first. How can Christ be the head of each local church ? How can each local church be His bride? This is not known; neither is it known how the Holy Spirit, a person, can dwell in the heart of each saved person on earth. No more mystery is attached to one than the other.

Attention is now directed to Colossians 1:18, which declares: "And He is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning: the firstborn from the dead: that in all things He might have the preeminence."

The universalist's argument is that since this verse does not refer to a particular church, as 1 Corinthians 12:27, no local meaning can be attached to it. There is the same argument on Verse 24, which reads: "Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church."

Though it is true Paul does not follow these statements with the declaration that the church at Colosse is the body of Christ, neither did he say "for His body's sake, which body ye are." But does it suggest, even remotely, that the church at Colosse was not the body of Christ? Does a Bible truth once established, as 1 Corinthians 12:27, need to be invariably repeated? Rather, when a Bible truth is once established all other Scripture must harmonize with it. Many passages seem to be dark and very confusing until brought into the light of definitely and positively clear statements. (Then why should the student go out into the infinite and mystical trying to find an explanation for these verses that will harmonize with all of the scholars? The scholars are not agreed among themselves on many different subjects. For example, if one tries to please them all one will have to accept evolution, the universal brotherhood of man, and deny the virgin birth of Christ. But at the same time one will have to reject evolution, deny the universal brotherhood of man, and accept the virgin birth of Christ. These are just a few of the paradoxes to be found if one tries to go along with all the scholars[cf. Deut.

29:29.-ed.]).

The ekklesia of these passages could not mean the great invisible aggregate of all the saved. If so the Scripture would be contradicting itself because these passages would fail to harmonize with the eighty-five scriptural references which point to the church as a local body.

Neither do these passages refer to spiritual Israel, but rather to the local church of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Some one must always ask; how many bodies, how many wives, does the Lord have? When one finds how many churches He has he will have the answer. Many object and cry "impossible" "plurality" "polygamy" and "impossible to understand." It must not be forgotten that the terminology is metaphorical, and it is not ours to understand, but to believe. When one tries to understand the eternal God; who had no beginning and no ending, when one tries to understand the omnipresence of God it will cause the mind to stagger.

But one thing is known, when all of the churches have been brought together in the resurrection there will be but one body, one bride. It will not be made up of all the saved, but of all the local churches of Jesus.

There are yet a few scriptures that are used to argue the universal theory. These shall be examined and the first to claim the readers attention is Romans 16:23, which states: "Gaius mine host, and of the whole church, saluteth you."

This verse is supposed to teach that Gaius made all of the Christians welcome when they came to Corinth, thus he was the host of the great mystical and invisible church. The language of the verse is very simple and so is the statement, "Gaius mine host, and of the whole church." Even a child can see how utterly impassible it would have been for Gaius to be host to a great universal, invisible church composed of all the saved of all the ages both living and dead. At the time Paul wrote these words many churches had no meeting place except in private homes. Thus they were referred to as "the church in thy house." So it is only logical to believe that Gaius was accommodating this particular church in his home.

Next in order is 1 Corinthians 6:4, which admonishes: "If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church."

If the student will study the context of this verse, he will find that the reign or the judicial aspect of the church is future. Therefore, the immediate application is to the church in Corinth, rather than to an ecclesiastical body, which alone has the ability and the right to execute judgment.

1 Corinthians 10:32 urges: "Give no offense, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God."

If this statement were found in any epistle other than 1 Corinthians, the universal theologians would make much of it. However, since it is in this epistle, and in chapter 1, verse 2, the explicit declaration, "to the church of God at Corinth," is found, there is very little that can be said. Therefore, it was the church of God at Corinth, to whom they were to give no offence.

The following four verses are of no special value to the universal theorist, however, they are sometimes used in attempt to bolster the theory.

"For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle because I persecuted the church of God." (1 Corinthians 15:9).

"For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jew's religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God and wasted it." (Galatians 1:13).

"Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless." (Philippians 3:6).

"As for Saul, he made havoc of the church, entering into every house, and haling men and women committed them to prison."

(Acts 8:3).

The word church as used in these verses refer so clearly and distinctly to the church at Jerusalem they require no comment.

The verse that is to follow properly belongs with the four quoted above. However, since there is some question concerning its reference to the church, it is listed, and shall be discussed, separately.

"Then had the churches (church) rest throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied." (Acts 9:31).

This verse had to do with the period after the conversion of Paul when the church had rest

from persecution. The records show only one church, the church at Jerusalem, which Paul persecuted. In fact, the records reveal no church other than the one at Jerusalem until the one at Antioch was established.

The argument, concerning this verse, set forth by the universal theorist seems to center around the word "church" singular, and the word "churches" plural. The King James version has "churches" the Revised Version, "church." Most scholars seem to believe the word should be rendered "church" singular. For example A. T. Robertson says: "The singular ekklesia is undoubtedly the true reading here (all of the great documents have it so). By this time there were churches scattered over Judea, Galilee and Samaria (Galatians 1:22) but Luke either regards the disciples in Palestine as still members of the one great church at Jerusalem ... or he employs the term ekklesia in a geographical or collective sense, covering all of Palestine. The strict local sense we have already seen in 8:1 and 3 and Matthew 18:17 and the general Spiritual sense in Matthew 16:18. But in Acts 8:3 is is plain that the term is applied to the organization of Jerusalem Christians even when scattered in their homes." 11

W. O. Carver says: "The church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace. The church still includes all believers in the whole of Palestine.

Either, as Baptist and other democratic denominations hold, the development of independent, local organizations had not yet arisen, or the term is applied in a general sense to include all believers in this territory. In Galatians 1:22, referring to this same period, Paul speaks of the churches of Judea, which lends color to the second interpretation. Still it may well be, as many Baptists (Broadus, et al) have held, that Paul speaks from the standpoint of his writing several years later, while Luke speaks here from the standpoint of the fact at this time. In this view the differentiation into churches took place between the two dates. We must remember that throughout the New Testament period churches included in their organizations more territory and more people than later custom provided. Always the disciples of a city and the surrounding territory seem to have remained in a unified single church organization, however, many centers of worship and service may have been needed." 12

Strong says: "Broadus in his commentary on Matthew, page 359, suggests that the word ekklesia in Acts 9:31 denotes the original church at Jerusalem, whose members were by the persecution widely scattered throughout Judea and Galilee and Samaria, and held meetings wherever they were, but still belonged to the original organization ... When Paul wrote to the Galatians, nearly twenty years later, these separate meetings had been organized into distinct churches, and so he speaks, Galatians 1:22, in references to that same period, of the churches of Judea which were in Christ." 13

Brown, of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown say : "Then had the churches.-But the true reading here seems to be 'The Church' which Lachmann and Tisschendorf adopt, (and DeWette, Alford, and Lechler approve, though not Meyer). Indeed, it is hardly conceivable that churches in any proper sense of the term, should have been formed this early throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria." 14

At the time of the great persecution (Acts 8:1-4) the biblical records reveal no hint of any church other than the one at Jerusalem. Of this period Carver says: "Saul of Tarsus will be a great leader of the effort to put down the church. As yet there is but one church. No differentiation into groups in the various cities has been made. All Christians thus far are in the one Jerusalem group." 15

Acts 8:3 shows Paul entering upon his career of hate and persecution of the Christians. Acts 8:4 tells that the Christians were scattered abroad, by this persecution, and went everywhere preaching the word.

Verses 5-40 of the same chapter give a word picture of the great work done but nothing is heard about a new church until the church at Antioch. This persecution could not have extended more than three or four years, so with Brown, of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown the author agrees: "It is hardly conceivable that churches in any proper sense of the term, should have been formed this early throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria." 16

After letting the light of all the evidence shine upon this controverted verse, it seems positively certain the church at Jerusalem, with her scattered constituents, was the church referred to as having rest from persecution. Subsequent Baptist history in America reveals a similar circumstance. The records show that the Pennepack Church was instituted by Elias Keach, 1688, in Pennepack, or Lower Dublin, Pa. The records further reveal this church had constituent groups or congregations in Trenton, Chester and other small towns in New Jersey and Pennsylvania. In later years these constituent congregations were organized into churches.

The readers attention is now directed to the much controverted, and indeed hard to understand, Hebrews 12:18, 22-23, which states: "For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, nor unto blackness, and darkness, and tempest ... But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect."

Before entering into a study of these verses a few quotations from the scholars shall be given. The American Commentary says: "And to an innumerable company...And to myriad ones, a festal host of angels, and a congregation of firstborn ones, who are registered in heaven. Such is, perhaps, the best construction of these difficult and disputed words." 17

A. T. Robertson says: "To the general assembly (Panegurei). Old word (from pas and aguris, agerio). Here only in N.T. Panegurizo occurs in Isaiah 66:10 for keeping a festal holiday. Possibly to be connected with aggelon, though not certain. Church of the firstborn (ekklesiai Prototokon).

Probably an additional item besides the angelic host as the people of Israel are called the firstborn (Exodus 4:22). The word exxlesia here has the general sense of all the redeemed, as in Matt. 16:18; Col. 1:18; Eph. 5:24-32, equivalent to the kingdom of God. Who are enrolled in heaven (apogegrammenon en ouranois). Perfect passive participle of apographo, old verb to write off, to copy, to enroll as in Luke 2:1, 3, 5 (only N.T. example). Enrolled as citizens of heaven even while on earth (Luke 10:20; Phil. 1:27; 3:20; 4:3; Rev. 8: etc.). To God the judge of all (kritei theoi panton.)" 18

William R. Newell says: "Literally the greek of verses 22-24 reads, But on the contrary ye are come to mount Zion and to the assembly of firstborn ones enrolled in heaven and to God judge of all and to spirits of righteous ones perfected and to Mediator of new covenant, Jesus and to blood of sprinkling speaking better than (the blood) Abel." 19

Charles B. Williams Translation says: "But you have come to mount Zion, even to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to countless host of angels, to the festal gathering and assembly of God's firstborn sons enrolled as citizens in heaven, to a judge who is the God of all, to the spirits of upright men who have attained perfection.""

The Pulpit Commentary says: "The Jewish church was shut cut from intercourse with the rest of the world; but our fellow citizens under the new Covenant are: (1) The Holy Angels:. Myriads of Angels, a festal assembly, the celestial hierarchy.

(2) The saints on earth: the church of the firstborn who are enrolled in album of heaven. Israel was mustered and numbered at Sinai; and so the New Testament Church although dispersed all over the world, forms but one society of firstborn ones, each of whom is a prince of the blood of God. (3) The believers of the ancient church: the spirits of just men made perfect. The disembodied souls of the Old Testament saints could not be made perfect, apart from us, chapter 11:40, and thus we now form one brotherhood with them, as well as with departed believers who lived in Christian times. . . 21

Dr. Dana says: "The plain unstrained interpretation is to understand the author as meaning that the redeemed in Christ have direct access to the very glorious presence of God, surrounded by hosts of angels in their festal gathering as an assembly of enrolled citizens of the heavenly city.

The desire to depict a church in glory appears to be the chief reason why many interpreters overlook this plain meaning and as a result involve the passage in intricate difficulties..." 22

Thus is presented, in substance, what most of the commentators say in interpreting these verses. The student will not overlook the fact the commentators unanimously interpret the word church to mean all the saved of all the ages. It is well, however, to remember first, though a man has written a commentary and is found to be right in many things, it does not follow that he is infallible. He is still a man and subject to error. Second, most of the commentators are members of man-made churches. If the church of the Lord Jesus Christ does not include all of the saved then many people, including the commentators, have no part in it. This is not a pleasing prospect, therefore many efforts are made and many interpretations are strained, in an attempt to prove the church is composed of all the saved of all the ages.

A consideration of this entire letter is very important to a comprehensive study of these verses.

This letter was written to Hebrew Christians. The purpose was to convince the Hebrews of the excellence and superiority of Christ and the church age over Abraham, Moses and the old dispensation of law, circumcision and ceremony. In other words this letter is related to the Jewish problem of the new dispensation.

The student will remember there were three mountains outstanding in the mind of any Hebrew. First, there was Mount Moriah, upon which Abraham was instructed to offer his son in sacrifice to God (Genesis 22:2). Mount Moriah was again the place of sacrifice, after David had sinned against God by numbering the people (1 Chronicles 22:1). It was upon Mount Moriah that Solomon built the great temple (2 Chronicles 3:1). Second, was Mount Sinai; the place where God came down to the people in fire and smoke, typical of judgment (Exodus 19:16-18). Third, was Mount Zion; this is the higher hill in Jerusalem, the place where David dwelt after he had overthrown the Jebusites (2 Samuel 5:6-9). Upon the return of our Lord, the tabernacle of David shall be built again (Acts 15:16-17). Mount Zion is to be the site of the great millennial temple (Isaiah 2:2-3, Micah 4, Psalm 48, Psalm 68:15-35). The last nine chapters of Ezekiel give a word picture of this great temple.

The Jews were familiar with the prophetic future of Mount Zion; therefore to them it represented freedom, joy, and a great outpouring of grace.

So the writer of the Hebrew letter, taking advantage of their knowledge, in substance, says: "you, that have believed unto salvation, have not come to Mount Sinai, as did your fathers, the mountain of fire, smoke, fear and great trembling which was typical of bondage and judgment: but you have come to Mount Zion, the place of grace and freedom from fear and judgment (Romans 8:2). You have come to the heavenly city, the eternal Jerusalem, of which the earthly Jerusalem was only a type, And to an innumerable company of angels (Revelation 7:11-12) to the general assembly and church of the firstborn." In other words the writer of this epistle is trying to make these Hebrew Christians conscious of the fact they have passed from the old dispensation of legalism (Galatians 3:13, 2425) into the glorious age of grace and freedom.

Albert Barnes expresses the aim of the inspired writer when he says: "By the phrase 'ye are come,' the apostle means that this was the characteristic of the new dispensation, that it conducted them there, and that they were already, in fact, inhabitants of that glorious city. They were citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem (Phil. 3:20) and were entitled to its privileges." 23

Thus the purpose of the inspired writer is clearly seen, but what do the verses teach relative to the church? Do they reveal a great and final gathering of a universal church? The word 'ekklesia' seems to be used here in its common classical sense of 'assembly.' It would be impossible, however, to prove the church is universal on that evidence, because the local church is an assembly. The scholars do not agree as to what the word, in these particular verses, teaches.

Some of them seem to believe the word ekklesia points to both the angels and redeemed, of all the ages, in one festal gathering which is to be a future realization. Others seem to believe it points to the future gathering of all the redeemed around the throne of God. Still others believe the word refers only to the redeemed on earth who are, though still on earth, enrolled in heaven. Thus the scholars do not give conclusive proof but rather confuse the student. Nevertheless, a careful study of the verses will reveal they present no just cause for confusion.

The students attention is again directed to the purpose of the inspired writer. Here, it seems, is to be found the key which opens the door of understanding to the otherwise mysterious statements. In the attempt to show these Hebrew Christians the superior blessings and privileges of the new dispensation the writer makes the emphatic declaration, "ye have come."

It is well for the student to remember these statements are all in the present perfect tense. These people had passed from the old dispensation, with its priesthood, carnal ordinances, and the veil which stood between them and the mercy seat; all of these things were limited to types and shadows. In this age from which they had just passed they were shut up to the blessings which were theirs to enjoy in the new age. Galatians 3:23, states: "But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed."

Hebrews 9:7-10, declares: "But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people: the Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation."

They had come, that is, passed into the age which brought them, as priests (1 Peter 2:5, 9) to the very throne of God. Hebrews 7:19 reads: "For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw night unto God."

Romans 5:2 declares: "By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God."

Hebrews 4:16 reads: "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need."

Thus they had come to the great festal assembly of angels gathered around the throne of God; to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to the church of the firstborn. In brief, this is the summing up of the blessings and special privileged that accrue to those of the new dispensation.

The church is the very center of the new dispensation even as the nation of Israel with her system of worship was the center of the old. The church is God's official representative on earth in this age, as Israel was His official representative on earth in the old. The world has received the New Testament through the church, and Jesus said the church was the salt of the earth and the light of the world. The Holy Spirit gave us a strong hint that she is the bride of Christ (II Corinthians 11:2) to further honor the church and show her importance the Holy Spirit said: "Ye shall judge angels" (1 Corinthians 6:2-3).

Realizing the preeminence of the church in this dispensation which is many times referred to as the 'church age,' and keeping the purpose of the inspired writer in mind, one cannot fail to see the propriety of this reference; "ye are come ... To the general assembly and church of the firstborn . . ." It makes little difference whether the word is used in the classical or the institutional sense, it's place in the reference would be the same.

The primary purpose of the inspired writer is not to depict a future gathering, but to make these Israelites know that, among other blessings and privileges received, they had been permitted to see; and the writer believes, to become a part of the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Some, perhaps, will object to the argument that the blessings mentioned by the inspired author of the epistle are present blessings. These objectors seem to believe the references are to blessings and privileges which cannot be realized before the heaven age begins; thus they attempt to make the church universal in the heaven age. However, where facts begin arguments must end: the statements, "ye have not come . . . ye have come" are in the present perfect tense in both cases.

The writer understands that the glories of these blessings cannot be fully realized on earth.

Paul said: "But as it is written, 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."

That, however, does not alter the fact these are present possessions. They have their beginning here and their consummation in the heaven age. In other words the writer of this epistle in one grand scope of vision carries these Hebrew Christians from the present through the resurrection, the millennial reign with Christ, and the beginning of the heaven age.

Some who are so urgent in their desire to establish a universal church will object to the argument that these Hebrews were members of a church.

Despite the objections it seems in all probability they were church members.

They had received the gospel from Christ, or through the church, and it seems only reasonable that in either case they would have been church members.

Then in chapter 10:25, they are told not to forsake the assembling of themselves together. This verse, so far as the writer knows, has never been thought to apply to anything but a New Testament church.

In recapitulation it can be said; every Scripture in the New Testament that pertains to the church has been examined and not one has been found that will uphold the universal church theory. The etymology of ekklesia in both its classical and Septuagint usage proves the word to have only one meaning; 'local.' The usage of the word in the New Testament proves that the Holy Spirit meant for His readers to understand the ekklesia to be a local body. Finally, our Lord's choice of the word proves that He meant for His people to understand His ekklesia to be a

local congregation. These are facts neither wishful thinking nor oratorical argument will be able to refute.

Why Some Hold the Universal Theory Why is the universal church theory the prevalent theory? It is a well known fact that almost all of the scholars believe that the church is made up of all the saved of all the ages, but why? The writer thinks it easy to understand why the average person will believe that one church is as good as another, and that all saved people belong to the church. They believe it for the same reason people believed the world was square; because it seems reasonable. The average person has nothing but a superficial knowledge of the Bible and they are excusable, perhaps, on that ground.

But why will the scholar, with his historical and linguistical Bible training, believe it? If it could be proven all the scholars were dishonest it would be understood, but this cannot be done for many of them are sincere in what they believe and teach.

The big question 'why,' is still unanswered unless the reader will consider the Devil, his attitude and his tactics. Bringing the Devil in to help establish a fact will not be thought scholarly.

Nevertheless, the writer is not ashamed, because God in the book of all books has warned men of the Devil's purpose and power. 1 Peter 5:8, Revelation 20:10, Genesis 3, and Matthew 4, will reveal to any student of the Word that the Devil can do much to control men's thinking, and that the Word is the very thing he uses, many times, to accomplish his purpose. In fact, the Bible, from Genesis through Revelation, is one continuous display of the Devil's activity in his efforts to defeat the plan of God. He has left nothing undone; he has not failed to exercise any effort that might hinder the cause of the Lord Jesus. Then, since the church is the pillar and ground of the truth, it is not surprising to find the Devil making every effort possible to destroy the church. The universal church theory is his greatest masterpiece; it is the nearest thing to a deathblow that he has been able to deal the church. Someone has well said, "The blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church."

So the Devil instituted the universal theory and today, so far as the world is concerned, the church is nothing more than a name, and the truth is anything one wants to believe. Salvation is thought of as a system of ethics, having its roots in sociology rather than in Bible truth. Every member of a man made church must somehow justify himself, and men searching for selfjustification will grasp at a straw. The universal theory is that straw; the great panacea, covering all the errors, and justifying all the man-made institutions which call themselves churches.

1 Strong's Systematic Theology, The Judson Press, . Page 887. 2 Ibid., Page 889.

3 A Manual of Ecclesiology, Dana, Central Seminary Press, Kansas City, Kansas, 1944. Page 37.

4 Strong's Systematic Theology, The Judson Press. Philadelphia, Page 901. 5 Ibid., Page 893. 6 Ibid., Page 900.

7 Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Eerdman's Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1948.

Vol. VI, Page 402.

8 The Greek New Testament Interlinear, Geo. Ricker Berry, Wilcox & Follett Co., 1954.

Page 505.

9 Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Eerdman's Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Mich., 1948. Vol. VI, Page 407.

10 Bible in Eight Ages, Foreman, Seminary Baptist Press, Little Rock, Ark. 11 Word Pictures in the New Testament; A. T. Robertson, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1930. Vol. III, Page 128.

12 The Acts of the Apostles, Carver, Broadman Press, Nashville, Tenn., 1916. Page 101.

13 Strong's Systematic Theology, The Judson Press, . Philadelphia. Page 892.

14 Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Eerdman's Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1948. Vol. VI, Pages 62-63.

15 The Acts of the Apostles, Carver, Broadman Press, Nashville, Tenn., 1916. Page 79.

16 Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, Eerdman's Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1948. Vol. VI, Page 63.

17 American Commentary on the New Testament, American Baptist Publication Society, Philadelphia. Vol. VI, Page 176.

18 Word Pictures in the New Testament, A. T. Robertson, Harper and Brothers, New York, 1930. Vol. V, Page 440.

19 Hebrews Verse by Verse, William R. Newell, Moody Press, Chicago, 20 The New Testament, Charles B. Williams, Moody Press, Chicago, 1954. Page 503.

21 Pulpit Commentary.

22 A Manual of Ecclesiology, Dana, Central Seminary Press, Kansas City, Kansas, 1944. Page 66.

23 Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Mich., 1956. Page -.

History This study of the local church would not be complete without at least a passing glance at

what the early writers, in the first and second centuries, had to say in regard to the church.

The first of the ancient writers to claim our attention is Clement, the author of "The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians." This book was written approximately ‌, A. D. 95 to 97. It is an epistle from the church at Rome to the church at Corinth. It was presented to King Charles I

by Cyril, Patriarch of Alexandria, and is now in the British Museum. In the English translation is found the word "church" six times. Chapter 1:1 states: "The church of God which is at Rome, to the church of God which is at Corinth ...",

Clement thought of the church as local. It should be recognized that Clement was a disciple of Peter, and later became bishop (pastor) of the church at Rome. In the introduction to the epistle it is stated that Jerome says he was an apostolical man, and Rufinus says, he was almost an apostle.

Eusebius calls this the wonderful epistle of St. Clement, and says that it was publicly read in the assemblies of the primitive churches. The purpose in writing the epistle was the correction of certain seditions which had arisen in the church at Corinth, but it is not even hinted that the pastor, or the church in Rome had any authority whatsoever over the church at Corinth. The position assumed

by Clement was admonitory and advisory. The epistle is from one local church to another local church with not the slightest suggestion that the church in Rome failed to recognize the sovereignty of the church in Corinth.

These words are found in Chapter 5: "Through zeal and envy, the most faithful and righteous pillars of the church have been persecuted even to the most grievous deaths." 2

It is an outstanding fact that an honest and sincere study of the early writers will reveal that they thought of the church as one, in doctrine and in purpose, the pillar and ground of the truth.

But with none of the writers had the local church lost her identity. That fact is obvious from the writings of Augustine, who is designated as the father of Roman Catholicism. (Catholicism had existed in germ before Augustine). Since there existed only one system of teaching and all the teachings came through the various churches, it is easy to understand why they would think of the churches as one universal church, even to the extreme. Since there were no saved people, at least very few, that did not belong to the churches the conclusion that none could be saved outside the church was logical. Despite these theological vagaries, they did not use the word universal in the sense that it is used by our modern theologians. The author feels if it is possible to prove anything, he has proven both by the Scriptures and the early writers that the ekklesia is not a universal, invisible, mystical body but a local body.

1 Anti-Nicene Fathers, Eerdman's Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1953. Vol. I. 2 Ibid.

Eschatology Since the fall of man and the corruption of creation by sin, God has had a plan for the salvation of man and the subjection of all things unto Himself. This plan manifestly centers in Christ. Its revelation, its progress, and its consummation are all linked with Him. The church, as the body of Christ, is the great and final instrument that Christ is using in this last age in the consummation of His plan or the work which His Father has given Him to do.

That this age (the church or Gentile age) shall come to an end is known. That the second coming of Christ will manifest the end, all orthodox scholars agree. The second coming is an established fact. No other event is more clearly revealed by scripture.

THE BLADE, and the EAR, and the FULL CORN. Excerpt from "The Dispensational Expositions of the Parables and Prophecies of Christ" by J. R. Graves, (1887)

The Gradual Development of Christ’s Kingdom.

"And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground; And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how. For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear. But when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come."—Mark 4:26-29.

That this parabolic, gem, so natural and so significant, should be recorded only by Mark is "one of the surprises of gospel history;" but it does not militate either its "genuineness or importance."

Of this parable Dr. Bruce, of Scotland says: "The law of growth in the spiritual world, not being duly laid to heart, has, therefore, not been found here, and this parable consequently has been misinterpreted, or rather scarcely interpreted at all. Few of our Lord's parables have been more unsatisfactorily expounded, as there are few in which a right exposition is more to be desired for the good of believers" ( Parabolic Teachings, p. 120.)

This expositor verifies the truth of his own assertion by interpreting this parable, at great length, as teaching the growth of grace in the souls of Christians; in other words, that sanctification is a gradual growth, and, in trying to conform it to the laws of growth in the natural world, he altogether misses, I think, what Christ intended and does manifestly teach by this parable, Indeed, Dr. Bruce frankly confesses that he has limited its application to the individual Christian's experience rather than to the history of the kingdom of God at large, its real scope, and his apology is because he understands the former better than the latter. So disingenuous is his admission, and so applicable his reason to other commentators, that I quote him verbally here: "And here we shall confine ourselves to the experience of the individual, though sensible that the history of the kingdom of God at large is a far greater theme than that of any individual Christian, and ready to admit that it was probably the former which our Lord had chiefly in His thoughts when lie uttered the parable. Our apology for restricting our inquiry to the minor subject is, first, that we understand it better."—Bruce, p.133 Let the reader mark this writer's statement, which I accept as true, viz,: that "our Lord had the history of His kingdom at large chiefly in His thoughts when He uttered this parable." Had he said wholly in His thoughts, it would have been nearer the exact truth for this is what He explicitly declared the parable was intended to illustrate, viz.: that the growth of His kingdom would be slow and by marked stages from its origin to its final and glorious consummation, like unto that of a seed of corn from its planting to its final development—the full corn in the ear. But, amazingly strange, although this is so clearly stated by Christ as the true and only scope of the parable, commentators so generally, Dr. Bruce not excepted, ignore it, and even base their interpretations upon a single and confessedly mistranslated text of Scripture! (Luke 17:20.)

Christ's kingdom, composed, as it is, of His visible local churches, could not be in the hearts of those wicked and murderous Pharisees, either in its literal or spiritual, its physical or figurative, senses. It was among them or in their midst, although they did not discern the fact; and this is undoubtedly what Christ said. At another time He said, "But if I, by the finger of God, cast out devils, then has the kingdom of God come unto you." I can recall no passage in the Sacred Scriptures where it is taught or intimated that Christ's kingdom ever was or ever could be in the hearts of saints or sinners. Paul does, in one place, say that "the kingdom of God is righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit;" but this is manifestly an elliptical sentence for the fruits of the kingdom-its aim and the natural result of its rule. We all know that the apple is not the tree, nor the grape the vine, that produces it. The third Napoleon, in the fete given at his coronation, said, for the ear of the foreign diplomats, "The empire is peace." certainly did not mean that the French government was either literally or figuratively peace, but that its aims would be to secure peace with all nations.

I regret to say that one of our own recent and valued commentators of the New Testament thus briefly explains the scope of this parable: "The kingdom of God in the soul and in the world, a life and a growth not dependent on human power, gradual, progressive and complete in its development."--Dr. George Clark's Notes, published by the American Baptist Publication Society.

A SUGGESTED INTERPRETATION. Analogous to the three noted stages in the growth of a seed of corn—viz.: 1. From the appearance of the blade to that of the stalk. 2.

From the stalk to the appearance of the ear. 3.

From the earing to the full corn in the ear—its complete and ripened development—is the growth

of the kingdom of heaven.

These stages of growth would be the three marked periods in the growth of His kingdom on earth I. Its inceptive or organizing period.

II. Its development.

III. Its full and glorious consummation.

1. The Inceptive Period includes the time from the planting of the first church (the setting up of the kingdom) until the ascension of Christ and the descent of the Holy Spirit-i.e. the period of the personal administration of it by Christ himself.

As in the case of the blade stage of the corn, the casual and unintelligent observer could not discern the real character of the plant, or distinguish it from the common grass of the field, and certainly not discover anything that bore the appearance of an ear of corn, so many casual readers and partisan interpreters profess to see nothing in the history of Christianity from the days of John the Baptist until Pentecost that indicates the existence of the kingdom of Christ; but, nevertheless, it was as certainly there, in its elementary form, as the undeveloped ear is in the corn blade. Christ himself expressly and repeatedly asserted its actual existence: "THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS WERE UNTIL JOHN, SINCE WHICH TIME THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS PREACHED, AND ALL MEN [NOT PRESS INTO BUT] ASSAIL IT."—LUKE 16:16.

This agrees with Matt. 11:12.

"AND WHEN HE WAS DEMANDED OF THE PHARISEES WHEN THE KINGDOM OF GOD SHOULD COME HE ANSWERED THEM AND SAID, THE KINGDOM OF GOD COMETH NOT WITH OBSERVATION ; NEITHER SHALL THEY SAY, LO HERE OR THERE, FOR LO, THE KINGDOM OF GOD IS IN THE MIDST OF YOU." —LUKE 17:20-21. (SEE AMERICAN REVISION.)

That is, it was there present among them.

"BUT IF I CAST OUT DEVILS BY THE SPIRIT OF GOD, THEN IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD COME UNTO YOU."—MATT. 12:28.

It was an actual existence. Publicans and harlots entered into it by baptism. The scribes and Pharisees assailed it. Christ informed Nicodemus that except a man were born of the spirit he could not see it, and, unless born of water (baptized) in addition to the spiritual birth, he could not enter it, which implies its existence.

During this, the Organizing Period, the kingdom was under the direct personal administration of its King and Founder. He was building, setting up and establishing it. Its laws were both enacted and executed by Him in person. This period was represented by the cutting of the stone out of the mountain without hands-i. e. human or angelic agency.

2. The Second Period in the progress of Christ's kingdom embraces all the time from His ascension until His return—the Regeneration.

(Matt. 19:28.) This period is analogous to the earing time of the corn blade or stalk, and, in Daniel's prophecy, is the time between the cutting out of the stone from the mountain and its smiting the great image. (Dan. 2:44.)

During the blade, or stalk, period of the corn, as I have said, there was nothing, to the inexperienced eye, that looked like an ear of corn; yet, during this period, after the form of an ear and the green, imperfect and scattered grains of corn appeared, no one questioned that it was indeed corn; so, in this age, few can be found to deny that the kingdom, in one of its phases, is in existence. The kernels of corn are fast multiplying in the ear; and the signs of its fullness and maturity are manifold and evident to every Scripturally intelligent observer.

3. The Third Period in the progressive growth of the kingdom, represented by the first appearance of the green ear on the stalk, and the scattering kernels of unripe corn upon it, to the FULL CORN IN THE EAR, represents all the time in the history of the kingdom from the return of Christ—when commences the Regeneration—until the close of the Millennial Age.

(1 At the commencement of this Third Period Christ will return with all His now glorified saints, gathered from their graves and caught up and out of the living populations of earth.

(2 Then will take place, in their presence, the judgment of nations, as nations, and the avenging of their blood

upon those that dwell upon the earth- those "goat nations" that oppressed and persecuted them.

(3 Then Antichrist himself will be destroyed, and all Antichristian organizations, civil and religious (and at this time

the whole world, with its kings and rulers, will be under his control, and in open rebellion to Christ), will be crushed into dust by Christ as King of His saints, as the symbolic stone cut out of the mountain, and their very dust driven from the earth like the chaff by the wind of a summer's threshing floor.

Thus and then will the prophecies of Daniel 2:44, and David (Ps. 2.), and John (Rev. 20.), be fulfilled when the stone-kingdom will smite the image and break it in pieces. But this is not all of it. It was to become a great mountain and fill the whole earth.

Then will Christ, as the antitype of David, by His almighty power, subdue all His enemies, overcome and bind and cast out Satan, the strong man armed; will spoil his goods (Luke 11:21-23) sion of all the kingdoms of this earth. and take posses­ "The Regeneration" will be the constituting of all these kingdoms into His one now universal kingdom, over which, with His saints as joint heirs, He will reign on this earth for one thousand years in undisputed sway, as King of kings and Lord of lords, "and all men shall see and fear His glory from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof."

This Millennial Period, during which the "full corn in the ear" will appear in its ripened state—its full glory—I call The Consummation of the Kingdom.

I refer to the following Scriptures in support of these positions, which I trust the reader will carefully read: Dan. 2:34-45; 7:26-28; Luke 22:29-31; Matt. 19:28; Acts 3:20-22; Rev. 19:11; 20:17, 10; 2Tim. 2:12.

Note.-- See "Seven Dispensations", Part III., for a full development of Christ's work, and the "Doctrine of the Last Things."

Excerpt from

"The Millennial Issue" First Objection:

by Elder G. E. Jones, c. 1950

It Robs Jesus of His Throne and Crown.

This is the first objection Mr. Kempin offers to try to show why the millennial doctrine is not Biblical. I shall turn that charge around and place it on him. He and all his kind are the ones who would take from Jesus His throne and His crown. The Premillennialists are the only ones who believe and teach that Jesus will receive the throne and the crown promised Him. Under his first reason, or objection, Mr. Kempin says, "Jesus has a kingdom now."

Premillennialists do not deny this. But Mr. Kempin does not seem to know that Jesus teaches that there are three phases to the kingdom of God. In Mark 4:26-28 Jesus likens the kingdom of God to the seed of corn that is planted in the earth. He says, in this connection, "The earth bringeth forth fruit of herself: first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear." Here we find three stages or phases of the kingdom. We have: (1) The blade. (2) The ear. (3) The full corn in the ear.

Mr. Kempin would only have one stage or phase. He would cut it short in the blade stage. He sure would make a fine farmer. He would cut his corn down when the blade first shows through the ground. But at that he would be as good a farmer as he is a Bible teacher. We admit that the first phase started when Christ was here the first time. But there are other phases, and the thousand years reign is another one of those phases.

In his effort to upset the millennial doctrine, Mr. Kempin contradicted himself. On page 5 he quoted part of Isaiah 9:6-7 to prove that Christ had a kingdom in His first advent into the world. I shall quote what he quoted, and after that what he left off "Unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder....Of the increase of his government there shall be no end." But he failed to quote the next expression in Isaiah, which reads: "Upon the throne of DAVID." That part of the quotation did not fit his doctrine, so he had to leave it out. After quoting the words above he said, "This reign is immediately associated with Christ's birth—a Son is given.

Our Lord claimed a kingdom in His first advent into the world." Then he quoted John 18:36 and Matt. 24:14 to substantiate his position that Christ had His kingdom during His first advent. But hear him on the very next page. There he asks the question, "When did Christ receive this kingdom?"

Then he quotes Dan. 7:13. After quoting this verse, he says, "Daniel saw Jesus ascending to God after having suffered, bled and died, to begin His great mediatorial reign." Page 6.

So on page 5 Mr. Kempin said, Christ had His kingdom while He was on earth during His first advent. But on the very next page He does not receive it until after He has left the earth and gone back to heaven. Mr. Kempin had better learn to keep straight with himself before launching out to straighten out the Premillennialists. Which time was Mr. Kempin right ? Was he right on page 5 when he said Christ claimed a kingdom in His first advent, or was he right when he taught that Christ did not receive that kingdom before going back to heaven?

After quoting Matt. 24:14, Mr. Kempin said, "Millennial teachers would have the end come and then the establishment of the kingdom of Christ, but Jesus said the kingdom would be shared through the preaching of the gospel and then the end would come," page 5. Now, just where did Jesus say anything about the kingdom being shared through the preaching of the gospel? I fail to read such an expression in Matt. 24:14. That verse says, "This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

This verse states that the gospel of the kingdom shall be preached for a witness unto all nations; and then the end should come. But it says nothing about sharing in a reign or kingdom during this time. The end of what shall come? I guess Mr. Kempin thinks this means the end of the earth. But it does not say so. In that chapter the apostles had asked Jesus about the end of the world (Gr. age). It matters little with me whether he takes the King James translation which renders this "world," or others which render it "age." The world is not the earth. The world is simply this present order of things which exists upon this earth. The Devil is said to be the god of this age or world, 2 Cor. 4:3-4; Eph. 2:2; 6:11-12. "The whole world lieth in the wicked one," 1 John 5:19, R.V. When this age ends this present world will end, but then Christ shall establish a new order of things and reign a thousand years on this earth. Millennial haters have never learned to discriminate between different terms. Because they have confused the words world and earth they think the end of the world means the end of the earth.

In the same connection Mr. Kempin used John 18:36, where Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world."

Of course, it is not. If so He would have received His authority from the Devil and would be working in connection with the Devil, who is the god of this world. But Jesus nowhere said His kingdom or reign would not be on this earth.

When Jesus returns to the earth to reign He will set aside this present world order, and establish a new order on the earth. "A King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth," Jer. 23:5.

"Thou shalt judge the people righteously, and govern the nations upon the earth," Psalm 67:4.

On page 5, Mr. Kempin quoted Heb. 1:8 and Heb. 4:16 to try to show that Jesus is now upon His throne. Heb. 1:8 is a quotation from the 45th Psalm. Had Mr. Kempin read the connection closely he would have seen that the application is not to this present time, but to the second advent of Christ back to the earth. Let us read it: "Gird thy sword upon thy thigh, O most mighty, with thy glory and thy majesty. And in thy majesty ride prosperously because of truth and meekness and righteousness ;—thine arrows are sharp in the heart of the king's enemies ; whereby the people fall under thee.

Thy throne O God is for ever and ever: the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre," Psalm 45:3-6. By comparing this passage with Rev. 19:11-21 where Christ is pictured coming on a white horse in righteousness and make war, we see they are the same. At that time He will destroy the armies and the kings of the earth, so this passage applies to His second coming to the earth.

In Heb. 4:16 the believer is admonished to come boldly to a throne of grace. That throne of grace is the throne of the Heavenly Father in heaven, not David's throne which was promised to Christ.

Then Mr. Kempin says, "Our Lord wears the crown of His sovereignty now. Jesus is not an uncrowned King. He wears His glorious crown now." To prove this statement he quotes Heb. 2:9, or

part of it. "We see Jesus—crowned with glory and honour." He failed to finish the quotation, "that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." Mr. Kempin does not seem to know that there are two kinds of crowns mentioned in the New Testament. One is a crown denoting victory in a contest. That kind of crown Paul had under consideration when he was talking about runners running in a race. "They do it to obtain a corruptible crown," 1 Cor. 9:24-25. No runner wins a crown of sovereignty by winning a race. He wins a crown of victory. The word in Greek for this crown is "Stephanos." The verb form of this word is "Stephano," which means to crown the victor in a contest. This is the word used in Heb. 2:9 to which Mr. Kempin referred. As a victor over temptation, death and the grave, Jesus is crowned as victor. But the crown of sovereignty is denoted by another word. This word is "Diadema," meaning diadem, or crown. On page 136 of his Lexicon, Mr. Thayer says, "Stephanos" is the crown of victory and that "Diadema" is the crown as badge of royalty. We nowhere find Jesus wearing the "Diadema," crown of royalty, until John gives us a picture of Him at His second coming in Rev. 19:11-21. Here we read that "On his head were many crowns" (Diadema), Rev. 19:12. Mr. Kempin would have done well to have looked up on this instead of jumping to a conclusion on the matter.

Mr. Kempin denies that Jesus is going to reign from Jerusalem on earth, so he is the one who is robbing Jesus of His throne and His crown, for Jesus was promised the throne of His father David, and that throne was in Jerusalem. But this comes up more fully in his second objection.

Fifteenth Objection:

The Millennial Doctrine Ignores the Kingdom of God as a Present Reality.

I have already shown that there are three stages to the kingdom, the blade, the ear, and the full corn in the ear, Mark 4:26-28. We do recognize the present, or blade stage, but we do not ignore the millennial stage as he does. The kingdom exists today in the person of the King, Christ, and the ruling class He is now calling out. But that over which we are to reign is yet future, for flesh and blood doth not inherit the kingdom of God. We must first be resurrected. This is just more proof that the first resurrection in Rev. 20:5-6 is the resurrection of the bodies of the saints.

Under this objection, Mr. Kempin says, "If we are to reign with Christ we ought to do it now."

P. 34. This doctrine came from the Roman Catholic Church. On page 4487 of The World Book Encyclopedia I read the following: "Saint Augustine, the great Catholic theologian of the 5th century, was the first to teach the present belief of the Roman Catholic Church, that the church is the kingdom of Christ, and that the millennium began with His first advent."

Here is the source of Mr. Kempin's false doctrine and his opposition to what the Premillennialists teach. He is holding on to the false teaching of the harlot. The Bible puts our reign in the future. "If we suffer, we shall (future) also reign with him," 2 Tim. 2:12. The false doctrine that we are now reigning came through Roman Catholicism. The first one to teach it was Augustine, a Catholic theologian. We shall have more of this anon. A lot of people have more Romanism hanging on to them than they think. Even some Baptists have been infected with the leaven of this scarlet woman.

Conclusion There are three phases of the kingdom to be reckoned with, Mark 4:26-29.

The millennial reign is only one of these phases.

There were mysteries about the kingdom that were not made known to the old prophets, Matt. 13:35.

One of these mysteries was that the kingdom was to have three phases, Mark 4:26-29.

They only saw the kingdom enduring without an end, Isa. 9:7.

They foresaw the events of the millennial age, but did not see that phase as separate from the eternal phase.

It remained for the New Testament to make known the three phases, Mark 4:26-29, and to

give us the length of the phase of that kingdom on this present earth, 2 Peter 3:7-8, and Rev. 20:46.

"THE KINGDOM POSTPONED?" Excerpt from "Rice–Smith Discussion" by Elder C. A. Smith, 1936

In "Sword of the Lord", issue of June 12, 1936, Brother Rice says, "Jesus meant that the promised heavenly kingdom on earth foretold by Daniel and other prophets was now offered to the children of Israel. Christ their king was at hand. But they rejected Christ and his kingdom. The nation would not repent. The leaders soon set about to crucify Jesus and THE KINGDOM WAS POSTPONED." Where does the Bible say that "the kingdom was postponed"? This position teaches that JESUS CHRIST WAS NOT GOD—that he came to do something he was not ABLE to accomplish!

IF JESUS CHRIST WAS DEITY, THEN HE KNEW ALL THINGS, AND WOULD NOT HAVE UNDERTAKEN SOMETHING THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO BACK OFF FROM, AND POSTPONE. The trouble with you, Brother Rice, is that you cannot see the "THREE DOMINIONS" of the ONE kingdom—(1) "first the blade"—(2) "then the ear"—and (3) "after that the full corn in the ear" (Mark 4:28).

The kingdom has a "trinity" of fulfillment. Our Lord's personal ministry as the first stage, part or "dominion", and the second is under the direction of the Holy Spirit in the absence of the king; and the third begins upon our Lord's return, the perfecting, or "harvest" time—"but when the fruit is brought forth, immediately He putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come" (Mark 4:29).

The coming of Christ, back to earth to reign as "King of kings, and Lord of lords", is also called His kingdom, the coming of His kingdom—"So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand" (Luke 21:31). But if this means that the kingdom was "postponed", how do you know, Brother Rice, THAT CHRIST WILL NOT AGAIN POSTPONE HIS KINGDOM? If he was so imperfect upon his first coming, to POSTPONE what he came to do; WE ONLY HAVE A PRETENDED "CHRIST" WHO MAY ALSO "FACE ABOUT" UPON HIS SECOND COMING, AND LEAVE THE WORLD WITHOUT A KINGDOM! If not, why not, Brother Rice? This needs some fixing!

Christ said through Malachi: "BEHOLD, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me." (Mal. 3:1). Mark records. "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God; as it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face. which shall prepare thy way before thee" (Mark 1:1-2). But according to Brother Rice, after John the Baptist preached, "Saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matt.

3:2), and after, "From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matt.

4:17), and after Jesus had ordained and commissioned the apostles, saying, "As ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matt. 10:7)—AFTER ALL OF THIS, ACCORDING TO RICE'S "MIRACLE THEOLOGY", JESUS CHRIST, THE PERFECT ONE, HAD TO "TAKE BACKWATER" AND POSTPONE HIS KINGDOM! But of John the Baptist, it is recorded, "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John" (John 1:6). Again John the Baptist said, "And I know Him (Christ) not; but He (God) that sent me to baptize with water, the same (God) said unto me, Upon whom thou (John) shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, the same is He (Christ) who baptizeth with the Holy Ghost" (John 1:33). So God the Father sent John the Baptist, and "said unto him" the things God wanted John to preach; and John preached, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand". SO GOD OUR ALLWISE, AND ALL-MIGHTY, HEAVENLY FATHER ("The silly dunce!") ALSO HAD TO BACK UP, CHANGE HIS PLANS, AND HAVE HIS KINGDOM POSTPONED, according to "John R. Rice

Theology"!

THE BRIDE OF CHRIST From Dr. Fred G. Stevenson’s Direct Answers to Difficult Questions.

“Are the church and the bride the same? Are the bride and the new Jerusalem the same? Is the new Jerusalem the city for which Abraham looked? Will Abraham and the other patriarchs be in the new Jerusalem?”

As we consider the subject of the church, the bride of Christ, and the new Jerusalem, it will be necessary for clearness to mention some prevalent ideas on it. The most common idea is that all the saved, or even all the religious people, constitute the real, the universal, the spiritual church.

This idea is foreign to the Scriptures, and it was concocted by Protestant scholars to cover up the embarrassment of their modern origin as religious denominations. All of them lack fifteen hundred years being old enough to be the church that Jesus founded in person while He was in the world. Jesus says to the true church at Matthew 28:20, “. . . Behold, I am with you all the days until the completion of the age.”

Jesus could not be with them “all the days” if they did not come into existence until fifteen hundred years after he had begun His church.

There are certain qualifications which a member of a true church must meet: (1) He must be saved by repentance and faith. John came to prepare the people of whom Jesus formed the church, and Matthew 3:2 tells us the burden of His message was that the people should repent. At Acts 16:31, Paul and Silas told the Philippian jailer that he should believe on Jesus Christ and he would be saved. Joining the church does not save anyone, but it puts saved people in the only place where they may serve the Lord in a fully acceptable manner. One can get his name on a church roll without being saved, but he cannot be a real church member without having been born again.

(2) In order to enter into the spirit of church membership, one must solemnly commit himself to walk by the letter and the spirit of the New Testament scriptures. In the third chapter of Luke, John impressed upon the people that there were some things to be forsaken and some things to be embraced when one commits himself to church membership. The testimony of a changed life is the most effective testimony that a church member may bear before the world.

(3) To be a real church member, one must have submitted himself to scriptural baptism. This is immersion in water of a saved person who by his baptism is committing himself to a new life.

Before the Israelites were typically baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea (I Corinthians 10:1-4), they might have very readily returned to Egypt with its bondage; but afterward, it would be virtually impossible for them to return to the same status they had before their leaving Egypt. They must either go on with Moses to the promised land, or they must die in futility in the wilderness. This is not an implication that they might have fallen out of salvation, but it is a fearful warning that saved people may live their lives in vain so far as being a right testimony is concerned.

Commitment of oneself to church membership is such a serious thing that apparently one does not do it but once in his lifetime. When one walks in a way that is unworthy of church membership, the church withdraws church fellowship from him; see I Corinthians 5:4-5. Apparently, this same man was restored to church fellowship without being rebaptized (II Corinthians 2:6-8). This is in full harmony with the common practice of Baptist churches.

We exclude them from fellowship when they sin, and we restore them to fellowship when they repent. Only when one testifies he was not saved when he was baptized is he rebaptized, considering his first baptism to be invalid.

Those who constitute the bride of Christ are likewise church members who meet certain qualifications. As a general statement, we may say the members of the bride are church members who live up to the commitment they make entering into the church. It is suggested that when one meets all the qualifications for church membership, he is at that time accounted as a member of the bride of Christ. If he should die at that moment, he would have a position in the bride. But for people who live over a period of time after they enter into the bridal relationship, continued faithfulness is required. A position in the bride is evidently what is promised to those who continue with Jesus in temptations; see Luke 22:28-30. John 6:64 refers to Judas, who betrayed Jesus. He had never been saved; therefore, he had never been a real disciple — only an outward conformer. But those who turned back at John 6:66 may very well have contained some who were saved, but they decided the way was too hard for them to continue in it. They would correspond to the typically saved Israelites who fell in the wilderness. None of them lost salvation, but they lost the blessings they might have had in life and a reward in the life to come. Faithfulness involves such an infinite number of details that only an infinite God is capable of rightly estimating who is worthy and who is unworthy to be accounted a position in the bride. Of course, all of us can see about us those who notoriously despise the opportunities that are theirs. It seems we are justified in reckoning them to be unworthy of the bridal relationship.

As to the new Jerusalem, we may sum it up as follows: (1) Galatians 4:26 — The heavenly Jerusalem is the present abiding place of God, the holy angels, and the spirits of all the departed saved; see also Revelation 6:9-11.

(2) Hebrews 11:10-16 — The heavenly Jerusalem is the city for which Abraham and other saved people look. It is the place where our spirits go when we die.

(3) Hebrews 12:22 — Through the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the heavenly Jerusalem is the place where our spirits may go in communion, meditation, and worship. This is a special blessedness that church saints have over those who have lived in previous dispensations. Before one denies this, let him explain what Hebrews 11:40 means in the light of its context.

(4) Hebrews 13:14 — The continuing city which we seek is the same one for which Abraham looked.

(5) In the last two chapters of Revelation, the heavenly Jerusalem comes down to abide on an earth which has been completely renovated with every trace of sin removed. This is the eternal home of all the saved.

In summary, the church, institutionally speaking, is made up of all the legitimate members of all scriptural churches. Scriptural churches are only those which have the Scriptures as the basis of their doctrines and practices.

Some of the members are faithful in service and some are not.

The bride of which John spoke at John 3:29 is that group of church members who follow Jesus in all His doctrines and practices. They were found literally following Jesus when He was in the world; since He left the world, they are found following His teachings and practices. The marriage of the Lamb takes place in Heaven immediately after the judgment of the saved. It amounts to the faithful of the church age being joined to Christ in a special relationship for the Millennial reign (Matthew 19:28).

In the Millennium, all the saved are fully and finally prepared for the Heaven ages.

All are forever in complete harmony with God. If we have led souls to the truth in the present world,

nothing will ever change that fact; if we have not stood faithfully for the truth in the present life, nothing will ever change that fact either. So, we see that in one sense there will be equality in Heaven; in another sense there never will be equality.

The heavenly Jerusalem is now the home of God, the holy angels, and the spirits of all the dead saved. It will come down to the recreated earth at the end of the Millennium and the beginning of the eternal ages of the future. It will be the eternal home of all the saved, but the two covenant peoples, Israel and the church, will retain their identity as such forever (Revelation 21:10-14).

The works of God among mankind have always been two-fold: First, to get all the people possible saved; second, to call out and maintain a people who will continue to bear faithful testimony to the truth of God. The two peoples with and through whom God has worked especially are, of course, Israel and the church.

“In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel. {beautiful…: Heb. beauty and glory } {them…: Heb. the escaping } And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Zion, and he that remaineth in Jerusalem, shall be called holy, even every one that is written among the living in Jerusalem: {among…: or, to life } When the Lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and shall have purged the blood of Jerusalem from the midst thereof by the spirit of judgment, and by the spirit of burning. And the LORD will create upon every dwelling place of mount Zion, and upon her assemblies, a cloud and smoke by day, and the shining of a flaming fire by night: for upon all the glory shall be a defence. {upon all: or, above all } {defence: Heb. covering } And there shall be a tabernacle for a shadow in the daytime from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain.” - Isaiah 4:2-6 "In Yom Hahu (that day) shall the Tzemach Hashem be beautiful and glorious [See the word “kavod,” Isaiah 11:10], and the p'ri ha'aretz shall be the ga'on (pride) and glory for them that are escaped [see the word she'ar remnant, Isaiah 11:11] of Yisroel. And it shall come to pass, that he that is left in Tziyon, and he that remaineth in Yerushalayim, shall be called kadosh, even every one that is hakatuv lachayyim (recorded for life….Rosh Hashana theme, see Shemot; Exodus 32:32; Tehillim; Psalms 69:28; Daniel 12:1; Malachi 3:16) in Yerushalayim: When Adonoi shall have washed away the filth of the Banot Tziyon, and shall have purged the dahm of Yerushalayim from the midst thereof by the Ruach Mishpat, and by the Ruach Ba'er (Spirit of Burning). And Hashem will create upon the whole place of Mt Tziyon, and upon her assemblies, an anan and smoke by yom, and the shining of a flaming eish by lailah; for upon all the kavod shall be a Chuppah. And there shall be a Sukkah for a shade in the daytime from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from storm and from rain." - The Orthodox Jewish Bible The Shayne Moses Project Thursday, July 09, 2015

Got PDF?

A Story Of

HOW CHRIST PURCHASED HIS BRIDE

by Eld. G.E. Jones* - DEDICATION This work is affectionately dedicated to the memory of Betty Ann Jones, our little daughter, who passed away January 12, 1936, at the age of six years. --- The Author 1st Printing, 1936, Morrilton, Arkansas; 2nd Printing, 1975, Caldwell, Arkansas; 3rd Printing, 1977, Bald Knob, Arkansas by Rev. James Wilcox

The book of Ruth, though consisting of but four brief chapters, brings to us one of the sweetest stories in the word of God. At our first reading of the story it may seem nothing but an ancient romance in which a heathen girl who had left her native land to follow the mother of her dead husband to another land, meets with and marries a rich old bachelor. But, as we study this simple story in the light of New Testament truth, we find it to be a veritable mine of hidden truth.

The events of the book happened during the reign of the judges in the land of Israel. This is set forth in the opening verse of the first chapter.

The time of the book itself covered a period of something like ten years or a little more. We find in the fourth verse of the opening chapter that the family of Naomi spent about ten years in the land of Moab. We find in the twenty-second verse of the first chapter that Naomi and Ruth reached the land of Judah in the beginning of the barley harvest. Ruth labored in the fields of Boaz until the end of the wheat harvest. Ruth 1:1-4, 22; 2:23. Soon after this Ruth is married to Boaz, a kinsman of Naomi's dead husband.

The Famine The book opens with the statement that there was a famine in the land in the days when the judges ruled. This famine resulted in the family of Elimelech and Naomi leaving the country of Bethlehem-judah and going down into the country of Moab to sojourn. This man and his wife were from the town of Bethlehem which later became famous as the birth place of both David and our Saviour. This old couple with their two sons, Mahlon and Chilion, went into Moab to seek a refuge from the famine that had befallen their native land.

Such famines had happened before in the history of this people. They were always a time of testing for the people of God. There was a famine in the time of Abraham which caused him to leave the land of promise and go down into Egypt. This step was far more reaching in its consequences than it might seem at first. The casual reader sees where this step caused Abram to take a false position concerning his wife to save himself from the king of Egypt. As we read the story of Abram further we find in his household Hager, an Egyptian hand-maid. I think we are safe in concluding that Hager was picked up during the sojourn of Abram and his wife in Egypt. Bible readers are familiar with the story of Abraham taking this young Egyptian woman as one of his wives later on, and of the birth of Ishmael to this union and the trouble this young woman and her son brought into Abraham's family. Even until this day the Arabians, the descendants of Ishmael, are at strife with the Jewish people, the descendants of Abraham through Sarah. Thus we see the far reaching consequences of a lapse of faith and a mis-step made during that time.

There was another famine in the promised land during the days of Isaac, and Isaac was only saved from going down into Egypt by the appearance of the Lord unto him and admonishing him to dwell in the land of Canaan.

Every Bible student is familiar with the famine in the days of Joseph and the descent of the whole family of Jacob into the land of Egypt to escape the same. This famine resulted in the whole house of Israel becoming bondmen in the land of the Pharoahs.

Amos, the prophet, tells of another famine, which is not a famine of bread, but of hearing of the words of God. "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a

famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord." Amos 8:11. This is a

spiritual famine, one of preaching and proclaiming of the word of the Lord. When such is the case, as Abram left Canaan to sojourn in Egypt, and the family of Elimelech went to live in Moab, so the Lord's people leave the services of God and partake of the things of the world.

We are in the midst of such a famine today. There are plenty of church buildings, and plenty of formal worship and service, but very little of the preaching of the Word of God, and too little manifestation of the Lord's presence and power. Denominational programs, drives, church parties, social functions, ball games, and other forms of amusement have crowded out the preaching of the Word of God, grieved the Holy Spirit, and brought on a spiritual famine. As the result of all this, the churches, largely speaking, are without spiritual power, and in many places the Lord has taken away the candlestick. There are hungry souls who are wandering from sea to sea, and running to and fro (Amos 8:12) seeking the Word of God and finding it not. They go to churches of brick and stone and expensive and attractive pews seeking for bread, and are given a stone, asking for an egg and are given a scorpion.

As I write these words there is a Mr. Kagawa, a Japanese speaker in this country who is being invited to speak in various churches and before different religious bodies which are supposed to be Christian. This Mr. Kagawa is an avowed modernist. He does not believe in the virgin birth or the resurrection of our Lord or His second coming. He says that Jesus had sins of His own that needed to be forgiven. Yet this Mr. Kagawa is being heralded as the greatest living Christian and is appearing on the platforms of prominent religious bodies as their chief speaker. I have before me as I write a clipping from the Arkansas Gazette in which some students from Hendrix college, an institution erected for the special purpose of educating Methodist preachers, are defending Kagawa and his lectures. They make light of the fact that he does not believe in the miraculous birth and resurrection of our Lord. To these students such doctrines are trivial matters. Surely there is a famine in the land.

Some few years ago in the columns of questions and answers as carried by the Arkansas Gazette as well as other papers the following question was asked Mr. Cadman, the head of the American Federation of Churches: "We have in our home a boy who is sixteen years old: This boy is in a state of turmoil about the spiritual things of life and more especially about his soul's relationship with God. What would be the best way to guide this boy safely through this experience?" The preacher's answer was as follows: "Tell this boy it is not God's will for him to be unduly concerned about the unseen things of the Spirit. Have him form healthy companionships, play life's games and read Tom Brown's 'School Days'," and another book or two of similar nature was mentioned. Not one thing was said about repentance and faith. Not a thing was said about Jesus Christ or reading the Word of God. How many pulpits are there today that are offering about the same kind of spiritual food to hungry souls? Only a few are preaching in the power of the Spirit of God the doctrines of depravity, repentance, faith, the New Birth, the resurrection, and the glorious pre-millennial coming of our Lord. Instead of the doctrine of the New Birth and the Gospel of our Lord's death for our sins and His resurrection, they are advocating what they call a social gospel. The two Hendrix College boys referred to above, say that the gospel of Jesus Christ is a social gospel. I emphatically deny that statement. It is a gospel for guilty sinners who are rebels in the sight of God and on their way to hell. Jesus said he came to seek and save that which was lost. "Thou shalt call His name Jesus: for He shall save His people from their sins." Matt. 1:21 .

This social gospel is the devil's substitute for the doctrine of the substitutionary death of Christ. When men like Mr. Kagawa and a host of other wolves in sheep's clothing deny the virgin birth and resurrection of Christ, all they have left to preach is the devil's substitute of a social gospel.

Surely there is a famine in the land. Fifty years ago there was scarcely a pulpit in the South that would give a man a hearing who denied the resurrection of Christ. Alas how different it is today? Surely we are in the midst of a spiritual famine. How many preachers today are able to read the signs of the times? How many are able to tell us where we are drifting? To them the upheaval among the nations, the wide spreading wave of lawlessness means nothing except perhaps hard times. There is a famine in the land. These preachers have been cut out on the pattern of their schools and have been taught to push the denominational programs rather than preach the word of God. They are so busy attending social clubs, and carrying on other non-scriptural organizations that they do not have the time to search the word of God and feed the starving souls of men the word of life. Last year I visited a college friend of mine, a dear soul, and at

heart a fine man and sound on the fundamental principles of the word of God, but the poor fellow had allowed himself to be so burdened down trying to keep up with all the social functions that a modern city church expects a preacher to keep up with that he scarcely had time for anything else.

It is not the business of God's men to make after dinner speeches at Rotary clubs, be judges in baby contests, and a hundred other things that are of the world. It is time that those who are really men of God are throwing off the yoke of bondage and telling the world we will no longer make bricks for Pharoah.

We have enough to do to study the word of God and giving the same to the famishing souls of men. Kiawnis and Rotary clubs may give us a little more prestige with men of the world but that is not giving the bread of life to dying men and women. Men need salvation from sin more than they need temporal food. Jesus said, "Labor not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life." John 6:27.

Elimelech and Naomi As a result of the famine in the land of Judah Elimelech and Naomi and their two sons went into the country of Moab to sojourn. They could not stand the pinch of poverty. They reasoned that they had a better chance to prosper in a material way in Moab than in the land of Judah. They were willing to sacrifice the fellowship of their own people for the sake of material gain, so they left the land where the true God was worshipped and went to live in an idolatrous country. How many today have forsaken the people of God and have taken up with the world for sake of gain, or have joined hands with formal and false religious systems for the sake of social prestige? Many cannot bear the stigma of being classed with the poor of this world, rich in faith, whom God hath chosen as heirs of His kingdom. James 2:5. Like Lot they have pitched their tent toward Sodom; or like Elimelech they have gone into Moab to sojourn.

Though Elimelech and his family only went into Moab to sojourn they continued there ten years.

Had it not been for the chastening hand of God this very likely would have been the permanent dwelling place of this family and their generations. Doubtless they thought when they went into Moab they would only remain there for a short time. When things were better they would return to the land of their people and the service of their God. But it was easier to go down into Moab than to depart from it. The things of that country had taken fast hold on their lives and it was not so easy to break away. So it is easy to drift from the service of God and the fellowship of His people, but it is a difficult thing to get back. Today there are many who once were regular attendants at the services of the Lord, but where are they now? The new friendships and ties get a stronger hold on us than we think possible. Then again it is hard to come back and confess our mistakes and blunders. We go into Moab to sojourn, but continue there; and were it not for the grace of God it would be our permanent abiding place.

The Chastening Rod The chastening rod of the Lord now begins to fall upon the family of Elimelech and Naomi.

Elimelech, the husband and father, dies. God will not allow his people to live in disobedience to him and waste their lives in the services of the things that are material. "Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth." Heb. 12:6. "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent."

Rev. 3:19.

Elimelech went into Moab to seek his material welfare and found a grave there. When he left the land of Israel he did not see that grave that awaited him in that place. When we grow careless and indifferent to the truth and service of our Lord we do not see the misfortune that awaits us out yonder.

We see only the hope of gain and the lure and attraction of better prospects ahead. Let us beware! Out yonder is a casket, an open grave, and a broken place in the family circle.

Elimelech never saw his native land again. He went to sojourn in Moab, but he died there.

Sometimes God's people may get so far from His services as to cause Him to take them out of this world.

Paul in discussing the disorders at the Lord's table in the church at Corinth told them that such had happened to some of them. "For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep."

(Are dead). 1Cor. 11:30. Some would teach the doctrine of apostasy from these things. They can only see but one thing involved and that is the salvation of the soul. The doctrine of salvation by works has them

blinded to everything else. Our salvation is based upon the merits of Christ, not our own. Our rewards in the world to come, our present enjoyment of our Christian experience, and perhaps our physical life depends upon our staying close to our Lord. Moses disobeyed God and died in the wilderness. He did not lose his soul, but his physical life, for his act of disobedience. See Deut.

4:21-22. God may chasten His people but will not suffer them to be lost. "When we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world."

1Cor. 11:32.

Sowing and Reaping The reaping time is sure to follow the sowing time. "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." Gal. 6:7. We next notice that the two sons of Naomi take them wives of the daughters of

Moab. This was a strict violation of the law of Moses. It was contrary to the principle that runs throughout the word of God. Abraham would not let his servant take a wife for his son from the daughters of the Canaanites. Paul taught that a Christian woman whose husband was dead was free to marry again, but only in the Lord. See 1Cor. 7:39. How few of the children of God consider this principle when choosing their life's companions. Many have had their lives made miserable and their usefulness in the Lord's work ruined because they have ignored this teaching.

Doubtless it was a grief of mind to Naomi to have her sons marry Moabitish women, but when we drift toward the world and away from God we may expect our children to go further, and become rooted and planted in the things of the world. Recently I heard a preacher say that he had always found that the children of unfaithful church members were always the hardest to reach with the gospel. There is but one safe place for us and family, and that is in devoted service to our Lord.

Further Chastening We next read that Mahlon and Chilion died in the land of Moab, and "the woman was left of her two sons and her husband." If one stroke is not enough to bring us back into line God knows how to lay

on the lash harder. Naomi now realized that she and her husband had made a mistake in coming into this country. She could now see that it was not the place where the Lord would have her to be, and her heart turned back to her people and the country of her Lord. She had enough of the chastening of the Lord, and in her sorrow she longed for the comfort which only the people and the service of her Lord could give.

Perhaps some reader of these lines may have gone through the same experiences as Naomi. Once you were faithful in your services to God, but you, like Naomi, forsook these things for the sake of gain.

You have lost the joy of your own salvation and the sweetness of God's presence. God's chastening hand has been upon you. You have been made to suffer for your neglect. Perhaps you have lost your health, your property, or part or all of your family. You have learned the emptiness of the world and its promises. Are you not hungry for the worship of God and the fellowship of His people? Have you not learned by experience that only in faithful service to the Lord is happiness and peace to be found? But if you have been chastened take heart. It is because the Lord loves you and you are his own. "Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth.---If ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons." Heb. 12:6-8.

The Revival in Judah There may be seasons of spiritual famine, and times when the cause of our God seems ready to die, but our Lord is equal to any emergency. After the drouth comes the seasons of rain. After the cold of winter comes the warm days of spring and new life.

Naomi now hears that God had visited His people in Judah in giving them bread. No matter how dark the day. God is still behind the clouds. The land may be over run with false prophets and under the tyrannical control of an Ahab or Jezebel, but somewhere God has in reserve an Elijah who has the boldness to defy the powers that be, and call the people back to the worship of the God of Israel.

When Naomi heard of better times in her country she made up her mind to return to her native land. So it is with many a backslidden child of God. There are many out of touch with the service of God

who have felt the chastening hand of God. Nothing has gone right with them. Their crops have failed.

Their stock has sickened and died. Their families have been ill, or their children have become involved in trouble that has turned their lives into bitterness until they are ready to say with Naomi, "I went out full, and the Lord hath brought me home again empty." Ruth 1:21. But let a revival come in the land; let the Spirit of God be upon the people, and these Naomis are ready to shake themselves loose from the things of this world and return to God's people and the services of God's house. May the Lord of glory visit us again in giving us spiritual bread! Let us pray for showers of blessings to descend that will quicken His churches into new life and call the wandering, backslidden, brokenhearted Naomis back home again.

The Influence of a Worthy Step David prayed "Restore unto me the joy of thy salvation; and uphold me with thy free spirit.

Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto Thee." (Ps. 51:12-13).

When Naomi decided to leave the land of Moab and return to Judah her example caused Ruth, her daughter-in-law, to turn her back on Moab and cast her lot with Naomi and her people. But for this, Ruth would never have seen the land of Judah, nor have met with Boaz; nor have become the ancestress of David, and hence of our Lord Jesus Christ. And so it is in the service of our master.

When some wandering backslidden child of God shakes loose from the things that have held him back, and in humility and repentance returns to the place of service, some person is influenced by his example to come to Christ. Is there some wandering, stricken, unhappy Naomi who is reading these words? It may be that there is near you some potential Ruth, whom you may, by your example, influence to come to Christ, if you will only cut loose from Moab. As Ruth rose to heights of fame and honor in the annals of sacred writ, so these may rise to sublime heights in the service of our Lord.

The Province of God "We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He did foreknow, He did also predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them He also called, and whom He called, them He also justified, and whom He justified, them He also glorified." Rom. 8:28-30.

How wonderful is the providence of God. How marvelous His dealings with those whom He has chosen for His own. He is able to work through weal and woe: through our failures as well as our successes; through our backslidings as well as our acts of devotion and obedience; to glorify His name and bring to Himself those whom He has chosen. How precious to think that after He has chastised us for our wanderings and brought us back empty as He did Naomi, He is able to restore the years the canker worm has eaten and make our last days more blessed and glorious than the first! Though Naomi returned to Judah empty and her soul filled with bitterness, yet she lived to see her daughter-in-law married to Boaz the kinsman redeemer and a child born who proved to be the grandfather of David. So His race is sufficient to restore us and enrich our lives beyond our fondest dreams.

Not only is the grace of God exemplified in blessing the last days of Naomi, but His wisdom and grace is displayed in working through her to bring Ruth to Himself. Though Elimelech and Naomi were in fault in going down into Moab, and they brought upon themselves much suffering and sorrow, yet God through His foreknowledge and providence was able to make use of the wanderings of these disobedient children of His to call Ruth out of the land of Moab, into the land of Israel and covenant relationship with Himself. Ruth was one of His chosen vessels and destined to become famous in Israel.

I do not wish to go at length into the doctrines of foreknowledge and election, but they are found in this simple story. As God had from the beginning chosen the Thessalonician brethren unto salvation (2Thes. 2:13), so had He chosen Ruth, and so has He chosen all His children. See Eph. 1:14; Rom. 9:2324. We may not understand all about this doctrine, but it is most certainly taught in the word of God. It is not ours to explain, so much as it is ours to believe. God does not require that we be able to understand and explain all that He has spoken, but to believe it because He has said so. When God has

spoken, as He most certainly has on this great subject, it is not ours to cavil but to accept and believe what is written in His word. The Holy Spirit is the author of the Scriptures. He is also their interpreter.

He knows best of all what He means by the words He has given. He will not teach those who seek to argue with Him. We must accept what He has spoken even though according to our finite reasonings we cannot understand and explain the same. Herein lies one of the main reasons of so much misunderstanding and confusion about the word of God. There are too many who are not willing to accept what they cannot fathom by their own reasoning powers. They try to measure the infinite by the finite. They try to understand all the deep mysteries of God's dealings by the limited power of their own reasonings instead of accepting by simple faith what God has spoken. When we are willing to accept a thing because God has spoken it and place ourselves at the feet of Him who alone is able to give us spiritual understanding (1John 5:20) then we are in position to learn of these things.

Having done this we are in the right attitude to be led by the Spirit of God into the glories of these most comforting doctrines.

Naomi wandered far, but God brought her back to himself by His grace.

It will bring settled peace to the soul to know that God holds the reins of our lives in His hands, and though He may permit us for awhile, like Naomi, to wander from His ways, yet He never lets us go beyond His control. He will make all things work together for our good. He may permit Satan to sift us as He did the apostle Peter (Luke 22:31-32), but He will also pray for us that our faith fail not, and we shall come out of this experience subdued and chastened and better prepared for His service than before.

It is also glorious to know that God knows how and will find His own, even though it is through the wanderings and bitter experiences of some of His backslidden children that He finds the one He has chosen. He will save and keep His own. He found Ruth, and wherever there is a heart hungering for Him and His truth, and is willing to accept the same or will be willing to receive Him, He will find a way to ultimately reach that soul and life. Ruth was one of His sheep, given to Him by the Father. John 10:2829. All the Father gave Him will come to Him, John 6:37. He shall save His People from their sins Matt.

1:21.

Wherever they are He shall find them. "Other sheep I have which are not of this fold, them must I bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold and one shepherd." John 10:16.

Does this sound like fatalism? Nay, it is the very opposite. There is nothing about this that teaches that God decreed the damnation of any person irrespective of their wills.

God not only chooses His people but He also chooses the means by which He reaches them and brings them to Himself. He chose Ruth as one of His own.

His foreknowledge enabled Him to choose Naomi as His instrument by which He brought Ruth to Himself.

Before leaving this fertile field I wish to add another thought. No incident in the life of a child of God is accidental and without meaning.

Everything that God permits to come is a part of the divine pattern for our lives. Even our failures, our backslidings and broken vows, He has taken up and woven into the great fabric of our lives. It may all seem meaningless and haphazard to us, but it is not to Him. He is able to pick up the broken threads in our lives, mend the broken places, and make them all the more beautiful because of the same. We see only the present things in our lives; the tangled threads, the marred places, and the difficult trials. He sees the finished product. It was so with Naomi. She could see her failure, her shortcomings, and her loss and say "Call me not Naomi (Pleasant) but call me Mara," which means bitterness. But as you and I see the finished product, and read the wonderful story how glad we are that this backslidden Naomi did go down into Moab. But for that we would not have had the beautiful story of Ruth; and the story is all the more beautiful because of Naomi's failure. It is not our purpose to justify Naomi or any child of God in wrong doing, but we rejoice to know that God in His wisdom foresaw it all, and in His divine plan He made provision for all our shortcomings. While it is true that we are not to sin that grace might abound, yet it was sin that gave God an opportunity to display His marvelous grace. "Where sin did abound grace did much more abound."

How wonderfully God wrought in the life of Naomi! What a marvelous display of grace it was to pick up the broken fragments of her life and mold them into a vessel of honor! When she returned from Moab she doubtless thought that life had nothing more in store for her but sorrow. Bereft of her husband and two sons she thought she had lost all. But when Ruth proved to be so faithful and devoted and was married to Boaz and a son was born to the union she could look back over the way God had led and say,

"Oh to grace how great a debtor, daily I'm constrained to be!" "All things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose." Rom. 8:28.

Ruth We shall next study this most interesting character, from whom the book received its title.

Ruth was a Moabitish damsel. She was born and reared in the land of Moab, a heathen land. She was an alien from Israel and a stranger to their people. So we were one time without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenant of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. See Eph. 2:12 and Ruth 2:10.

There had been enmity between the country of Moab and Israel. See Numbers chap. 22. Here we have a picture of man in his natural state, at enmity with God. "The carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Rom. 8:7.

This heathen young woman, however came under the influence of Naomi, a worshipper of the true God. Despite the fact that Naomi was away from her native land, the place where her God was worshipped and served, yet there was something about her demeanor that was different from that of the people of Moab. There was something about her life and devotion that won the heart of this young woman. It may have been her fortitude during her bereavement, when she was bereft of her husband and two sons, that made such a deep impression on Ruth. She must have seen that there was a comfort in the faith of Naomi that was not to be found in the religions of Moab. Nowhere is there such a contrast between the believer's hope and the things the world holds to as at the open grave. Here the hope and joys of the unbeliever have an end. All is swallowed up in the grave. But the believer in Christ can look up through his tears and find comfort in the hope of a reunion in the by and by. Ingersol might say "Life is a narrow vale between two barren peaks of eternity. We strive in vain to look beyond the heights. We cry aloud and the only answer is the wailing echo of our cry." What a gloomy prospect! What poor comfort for breaking hearts! In contrast to this the believer can say with David "In the day of my trouble I will call upon thee: for thou wilt answer me." Ps. 86:7. He can say with Job, "I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that He shall stand at the latter day upon the earth; and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God." Job 19:25-26.

Whatever it was that caused her to cling to Naomi when the old woman decided to go back to Judah, there was no influence or persuasion that could keep Ruth from going with her. Naomi herself tried to persuade her to go back as she had no more sons to give her for husband, but Ruth replied in those words that have become famous. "Entreat me not to leave thee, nor to return from following after thee; for whither thou goest, I will go; and where thou lodgest, I will lodge; thy people shall be my people, and thy God shall be, my God; where thou diest, will I die, and there will I be buried: the Lord do so to me, and more also, if ought but death part thee and me." Ruth 1:16-17. When Naomi

saw that she was stedfastly minded to go with her, then she left off speaking to her. Ruth 1:18. Notice the word stedfastly. Stedfastness was one of the chief characteristics of this noble young woman. She kept fast by the maidens of Boaz to glean unto the end of barley and wheat harvest. See Ruth 2:23. This reminds us of the words of the apostle Paul. "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast,

unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord."

1Cor. 15:58. Ruth was stedfast and unmovable in her choice and her noble

purpose. She abounded in good works and her labor was not in vain. Reader, is your mind fixed? Are you stedfast in your decision for Christ, or are you like Orpah, wavering and ready to turn back?

Ruth's Choice Life and destiny is determined by the choices we make. We are not saved by our works, but we have to choose between Christ and the world and the choice we make will determine whether or not we are saved. The Lord puts before us life and death. We can choose Christ and live or our own way and die.

Moses had to choose between the glories and splendor of the Egyptian throne and casting his lot with a nation of slaves. He chose to turn his back on Egypt and the pleasures of sin which were for just a season, and cast his lot with Israel and gained everlasting fame and glory. Joshua called upon Israel to

choose whom they would serve. Ruth also had to make a choice. She made the right choice and was richly rewarded in due time. Reader, have you made your choice? You cannot have both Christ and the world. Ruth could not remain in Moab and become a citizen of Israel and share in the covenant blessings of Israel. Neither can you hold on to sin and the world and win Christ. You cannot gain a reward without self sacrifice. The way to the crown leads by the cross. If you would be His disciple you must deny yourself and take up your cross and follow Him. Ruth also had to make her choice quickly. She did not have a decade in which to make up her mind as to what she was going to do. Naomi was going back to the land of Judah and if Ruth went with her she must decide quickly what she was going to do. Too many never get anywhere because they procrastinate. They mean to decide for Christ but not today. A little later on will do just as well, they think. But tomorrow the strength of the resolution has grown weaker and their hearts have become harder. When the plague of frogs had been sent on Egypt, Pharoah called for Moses and asked him to entreat the Lord for him and his people and he would let Israel go and worship God. Moses asked "When shall I entreat for thee?" Pharoah said "Tomorrow." When the morrow had come the king's heart was hardened. So it is with many. They put off until tomorrow to make their decision. When tomorrow has come they are hardened and the resolution is gone.

I am persuaded to believe that there are comparatively few days in the lives of men when they can accept Christ. Not that salvation is confined to the days of youth or any particular age, but men must be saved while the Spirit of God is drawing. There are seasons of grace as there are seasons for planting and reaping. We must plant in season or it will do no good at all to plant.

There was in the days of Christ a pool called Bethesda. At a certain season an angel came down and stirred the waters of that pool. Whosoever first stepped into the waters after they were stirred was healed of whatsoever infirmity he might have. But it would do no good to step into the pool after the waters were quieted down. The afflicted one must step in while the waters were stirred. So there are times when the Holy Spirit troubles the souls of men and they are made to feel and realize their lost condition. This is the season of grace.

This is the time for men to accept the offered terms of mercy and be saved. If men will not come then, they cannot come at all. Jesus said "No man can come unto me except my Father which sent me draw him."

Ruth made the choice while it was day. She seized the golden opportunity and stepped out on the promises of God. "Yet a little while the light is with you, walk while ye have the light, lest the darkness come upon you. While ye have the light believe in the light, that ye may become the children of light." John 12:35-36.

Now let us notice what was involved in this choice that Ruth made.

First, she had to choose between the land of Moab and the land of Israel.

Second, she had to choose between the gods of Moab and the God of Israel.

Third, she had to choose between her people and the people of Naomi.

In choosing between the land of Moab and the land of Israel she was choosing between that which she had seen and that which she had not seen.

"Our afflictions, which are but for the moment, work out for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things that are seen, but the things that are not seen." 2Cor. 4:17-18. To the natural man it looks like foolishness to

give up that which is seen for that which is not seen. He sees no gain in giving up the present for the future. That is because he is too short sighted. Not long since I visited an old bachelor who was past 70 years of age. He was afflicted and Helpless and dependant upon others for his support. He said he could now see where he had made a mistake. Instead of spending his money on himself and having a big time when he was young and making plenty of money he should have married and raised a family. Now, in his old age he would have some one to love and care for him, instead of being thrown upon the mercies of the world. In the days of youth and strength he did not foresee this affliction and infirmity. So it is with the sinner. The god of this world hides the future from him. He cannot see the days of want, decrepitude and weakness awaiting him. The call of the future is drowned by the call of the pleasures of the present moment.

Again, the value of spiritual things is hidden to the lost man. The god of this world has blinded his eyes to the glorious gospel of Christ. II Cor. 4:3-4. He does not understand the things of the Spirit. I Cor.

2:14. Only the working of a supernatural power can shake him loose from the present and cause him to choose the unseen things of God. Though the unsaved man might not realize it, yet there was a vast difference between the things of Moab and the things of Israel. Israel was in covenant relationship with God. They had the promises of God and Moab did not.

There was a great future in store for Israel. God had promised to bless the seed of Abraham and make of them a great nation. That covenant made with Abraham still stands and Israel shall yet be established in the promised land according to the covenant made with Abraham. Moreover the Christ was to come of the stock of Israel. Any true virtuous woman of this nation might become the mother of the promised Redeemer, or be in the line leading to Christ. This is exactly the distinction that came to Ruth. She was the great-grandmother of David, and Christ was of the seed of David. Had she chosen to remain in Moab she would never have had this honor. She would have had a few years of pleasure with her people and have gone down to a nameless, if not a Christless grave. The flesh urged her to stay in Moab, but faith reached out after the glories of the unseen future and she stepped out on the promises of God and was blessed in so doing.

Before passing I wish to add another thought here. Since Jesus Christ was of the lineage of Ruth he was a descendant of the Gentiles as well as of Israel. This makes Him the kinsman redeemer of the Gentile people as well as of Israel.

Ruth also had to choose between the gods of Moab and the God of Israel.

We read where Orpah turned back to her people and her gods. So Moab had its gods and its religions. But the God of Israel was the true God, while the gods of Moab were only idols. Naomi's God had the power of life and death. The gods of Moab were mere dumb idols without power to save and comfort. They could not summon the sleeping dust from the grave. The God of Israel was Lord of the universe and able to call again His people from the grave. Ruth must have been convinced of this for she said to Naomi "Thy God shall be my God." What a wonderful statement! Only grace could enable her to make such a confession. It meant that Ruth and her people had been wrong in worshipping and serving their idols and that Naomi and her people were right in serving Jehovah. What condescension! How many have the boldness and the grace to say "I have been wrong and you have been right, I am convinced that you have the truth, so I give up my error." To make such a statement means the crucifiction of one's pride and prejudices. None could do that apart from the grace of God. Here is the rub. How many have been mentally convinced of their error, but because of pride they would not concede that they were wrong? They have seen the framework of their faulty structure crumbled to the ground, and yet they have clung to their error. Why will men do this when their rewards or it maybe their salvation depends upon giving up their error? The trouble is with the heart. The roots of pride and self glory are fastened too deeply in their hearts, so they continue to hold to a deceptive doctrine when mentally they have been convinced of their wrong. Reader, is this the case with you? I t is a dangerous thing to resist the truth. It is spiritual suicide to come in contact with the truth and be convinced of the same and then not receive a love of it.

Those who receive not a love of the truth that they might be saved are to be delivered over to strong delusion. II Thess.

2:10-11.

Ruth had to choose between the gods of Moab and the God of Israel, so must we choose between the god of this world and the true God. There are many churches and many doctrines, but Christ is not glorified in all of them. He is not to be found at all in many doctrines that are preached and in many places of worship. Many doctrines that are preached in His name subvert the cross and lead men away from Christ and not to Him. Many churches, so called, are filled with formalism, sham and veneer.

There is more outward show and vain glory than devotion to the truth. There may be much social attraction, but how much of the unction of the Spirit? There may be scholarship, but are hungry souls fed on the bread of life? As Ruth made the choice between the gods of Moab and the God of Israel, so must we choose between truth and error.

But, someone says, "How am I to find the truth? There are so many things preached and practiced how am I to distinguish that which is true from that which is false." Let me first ask a question. Do you from the bottom of your heart want to know the truth? Are you willing to pay the price of knowing it and possessing it? If you knew it meant financial loss, or the giving up of your cherished traditions and ideas, or the loss of social prestige would you still want the truth? Are you willing to bear the reproaches that

would be your lot by making a change? If so, you can know the truth. If not, then the truth is not for you.

You may as well go on your way with those who love the world and self rather than Christ. But if you wish to know how to judge, here is a sure gauge. The false religion appeals to the flesh and your selfish pride. It offers you that which you naturally desire to follow. It calls for no sacrifice. It would save your pride and let you go the easy way.

On the other hand, the way of Christ calls for self denial and humility. It cuts deep at the roots of pride and sin. It calls for the crucifixion of self and selfish desires.

"They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts." Gal. 5:24. Death by crucifixion was painful and one of ignomy and shame. So when Christ calls upon us to crucify ourselves, He calls for something that is exceedingly painful to our pride and selfish desires.

Now let us make the application. Why the doctrine of baptismal salvation? It presumes to save one by such things as mere lip profession of faith and repentance and the putting of the body under water. All this can be done and the heart be as far from God as hell is from heaven. This can be done and the heart at the same time be filled with selfish pride and deception.

"The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked: who can know it?" Jer. 17:9. This way does not call for mourning and weeping. Its advocates do not call upon their seekers to mourn and weep, but they rather make light of it. Their hearts have deceived them. They think they are fighting the mourner's bench, when in reality they are fighting the Bible doctrine of mourning. It is not the bench that gives offense, but the mourning; and mourning is a doctrine of Christ. "Blessed are they that mourn; for they shall be comforted."

Matt. 5:4. No thinking person puts any virtue in a seat. Earnest seekers are simply invited to take a seat apart from that part of the congregation that is not interested. They are taught to seek the Lord with a broken and contrite heart. "The Lord is nigh them that are of a broken heart; and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit." Ps. 34:18.

Again, why do some churches practice three forms of baptism? Is it because they are all taught in the word of God? No, for there is only one baptism. See Eph. 4:5. They do it to please the people and not because such practice is sanctioned by the word of God. A church that is true will stick to the word of God even though it does give offense to people. "If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Gal. 1:10.

Third, Ruth had to choose between her family and Naomi's people. We are often called upon to make this very choice. God told Abram to get out from his people and his father's house. Gen. 12:1. Jesus said, "He that loveth father and mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he that taketh not up his cross and followeth after me, is not worthy of me." Matt.

10:37-38. In contrast to this how many say "This church was good enough for my father and mother and it is good enough for me. My father and mother believed this doctrine and lived and died in this church and I will do the same."

Reader, have you ever been guilty of saying or thinking such as this? Do you not know that this is an argument of the flesh, and not an appeal to the truth? Does this sound like you are hunting for the truth and you are desirous of following Christ, or does it sound like you want to please yourself and at the same time have the appearance of trying to follow Christ? Such as this savours of the world and not of the truth. Any preacher or church that relies upon such argument to win followers stamps himself or itself as being of the world. What if Ruth had said, "The religion of Moab was good enough for my father and mother, therefore it is good enough for me?" If she had done so, then we would never have had this beautiful story, nor would she have acquired the wonderful position that became hers through her choice. But Ruth was not held back by the ties of the flesh and tradition. She broke with all this and cast her lot with the people of God and was blessed in so doing.

Reader, do you desire to please God and do His will? Do you want His blessing upon your soul?

Then cut loose from all traditions and fleshly ties and swing out upon God's promises and His glory shall fill your soul.

The Results of Ruth's Choice First of all Ruth's choice meant that she ceased to be a citizen of Moab and became a citizen of the nation of Israel. So our choice of Christ means a transfer of our allegiance and citizenship. It means that we have been delivered from the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of God's dear Son.

Col. 1:13.

Secondly, Ruth's choice meant that she had given up her former friends and associates. But it also meant that she gained new and better friends. So the acceptance of Christ may mean the giving up of old friends and acquaintances, but it also meant that we shall gain others which are far better. One hour of fellowship with the people of God as they are made to sit together in heavenly places is worth more than a decade of pleasure with the unbelieving world. What child of God would want to trade his new friends and associates for the old ones again?

Next, Ruth's choice brought her into covenant relationship with God. Before this she was a stranger to Israel and the covenants of promise. "At that time ye were without Christ, being aliens

from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenant of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world."

Eph. 2:12. Now she is no more a stranger and foreigner, but a fellow citizen of Israel. So our acceptance of Christ will take us out of the place of strangers and make us "fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God." Eph. 2:19.

Ruth's choice also made her famous in the nation of Israel and the annals of sacred writ. Had she stayed in Moab she would probably have found a nameless grave. She became the wife of Boaz and the mother of Obed, who was the grandfather of David. Thus she gained the distinction of being one of the ancestors of Jesus Christ our Lord. "Whosoever will save his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it." Matt.

16:25. Faith caused her to be willing to lose her life, and in losing it she found it. Through self-denial she was lifted from a place of obscurity to a pinnacle of lasting fame. How many today, unlike Ruth, are losing their lives by saving them.

Last, her choice meant that she was brought under the protecting wing of the God of Israel. We find Boaz saying to her, "The Lord recompense thy work, and a full reward be given thee of the Lord God of Israel under whose wings thou art come to trust." Ruth 2:12. What a beautiful picture of God's protecting care. As the mother hen gathers her brood under her wings in time of danger, so the Lord of heaven and earth will shield His children. One stormy night when the rain was falling in torrents and the wind was raging I went out to see about a hen in a coop with a brood of chicks. I found that hen hugging the ground as closely as possible. Hastily I threw some more weights on the cover over the coop.

In the morning I found that the hen had brought her chicks safely through the storm. So God shields his own from the storms and perils of life, and when the night of tempests and fears is over, and that eternal morn shall break, we shall find that God's protecting wing shall have carried all his children safely through the storm into the sunlight of that unending day. "In the shadow of thy wings I will make my refuge until these calamities be overpast." Ps. 57:1.

Orpah How different are the stories of Orpah and Ruth. They started life together but when the question arose of choosing between the God of Israel and the gods of Moab, the channels of their lives separated never to converge again. Yet Orpah had the same chance that Ruth had. At the first she even affirmed that she would go with her mother-in-law to the land of Israel. She went so far as to start on the way, but she never got out of the land of Moab.

When she came face to face with the cost, her courage failed her. Her heart was still in Moab. The ties of the flesh were too strong for her and she turned back to her people and her gods. This is the last we hear of this young woman.

She went back, perhaps to spend a few years of pleasure with her kindred and friends, and in the end to go down as an unbeliever to the grave. Far better that she had never met with Naomi and had been given a glimpse of better things. The greater will be her judgment in the day of reckoning. "It had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them." 2 Peter 2:21.

How many Orpahs are there today? How many who in their minds have been convinced of better things. Some perhaps have even seemed to make a start.

Their hearts however have still been in the world, so they like Orpah have turned back to the things of the world, to the disappointment of the children of God and to their own loss.

Boaz The next character with whom we meet is Boaz. He was a wealthy bachelor, a prosperous farmer of Bethlehem, and a kinsman of Elimelech the dead husband of Naomi. We find that he became the kinsman redeemer of Mahlon, the dead husband of Ruth. According to the Mosaical law, when a man had waxed poor and his land was to be sold, or had been sold for his debts, a kinsman might redeem it.

See Lev. 25:47-50. Again, when a man had died leaving a widow and no child it was the duty of the kinsman redeemer to marry the widow and the first-born child was to be counted as the child of the dead man. This was to keep the name of the dead man from perishing from among his people. See Deut.

25:59. We find in this beautiful story that Boaz filled this double role of kinsman redeemer. He bought the land that was Elimelech's and he married Ruth, the widow of Mahlon, and a child was born to them.

In the above we have the doctrine of redemption in a type. Boaz, the Bethlehemite, was a figure of that greater one born in Bethlehem centuries later who redeemed us from all sin. Christ became our kinsman when He took upon Himself the form of man. He became our Redeemer when He paid the price of a broken law by dying for us on the cross. He will yet restore to us our forfeited inheritance when the earth shall be restored to its rightful owners.

"Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth."

We are told in Eph. 1:13-14 that the Holy Spirit is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession."

Christ as Kinsman Redeemer Will yet Marry The Church Not only is Christ to be married to the church at His second coming, but there is a union between Christ and the believer at the present time. This is clearly taught in the 7th chapter of Romans. "Know ye not brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law), how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.

So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that ye should bring forth fruit unto God." Rom. 7:1-4. When we were in the flesh we brought

forth no fruit unto God. This is beautifully set forth in Ruth's relationship to her two husbands. Ruth had no child by Mahlon, her first husband. She did have a child by Boaz, her second husband. So when we were in the flesh, our old natures bore no acceptable fruit unto God. It was needful to become dead to the law by the body of Christ for us to bring forth fruit unto Him.

Ruth Labors in the Harvest Fields "Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest. And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal." John 4:35-36.

In the opening of the second chapter we find Ruth going out into the harvest fields to glean. Right here I wish to point out the order of things in this beautiful story. In Chapter one we have Ruth choosing. This choice carried her out of the land of Moab into the land of Judah. This typifies our choice of Christ which takes us out of the kingdom of darkness and translates us into the kingdom of His dear Son. Col. 1:13. Salvation comes before service. Eph. 2:8-10. In chapter two we find Ruth laboring in the fields of Boaz. We are saved for service in the fields of our Lord. Ruth labors until the end of the harvest period. So are we to labor for Christ until the end of the harvest. In chapter three we find Ruth resting.

Ruth 3:1. So at the end of our period of labor for Him we shall rest at the end of the way. In the fourth and last chapter we find Ruth rewarded. So will our rewards come for our services when Christ comes.

"Behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be." Rev. 22:12.

We do not find any record of any labor that Ruth did while in the land of Moab. That did not count in the annals of the Word of God. So all that we do while unsaved is of no value in the sight of God. Our service for Him commences when saved.

Last, I wish to call attention to the stedfastness of Ruth in her work.

"She kept fast by the maidens of Boaz to glean unto the end of the barley harvest and of the wheat harvest." Ruth 2:23.

We should pattern after her in our service for our Saviour. "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord." 1 Cor. 15:58.

Grace Ruth said to Naomi, "Let me now go to the field, and glean ears of corn after him in whose sight I shall find grace." Ruth 2:2. Here is the doctrine of grace. We are saved by grace apart from all

our works. Rom. 4:5-6; 11:5-6; Eph. 2:8-9. After we are saved then we, like Ruth, labor for Him in whose sight we find grace.

Not only are we saved by grace, but grace plants in our hearts the desire to work for Him who saves us. Grace also furnishes the ability to do that work. "I labored more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." 1Cor. 15:10. [see Phi. 2:12-13. Ed.] It was Ruth's lot to light on a part of the field belonging to Boaz.

This was no accident. It was providential. The hand of the Lord was leading in the affairs that concerned the future of this noble young woman. That same providence looks over and guides in the lives of His people today and always.

Boaz heard of her fidelity to her mother-in-law, and of her choice of the land of Judah, and Ruth found grace in his eyes. When he took notice of her she bowed herself to the ground and said unto him, "Why have I found grace in thine eyes, that thou shouldest take knowledge of me, seeing I am a stranger?" Ruth 2:10. So we were once strangers and aliens from the commonwealth of Israel. Ruth was amazed at finding such grace in the eyes of Boaz. So is His grace toward us amazing. "Amazing grace. how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me ."

She was bidden by Boaz to abide fast by his maidens and not to glean in the field of another. Ruth 2:8. Christ desires that we be found continually in His service and not in the fields of another. Not only did Boaz command her to continue in his fields, but he invited her to come and partake of his provisions at mealtime. She accepted the invitation and ate, and was sufficed.

What a beautiful lesson is here. Not only are we saved by the grace of our Lord, but He bids us partake of the bounties He has in store for us.

We feed upon the riches of His grace and His bounteous provision, and our souls are satisfied. Outside of this there is no satisfaction. We may feed upon the things of the world, or of our own provisions, but that will not satisfy. How often we have found it so! But we never feed upon the things He has prepared for us without finding that they satisfy the longings of our souls. Let us hear His invitation. "Ho, every one

that thirsteth, come ye to the water, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy and eat; yea, come buy wine and milk without money and without price. Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? And labor for that which satisfieth not? Hearken diligently unto me and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness."

Isa. 55:1-2.

We also find that Boaz supplied the needs of Ruth. Not only was she permitted to glean in his fields but he commanded his young men to drop some hands full for her on purpose. Here we find her needs supplied. "My God shall supply all your needs according to His riches in glory by Christ Jesus." Phil.

4:19.

Ruth Finds Rest In the beginning of the third chapter we find Naomi saying to Ruth, "My daughter, shall I not seek rest for thee, that it may be well with thee."

Ruth 3:1. In Christ there is rest for every soul. He is the Shiloh, or great rest giver of His people. There is rest from the demands of the law. On one occasion He said to the multitudes "Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give thee rest." Then there is rest from our labors at the end of Life's way. "Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord from henceforth: yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labors; and their works do follow them." Rev. 14:13. Last, there is that eternal rest that is for the people of God. As Ruth

entered into her rest through Boaz, her kinsman redeemer, so we obtain our rest through Christ our Redeemer.

Spiritual Boldness In verses 2 to 10 in the third chapter we have the record of Ruth claiming of Boaz the part of kinsman redeemer. Here is spiritual boldness. The law of Moses, which Naomi without doubt had taught her, justified her in this bold request of Boaz. So the Word of God and His rich promises to the believer in Christ justifies us in relying upon and claiming those same promises. "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need," Hebrews 4:16.

When Ruth claimed of Boaz that he perform the part of kinsman redeemer he told her there was a nearer kinsman than he, and if this man would not do the part of a kinsman that he would do so. This nearer kinsman represents our old nature which is unable to redeem us from sin, and which is unwilling to sacrifice of the things of self for the glory of God. We find in Chapter 4 and verse 6 that this nearer kinsman refuses to redeem the inheritance lest he mar his own. Here is the selfishness of the flesh asserting itself. The name of this man is forgotten, while the name of Boaz who was willing to perform the part of kinsman redeemer became famous. In saving his life he lost it, while Boaz in losing his found it. "Whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it." Matt. 16:25.

When Ruth informed Naomi of the promise of Boaz, Naomi said unto her, "Sit still my daughter, until thou know how the matter will fall: for the man will not be in rest, until he have finished the thing today." Ruth 3:18. So will Christ finish what he hath begun. "He that hath begun a good work in you will perform it unto the day of Jesus Christ." Phil.

1:6.

Ruth's Marriage In the fourth and last chapter we find a most fitting climax to this brief, but beautiful story. Here we find Ruth's labor of love is rewarded. She becomes the wife of Boaz and a child is born to this union who becomes famous in Israel. The last days of Naomi are also made blessed. Thus the Lord turns the bitterness of Naomi into rejoicing.

The next morning after Ruth had asked Boaz to perform the part of kinsman redeemer he took his seat in the gate of the city with ten witnesses.

When the nearer kinsman came along he called him aside and informed him that Naomi the wife of their dead kinsman, Elimelech, was selling a piece of land.

At first the nearer kinsman proposed to redeem it, but on being informed that he must also marry Ruth, the widow of Mahlon, the son of Elimelech and Naomi, he refused to redeem it lest he mar his own inheritance. According to the custom in Israel the man plucked off his shoe and gave it to Boaz as a testimony that he had relinquished his claim to Boaz. When this was done Boaz turned to the witnesses and said, "Ye are witnesses this day that I have bought all that was Elimelech's, and all that was

Chilion's and Mahlon's, of the hand of Naomi. Moreover Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, have I purchased to be my wife, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance, that the name of the dead be not cut off from among his brethren, and from the gate of this place." Ruth 4:9-

10. In these two verses we have set forth the doctrines of the resurrection of the dead and witnessing for Christ. As Boaz the kinsman of Elimelech and Mahlon raised up their names through his child Obed, so Christ will raise up His people from the dead so that their names shall not perish from the earth. We are witnesses for Christ as these ten men were witnesses for Boaz. We find that the apostles went about preaching through Jesus, the resurrection from the dead. Acts 4:1-2.

After this the marriage of Boaz and Ruth took place. Some day Christ our kinsman redeemer is coming back for His own. Then the church will become His bride. "Christ also loved the church, and

gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish." Eph. 5:25-27. As Ruth waited for Boaz to

perform what he had promised to do, so are we waiting for the coming of our Lord who shall take us unto Himself. The happiest time in a man's life from a natural standpoint is when he walks to the marriage altar and takes the hand of the woman who consents to become his for life. This is the highest earthly

relationship that can be. Our Lord could find no greater illustration of the relationship that exists between Him and the church and to express to us the joy that shall be ours when we take part in that marriage in heaven. "And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many

waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth. Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to Him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and His wife hath made herself ready. And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And He saith unto me. Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And He saith unto me.

These are the true sayings of God." Revelation 19:6-9.

The End * George Elliott Jones (1889-1952) was born July 12, 1889, in Morrilton, Arkansas, but spent most of his boyhood in Plumerville, Arkansas, and graduated from high school in that town. In 1914 he graduated from Quachita Baptist College in Arkadelphia, Arkansas. He was ordained to the ministry in 1912. He pastored various churches in Arkansas and Missouri. He was engaged in over 400 revival meetings and Bible schools in 16 different states. For two years he was Bible teacher for young preachers in Missouri and for four years he served in the same capacity in Arkansas. He was the author of 29 books and booklets. For 12 years he was writer of Sunday School lessons for Associational Baptists. For over 30 years he contributed articles for various Baptist papers.

Information for the Biography taken from "THE TRUTH versus NON-MILLLENNIAL TRADITION" author G. E. Jones. Â

The Shayne Moses Project http://www.wvi.com/~moses/

How to Study the Bible with

Seven Rules

by

Which

to

Study

and

Understand the Bible.

By I. M. HALDEMAN, D.D. (1884–1933); Pastor First Baptist Church, N. Y.

The Word of God. The Bible contains the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom of sinners, and the happiness of believers.

Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are binding, its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise, believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. It contains light to direct you, food to support you, and comfort to cheer you. It is the traveler's map, the pilgrim's staff, the pilot's compass, the soldier's sword, and the Christians charter.

Here paradise is restored, heaven opened, and hell disclosed.

The Lord Jesus Christ is its grand Object, our good its design, and the glory of God its end. Read it slowly, frequently, and prayerfully. Let it fill the memory, rule the heart, and guide the feet. It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of pleasure.

It is given you in life, will be opened in the judgment, and remembered forever. It involves the highest responsibility, will reward the highest labor, and will condemn all who trifle with its sacred contents. - Author Unknown

The Golden Rule of Bible Interpretation.

When the PLAIN SENSE of Scripture makes COMMON SENSE, SEEK NO OTHER SENSE. Therefore, take EVERY WORD at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, UNLESS the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages, and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate CLEARLY otherwise. God, in revealing His Word, neither intends nor permits the reader to be confused. He wants His children to understand. - Author Unknown

How to Study the Bible.

"Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

2 Timothy 2:15

In order to an intelligent and satisfactory study of the Bible there are at least eight principles which must be applied to it.

First, we must recognize that the Bible is written to, or about distinct classes.

Second, we must inquire of each Scripture, whether book, section, or passage, to whom it is written, and righteously give to each the portion belonging to it.

Third, we must know Dispensational Truth.

Fourth, we must put truth in its proper dispensational relation.

Fifth, we must know the distinction between things which appear similar, but are different.

Sixth, we must know the meaning and purport of each book of the Bible.

Seventh, we must know how to divide each book into its component parts.

Eighth, we must recognize that each book finds its place by the law of growth and by moral and spiritual logic; so that it is impossible to take any book out of its place without deranging the whole order of revelation.

Two other observations may be made, namely: that the New Testament is the fulfillment of the Old and therefore many of its books must be, and are, commentaries on the Old; and further, that each book has its own key hung up by the door.

DISTINCT CLASSES. We must recognize that the Bible is written to, or about distinct classes.

According to the general view everything from Genesis to Revelation is written to, or about the church and Christians.

No greater mistake could be made. The truth is, the church and Christians occupy a very restrained area of the Bible.

If all that is said directly about the church and Christians was printed by itself it would make a very small book.

Not even all of the New Testament is directly written to, or about the church.

In his Epistle to the Corinthians the Apostle speaks of Jew, Gentile, and the Church of God. 1Corinthians 10:32 The Bible is written to, or about one or other of these classes.

Sometimes in the same book there are things which belong to all three, or have application to them either as object or subject.

Sometimes there are books which belong to one class and rigidly exclude the others either as subject or object. By this is not meant that all Scripture is not profitable for doctrine, reproof, or correction, for we are definitely told that all things which happened to the Children of Israel happened unto them that they might be as types full of instruction to us upon whom the ends of the ages have come, and that the whole Bible from end to end is intended for the profit and furnishing of the man of God unto all good works; it is meant to say, however, that in every Scripture one or other of these classes has priority of claim and that the truth must first be considered in the light of its original relation before its profit can be more extendedly applied. My friend may receive a letter intended exclusively for him; and yet when he hands it to me to read I may discover something quite necessary for me to know, some lessons and truths well enough for me to apply; but even then I would never dream of claiming that the letter was first written to, or about me.

Each class therefore, Jew, Gentile, and Church of God, is the primary subject or object of some particular form or accent of truth; and we must recognize this classification in any endeavor we may make towards the study of Holy Scripture.

TO WHOM IS IT WRITTEN? We must inquire of each Scripture to whom it is written and give to each class the portion of truth belonging to it.

We have no right to take truth from one class and give it to another: to do so is as much an act of robbery as it would be to go into a man's house, steal his coat, and wear it forth as ours.

And yet this robbery has been carried on in the most extensive way by preachers and teachers of the Word.

In no case has this been more marked than in relation to the promises of Israel. Whole sections, chapters, and passages have been taken bodily from the Jew and transferred without compunction to the church and Christians.

It is a common thing to take the sixtieth chapter of Isaiah which speaks of the time when the Jew shall be the head and no longer the tail of nations; when Jerusalem shall be exalted as the capital of the whole earth and the wealth of the Gentiles like a rising tide shall pour into it; it is common to take all this and apply it to the church and Christians.

Again and again it is read in Missionary meetings and preached from as the assurance given

by God Himself that the world will be converted by the Gospel and the church exalted to reign in glory over all nations. Mount Zion is made to mean the church. Jews mean Christians, and the Gentiles coming in with their riches the vast multitude of converts yielding to the truth of the Word, the conviction of the Spirit, and the power of missionary zeal.

And for all this not a single ground or warrant. The Jew is never called a Christian any more than he is known as a Gentile, nor has Mount Zion any more reason to be called the church than Bunker Hill to stand for Westminster Abbey. Out of this robbery a whole system of modern theology lives and thrives, finding its only sustenance in the plunder it has obtained by taking from the Jew the promises which God has so solemnly given to him, and to him alone.

When you receive a letter, the first thing to do is to look at its superscription, find out to whom it is addressed, and respect that address by giving it to the owner.

Such a procedure would save from the disastrous results of misplacing truth; and that this misplacement is disastrous is in evidence.

I heard an earnest sermon from the text, "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling."

The preacher with the profoundest conviction that he was doing the will of God echoed the thunders of Sinai and belched its lightnings over the heads of his hearers, insisting that in order to salvation each soul must toil and labor with strong crying and tears to win the Divine favor, and then tremble at the last, lest with all its efforts it should fail to win the salvation it had so laboriously sought. If the preacher had inquired as to whom this exhortation was written he would have been delivered from the misplacement of truth and the darkening of counsel with words without knowledge. The text in question occurs in an epistle. It is written to those who are saved, to those whose names are in the Book of Life.

It is written to the church at Philippi and is an exhortation to those who by the grace of God already possess salvation to work it out. It is not an exhortation to work to salvation but from it. It is an exhortation to take this salvation and work it out in our daily lives in such fashion that God may be glorified in us; trembling, that is to say filled with a sense of carefulness lest in any manner we should obscure the glory of our salvation, but at the same time fully assured in our endeavor to live the Christian life by the fact that in all our working, "it is God that worketh in us to will and do of His own good pleasure."(Php2:12-13) Take up the Epistle to the Corinthians.

There are many things said in that portion of Scripture which commentators endeavor to explain by local conditions, such as the order of the ordinances, prayer, and the public attitude of women in the churches. A glance at the superscription will demonstrate that the book is anything but local. The superscription reads: "to all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." So far from being local therefore the application is as much to Galatia, Rome, or Ephesus. It is as much for the Twentieth Century as the First, as much for New York as for Corinth.

In the Epistle of James there are some marked things about the calling together of the elders and the anointing with oil. This epistle is written to the TWELVE TRIBES scattered abroad. A. reading of its contents in the light of its superscription might change certain expositions not altogether excuseless for the vagaries of "faith healing."

The Book of the Revelation is not infrequently characterized as dark, difficult to understand and wholly impracticable. And yet the title of the book ought to contradict all such judgment,

seeing that it is actually called the Apokalupsis, which signifies the unveiling, the revealing; while the superscription testifies as to its most practical character not only by the constantly reiterated exhortation, "He that hath an ear to hear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches," but by the superscription itself; for that superscription is "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave to Him, to show unto His servants."

His servants are His workmen, working in His Word; and as He through an Apostle exhorts them to so divide that Word that they may not be ashamed before Him but be approved at His coming, it may be said without fear of controversy that He could not send a specially inspired, impracticable, and incomprehensible message to these servants.

The superscription then manifests that the book is for practical purposes and that he who takes k up with the inquiry on his lips, "To whom is this written," will find in the clearness of the answer the justification of the Apostle's exhortation to rightly divide the Word of Truth.

"Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the Word of Truth."

2Timothy 2:15

DISPENSATIONAL TRUTH. No matter what may be the equipment of the Christian, no matter what intellectual, moral, or spiritual endowment he may have, unless he understands dispensational truth he will never fully lay hold of Bible doctrine; while many of the wondrous testimonies of the Word will be unto him but as the tangled threads in an endless labyrinth.

The warrant for the word "Dispensation" is to be found in Ephesians 3:2 and Colossians 1:25.

The Greek word for dispensation is oikonoinia, from which we get our English word economy, system, administration.

Such a word carries with it necessarily the idea of time, a period, an epoch, or age.

From the Bible point of view a dispensation is a definite period or epoch in which God makes manifest some characteristic dealing with man; dealing in one age or epoch distinctly from that of another and with different individuals or classes; revealing in each of these distinct dealings and administrations various and separate principles, various objectives and purposes.

To confound these dispensations, to take the principle of action revealed in one and apply it indiscriminately to another, to ignore the classes of persons and the peculiar aim of each dispensation is to produce confusion, contradiction, and lay the foundation for that disharmony which reigns all too manifestly to-day among Christian expositors.

There are eight dispensations, each having a stated point of departure, and an equally defined place of ending.

T he E denic D ispensation Beginning at Genesis 1:26, with the creation of man, and ending at Genesis 3:24, with the expulsion of man.

In this dispensation man is seen as innocent, but untried.

He is at once tested for headship and as the expression of God's governmental authority in the earth. God tests him in His word and declared will. The actual test is whether man will abide by, and rest in what God has said, or lean to his own understanding. Whether he will take the Word of God or the dictates of reason as the standard and rule of his life.

The instrument of the test is necessarily the tree of knowledge; the agent in the test is that Old Serpent which is called Satan and the Devil.

Satan puts the test in the form of a temptation. The temptation is made by raising a question as to what God has said.

He does not at first openly deny God's Word, he acts in a very much more modern and hypercritical way; he simply suggests a doubt as to its authenticity:

"Hath God said?"

That is to say, is this so, is it really after all the Word of God? Then he criticises the unreasonableness of the statement, makes light of its threatenings, swiftly passes on to its open denial and repudiation, and finally declares that man ought to act independently, and for himself.

Man yields to the Devil's subtlety and believes his lie rather than God's truth. He puts sight in the place of faith, exalts his own will instead of the will of God, and by this gets that from which God would have delivered him, the knowledge of sin.

The Edenic dispensation then is man tested and found self-willed rather than God-willed.

T he A ntediluvian D ispensation Begins at Genesis 4:1, with the birth of Cain, and ends at Genesis 8:3, with the subsidence of the flood.

Man is here without law and under the reign of conscience, conscience coming in not as an original endowment from God, but as an evidence of sin, and as its Nemesis.

There is no restraint put upon the flesh. The flesh is allowed of God to work itself out. It does work itself out till it becomes a stench in the nostrils of God. God's testimony in the Edenic dispensation is the tree as seen in Genesis 2:16-17. In the Antediluvian dispensation the testimony is the Ark, as indicated in Hebrews 11:7.

The Antediluvian dispensation gives us man turned over to his own will.

In this dispensation we have a declaration concerning the operation of the Spirit which illustrates the distinctive attitude of God in different dispensations and emphasizes the necessity of knowing dispensational application for truth. In Genesis 6:3, it is written: "And the Lord said, my Spirit shall not always strive with man."

The text is applied again and again in our times to awaken, to alarm, and to exhort the sluggish sinner to lay hold on the grace of God. And he is assured that if he does not so lay hold the Spirit of God will take his "sad flight" and leave him forever.

Such teaching is in itself absolutely pernicious, opposed to the whole trend of this dispensation, contradictory to the Grace of God; and he who so teaches makes manifest that he is fumbling with instead of expounding the Word of God. An examination of the passage in question will show that it belongs exclusively to the Antediluvian dispensation and can belong nowhere else.

According to Genesis third this striving took place in the days of Noah. It was to last One Hundred and Twenty years. It was to last till the flood came.

It was to last during the testimony of warning that God should give the antediluvians, and did so last till the Antediluvian dispensation itself ended. The doctrine here taught in general is that the striving of the Spirit is limited, not individually, but dispensationally, and that this particular striving concerns the Antediluvian dispensation alone, that it can in no way support the theory- that the Spirit plays fast and loose with the sinner in this hour of grace. Own this doctrine of the striving of the Spirit as belonging to the age of Noah, keep it there that it may not uselessly invade and spoil the truth of the Spirit in this age, and in doing that the order of dispensational distinction will be maintained.

T he P atriarchal D ispensation Begins at Genesis 8:18, with the going forth of Noah out of the Ark, and ends at Genesis 50:26,

with the death of Joseph.

God is now seen dealing with selected families and ruling for righteousness in the headship thereof, that is to say through the father, the father being the depository of revelation, and standing for the family in responsibility to God. The characteristic principle is election. God looks upon the world of idolators and alone of His good pleasure selects Abraham to be the beginning of the Family of Faith in the earth. (Joshua 24:2-3.)

This dispensation presents us with four forms of spiritual life as illustrated in the four Patriarchs.

1.

In Abraham you have Faith.

2.

In Isaac, the fruit of faith which is Sonship.

3.

In Jacob, the fruit of sonship which is Service.

4.

In Joseph the fruit of service, that is to say Glory and Rule.

T he M osaic D ispensation Begins at Exodus 14:22, with the going forth of the Children of Israel out of Egypt, and ends at Matthew 11:13, with the coming of John the Baptist.

As in a previous dispensation God called out and separated unto Himself one family, even as in the dispensation previous to that He had called into view one man, so now He calls out and separates unto Himself one nation.

He calls it out to be the memorial of His grace, the witness of His unity, and the inheritor of His unconditional covenant.

The nation despises Grace and puts itself under Law, and henceforth the Law becomes the basis of relationship between Israel and God. The Sabbath is for the first time given as a commandment, and thus both the Law and the Sabbath belong exclusively and dispensationally to Israel.

To take the Law and the Sabbath out of the Mosaic dispensation and enforce them in this age and dispensation of the church and Spirit is as excuseless a bit of confounding as it would be to teach in our public schools that the period of discovery in American history corresponded in all principles and applications with the period of colonization. It would be just as sensible to place the battle of Bunker Hill and the landing of Columbus in the same year as to put Mount Sinai in the same dispensation with Calvary.

T he M essianic D ispensation Begins at John 1:28-31 with the Baptism of Jesus, and ends at John 19:30, with the Cross.

God manifests Himself in the flesh. He comes down in His Son and fulfills the covenant promise made to Israel. (Matthew 15:24; Romans 15:8; Galatians 4:4-5.)

As a messenger of the covenant Christ comes only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, characteristically refuses to listen to the Gentile woman when she appeals to Him on Jewish ground, and bids His disciples not to go into the way of, nor to preach the good news of the Messiah to any of the Gentiles.

T he H oly G host D ispensation

Begins secretly, at John 20:22, with the breathing on of the Holy Ghost, and thus the coming of the Comforter. It begins publicly, at Acts 2:1-4, with the coming of the Holy Ghost to Israel as the Power promised to them through the prophet Joel. It ends secretly, at 1Thessalonians 5:2, with the Rapture, or sudden, secret Translation of the church into the air to meet the Parousia of Christ, and ends publicly, at Revelation 19:11-20; 20:1-2, with the appearing of Christ and the binding of Satan.

God at once begins dealing with man in grace on the basis of the cross as a sacrifice for sin, and invites to faith in a Risen and Ascended Man. Having concluded the whole world under sin and set aside the Jew nationally, He no longer

deals with nations as such, but with individuals, and through the Gospel and the Spirit is calling them out of all nations to form a peculiar body, the church, the spiritual temple, the habitation and dwelling place of God on earth.

The object of this dispensation. is not the conversion of the world but the calling-out of it those who from before its foundation were ordained to eternal life and glory. To that end the Gospel is to be a proclamation made in all the world, and to every creature.

The dispensation of the Holy Ghost stands over against the Messianic in this that while in the Messianic he is seen walking on the earth in the flesh, in this dispensation He is no longer seen, and yet through the Spirit just as really walks it as though He were flesh clothed before our very eyes. He is on the throne as to body, the Man in the Glory, but by the proxy of the Spirit is in the church, and individually in every person who has been made a partaker of His life.

The question of sin having been settled at the cross according to the demands of Divine righteousness, of which the resurrection of Christ is the infallible witness, it is no longer the Sin question but the Son question which is at issue between God and man. "What think ye of Christ, whose Son is He?" That is the supreme question on the answer of which turns all of heaven or hell.

In this dispensation it is not a question of what you are, but what Christ is. And the Grace of God is so absolute, the power of the Holy Ghost is so imminent that it is written: "If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Romans 10:9.

Under no other dispensation can or will such conditions of salvation prevail.

T he D ispensation

of the

T imes

of

R estitution

Begins with the Appearing of Christ and the Binding of Satan, and ends according to 1Corinthians 15:24, when Christ as the Second Man, the Last Adam, shall deliver up the world restored and regenerated to the Father.

This dispensation has two parts: 1. The Thousand Years, or the Millennium.

2. After the Thousand Years.

The Thousand Years begin with the binding of Satan, at Revelation 20:1-2 and end at Revelation 20:7, with the loosing of Satan.

The Thousand Years is exclusively the Day of Christ, while the whole period of the Times of Restitution inclusive of the Thousand Years is the Day of the Lord, the Last Day. In the Thousand Years Jerusalem is the Capital of the world, Christ is the King of Israel and the King of nations, and personally and visibly seated in Jerusalem rules through united Israel as the ordained head of the nations over the whole earth.

It is a time not of grace, but righteousness. The Lord rules with a rod of iron and dashes in pieces as a potter's vessel. The people learn righteousness not by the Gospel, but by judgments.

It is the display and administration of a pure government in the hands of a righteous Man. It is the kingdom come upon earth. It is the kingdom whose source of power is heaven, and not earth.

After the Thousand Years, is undefined as to length.

In it Satan is loosed, tests the flesh finally, brings out its failure under any and all circumstances, and himself meets the eternal doom.

The fourth and last Judgment, the judgment of the White Throne is set up, there is a great conflagration, the second resurrection, a new Genesis, and then the restored and regenerated earth is handed back to God with more of gain than Adam ever lost, while Christ takes His place as the Father of the Everlasting Age, as that God who is to be All and in All. The whole period inclusive of the Millennium is a period of "putting down all rule and

authority" under the feet of God and God's Man.

T he E ternal S tate ,

or

D ispensation

Begins at Revelation 21:1, and ends, NEVER. Christ is God in All, and is characteristically manifested as "The Father of the Everlasting Age." (Isaiah 9:6.)

Righteousness has at last found a home. In the Millennium righteousness "reigned," but in the Eternal state, under the New Heavens and the New Earth it "dwells." Paradise is no longer a garden spot of earth but the whole shining globe, and the Paradise Lost has been forgotten in. the Paradise Regained. Sin and sorrow, sickness and death are forever banished, and God is with men to wipe away the memory of every tear.

God has got His own world again, and no longer merely in the might of that creation over which the morning stars sang together and the sons of God shouted for joy, but in the value of the redeeming blood of His dear Son. Henceforth, He is the unfoldment of the Eternal Father, as the Church is the eternal disclosure of the Son. Israel is the Memorial Nation in eternity, bearing witness of God's covenant faithfulness in time. The nations of them that are saved are transformed into the men with whom God lives, and over all is written that unspeakable decree "that of the Increase of this government of the Father by the Son there shall be NO END." A perfect world, the witness of God's perfect love and grace, in which the face of Christ with all its measureless glories shall still be the face of Him whom we know as Jesus of Nazareth; a world amid whose splendors the Church shall always be exalted as above things in heaven or things in earth; a world where Christians shall be the trophies of infinite love, the objects of God's eternal kindness through riches of grace in Christ Jesus our Lord; and where with Him we shall shine as the supreme sons of God, the rulers of the universe, the God-men, the aristocrats, the best ones of eternity; where finally, our lives in the full rhythm of God's accomplished purpose concerning us shall constantly utter in every deed, or word, or thought, in every essence of our being, ascriptions of praise and glory to Him who redeemed us by His precious blood and made us to be that New Humanity which is the eternal enthronement of God, the synonym, the symbol of life and joy, of peace and power, absolute, and forever.

One characteristic is common to each time dispensation; each ends in the failure of man under responsibility.

In Eden he fails under responsibility to the Word.

In the Antediluvian dispensation he fails under responsibility to Conscience.

In the Patriarchal, under responsibility to Fatherhood. In the Mosaic, under responsibility to Law. In the Messianic, under responsibility to Incarnation. In the Holy Ghost, to the Gospel.

In the Millennial, to the King of Righteousness.

At the close of each of these dispensations God gives man up to his own way.

In the Edenic, He gave him up to the knowledge of Sin. In the Antediluvian, He gave him up to the Imaginations of Evil.

In the Patriarchal, He gave him up to the Food of Egypt.

In the Mosaic, He gave him up to Formalism. In the Messianic, to Judicial Blindness.

In the Holy Ghost, to the Love of the World.

In the Millennial, to the Going after Satan..

At the close of each dispensation God takes off the restraint of evil and allows it to head itself up in some particular form for Judgment.

In the Edenic, it heads itself up in a Fallen Woman. In the Antediluvian, in Sinful Angels.["sons of God" Ge6:2] In the Patriarchal, in the king who knew not God. In the Mosaic, in the Hypocrisy of Scribes and Pharisees.

In the Messianic, in Judas.

In the Holy Ghost, in Antichrist.

In the Millennial, in Satan.

Each dispensation ends with a great World Crisis.

In the Edenic, the great world crisis is the Expulsion of Man. In the Antediluvian, it is the Flood.

In the Patriarchal, it is the Bondage of the Chosen People.

In the Mosaic, it is the Beheading of John the Baptist. In the Messianic, the Cross of Christ.

In the Holy Ghost, the Rapture of the Church. In the Millennial, the Binding of Satan.

After the Thousand Years there is the Judgment on Satan, the Great Conflagration, the Second Resurrection, and the Second Death, a Climax of Crises.

It must be evident as already intimated and illustrated that these dispensations include a wide variety of characteristic dealings and principles, and that it is absolutely necessary not only to know the outlines of these dealings and principles, but to be able to classify Truth in its several relations to them. Indeed, the classification of Dispensational Truth affords a distinct subject in itself.

It is sufficient to say that careful examination and prayerful consideration will show whole bodies of truth which belong exclusively to one dispensation and not to another; and that failure to put them in their proper dispensational relation means as great a disaster to that body or bodies of truth as the disarticulation of its members would be to the human body.

CLASSIFICATION OF DISPENSATIONAL TRUTH. It is not only necessary to know the Dispensations, but eminently important to keep truth in its proper dispensational relation. To put the truth applicable to one dispensation into another is to risk confusion, and not only theological, but spiritual death.

Take, for example, the imprecatory psalms, as indicated in Psalms 58:10; 137:8-9.

These Scriptures are full of imprecation and breathe the spirit not of forgiveness but vengeance on the enemy.

This spirit seems such a contradiction to the age in which we live, such a contradiction to the attitude of love, grace and forgiveness occupied by the church that many efforts have been made by good Christians to reconcile them with the teachings of Christianity others finding the attempt useless have been led to expurgate them altogether from their Bibles.

NOW it is indisputably true that the spirit of imprecation and vengeance is absolutely contradictory to the present spirit and mission of the church, but it is not contradictory to God's mind nor to His intended dealings.

There is a period coming when the Lord will be King over all the earth, when He will rule not in grace, but with a rod of iron, when He will no longer be full of longsuffering and forbearance, but will dash in pieces as a potter's vessel. A time is coming when the people of the earth shall learn righteousness, not by the preaching of the Gospel but by sudden judgments on the guilty. Isaiah 26:9. Revelation 2:25-29.

At that period the idea will be righteousness and not grace.

Instead of listening to appeals for mercy He will bend His ear to catch the invocations to judgment. It will not be the principle of vengeance but of vindication, not cruelty of feeling but justification of law; a dealing just as much in place then as it would be out of place now.

Apply the imprecatory psalms to this age and there is complete contradiction, put them where they belong in the Millennial era, and there is order, the order of the distinct dealings which God Himself reveals.

In Isaiah 60:1-12, we have a passage that is again and again applied to the church, being used to set forth the triumph of the Gospel, and the recompense of missionary zeal. But an

examination of the statement in Galatians 3:27-28, will show that the passage cannot be related to the church, and does not belong to this dispensation.

Galatians tells us that in Christ there is neither "Jew nor Gentile." That is to say in the church all national distinctions disappear. But in the quotation from Isaiah the distinction of Jew and Gentile is particularly emphasized. The prophet is therefore not speaking of the church but of Israel in the last days after the church has been translated; he is speaking of that time in the Millennial Dispensation when the Jew shall be the head of the nations and when the Gentiles shall bring in their wealth to support him.

If you turn to Zechariah 14:3-20, you will find that National Thanksgiving does not belong to this age but to the Day of Christ. In that day the nation that does not send its representatives to Jerusalem to pray before the Lord and return thanks for blessings will be smitten in field and harvests.

Dispensational classification gives point and place of application to the prayer of the Holy Spirit.

In the very nature of the case if the Holy Spirit is in the church, if He is here as the executive of the Godhead and the all-potent administrator of the church, the seal of the individual Christian, then we are not warranted, but rather forbidden to pray for the coming or outpouring of the Spirit.

And yet we have a Scripture in Luke 11:13, which definitely, and by no less an utterance than that of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself authorizes a prayer for the Holy Spirit: "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 to them that ask him?"

Is there a contradiction here?

If dispensational classification is not observed there will be.

Turn to John 7:37-39. "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."

Jesus was not yet glorified, that is to say He was not yet crucified and raised from the dead.

He had not yet ascended into heaven as the Risen Man, of which immense event the descent of the Holy Ghost was to be the indisputable evidence. The dispensation which gives us the Holy Ghost as an abiding guest in the hearts of believers had not yet come. The moment in which the Lord spoke was yet that of the Messianic dispensation, it was therefore perfectly justifiable to offer the prayer then, just as it would be thoroughly unjustifiable and contradictory now.

The one settling thing, the one thing that puts an end to all controversy is in the authoritative phrase: "The Holy Ghost was not yet given."

Dispensational classification explains the place of what is commonly known as "The Lord's Prayer."

That prayer belongs in the closing hours of this dispensation when the church is gone and when the elect Remnant among the Jews suffering under the persecution of the "Wilful" king call on God to deliver them from the horror of his rule, deliver them from the Great Tribulation and the power of this "Evil One," give them the daily bread which Antichrist makes it impossible for them to touch without sin, and bring in the long-promised kingdom of the Messiah. The prayer belongs essentially in that part of the present dispensation because grace will be gone and law and righteousness will be in vogue.

In Matthew 25:31-44, there is a picture of the coming of Christ, and the gathering before Him to judgment of all nations.

This judgment has been expounded as the last judgment and the scene set forth as the resurrection of the dead.

Not only is there no thought of resurrection in the passage, but strict examination, will show that the Christian does not appear in it at all.

Nations are there, and they are judged, not according to the relation they have held to the

Gospel but rather according to the manner in which they have treated the "Brethren of Christ."

The brethren of Christ in this case as cognate scriptures demonstrate are the Jews, the elect remnant who escape out of the hands of the Antichrist. As these nations, principally the nations of Europe have treated the Jew, so will they be dealt with and judged in that hour of hours, "before the Son of Man." The place of this judgment is in order at the commencement of the Millennial dispensation, and at least seven years after the Judgment Seat of Christ before which the church stands after her resurrection and rapture.

Dispensational order is remarkably set before us in Acts 15:14-18.

"God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His name.... After this I Will Return, and will build again the tabernacle of David...."

This is the order as dispensationally indicated by the Spirit: God is now in this dispensation of the Holy Ghost "taking out" a people for His name. It is therefore the dispensation of the Taking Out, the Calling Out, the Called Out Ones, the Church. It is not the time of pell-mell conversion to Christ, but the calling out from among all peoples kindreds and tongues, here and there, an individual to faith and life in Christ.

"After this," after the calling out of the church, He will return and build up the house of David. That is to say. He will set up and establish the Jewish economy in the earth.

The church for this dispensation.

The Jew for the next.

That is the Divine Order.

The distinctive value of dispensational truth may be seen by contrasting the dispensation of the Holy Ghost with the Mosaic dispensation.

In the Mosaic dispensation, God dealt nationally.

In the Holy Ghost dispensation, He deals individually.

In the Mosaic dispensation, He dealt with one nation.

In the Holy Ghost dispensation, He deals among all nations.

In the Mosaic dispensation, He brought in the Jew, and shut out the Gentiles.

In the Holy Ghost dispensation, He brings in the Gentiles, and shuts out the Jew. In the Mosaic dispensation, God dealt according to man's work.

In the Holy Ghost dispensation, He deals according to Christ's work.

In. the Mosaic dispensation, God dealt on the basis of Law. In the Holy Ghost dispensation, He deals on the basis of Grace.

In the Mosaic dispensation, God said: "Do, and live."

In the Holy Ghost dispensation, He says: "Live, and do."

In the Mosaic dispensation, the Law brought a work for man to do.

In the Holy Ghost dispensation, the Gospel brings a Word for man to believe.

In the Mosaic dispensation, all is summed up in a word of two letters. "Do." In the Holy Ghost dispensation, all is summed up in a word of four letters, "Done."

The attempt to put Christians and Gentiles under the law of Moses in this dispensation gave this country the witchcraft of Salem, and such modern misnomers as Christian Sabbath, and American Sabbath.

Law is right in its place and for a people on earth in the flesh, and it is to be remembered that the law is always for the sinful man in the flesh, but it is out of place and all wrong for a Christian, one who is in Christ and no longer seen of God as in the flesh, but risen, ascended and seated with Christ in heavenly places.

The Priesthood of Christ illustrates dispensational truth and makes manifest that the Christian is not under the Mosaic Law, or dispensation.

In Hebrews 8:4, it is written: "If He (Jesus) were on earth He should not be a priest."

In Hebrews 7:12-14, the reason is given: "Our Lord sprang out of Juda: of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood."

Priesthood on earth belongs to the tribe of Levi, and is for those who are under the Law. The Priesthood of Christ belongs in heaven, and is for those only who are joined to Him as the man risen from the dead, ascended and seated in the glory.

The Christian. who goes under the law, goes under the Levitical priesthood; as Christ is a priest only for those who are judicially dead, risen and ascended in Him to heavenly places, then the Christian who goes under the law shuts himself out from the priesthood of Christ.

Thus a knowledge of the dispensational place of Christ's Priesthood would settle all controversy as to the Christian's relation to the law.

But more than this, it would settle all controversy about sacerdotalism and make a separate priesthood in. the church impossible. And this is self-evident. According to Holy Scripture, Christ never was a priest on earth.

He could not, He would not be a priest if He were on earth to-day. By what law has anyone who wears the name of Christ the right or authority to claim priesthood apart from, or in any other sense than that in which all are spiritual priests.

Accept dispensational distinction and prelacy in the church is at an end.

Dispensational classification can alone save Truth from contradicting itself.

Take for example, Romans 11:26, and Romans 11:28, read them in the light of the proposition that there is no such thing as dispensational truth or that both verses belong to the same period, and you have a contradiction that all the ingenuity or piety of men cannot excuse, or minimize, for Romans 11:26, declares that "All Israel shall be saved," while Romans 11:28, asserts with equal force that "As concerning the Gospel, they are enemies."

But put verse 28 in this dispensation and all the facts of history and experience will demonstrate its truth. Put verse 26 in the Millennial age, the age that will follow this, and you will see that the nation of Israel is saved, as the Apostle Paul was saved, by the personal Appearing of Jesus Christ in glory.

Thus dispensationally classified the two verses harmonize instead of clashing.

Take Isaiah 2:1-4, "In the last days nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more."

Read II Timothy 3:1, "In the last days perilous times shall come."

Apply these "last days" to the same dispensation and there is a contradiction that cannot be explained away.

Read carefully the passage in Isaiah with the context and you will see that the last days of blessing are introduced by judgments which other scriptures show take place at the coming of Christ. And thus the last days of blessing in the Old Testament actually follow the Coming of Christ.

Read the statement in the Epistle to Timothy and you will find that the last days of peril and suffering, of war and apostasy, precede the Coming of the Lord.

Put the coming of the Lord between these two classes of last days and they fall naturally into their proper dispensations. This dispensation will end with perilous times in Church and State, a general apostasy and smashup, at the climax of which the Lord will come and smite the earth for its sin and failure under responsibility to grace. Then when the Lord is come the new dispensation of the Millennium will open in blessing and peace. Thus the passage in Timothy refers to the closing hours of this age.

Dispensationally classified and related, harmony flashes forth from that which otherwise is

the centre of discord.

Attention to dispensational order will prevent the excuseless blunder about the church going through the Tribulation.

There are those who teach this to the dishonor of grace and the confusion of the Christian mind.

The Spirit seems to have taken particular care that this blunder should not occur. In Scripture the Tribulation is specially qualified as in relation to God's earthly people the Jews, and not to the church. In Jeremiah 30:7, the Tribulation is definitely called "The Day of Jacob's Trouble." Read also Isaiah 66:8. In Matthew 24:16, we are told by our Lord that the scene of the Tribulation will be "In Judea:" verse 20, speaks about flight on "The Sabbath Day;" and all the nomenclature is of a people under the Mosaic law. But Romans 6:4, positively declares that the church is not under the law. This last statement then being so, and those who are to pass through the Tribulation being under the law, under the Sabbath covenant, and unequivocally declared to be Jacob, or the people of Israel, it follows that the church is never referred to in any matter involving the Tribulation.

There are other and direct declarations such as Revelation 10, and the picture of the church in heaven during the whole course of the Tribulation as given in the book of Revelation from the fourth chapter to the nineteenth which settles the question; but the moment the Bible student recognizes that the Law and the Sabbath are not for the church and that the whole earth and not Judea is her arena when in the world, he will see the utter impossibility and absurdity of that doctrine which makes the Christian to go through the Tribulation as a sort of earthly purgatory anticipative to heavenly glory. He will see as in the case of Lot in Sodom that tribulation and judgment will not fall till the church has been clean "taken out" of the world.

The same classification will save from the equally absurd mistake of making the 144,000 of Revelation 14th stand for the church, and on that chapter building certain impossible and confusing doctrines.

The opening verse of the chapter shows this select and numbered company on Mount Zion.

To the student of Scripture that word Zion ought to end all controversy. Zion is never the church even by the wildest allowance of imagination or "accommodation," invariably signifies the place itself, and stands only for Jewish thought and dealing. Of course a proper investigation and division of the book of Revelation makes it quite impossible to fall into the error of calling those who are declared in the seventh chapter to be the people of Israel, the church. But independently of all this, dispensational knowledge would save from such a mixture of things in heaven and in earth.

Passage after passage might be further cited to show that classification of truth according to dispensational distinction results in the light of a full dawn upon the divine pages, and touches every chord of revelation into perfect harmony.

Enough, however, has been said to show that knowledge of dispensational truth and ability to relate each truth to its own dispensation is absolutely necessary for him who would lay hold of the treasures of the Word, or reveal them to others.

DISTINCTION BETWEEN THINGS WHICH APPEAR SIMILAR. We must know and maintain the distinction between things which though apparently similar are quite distinct. This principle is simply an emphasis of what has been said largely under the head of classification of Dispensational Truth, the classification, however, sometimes falling inside of similar dispensations.

As an example of passages which are quite different although commonly confounded, examine, Luke 21:24, and Romans 11:25. The first reads: "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

The second reads: "Blindness in part is happened to Israel until the fulness of the

Gentiles be come in."

"The times of the Gentiles" signify the rule of the Gentile nations. That rule began as owned of God in Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon. At that hour Cod set the Jew aside because of evil and sin against Him and brought in the Gentile governmentally. 'i pat rule as owned of God continued on down through the Roman Empire; it continues to-day trampling Jerusalem and the Jew under foot, making the once Holy city the capital of the False prophet, and denying Him who is the King and whose that city is; this rule will continue until the Gentile nations of the old Roman earth under Antichrist shall once more be gathered about Jerusalem; then Christ and His church previously caught up will come to the Mount of Olives to overthrow him, put an end to his confederacy, write finale upon Gentile Times, and bring in "The Times of the Jew." "Behold the day of the Lord cometh...... for I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle...... then shall the Lord go forth, and fight against those nations......and His feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives......And the Lord shall be King over all the earth......Jerusalem shall be safely inhabited......in those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all languages of the nations (the ten nations of Antichrist, of the Roman[Arab -ed.] Earth) even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you; for we have heard that GOD IS WITH YOU." Zechariah 14:1-11; Zechariah 8:23.

This is the time of the Jew, he is the head and no longer the Tail of the nations. "And the Lord shall make thee the head, and not the tail." Deuteronomy 13.

The Times of the Gentiles historically then is the whole period from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar till the Lord shall come again in the clouds of Heaven and set up the Jewish State.

The "Fulness of the Gentile signifies the fulness or filling up of God's purposes in this age to take out from among the Gentiles a people for His name, as it is written: "God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for His name."

And to this agree the words of the prophet; as it is written: "After this (after the people from among the Gentiles are taken out), I will return, and build again the tabernacle (the house, the throne, and kingdom), of David." Acts 15:14-16.

Our Lord's name is the Christ, those who are taken out now from among the Gentiles unto His name are Christ-ians: this taking out from among the Gentiles began the day Peter preached at the house of Cornelius and the Holy Ghost fell on. all those who heard the Word; that taking out is being accomplished by the Holy Spirit and the Gospel as it is preached on the lips of men, and it will go on till the last one who shall constitute the "taking out" is called, then that body of calledout persons will be full, filled to its requisite number; for it must be self-evident that "a taking out from among the Gentiles" is not a taking of ail the Gentiles, it is a taking of some Gentiles from among others, and this is election: necessarily in an election there is a definiteness both as to number and time limit; this time limit must be marked by some well-defined point: it is so marked by the Translation of the church, by the resurrection of the dead and the transfiguration of the living into the Lord's presence in the air; an event which will precede the Appearing of Christ and His church to the Mount of Olives, at least, seven years.

Thus the Times of the Gentiles begin centuries before the birth of Christ and will end only at His Appearing to set up the kingdom of Israel; while the Fulness of the Gentiles begins only after the resurrection of the Lord and may end any moment by the sudden secret translation or rapture of the church into the air to meet Him, when like "the thief in the night" unknown to the world He shall come quietly to snatch away the church as His jewel, His "Pearl of great price." Matthew 13:45-46.

Thus the one truth involves the secret Coming of Christ and the Rapture of the church, the other the public Appearing of Christ and the beginning of that era when the nation of Israel shall be saved unto the glory of coming and millennial days.

The word Gospel is so familiar, its general definition as "good news" so well understood, that

its application is supposed to be uniform. When therefore we read of the Gospel of the Kingdom, the Gospel of God, the Gospel of Grace, the Glorious Gospel, and the Everlasting Gospel, it is taken for granted that they all refer to one and the same thing. The similarity is impressed upon the average mind by the word Gospel. But however the word Gospel may make for similarity it is a mistake to imagine that the word covers one subject. On. the contrary the several designations of the Gospel are of themselves the indications of marked distinctions which the Spirit impresses on us to observe.

The Gospel of the Kingdom is the good news of the Kingdom to be set up in Israel with Jerusalem as the Capital, when the Lord Jesus shall come the second time as Messiah, as Son of David. It is therefore in the nature of the case a Gospel that cannot be preached until after this particular age or dispensation is passed, not till after the Rapture or Translation of the Church.

The Gospel of God is the good news that God is a Father loving men in spite of their sins and seeking sons who shall worship Him in Spirit and in Truth.

The Gospel of Grace is the good news that Christ died for our sins, and rose again for our justification; this is peculiarly the Gospel that is to be preached in this age.

The Glorious Gospel would be better translated, "The Gospel of the Glory of the blessed (happy) God." Read I Timothy 1:11; II Corinthians 4:4.

It is the good news that Jesus Christ the crucified and risen man is now exalted to be the happy God. It is the good news of a God-man exalted to Heaven for believing men and their salvation.

The Everlasting Gospel is the good news of that era of time which is called the Age of Ages, the Millennial era; the good news that the King of Righteousness has come and is seated in Jerusalem as the King of nations, as the Prince of the Kings of the earth.

In recognizing these varied Gospels we get vistas of truth heretofore unopened and behold the keys with which many statements of Scripture otherwise dark are unlocked to our comprehension.

As a simple but striking example of things which seem similar but are absolutely distinct, take Matthew 25:34; Ephesians 4. The former reads, "The kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." The latter reads, "hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world."

The subject is election in both cases. In Matthew you have from the foundation of the world, in Ephesians you have before the foundation of the world. The difference is in the prepositions before and from: this distinction is rarely if ever seen; and yet the value of the distinction is immense.

From the foundation of the world is a term characterizing the kingdom as relating to earth and time, while before the foundation of the world takes us wholly above the earth and time and projects us into heaven and eternity, both past and future.

A striking illustration of the necessity of maintaining the distinction between things apparently similar may be found in a single passage.

In Ephesians 15, it is written: "Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named."

Ordinarily this is applied to the same subject, the subject in both members of the verse supposed to be the Church of Christ as the Family of Faith.

The family in heaven is taken to be all those who of the church of Christ have died on through the ages, all who die now and depart to be with Christ in Heaven; the family on earth are supposed, correspondingly, to be those who live in the church on earth today; the one is thus the church in heaven, the other the church on earth.

However true it is that those who are in heaven form with those who are really saved on earth the one great spiritual family, it is not true that they are ever known as the family in heaven and the family in earth. The key to the first half of the verse is found in the literal reading, "in the heavens." Now this epistle is the epistle peculiarly of the heavens or the heavenlies. If you take

your pencil and mark the word you will find that it is indeed the characteristic of the book, and is intended to set forth the fact that in God's mind the church has already gone home with the ascended Christ, and is seen of God as seated with Him, and in Him, in Heavenly Places, as it is written, "Hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus."

Ephesians 2:6.

The family in heaven then. means the church, the whole church, living or dead, in heaven or on earth. In other words, the church is the Heavenly Family.

There is another family, a family that is as much a family of God as the church of Christ, but a family that has to do wholly with the earth.

While all the promises to the church are made concerning heavenly things, all the promises made to the other family have to do with the earth, and the earth alone. That family is the .nation of Israel, and this is the family of whom we speak as "The Family in Earth." In God's final purpose Israel is to reign on the earth, but the church seated in the Heavenlies with Christ above all principalities and powers is to rule even over all Israel. The object of the Apostle's statement then is to set Jesus Christ as the centre of things in heaven and in earth, both to the church, and also to the Jew. Fail to recognize the distinction between these two families, allow yourself to be deceived with the idea that both families refer to the same thing and you will miss some of the most wonderful and comforting truths of the Word of God. Admit the distinction and there will be opened to you whole sweeps of distinct truths which at the last from heaven and from earth gather at His feet to own Him as their objective and glory.

In Ephesians 1:6, it is written: "He hath made us accepted in the Beloved."

In II Corinthians 5:9, you read: "We labor that we may be accepted of Him." In the one case it is stated that we have been accepted, and in. the other we are shown as under obligation to labor and toil in order to be accepted. Is there a contradiction here?

If the things have reference to the same truth there is a contradiction. But do they in spite of their similarity in form apply to distinct things? I answer they do. In Ephesians we are seen as to our standing before God in Christ, and as the rendering might be, "graced in Him." In Corinthians we are seen as to our state, our daily walk.

Our standing is invariable. It is in Christ and God sees us as perfect as He is. Our state is variable. We do not always live as those who have been accepted as sons of God in the Risen Christ. Because this is so we are exhorted to bring our state up to our standing and seek to live in accord with it, not that we may be accepted as sons of God but that we may live acceptably before Him. A proper rendering of the passage in Corinthians will substantiate this interpretation and will at the same time remove the appearance of similarity.

Instead of accepted read "acceptable." We are to labor then not in order to be accepted as sons of God but to be acceptable sons of God. In other words because we are the sons of God accepted in the Beloved, we are to live acceptably, pleasingly before Him. In the nature of the case, the knowledge of dispensational truth and the principles of strict classification will enable us more and more to distinguish between things which differ.

THE MEANING AND PURPORT OF THE DIFFERENT BOOKS OF THE BIBLE. We must know the meaning and purport of each book of the Bible.

The Bible is made up of separate books, sixty-six in number.

These books are divided into two great parts, the Old and New Testaments, or more correctly, "The Scriptures of Israel," and "The Scriptures of the Church."

The Old Testament, is divided into three great parts: Law, Prophets and Psalms.

This was the division current among the Jews in our Lord's time.

He sets His seal to this division: "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the Law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms,

concerning Inc." Luke 24:44.

The Law is known as the Pentateuch, the latter word signifies the fivefold book, and comes from the Greek, pente, five, and teuchos, book.

The five books are Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

The Prophets Twenty-nine books.

This division includes the prophetic and historic books, from Joshua to Malachi.

The Psalms Five books.

Job, Book of Psalms proper, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes and Song of Solomon.

Thirty-nine books in all in the Scriptures of Israel. The New Testament is divided into three great parts. Gospels, Acts and Epistles.

Gospels Four in number. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Three of these Gospels are called the "Synoptics," namely: Matthew, Mark and Luke.

These are called Synoptic from the Greek sun, together, and opsis, view, things viewed together or a general and uniform view. That is to say, these Gospels seem at first glance to give the same general and sequential view of the history of our Lord, while the Gospel according to John stands out in many and marked contrasts.

The Synoptics may be called the Earthly Gospels. The Fourth, or John's Gospel, the Heavenly Gospel.

The Book of Acts consists of two parts.

In the first part we have the Apostolate of Peter. In the second, that of Paul.

In the first we have the Kingdom presented again to the Jews; and in the second the Gospel given to the Jew first, and then the Gentile, with the gradual unfolding of God's purpose to call out the church from among the Gentiles.

Epistles to the churches:-Sixteen in number.

Romans, First and Second Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, First and Second Thessalonians.

These nine epistles are written by Saint Paul.

Seven epistles are written by John: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea.

Paul writes four individual, or personal, epistles: First and Second Timothy, Titus and Philemon, He writes one epistle to his nation: The Epistle to the Hebrews; he writes fourteen in all.

John writes two personal epistles: To the Elect Lady and her children, to the well-beloved Gains.

There are four epistles to the Hebrews: The Apostle Peter writes two: First and Second Peter. James writes one: The Epistle of James. Paul writes one: The Epistle to the Hebrews, so distinctively called.

There are two general Epistles: John writes one: The First Epistle of John. Jude writes the other: The Epistle of Jude.

The Epistles of John form the Family Epistles. They consist of letters to little children, fathers, young men, a mother and her children, a beloved brother in the Lord.

The New Testament is composed of twenty-seven, books.

In both these testaments we have a marvellous library, a library whose topics range from the creation of the world to the re-creation of a human soul.

The manner in which these books have been written and this library produced is declared by the Apostles Peter and Paul:

"God spake by the prophets."

Hebrews 1:1.

"Holy men of God spake as they were moved (carried along) by the Holy Ghost."

II Peter

1:21.

"The Spirit of Christ which was in them (thy prophets) testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory (glories) that should follow." I Peter 1:11 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." II Timothy 3:16.

Note who some of the authors of these books were, that is to say, those whom God by His Spirit used as His amanuenses: Kings, such as David and Solomon; Prime Ministers, such as Mordecai and Daniel; Kings' Cup Bearers, such as Nehemiah.

Prophets, scholars, poets, soldiers, physicians, taxgatherers, cattle-drivers, shepherds, tentmakers, and illiterate, at least uneducated, fishermen.

These are of all sorts; but mainly the weak and those who were not mighty in the world were chosen of God to form His Bible.

And we are told that God makes such choice in order -That no flesh should glory in His presence." I Corinthians 1 29.

The period of time in writing the book was about sixteen hundred years. Think of it ! A book taking sixteen centuries to write. What a story its composition would tell of the lands in which written, the circumstances under which written, and the varied emotions in the hearts of those who were privileged to give it forth as the mind and will of God to men.

The Old Testament is written in two languages, the Hebrew and Syriac; the Septuagint, or Greek translation by the Seventy of Alexandria is quoted by our Lord and His Apostles.

The New Testament is wholly Greek.

The supreme object of the Bible from Genesis to Revelation is to set forth the Son of God in His varied relations as Creator, Man, Redeemer, Priest, King and God-man.

The Bible is Christo-centric; without that centre all is chaos; with that the book is order, the expression of infinite intelligence, filled with light, with life and love, and intelligible to the quickened minds of the sons of men.

It is evident that each of these books contributes its part towards the general whole; that each has its special lineament to paint in the common portrait of the King; that each book stands for some definite form of the great revelation, and that necessarily each book has some special characteristic, some particular purport. This meaning and purport may sometimes be told in a word or a phrase. The knowledge of the meaning, the comprehension of the purport will flash light into the mind concerning the truths each book seeks to present.

Let us consider then more particularly the characteristic meaning and purport of the books of the Bible: Genesis. Book of beginnings. Seed-plot of the Bible. The germs, the roots of every doctrine afterwards unfolded in the Bible.

The whole doctrine of man, his creation, fall, ruin, re-creation and glory, may be found in the first chapter.[sic -ed.]

Exodus. Going out, or book of Redemption.

Redemption by blood and Redemption by power.

Leviticus. Sacrifice, Priesthood and Worship. This has been called the Priest's Guide Book.

Numbers.

Wilderness Experience. You have here the suggestions, typically, of the church in the world, and Christian experience. Like Israel the church is passing on from the sands of time to the Promised Land and to the golden floors of the Temple of God. On the way there are foes to fight, lessons to learn, and experiences to enjoy in the manifested grace and forbearance of God. Deuteronomy.

Preparation for the land. To be read in connection with the Epistle to the

Colossians.

Joshua.

Conflict with the enemy in the land. To be read with Ephesians, the book of the "Heavenlies."

The key, Ephesians 6:10-17.

Judges.

Eye-sight instead of faith-sight. Key, Judges 21:25.

Ruth.

Gentile bride for Jewish Lord. Boaz. Kinsman, Redeemer, Advocate.

Samuel, Kings and Chronicles, six books. They set before us the Story of the Kingdom.

I Samuel.

King after man's choice, and the King after God's choice. The king after man's choice, splendid in stature, glorious in beauty, wilful in way. The King after God's choice, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, despised and rejected of men.

II Samuel.

The man of sorrows and acquainted with grief exalted to be king over all Israel.

I Kings.

The King of Glory.

II Kings.

The Great Apostasy.

I Chronicles.

God dealing in Grace with the Ark as the centre.

II Chronicles.

God manifesting Glory with the Temple as the centre.

Ezra.

Building the Temple.

Nehemiah.

Building the City.

Esther.

Secret Providence to a Godless people. Job. Self-righteousness.

Psalms.

Christ's Sufferings and Glories.

Proverbs.

Rules of Heaven for men on earth. Ecclesiastes. "Under the sun."

Song of Solomon.

The marriage joy of Bride and Bridegroom: The joy of Christ and the Church in the marriage hour of glory when at last she shall come up out of the wilderness leaning on His arm to enter into the place prepared, where His banner over her shall be love.

Isaiah.

The anticipated Gospel, and Israel in "The latter days." Key chapter, Fifty-third.

Jeremiah.

"The day of Jacob's Trouble." Lamentations. Jerusalem under foot of the Gentiles.

Ezekiel. Visions of God and Latter Day Glory. Daniel. Hand book of Gentile politics.

Hosea.

The wandering nation.

Joel.

Day of the Lord.

Amos.

Desolation and Restoration.

Obadiah.

Judgment on Gentiles.

Jonah.

Substitution and Resurrection.

Micah.

Bethlehem and the Babe.

Nahum.

Gentile Confederacy.

Habakkuk.

Messianic Glory.

Zephaniah.

Israel the Head, and no longer the Tail. Zechariah. The Appearing in Glory on the Mount of Olives.

Malachi.

The Sun of Righteousness, and the smiting of the earth.

Matthew.

The King of the Jews.

Mark.

The Servant. No Genealogy, no record of birth. Key words of the book, "Immediately," "Straight-way. These words express the servant character of our Lord, as set before us by Mark.

Luke.

The Man among men.

John.

God the Word who became man and dwelt among us that we might behold the glory of the Divine Fatherhood in the Divine Sonship.

Acts.

History of the Holy Spirit acting in the church. Romans.

Justification by Faith.

I Corinthians.

Gospel Order.

II Corinthians.

Discipline and Benevolence.

Ephesians.

The Heavenlies.

Philippians.

The mind of Christ.

Colossians.

The Deity of Christ.

I Thessalonians.

Waiting for the Son of God from Heaven. (Secret.)

II Thessalonians.

Appearing of the Son of God from Heaven. (Public.)

Titus.

"The Blessed Hope."

Philemon.

"Put that on my account."

Hebrews.

Shadows and Substance. The Book of Contrasts.

James.

Justification by works. In Romans man is justified by faith in "God's sight." In James man is justified by works in "Man's sight."

I Peter.

Pilgrims and Strangers.

II Peter.

The Great Fire, and the Wonderful Reconstruction.

I John.

Reading the Title clear, or Written Assurance. Key text. I John 5:13.

II John.

Abiding in the Doctrine, or Christ coming again in the Flesh.

III John.

Walking in the Truth.

Jude.

The Great Apostasy, and Vengeance Coming.

Revelation.

Consummation or the New Genesis taking the place of the Old. The purport of the book, the purpose for which it was written, forms the point of view from which we must interpret its contents, get the grasp of its intents.

For example, in the Gospel according to Matthew we have no record of the ascension of Christ. Recognize that this book is written to set forth the Lord Jesus Christ as the Messiah, the King of Israel, and you have the explanation of the omission: as king of Israel His place is not in Heaven but on earth, at Jerusalem the city of "The Great King."

There is no account of the Ascension in the Gospel of John.

Recognize the Lord's own utterance in John 3:13, that "No man hath ascended up to Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of Man which is in Heaven," and the omission becomes characteristic.

It is just as characteristic that the record of the Ascension should be given in Mark and Luke.

In Mark He is seen ascending as that servant who did the Father's will, and whom the Father would exalt as the witness that "the way to exaltation is in the dust."

He is seen ascending in Luke because as risen from the dead He must take a new, immortal Humanity to heaven, and sit there as "The Man in the Glory," the witness that as man He has met for men in His death perfectly all the demands of God's righteousness against the chief of sinners; He must sit there as the Second Man, the Last Adam, the Head of a new race, the prophecy of what all shall be who believe in Him; the shining glorious proclamation of that hour when the world shall be put not under angels, but redeemed, regenerated, and deathless man.

In Matthew the genealogy of Christ is connected with Abraham and David because as the King of Jews it is necessary that He shall get the Land through Abraham, and the Throne through David.

In Mark there is no genealogy because He is there represented as the Servant, and the servant has no need of ancestry.

In Luke His genealogy is carried back to Adam that He may be presented as the Son of Man

and the seed of the woman.

In John we have no genealogy because the purport of that book is to set the Christ before us as the unbegun, eternally begotten Son of God, He who is from everlasting to everlasting.

For a right understanding of the book we read we are under obligation to put ourselves at its point of view and see the truth it presents in the light which that attitude and angle of vision may give.

DIVIDING THE BOOKS INTO THEIR COMPONENT PARTS. We must know how to divide a Book into its component parts.

A book may be divided into characteristic and constituent parts: for example the Book of Job: Characteristically, the Book of Job may be divided into five parts: 1.

The abode and power of Satan.

2.

The manifested folly of human wisdom in its endeavor to explain the providence of God. 3.

Thirty chapters of self-righteousness.

4.

The need of a Days-man.

5.

The vileness of human perfection..

Constituently, the book may also be divided into five parts:

1.

God's permitted trial of Job by Satan.

2.

The efforts of Job's friends to account for his trial.

3.

The address of Elihu.

4.

The Lord Himself answering Job. 5.

Job coming to a knowledge of his own vileness in the presence of God's Holiness.

On the same principle it is possible to analyze chapters as well as sections. Take as an illustration the Gospel according to Matthew.

This is the Gospel of the King of the Jews: each chapter sets forth some special action of the King: 1. Generation of the King. 2. Birth of the King. 3. Baptism of the King. 4. Temptation. of the King. 5-7. Legislation of the King. 8-9. Manifested power of the King. 10. The King sending out ambassadors. 11. The King reporting Himself through His works to John. 12. The King giving His credentials to His enemies. 13. The King unveiling the mysteries of the Kingdom: or, presenting the Kingdom in a mystery. 14. The King acting in compassion. 15. The King acting in grace to Gentiles.

16. The King painting the portrait of His Bride.

17. The King giving a vision of His second Advent.

18. The King pointing out Regeneration as the door into the Kingdom. 19. The King and the Millenium, or the age of the Regeneration. 20. The King seeking laborers. 21. The King presenting Himself to His brethren in the flesh. 22. The King foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem. 23. The King setting aside the Jew as a nation till He comes again. 24. The Great Tribulation., "The day of Jacob's Trouble," before The King comes again. 25. The King coming first as a Bridegroom, and then as a Judge. 26. The King betrayed. 27. The King crucified.

28. The King raised from the dead and made not only the king over all Israel, but the authority over all things in Heaven.

Not only is it possible to take each chapter in some characteristic way, but to take the chapter and find in it an analysis of contents suggestive. Take as an example the Fifth chapter of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians:

1.

The location of the Christian between death and resurrection. v, 1.

2.

The Christian's perfect body. v, 2.

3.

The objective purpose of salvation. v, 4, 5.

4.

The Judgment Seat of Christ. v, 10.

5.

The true inspiration to service. v, 14.

6.

The New Creation. v, 17.

7.

The message to the world. v, 20.

8.

The supreme argument. v, 21.

In turning a book into its component parts we may inquire when it was written, by whom it was written, to whom it was written, the circumstances under which it was written, why it was written; these questions will bring the book into its several parts before the student and set its sections, whether of chapter or verse, into clear vision.

EACH BOOK IN ITS ORDAINED PLACE. There has been as much the manifestation of God's hand in the sequences of the books as in any other part of its creation; necessarily therefore each book is in its ordained place and cannot be taken out of it without the dislocation of the organism.

To illustrate, the Book of Ruth comes in between the Book of Judges on the one side, and the Book of Samuel on the other.

Ruth gives us the Gentile bride of the Jewish Lord and is therefore the type of the Church of Christ. Now the Church of Christ can only come into view after the failure in Israel; only when the marriage in Heaven takes place, or to be precise, when the church is called out, completed, and translated to meet the Lord at His Second Coming can the kingdom of Israel be set up. This is just what the position of the Book of Ruth shows conclusively. judges gives us failure in Israel, "every man doing that which was right in his own eyes." Samuel gives us the setting-up of the kingdom.

Here then you have the Gentile bride placed in the canon of scripture between the failure of Israel and the coming of the kingdom.

In the Book of Ezra you have the building of the Temple, and in Nehemiah the restoration of the city; it is of little matter what the chronology may be, the moral sequence demands that the dwelling place of God shall be looked at before the dwelling place of man; and examination will show that this sequence is independent of man's ordering.

To see how necessary the Book of Acts is to the place accorded it, it is only required in reading to close the book at the Gospel of John and open it again at the Epistle to the Romans. In John you close with Jesus on the shores of Galilee, but in Romans you find Him gone from the earth and the Church in His place, but no account of the origin or constitution of that church.

Without the Book of Acts you cannot assist at the birth of the Church and the inauguration of the dispensation of the Holy Ghost.

The Book of the Revelation finds it place by inherent law.

It is a matter of little import when it was written, there is but one place which it can logically occupy, that is at the consummation of the Bible. I recall seeing some years ago a house in process of building; before the walls were half way up the carpenters began constructing the roof, and at a certain stage when the walls were complete, caused that roof to be swung up into its place. No matter when the roof was constructed there was but one place for it, and that on top, as the

consummation of the building. No matter at what hour the Revelation was inspired of God there is but one place it can occupy, and that is at the close of the canon, resting in its place as the roof in the palace of Truth.

EACH BOOK IN PLACE BY LAW OF GROWTH. Each book finds its place therefore by the law of organic growth, each book is a necessity to, and produces the other, just as each preceding part of a tree is a necessity and inspiration to that which follows.

If Genesis is necessary to bring Israel into Egypt, Exodus is necessary to take them out. If the order of the New Testament is Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, it is because in the Gospels we get Christ in the flesh, in Acts Christ in the Spirit, and in the Epistles Christ in doctrine; and these are necessary the one to the other as parts of an organic whole.

If each book is thus related to the other it is evident that we may find books acting as divine commentaries, the one upon the other.

Colossians throws light spiritually on Deuteronomy, in that both books are the preparation for the inheritance. Ephesians is a commentary on Joshua, in that both books show conflict in the endeavor to enter into the purchased possession.

Corinthians is a flash light on Judges, the Christians at Corinth being largely in the same attitude as that which characterized Israel in the former book, "every one doing that which seemed right in his own eyes." Hebrews is a key to Leviticus, and the Book of Revelation to the prophecy of Daniel.

From all this it follows that each book being characteristic in itself, each book must hang the key up beside its own door.

The key of the Revelation may be found in the nineteenth verse of the first chapter. "The things which thou hast seen, the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter" (meta tauta, after these things) Past, Present, and Future, this is the inspired division of the book. The past things are in the first chapter, the now things are in the second and third chapters, the future things, or things which are after the now things, are from the fourth chapter on.

The key of the Book of Ecclesiastes is in the phrase "under the sun." It is the book that looks at the world from that standpoint and sees only vanity and vexation of spirit in the best that can be done there; it stands in contrast to the book of Ephesians where the believer exalted with Christ to the throne of God above the sun sees things from God's point of view, and rejoices in Him as the Author and End of his salvation.

In one of the Cantons of Switzerland whenever the inmates are away the key is placed under the cross at the door. Those who wish to enter the house know where the key is, and always look for it under the figure of the outstretched Christ. The final key that fits every book of the Bible is to be found under the Cross, under the figure of the outstretched Christ.

Take this key which comes from the cross, apply it to any book, open the door and enter in; stand for awhile in listening attitude, and the symphonies of eternal truth shall be heard sounding in Heavenly measures to your soul; stand patiently, and your eyes shall be anointed with eye-salve to behold the face of Him who is Himself, the Face and Likeness of God.

WHAT TO STUDY. Many persons lose time and wander aimlessly through the Bible because they do not know just what to study. A few suggestions in this respect may be helpful.

We ought to study Topics. Such topics as Grace, Law, Faith, Hope, Kingdom, Covenants, Sabbath, Second Coming, Inspiration, Angels, Spirits, First and Second Resurrections.

We ought to study the Types. Types of Persons, Places, Events.

Great Characters.

Such as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, David, Saul, Elijah and Elisha of the Old Testament. Paul, Peter, James, John, and scores of others in the New Testament.

Great Chapters.

Genesis 22, Leviticus xvi, Numbers xxi, Deuteronomy viii, Isaiah 53, Matthew 13, Luke 15, John 3, Revelation 2 and 3.

We ought to study Key Words.

Words and phrases, like Heavenlies, Much-more, Better, Straightway, Overcomes, the Eight Togethers of the New Testament, and the Seven Rests.

The Names of. God. God, Creator absolute; Lord-God, Creator in Covenant relation; Jehovah (Yahveh), He who will be, the Coming One; Almighty God, the God of Providence; the MostHigh God, the God of Nations.

The Names of Persons.

Jacob, the Supplanter; Israel, Prince with God; Saul, Destroyer; Paul, the Worker; Simon, man in the flesh; Simon Peter, man in the flesh called by the grace of God into relation with the Son, made a part of the living Rock, and himself a living stone.

Developments of Doctrine. For example: The Incarnation, seen in Eve's thought about Cain, typified in the supernatural causation of Isaac's birth, fulfilled in Christ, and now expanded in Christians.

In this way we may study, Sacrifice, Atonement, Repentance, Conversion, Regeneration, Justification, Sanctification.

Allusive Utterances.

A striking example of this is to be found in Philippians 2:6. "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." That is to say, thought not to snatch at equality with God. The allusion is evidently to some one who did; one who had the hardihood to think about robbing God of the glory of His supremacy. The very statement of the passage leads to such an inferential conclusion.

It leads to the inquiry as to what Scripture may say about the matter; and Scripture answers that there was such a person.

That being was Satan. Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28.

Another example: II Peter 3:3-4. In this passage the Apostle warns against a class of scoffers who should arise in the church in the last days, and in the endeavor to justify their worldly lusts would mock and scoff at the thought of the Second Coming. The principle of allusive utterance thus indicates that, in the last days, there will be a special testimony in the church to the imminency of the Lord's Coming.

Under this head of what to study may be included, also, the Plan of Study.

PLAN OF STUDY. It is necessary to have some definite plan or method to accomplish any real results.

1) Compare Scripture with Scripture.

It is written, that in His light we shall see light.

Illustration (Revelation 19:15, Ephesians 6:17). The sword out of His mouth in Revelation is explained by the Ephesians to be the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, and thus the sword out of the mouth is simply the declaration that by the word of His mouth the Lord will arraign the nations at His Coming, and hale them to judgment.

Matthew 25:1, is explained by II Corinthians 11:2, The virgins of Matthew equalling the assembly of Christ. presented as a virgin in Corinthians.

2) Study slowly.

You cannot "cram" the Bible. You must eat what you get. Jeremiah 15:16.

3) Read carefully.

Get all the light, examine every word, subject every part to microscopic investigation; a preposition or an article makes a difference. Dig into the original if you can; get helps if you cannot.

4) Patiently.

If you do not understand to-day, you may to-morrow. The advance in truth is in exact proportion to the use of truth.

5) Reverently.

You are reading God's Word. His breath and presence are in it.

6) Prayerfully.

Pray for illumination, for opening "the heart to attend unto the things spoken." (Acts 16:14.)

Only when a Risen Saviour opened the understanding of the Disciples could they understand the Scriptures. "Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures." Luke 24:45. How significant that the last act of the Son of God before He ascended was to open the understanding of His disciples in relation to the Scriptures; and how intensely significant that these Scriptures should be none other than the Scriptures of Israel, as it is written: "And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." Luke 24:27.

And these Scriptures according to verse 44, are Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms, or, the Old Testament from Genesis to Malachi.

7) Read, and study constantly.

Make it a daily practice to read and always to study something, no matter how little.

IMPLEMENTS OF STUDY. 1) The Bagster Bible.

Always with a broad margin for marking. When you mark be as systematic as you can. For example: Black lines for Gospel, Historic, or Spiritual, statement. Blue lines for Second Coming, and kindred truths, such as the Kingdom, etc. Red lines for Blood, Sacrifice, the Cross, and Atonement. Green, or violet ink for Holy Spirit.

If you would make a distinction between the Coming of Christ for His Church, and the Appearing of Christ with His Church, use a star for the former, and a circle with rays like a sun for the latter; for in the former He comes as "The Morning Star" (Revelation 22:16), and in the latter as the Sun of Righteousness. "Unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of Righteousness arise with healing in His wings." Malachi 4:2.

The Bible intelligently marked is a splendid instrument in the hands of a devoted student.

2.

A Cruden's Concordance.

3. A Topical Text Book.

4.

A copy of the Revised Version for examining readings and phrase constructions.

Making use of these implements, following these methods, and applying these principles, you will find: 1) A splendid style.

At one moment fresh with Eden blooms, anon hot with Sinai's flames: heaving with prophetic warnings, or jubilant with Messiah's strains: rapt in the glory of Isaiah's vision, or silvery with Bethlehem's natal song: sobbing with Gethsemane's woes, or triumphant with the Resurrection theme: tender with the Gospel call, and pitiful above the contrite heart; sulphurous with. curses at the sight of sin, or melting into universal song as the door in Heaven opens, and He is seen, the Living Lord, the Coming King.

Apart from this, the literary value of the English translation is above price; great orators, some of them foreigners, have found in it a classic. Kossuth, the great Hungarian, declared that his pure English came from reading the English Bible.

2) Supernatural wisdom.

It tells the story of Light, Sun, Moon, and Stars, of deep Sea, and melted Rock, before Astronomy, or Geology had come to the birth; and waits patiently till Science shall stop its hypotheses, revealing even now to him who loyally reads it that the only opposition ever made from Science was not from Science itself, but from "Science falsely so called." I Timothy 6:20.

3) A Royal Dignity.

Not a silly line in it: filled with the genius of reserve.

4) Denunciation of Sin. 5) The continual cry of "Holy, Holy."

6) Unity of Design.

The first Genesis unfolds in the new, the new Heavens and the new earth answer the old Heavens and the old earth, whilst Christ and His Church point back to the First Man and his bride, and the river under the throne becomes the reality of the river of Eden.

7) Christ in every line.

Here is the key that unlocks every mystery.

8) Your character.

By transgression and nature, a sinner under the judgment of God; by grace a sinner forgiven, justified, accepted as righteous before God and through regeneration, His deathless child.

9) Your Future.

A life of peace and power in the Paradise of God.

BENEFITS OF STUDY. 1.

Faith will be strengthened. "So then Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God."

Romans 10:17.

2. Joy will be increased. "I rejoice at thy Word as one that findeth great spoil." Psalm 119:162.

3. Spiritual life nourished. "Desire the sincere Milk of the Word that ye may grow thereby."

I Peter 2:2.

4.

The Christian thoroughly furnished unto all good works. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." II Timothy 3:16-17.

He who studies the Book as thus indicated will find himself able to flash into the darkness and ignorance of infidelic minds the light of the prismatic revelation of the truth of God, meet the difficulties of earnest seekers in the Word, and get for himself an abiding consciousness of its unity.

He will see it rooting there in Genesis, and fruiting here in Revelation.

He will see that the Old Creation begins with the Heavens, conies down to the earth, goes on with man's body and ends with his soul; and that the New Creation begins with man's soul, goes on to a perfect body, a perfect earth, and ends with the new heavens, a fourfold and complete triumph of Regeneration; regenerated soul, regenerated body, regenerated earth, and regenerated Heavens.

He will see that Christ is the centre of Heaven and Earth and Hell; that the whole universe is Christo-centric, and that the centre of the Christo-centric revelation is the immortality of the body

as the enthronement and manifestation of God; that from all eternity the thought of God has been to set up a deathless incorruptible man as the image and likeness of Himself, and through him forever make Himself known governmentally and morally to the universe. He who thus studies will see with ever-increasing awe and adoration that God came down to be Man, that man might go up to be God forevermore.

He will get visions of God as by the banks of the river of Chebar; he will see above all the Glory One like unto the Son of Man: and from the throne high and lifted up where the Seraphs sing, he will hear the voices saying, "Behold your God;" and other voices saying, "You shall be like unto Him, for you shall see Him as He is."

Seven Rules by which to Study and Understand The Bible Proverbs 2:1-5

1. The Bible Must Be Accepted as the Word of God. "My Son, if thou wilt receive my words." (Verse 1.)

Do not try to prove it first and then accept it.

Accept it first and allow it to prove itself.

There is no better way to test the truth or falsity of a thing than to give yourself up to it.

This was the attitude of the Thessalonian Christians; as it is written: "When ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of man, but as it is in truth, the word of God." (1 Thessalonians 2:13.)

Take the attitude of unbelief or doubt when a friend seeks to impart a matter to you, the friend will refuse to impart it.

Take the attitude of doubt in face of the message this book seeks to give to you, it will not speak to you.

No matter how much you read or study; no matter how much intelligence, education or culture you may have, it will be no more to you than so much cold paper and dry ink.

Our Lord went into a certain part of the country, but could not do many mighty works there.

And this is the startling reason given why He seemed to fail.

"He did not many mighty works there because of their unbelief." (Matthew 13:58.)

The Living and the written Word are one.

The same principle of action governs each-the Bible will not disclose its wonders nor reveal its powers to unbelief nor, even, to doubt.

2. Study of the Bible Requires Obedience to the Bible.

"Hide my commandments with thee." (Verse 1.)

"Be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. For if any man be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass; For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

But whoso looketh (stoopeth down and looketh into, examines carefully) into the perfect law of liberty (what a description of the Word of God is that) and continueth therein, he being not a

forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed." (James 1:22-25.)

He who does not obey the Word, who does not translate it into the practice of his daily life, is like the person who eats but whose system does not assimilate the food, builds up no tissue and gives him no strength; so is it with him who is disobedient to the Word, it does not become a part of him, builds up no spiritual tissue, gives no spiritual strength; he is of those who are "ever learning and never coming to a knowledge of the truth."

3. Study of the Bible Demands the Attitude of Listening.

"Incline thine ear unto wisdom." (Verse 2.)

The word "incline" is "listening," "hearkening."

In New Testament language it means to take heed; as it is written: "Take heed therefore how ye hear." (Luke 18:8.)

That is be careful of the way, the manner, in which you hear.

Give full, complete attention; listen for the slightest accent or emphasis.

If you were in the presence, of a king and listening to him you would be alert to hear each syllable and how he pronounced it.

How much more when it is the living, very God who is speaking to you from the pages of this book.

The Lord God is a great Grammarian. He is a marvellous Constructor of sentences. He puts enormous value upon a preposition and conjunction; His uses of tenses are again and again an apocalypse in themselves.

Take up a verse, study it, and study it again.

Read it over several times before you attempt to study and search out the meaning; let the cadence, the rhythm and the peculiarity of the arrangement, fix your attention.

There are foolish Christians who when they hear a text, because they have heard it before, imagine they know all about it. These are surface hearers and readers; they are indifferent listeners and skimmers of the Word of God. A word sometimes holds in itself a multiplicity of meaning and shades of meaning.

An Indian is skilled in woodcraft, because he cultivates his eye and his ear; that which is unobservable to the average passerby is an open trail to him, and sounds in the forest that are confused to many ears, to his, have their distinctive force and call.

It is worth while to become skilled in the craft of Bible study; keep the eyes open; keep the ears open; be tuned up to the note and power of expectancy.

Do this and you will attain by practice and the special grace of God to that most blessed of all attainments: Spiritual discernment.

Without it the Bible will be only a partial book to you.

Incline thine ear. Listen. Hearken.

4. The Whole Heart Must Be Given up to the successful study of the Bible.

"Apply thine heart to understanding." (Verse 5.)

The man who would get anywhere in the world must put his heart into whatever he seeks to do. The half hearted man is defeated before he starts.

This is particularly necessary in study, in any study.

The man who would become a good mathematician, a scientist, a linguist, be the subject, the objective what it may, must put his heart into it, have a purpose; a sincere desire to attain, to know.

Application-that is the word.

And in no study, in no range of effort is application of the whole heart and being so necessary as in the study of the Word of God. The Spirit of God is very sensitive, He is the essence of sensitiveness; the slightest bit of indifferentism on the part of the student, his unwillingness to persist, is met by a shutting out of the responsive action of the Word.

The Word of God lies below the surface. There are statements in which there seem to be no disclosures—all seems impenetrable, a mystery; there are paradoxical statements, statements that at times seem flatly to contradict other statements; nor are these things accidental. The very construction is a test, a test of sincerity, of heart. If the heart is in the study and faith insists, suddenly there will come a flash of light, solution to the problem, answers to the questions.

If you would study and understand this amazing book, the Bible, the Word of God, you must apply your heart.

5. The Bible can be successfully studied only with prayer.

"If thou criest after understanding."

(Verse 5.)

knowledge

and

liftest

up

thy

voice

for

The Psalmist prays that he may behold wondrous things in the Word of God. He says: "Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law." (Psalm 119:18.)

By "law" he means the word and testimony of God. The Apostle Pail prays the spiritual eyes of the Ephesians may be opened to the truth.

He says: "The eyes of your understanding being enlightened." (Ephesians 1:18.)

On that Sunday night after His resurrection our Lord met His disciples in the upper room and opened their understanding that they might understand the Scriptures; as it is written: "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures."

(Luke 24:45.)

The Lord opened the understanding of Lydia, the seller of Tyrian purple; "Whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken by Paul."

(Acts 16:14.)

And why pray? It is all plain enough.

To be sure, the writing is there; but that writing, those words, are as much a revelation today as when first given. Only through the power of the Spirit can you read and understand. The living God alone can take the veil off the mind, alone reveal the book till it becomes a revelation.

The prayerless man cannot read the Bible intelligently. He cannot divide it: Read, study, know the Bible without prayer! The thing is impossible.

There is bottom logic in that statement. The man who wants to know, who feels his inability, will cry out to God for light. The indifferent, surface reader will go on and pray not and - find not.

It is true you can breathe a silent prayer and ask the Lord to enlighten your mind; you can so press your desire before God that it will be as a prayer; but it is our privilege to lift up the voice, to

"cry" for it.

And why not? Today man can hear man almost whisper round the world. If we raise our voice in prayer shall not He who made the ear hear? There is a blessing in audible prayer. It shuts out the thoughts that come from the disintegration of mind and the suggestion of wandering spirits.

There is immensity of realism in it.

Talking out loud to God just as though He were in the room and you were beholding Him in open face!

We are told the Lord in Heaven listens for the voice of prayer and testimony; as it is written: "Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another: and the LORD hearkened (listened) and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the LORD, and that thought upon his name." (Malachi 4:16.)

He who would study the Bible with joy and find it a continual revelation of the mind and will of God must learn to bend his knees in prayer and cry unto the God who gave it to open mind and heart and understanding.

6. The Bible must be studied with the same inspiration, the same effort and energy with which men seek after Silver.

"Thou seekest her (understanding) as silver." (Verse 4.)

Silver in its final term stands for money.

Money is the purchasing medium of power, leisure, self culture as well as self gratification; it is the lever by which men lift themselves into position, into the place of authority, the uplook and envy of others.

Next to God money has the closest approach to omnipotence.

This is the declaration of Scripture; as it is written: "Money answereth all things." (Ecclesiastes 10:19.)

Look over a great city, everywhere business, merchandise, centers of exchange, factories, the coming and going of trains, the incoming and outgoing of ships, wharves filled, streets crowded and the multitude hurrying, rushing, toiling with ceaseless and seemingly tireless energy.

It all means money.

It is the one thing they are seeking. They are seeking it whether it be much or little.

It is an immense magnet that bids men quit their restless bed of a few hours snatched out of the night, up with the grey dawn, using hand, feet, heart, brain, all they have—for money.

Not .because of what it is in itself, but because of what it brings.

In the attainment of it men see compensation for all their labor and toil.

The Word of God is compared to silver.

"The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times." (Psalm 12:6.)

It is all silver signifies of intrinsic value; it is all that silver is when tried out in the fire and freed from dross, it is the pure Word of God and not of man.

If silver in the last analysis is money, the Bible in its last analysis is truth.

The truth about God and man, the truth about the other side of death, the truth about salvation and the things God has prepared for those who love Him. If money brings. its compensation for a time and yet, as riches, may take wings to itself and

flee away, the Bible brings compensation in blessings no money on earth can buy and blessings that do not take wings nor fade away.

But if you would have the Bible to be to you as the value of silver and more than the purchasing power of money, then you must put into your study all the effort of purpose and all the energy of determination to know and understand it.

If you cannot do that; if you cannot make every other book secondary to it; if you cannot exalt it into the place of supremacy in your life, purposing in your heart that you will go according to the demand of its precepts; if you are not willing to spend time upon it and pour out prayer for the understanding of it; if you cannot say with the Psalmist: "Thy word have I hid in my heart" (Psalm 119:11); if with the Prophet you cannot say: "Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart" (Jeremiah 15:16), then you are not seeking the wisdom, the truth of the Bible, as men are seeking for silver, and the Bible is not of as much value to you as money is to men.

And yet, we are told to buy the truth and sell it not; pay any price for it, the truth which this Bible essentially is, and sell it not—do not give it up for anything that earth may offer you.

If you would know the Bible and all it means for time and eternity then you must seek it as men seek for silver, with all the purpose and energy and essential determination they display.

7. If you would study and understand the Bible you must search it as men search for Hid Treasures.

"If thou searchest as for hid treasures." (Verse 4.)

earth.

This proposition is a parallelism of the other and yet has a distinctive thought.

The thought is that treasure does not lie on the surface.

This is true not only of such treasure as gold and silver, but precious stones, the jewels of

To get those treasures men must search for them.

They must be willing to dig for them, go down into the depths for them; the deeper they go the richer the find.

It has already been suggested that the truths of God do not all lie on the surface of the Bible.

There are truths there that lie open on the page so plain, so distinct that he who runs may read no matter how swiftly he run.

There are truths there, promises and pictures of things glorious that the simplest mind may behold with delight; but there are truths, very jewels, to which diamonds are common stones, so far under the surface that the passerby, he who reads upon the surface alone, will never see, never know.

Our Lord Jesus Christ reveals this in His admonition to the Jews.

To them He said: "Search the Scriptures." (John 5:39.)- He did not say "read."

He said, "search;" and that means, "examine," go down into the depths. Compare Scripture with Scripture; take up a thought in the New Testament, go back and find its origin in the Old Testament, take up the types and follow them out to the antitypes.

Study the relation of this world to the purpose of God and its contrast to other worlds.

Cast your gaze upon the nightly sky and you will learn with the Psalmist that the heavens declare the glory of God; they declare His glory as the Creator; they were set in space that they might reveal, not only His omnipotence, but His genius and wisdom; but this world was created for a greater purpose than that. Study the Word and see revealed therein how this world was

fashioned and made, that it might be the arena for the revelation of the heart of God, for the cross, where the beating of His heart of love might be seen.

Follow up and study this purpose.

See how on the background of human failure God is now, in spite of it, creating a new and perfect race of men in the image of, His Son, creating them now in soul function and relationship, and by and by to consummate them in the glory of immortality and kingly power - and here - upon this very earth.

Study His sovereign grace as well as power, and go through this book on the trail of the amazing fact that God makes the wrath of man to praise Him and where it will not, restrains it.

See how out of death He brings life, and how out of the slime and sin of shame, and men filled with it, He lifts these men into sons of God full of purity, holiness and truth.

There are wondrous things in the depths of this book that have not been seen; they are waiting the hour when some one wholly given up to God and His will shall study, when study shall mean the searching out of all God would have the heart of man to know.

Here are seven rules.

Follow these rules and there will be two results:

1. "T hen

shalt thou understand the fear of the LORD."

(V erse 5.)

That is, you will find yourself filled with reverence, with wonder and adoration.

Step by step as you follow the Spirit while He seeks to guide you into all truth you will feel a profound awe stealing over you.

You will have a revelation of the being of God, the wisdom and the genius of God; with the Apostle you will find yourself saying that this is, indeed, not the word of man, but in very truth the Word of God. As you read, search, meditate, you will get such sudden glimpses of the unity of the book, the unity of inspiration, the certitude that the very breath of God is on the page you read, that you will find yourself ready with the seraphim to lift up the thrice holy song: "Holy, holy, holy, is the LORD of hosts: the whole earth is full of His glory." (Isaiah 6:3.)

Yea, and amen. If you study this book we call the Bible, and study it as it should be studied, you will feel when you take it up you are handling that which in itself is as sacred as the body of Him who is the living Word, as sacred and awesome as it was that resurrection night when He bade His disciples to handle Him and see for themselves it was He. You will feel when you open it as though you were opening the doors of the temple of God and entering into the sanctuary of His presence.

Yes, study this book as it should be studied and you will never touch it like you touch anything else on earth.

But there will be a second result of this study.

2. "T hou S halt F ind God.

the

K nowledge

of

G od ." (V erse 5.)

Not merely knowledge from God, not merely knowledge imparted from God, but knowing

This is the knowledge of which our Lord Jesus Christ speaks.

He was speaking of eternal life.

He was defining *eternal life : He was making eternal life mean to know God. And therefore He says: "This is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." (John 17:5.)

By knowing God He means to be conscious of God. To be conscious of Himself as the transmitter of God; as the very fulness of the Godhead bodily.

Consciousness of God in the soul.

It comes through Jesus, Christ, to those who offer Him by faith as a sacrifice for sin and claim Him by faith as a personal substitute.

All that is true—absolutely true.

But apart from this Bible there is no revelation of Jesus Christ.

Here you must come to find Christ, listen to Christ and know Christ.

Here you must come through Him to know and be conscious of God in your soul.

Where there is no Bible there is no knowledge and no consciousness of God in the soul.

This Bible then is a nexus with God. Study it as it should be studied and you will have in your soul the consciousness of the eternal God as revealed in His Son "OUR GREAT GOD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST." And this is Finding the knowledge of God.

The Truth About the Law

by I. M. HALDEMAN, D.D. Pastor, First Baptist Church, New York City THERE are those who teach that the law of Sinai contained in the ten commandments, although given primarily to the Children of Israel, was ordained for the whole world; that the whole world is under bonds to keep it; and that Christians particularly are responsible to make it the rule and regulation of their daily life.

This teaching is without foundation in Scripture. It is a false exegesis. It is a perversion of the truth.

It is a darkening of counsel by words without knowledge. The teaching of Scripture is clear and simple.

The Law was never given to any other nation or people but the Children of Israel.

This is the statement of the Apostle Paul. He says: "When the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves." (Romans 2:14.)

This language admits of no misunderstanding nor quibbling. Speaking by the Holy Spirit, the Apostle authoritatively says: "The Gentiles, which have not the law." "The Gentiles, these having not the law."

This is the Holy Ghost's definite, dynamic declaration that in Paul's day the Gentiles did not have the law.

If they did not have it in Paul's day, they did not have it before his day, because there is no account of it having been taken away from them at any time previous to his day.

If they neither had it in his day, nor before his day, they have never had it in any time since his day. If they did not have it before his day, in his day, nor since his day, they do not have it in this day. The statement of Paul is therefore the unqualified affirmation that— The Gentiles as Gentiles never have been, and are not today, under the law of Sinai.

—

If the Gentiles never were under the law and are not under it now, then, and beyond all controversy The law of Sinai was given exclusively to the Children of Israel.

This is just what Moses the lawgiver himself says: Hear what he does say: "For what nation is so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the Lord our God is in all things that we call upon him for?

"And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?" (Deuteronomy 4:7-8.)

That the Gentiles knew nothing of the law and were not under it as a system publicly delivered unto them is the testimony of Pontius Pilate, the Roman Procurator of Judea, when our Lord Jesus Christ was brought before him by the Jews on the charge of being a malefactor.

Pilate said to them: "Take ye him, and judge him according to your law."

(John 18:31.)

Plainly and definitely Pilate makes a distinction between Jewish law and Roman law. He affirms the Mosaic law was the law of the Jew, not the law of the Roman.

Remember he did not say, speaking as a Roman, "our" law, but as a haughty Roman, despising the Jew—"your" law.

Officially and corroboratively, therefore, Pilate says the Gentiles were not under the law in his day and therefore not under the law before Paul's day, and consequently not under the law in Paul's day; and still more corroboratively not under the law in our day; and thus Paul and Pilate stand together to support the testimony of Moses that the Gentiles never were under the law.

Scripture tells us that the law of Sinai was a covenant between the Lord God and the Children of Israel; as it is written: "And Moses called all Israel, and said unto them, Hear, O Israel, the statutes and judgments which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and keep, and do them.

"The Lord our God made a covenant with us in Horeb (Sinai).

"The Lord made not this covenant with our fathers, but with us, who are all of us here alive this day."

(Deuteronomy 5:1-3.)

Again: "The Lord gave me the tables of stone, even the tables of the covenant." (Deuteronomy 9:11, 15.)

A covenant requires two parties.

The Lord God was one of the parties.

The Children of Israel were the other party. The Children of Israel—not the Gentiles.

Here are three witnesses that the law was never given to the Gentiles.

Moses, to whom God handed the law.

Pilate, who as a Gentile, denied the Law belonged to them.

Paul, a Hebrew of Hebrews and a Pharisee of Pharisees, who declares the Gentiles did not have it in his day, and necessarily could not have had it since; and demonstrably, never have had it since, as there is no record of the law of the ten commandments given to the Gentiles between Paul's day and this.

What shall we say then to these things?

What can we say, what else dare we say than that— The law of Sinai was never given to the Gentiles, and the Gentile world is not under the law today.

The law was given to the Children of Israel because they deliberately took themselves off the ground of grace and put themselves on the ground of the law.

The Lord had redeemed them from the sentence of death against the firstborn of Egypt by the blood of the passover lamb.

He had brought them out of the land of bondage by the right hand of His power.

He did this in fulfillment of His covenant with, and His promise to, Abraham more than four hundred years before.

It was an unconditional covenant and a promise of pure grace.

When they came to Sinai the Lord tested them. He rehearsed all He had done for them.

He bade Moses tell them what He had done, how He had brought them so far as on the wings of untiring eagles. If they would but obey His voice and keep His covenant, they should be to Him a peculiar treasure above all the people of the earth.

The people should have responded to the Lord that as He had dealt with them thus far in grace and by His mighty power, not their own, had delivered and led them, they would gladly continue to depend upon Him and not in any way upon themselves.

This is the attitude they should have taken, this is what they should have said and—at once.

Instead they answered and said: "All that the Lord hath spoken we will do." (Exodus 19:7-8.)

In giving this answer they fatally affirmed their belief in their own ability to do all the Lord required of them.

Immediately He drew a line about the mount and forbade the people to pass under pain of death.

Along with this came thunder and lightnings, the sound of a trumpet so loud the people trembled.

Sinai was altogether in smoke as the smoke of a furnace. The Lord descended upon the mount. The mount shivered and quivered at His presence.

Instead of the God of grace and protecting providence in the shielding cloudy pillar by day and its welcome illumination by night, there was revealed the God of righteousness and inexorable law.

And this is in the very nature and logic of the case.

Grace brings man into the favor of God. Law shuts him out and shuts him up to himself. In the issue of law it is no longer a question of what God will do, but what man is under bonds to do. The law is set up to measure man and not God. By their refusal to continue in grace the people of Israel came under law.

The law would never have been given had they not turned away from the Abrahamic covenant and the ministration of divine and measureless grace.

The law was given to the Children of Israel, not to keep, but to break.

It is written: "Wherefore then serveth the law?

"It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made."

(Galatians 3:19.)

The literal rendering is— "It was added for the sake (that is, for the purpose) of transgressions."

It was given, not to make them sin, but through transgressions to reveal the sin in them; as it is written: "I had not known sin, (the nature of sin, that it is back of, and the cause of transgressions) but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." (Romans 7:7.)

"By the law is the knowledge of sin." (Romans 3:20.)

Again it is written: "The law entered (was given at Sinai) that the offence (the trespass) might abound." (Be overwhelmingly revealed). (Romans 5:20.)

The Children of Israel broke the law spoken to them before they had received a written transcript of it.

Moses, at the call of God, went up into the mount to receive a copy of the law written by His hand on tables of stone as a record of covenant between Himself and the people.

He was gone for a long while.

The people became impatient.

They gathered about Aaron and said to him : "Up, make us gods, which shall go before us; for as for this Moses, the man that brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we wot not what is become of him." (Exodus 32:1) Aaron took the golden earrings of the women and made a calf such as the people had seen worshipped in the temples of Apis.

He then made a proclamation that on the morrow would be a feast of the Lord.

It was an attempted and shameful combination of the service of God and the idolatry of Egypt.

"And they rose up early on the morrow, and offered burnt offerings, and brought peace offerings, and the people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play." (Exodus 32:2-6.)

The word "to play" has profound significance.

It means they proceeded to give themselves up to the abomination that went with such worship; for it is written: "The people were naked; (for Aaron had made them naked unto their shame among their enemies)."

(Exodus 32 :25.)

That is, literally, Aaron had "taken off the bridle," and had given them "free rein," unlimited license to indulge in the indescribable things which in Egypt passed current for religious rites.

When Moses beheld what the people did, instead of going down to preach the law to them, he cast the tables of stone on which God had written it out of his hands and brake them beneath the mount.

Instead of preaching the law he went back to the presence of God to make an atonement and intercession for the people.

He said to them: "Ye have sinned a great sin : and now I will go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make an atonement for your sin." (Exodus 32:30.)

The ceremonial law was given to the Children of Israel as a memorial that they had broken the moral law: that they needed an atonement for sin through sacrificial death: and as prophecy that God would send the Lord Jesus Christ to redeem them

by His own blood from the curse of a broken law and bring them again into the full

blessing of the covenant and promise of grace.

Every time an Israelite brought a sin offering to the gate of the Tabernacle, and when once a year on atonement day sacrifice was made for the sin of the whole people, it was a proclamation that "without shedding of blood is no remission."

These offerings were simply shadows, types, figures of the true offering.

"For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year make the corners thereunto perfect. . . . For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins." (Hebrews 10:1-4.)

The moral law contained in the ten commandments was a witness of the failure of the people to meet it and the ceremonial law as a consequent and inseparable part of the moral law took the place of a schoolmaster (the word means the slave who took the children of a well to do household to the teacher) to lead the people to Christ; as it is written : "The law was our schoolmaster (the schoolmaster of the Israelites—and in Paul's day that part of Israel called Jews) to bring us unto Christ." (Galatians 3:24.)

By the tabernacle in all its construction, furniture and service; by the offerings and sacrifices, God was continually preaching an incarnate, sacrificial and redeeming Saviour, a risen Lord and coming King. By all these things He was preaching Christ to them.

By their whole history, their ritual and providential movements, He was testifying to them of their natural weakness, their need of grace and the full provision He had made for them in a coming Messiah.

He was setting before them every day that Christ was the seed in whom all the promises made to Abraham concerning them should be fulfilled; as it is written: "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." (Galatians 3:16.)

The coming in of the law did not make the unconditional covenant of Abraham of no effect; but the people having repudiated that covenant and putting themselves on the basis of law and good behaviour, the law was added to seal home to them their need of grace and the assurance that Christ was the eternal depositary of the covenant, the unfailing guarantee of its promised blessings and the source whence all grace should again come to them.

Wherefore it is written: "The covenant that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect." (Galatians 3:17.)

The law brought them face to face with their innate sinfulness, their helplessness to live up to the standard of God's righteousness, the futility of their own righteousness at its best, and shut them up to a faith that looked forward to a redeemer and saviour; as it is written : "The scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might come upon them that believe.

"But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up to the faith which afterwards should be revealed. (Doesn't the logic of the thing run ahead and tell you that if they were kept under the law till faith should be revealed, after that faith should be revealed they would no longer be kept under the law?)

"Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us (the children of Israel) unto Christ." (Galatians 3:22-24.)

The law of Sinai has been done away in Christ, and both Jew and Gentile have been put completely under the grace of the Abrahamic covenant.

By the hand of Moses law came demanding that the people should by their obedience and perfect living earn the blessings promised in and by the covenant.

By our Lord Jesus Christ came the grace that is ready to bestow the wealth and riches of the covenant blessings upon all who are willing to receive them through faith; as it is written: "The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." (John 1:17.)

The law was a temporary addition "till the seed (Christ) should come to whom the promise was

made." (Galatians 3:19.)

"The law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: "That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 5:20-21.)

The world today is not under the "reign of law," but under the "reign of grace."

By virtue of the cross and the empty grave; by virtue of the blood which the risen and ascended Lord took up within the vail, the throne of judgment has been transformed into a throne of grace, and the "much more" of grace reigns with its mercy over a world of sin.

By that grace men are now called to turn to the Lord and through faith receive the life which will enable them to triumph over sin in them, rebuke transgressions and walk pleasingly before God and in blessing to men.

The law demanded righteousness.

Grace bestows it.

Because grace reigns judgment is hushed and God waits to know what man will do with His offered mercy.

The law is not the ground of salvation to the sinner.

The reasons are manifold: 1. Because the law demands a perfection of life and character no man can give.

The law in its essence has been defined by our Lord Jesus Christ.

He said: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

"This is the first and great commandment.

"And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." (Matthew 22:37-40.)

The first commandment requires perfection of love to God. Perfect love to God means perfect obedience to the will of God in deed, in word, in thought and the intents and purposes of the heart.

It means perfect righteousness, the soul like a mirror reflecting the character of God, not a mere reflection of goodness, but Godness; so that, God shall be lived and breathed, perfectly revealed and completely expressed by the soul—such a condition would be sinless perfection.

This is the demand God makes of every soul of man, not by any mere law written in tables of stone, but in the very nature of God. God himself, being holy, perfect, cannot admit into fellowship with Himself anything less perfect than His own character; to do so would be to condone sin and imperfection in man.

For man to love his neighbour as himself, he must deny himself and make the self of another first, not only in deed, but in heart and intent. This would be perfection of man toward man.

Nor must there be a failure or lapse in any particular of this attitude of man to man and man to God. To break one link in a chain that holds a ship to its anchor is to break the whole chain.

To break the law at any one point, so far as the law can link a man to God, is to break the whole law.

This is the declaration of Holy Writ.

"For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." (James 2:10.)

He is guilty of all because the law demands no less than perfect obedience, not partial obedience, but obedience in all points.

You may have a piece of costly ermine, whiter than the heart of a lily; it is not the great spot, but the small one that spoils it—it is the surrounding whiteness that will reveal it. Should you keep the law in every respect but one, the one failure would be conspicuously revealed by the otherwise spotless perfection; but that one failure would cry aloud that you had missed the actual demand of the law— perfect obedience. Sinless perfection!

That is the demand of the law to all who, throwing themselves on their own resources, boasting in

their own righteousness, seek to be justified by the deeds of the law.

What man is there on earth who can respond to this demand?

He who declares himself perfect is guilty of folly. His folly shall condemn him as guilty of sin and his acts shall prove him to his neighbour as one who has fallen short. If he shall be ignorant of his failure or seek to conceal it to himself his fellow men will know it and proclaim it in his ears.

There is no difference!

Hear what God himself says : "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." (Romans 3:22-23.)

The law is not the ground of salvation to the sinner.

2. Because sentence of death has been passed upon all men, and the law does not ask a condemned sinner to keep it or bring forth a good character under it.

"Death passed upon all men." (Romans 5:12.) "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment." (Hebrews 9:27.)

No matter how much a man condemned by the state to die should offer to keep the law on condition that he should be saved from the sentence, the law would be deaf to every plea. It would mercilessly say to him,. "Pay me that thou owest. Pay me thy life. Thou must die."

Nay! the law is not the ministration of life. It is the ministration of death; as it is written: "The ministration of death, written and engraven in stones." (2 Corinthians 3:7.)

"The letter killeth." (V. 16.)

By the "letter" is meant the law graven in stone.

The man who turns to the law for salvation is as guilty of senseless folly as the sentenced criminal who should go to the electric chair expecting to get life instead of death.

The law is not the ground of salvation, 3. Because salvation is not a matter of good works.

Good works are set aside, not only because of man's inability to render them, not only because the sentence of death nullifies them, but because God will allow no man to boast in his own righteousness; as it is written: "Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:9.)

"By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight." (Romans 3:20.)

"By the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." (Galatians 2:16.)

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done." (Titus 3:5.)

"Not according to our works." (2 Timothy 1:9.) "All our righteousness are as filthy rags." (Isaiah 64:6.)

The law is not the ground of salvation, 4. Because God Himself has achieved the work of redemption for lost and dying men.

"Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree." (1 Peter 2:24.)

"For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust." (1 Peter 3:18.)

"Who was delivered for our offences, and raised for our justification." (Romans 4:25.)

"Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures." (1 Corinthians 15:3.)

"When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost." (John 19:30) That the work of redemption was finished is proclaimed by our Lord's resurrection and ascension to the right hand of the glory.

In face of such a finished work and finished by such an author as God in the person of His Son, there is nothing left for man to do but receive the salvation which it brings.

The law is not the ground of salvation.

5. Because God is dealing with the world on the basis of the Abrahamic covenant reopened in Christ as the true seed, and now made good to the whole world in His death and resurrection.

"It (the law) was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made." (Galatians 3:19.)

"He saith not, And to seeds, as of many, but of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."

(Galatians

3:16.)

"And this I say, that the covenant . . . was confirmed before of God in Christ." (Galatians 3:17.)

The Abrahamic covenant, it is to be remembered, is an unconditional covenant, a covenant and promise of grace.

Because of the functioning of this covenant now, grace and grace alone is the source of salvation.

"By grace are ye saved." (Ephesians 2:8.) "The grace of God that bringeth salvation." (Titus 2:110 It is sovereign grace that brings salvation.

It is not of man nor his devising, but of the Lord; as it is written: "Salvation is of the Lord." (Jonah 2:9.) "Salvation belongeth unto the Lord." (Psalm 3:8.)

"It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy." (Romans 9:16.)

"Who hath saved us, and called us, with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." (2 Timothy 1:9.)

The law is not the ground of salvation.

6. Because salvation by the decree of God is wholly through faith and not works.

"The righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed (foretold) by the law and the prophets.

"Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe." (Romans 3:21-22.)

"By grace are ye saved through faith." (Ephesians 2:,8.)

"Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith—without the deeds of the law." Romans 3:28.)

There are those who teach the law convicts men of sin, and because of that conviction brings them to repentance and to the Gospel which saves them.

It is true the Gospel saves, but it is not true the law convicts the individual sinner and leads him under the consciousness of that sin to receive the Gospel.

The law it is certain has brought the whole world in as guilty before God; but it has done so because it has revealed the sin and failure in Israel; as it is written: "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law (the Jews) : that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." (Romans 3:19.)

If all the world were at that time under the law, there was no need that Paul should say, "to them who are under the law," nor would there have been any value in such a phrase; but the fact that the Apostle makes such a statement is a demonstration that he was making a distinction, and that only a class were under the law. That class we have seen were the Children of Israel; and their failure at Sinai, together with the co-ordinate institution of the sacrifices, was witness that if the .nation chosen of God had failed under law and were proven guilty, how much more in the light and demand of that law was it evident the whole world was guilty before the God of that law.

The convicting power of sin in this age is not the law, it is the Holy Spirit.

He is here for that purpose.

But He is here not to convict men of the violations of the moral law.

He is not here to convict men of lying, cheating, robbery and such like, the common law of the land will do that: He is here to convict men of one immense sin that includes all moral failure, the sin of unbelief; as it is written: "When he (the Holy Spirit) is come, he will reprove (convict) the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.

"Of sin, because they believe not in me." (John 16:8-9.)

The sin of all sins is unbelief in the Son of God. For this He made no atonement.

This is the sin that never will be forgiven. Neither here nor in eternity.

"He that believeth not is condemned already, because (mark that causation well) he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (John 3:18.)

Condemned! because he has hesitated a single moment; because he did not, the moment he heard the Gospel, believe at once.

This is the sin which will render eternity an anguish and make endless existence a curse.

No matter what argument I may bring, nor how strongly I may speak, I cannot convince a modern moral man, a man upright in all his dealings, meeting all his duties and discharging all his responsibilities--I cannot convince such a man that the sin that will shut him out from eternal life and nullify all the earthly good he may have done will be, failure to believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, that God gave Him to die as a sacrifice for sin and raised Him from the dead to be the alone Saviour of men.

Nevertheless, this is the actual truth.. It is the truth because in this age the question of all questions is not the sin question. It is not an issue of how more or less sinful a man may be; nor, whether one man is a greater sinner than the other. That is not the question, because God has concluded all under sin, and in respect to meeting the standard of God's glory, which is his holiness, He, Himself, has declared, "there is no difference."

The supreme question that outranks all others is—the Son question.

Our Lord put that question in definite form when He said, "What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?" (Matthew 22:42.)

God the Father is putting that question to the world today: "What do you think of Jesus Christ? Is He my Son whom I sent to redeem the world and save the souls of sinful men?"

That issue is mighty and determining enough.

Heaven and Hell depend, not upon what you do, but what you think, yes, upon what you think about Christ.

If you think of Him as God thinks and as God has clearly revealed His thought in Holy Scripture; if you confess and make known your thought, even though you were the blackest sinner out of hell, you are saved. If you do not think of Him as God thinks of Him and has commanded all men everywhere to think of Him, even though you were the whitest soul on earth, you are lost now, and if you do not repent will be damned and lost forever.

But what self-righteous man, I repeat, will believe that, though I spoke with the tongue of an angel and the force of divine truth; nay, even though I should quote scripture after scripture in support of it? I assure you such a man would not believe it.

All the thunder of the law, all the flash of its lightnings would not do it.

There is only one person who can bring the conviction of that truth home to the heart and conscience of any human being, and that is the Holy Spirit.

The law then is not the instrument of conviction; it is not in any wise the ground of salvation.

If it were so, if the keeping of the law, if the establishment of a satisfactory righteousness before God by the works of the law could save, then the death of the cross was the most criminal blunder ever committed, the most useless shedding of blood God ever permitted.

And this is the logic of Scripture itself; as it is written; "If righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain." (Galatians 2:21.)

This settles it.

Christ did not, could not die in vain. Therefore—the law is not the ground of salvation to the sinner.

Christians are not under the law as the rule of life.

"Ye are not under the law, but under grace." (Romans 6:14.)

"Ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God." (Romans 7:4.)

The Apostle was referring to those Christians in the Roman Church who were Jews.

He says: "I speak to them that know the law."

(Romans 7:1.)

He compares these Jewish Christians to a married woman, the law to her husband. As long as her

husband lives she is bound by the law to him; but when he dies she is loosed from the law of her husband.

She is loosed from him in two ways: He is dead and no longer can exercise any claim upon her.

She is dead too; that is, as a wife. She judicially died in him, his death was her death legally. (This is true in common law today—the woman dies as a wife in her husband's death.)

Just so, when our Lord dies on the cross, the law ceases to have any further claim on Him. It has no more claim on Him than a dead husband has over his wife. Since He is dead to the law, the law is dead to Him. When Christ dies on the cross as a substitute for believers, they also are reckoned of God to have died in Him. The law therefore has no more claim upon them than it has on Him; no more claim than the law of the state has upon the man it has put to death in the electric chair; so far as that dead man is concerned the law is dead to him, as dead and without jurisdiction as though it never had been a law.

Since the Jewish Christians died in Christ who answered for them under the law of Sinai as well as under the general law of God against sin, they were like the woman legally dead in her husband. They were dead to the law and the law was dead to them.

Since a woman whose husband was dead was free to marry another and by him bring forth children, so the Hebrew Christians who had been under the law of Sinai as a first husband were now through faith married to another husband, even to the risen Christ; and where before that first marriage was sterile, so that they could not bring forth fruit unto righteousness, now by union with Christ and His union with them, they could bring forth fruit unto God. By this statement the Apostle not only testifies that Hebrew Christians are dead to the law and the law dead to them, but that Gentile Christians who never were under the law, by the death of Christ and the consequent end of the law in Him, are not and could not be under the law of Sinai today.

The Apostle says those who preach the law of Sinai to Christians are troublers.

He says : "There be some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ." (Galatians 1:7.)

He says the teachers who have endeavored to put the Galatians, the- Gentile believers, under the law have "bewitched" them; that is, deceived them.

He asks a question of them : "This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

"Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" (Galatians 3:13.)

He here makes it plain that the law has to do with a man in the flesh, not a man in the spirit.

He calls the law a "yoke of bondage." (Galatians 5:1.)

In this he is in accord with the Apostle Peter, who in the first great council of the Church at Jerusalem, himself protesting against the Judaizing teachers who sought to put Gentile believers under law, raised his voice and said: "Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" (Acts 15:10.)

For Jewish believers to go back under the law was to be entangled again with the yoke of bondage; therefore Paul exhorts them to stand fast in the liberty of Christ.

"Stand ye fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us (Jews) free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." (Galatians 5:1.)

He says further: "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." (Galatians 5:4.)

He calls legal preaching and teaching "a persuasion," and says they did not get it from the Lord who called them and compares it in its corrupting influence to leaven.

"This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you."

"A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." (Galatians 5:8-9.)

Leaven in Scripture is never a symbol of good, but always of that which is evil. Seeing that it is in itself, essentially a sour, rotten and corrupting thing it cannot be a symbol of. the Gospel.

It is a symbol of false doctrine, and is so declared by the Lord Himself.

"Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees." (Matthew 16:12.)

Thus in clear terms, speaking by the Holy Spirit, the Apostle denounces the preaching and teaching that would put the Christian under the law.

To those who under this teaching were being circumcised he says to attempt to keep one part of the law is to be under bonds to keep the whole law.

"For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law."

(Galatians 543.)

It is either law or grace!

You cannot mix law and grace any more than you can mix "woollen and linen."

The woman who lives with two husbands is guilty of adultery. The Christian who seeks to live under law and grace at the same time is guilty in God's sight of spiritual adultery.

The moment you touch the law and attempt to keep it in any particular, whether it be circumcision or keeping the Jewish Sabbath, you are a debtor to the whole law—you have fallen from grace.

Writing to Timothy the Apostle says: "The law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners." (1 Timothy 1:9.)

But Christians are not ungodly (genuine Christians) neither are they sinners in the sight of God. On the contrary, the righteousness of God is upon them; as it is written: "The righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe." (Romans 3:22.)

That is, by His faith which led Him to become "obedient unto the death of the cross," His obedience is transferred to the account of the believer," and He thus becomes legally and judicially the believer's righteousness before God. But more than that— The believer in Christ—in Him—is the very righteousness of God; as it is written: "For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." (2 Corinthians 5:21.)

And again: "As he is so, are we in this world." (1 John 4:17.)

How immense that is.

He is in Heaven on the throne of the universe, beautiful, glorious, not only very God, but the Man in the glory, the perfect man in the glory. And God looks upon us, faltering, feeble and failing Christians as we may be, as perfect as He is, because He sees us in Him, and sees us in that way only.

The fact is, the gracious fact, that God looks upon us as crucified with Christ, "risen with Christ" ascended with Christ, with Him already gone into Heaven and seated with Him in the Heavenly places: "And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus."

(Ephesians 2:6.)

To such a risen and heavenly people, a law, intended for the ungodly and the sinner, has no place, and cannot be preached to the Christian without an insult to the Christian, without offence to God and to His blood-sealed and measureless grace.

The law has to do with the Aaronic priesthood: the priesthood which on earth has to do exclusively with the family of Aaron, the tribe of Levi and therefore with the Jewish nation alone.

Grace has to do with the Melchizedec priesthood of Christ (effective not on earth, but in Heaven; "for if he were on earth, he should not be a priest," (Hebrews 8:4) and a people risen and seated with Him, as to their character representatively, in Him—in Heaven.

The moment a Christian puts himself under the law, he comes down from the heavenly places in Christ to the region of the earth, the flesh and the priesthood in Levi. He is on Jewish, not on Christian ground at all.

The Gentile Christian who puts himself under the law and keeps the Jewish sabbath becomes a counterfeit Jew. He is so styled by, the risen Son of God : "I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are of the synagogue of Satan." (Revelation 2:9.)

There were persons in Smyrna who professed to be believers in Christ, and said they were Jews. Our Lord says they were not Jews.

I2 they were not Jews they were Gentiles.

They were Gentiles then who, while professing to believe in Christ, called themselves Jews.

They could claim to be Jews only on the ground that they kept the law; that they were circumcised or were observing the Jewish sabbath.

There are Christians today who hold that all believers in Christ are—spiritually—Jews.

They quote a certain scripture in support of that claim.

"He is a Jew which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter." (Romans 2:29.)

The application of this text to the Gentile believer is shut out by the context.

The context shows the Apostle is speaking of a Jew who is such by nature—not of Gentiles at all.

He says: "Behold, thou art a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God." (Romans 2:17.)

A real Jew, a chosen and elect Jew, is not merely a Jew as to his flesh, he must be a regenerated Jew. The Apostle emphasizes this further on.

"They are not all Israel, which are of Israel.

"Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called.

"That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." (Romans 9:8.)

The regenerated Jew, the chosen and elect Jew is the real Jew in God's sight.

It is true the Gentile who believes is called a child of Abraham, because through faith (the faith Abraham had before he was circumcised, and more than four hundred years before the law) he is a child of God; but because through Abraham's faith he is a child of God he does not become a Jew, any more than the Jew who through Abraham's faith becomes a child of God—is a Gentile.

The Gentile therefore who put himself under the law whether he be circumcised or keeps the sabbath is a counterfeit Jew; and any so called Church assembly formed on the ground of the law of Sinai is not a Church at all, it is a synagogue—and a synagogue of Satan.

It is urged on behalf of law keeping that our Lord Jesus Christ did not come to destroy or do away with the law, but to fulfil it; as it is written: "Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

(Matthew 5:17.)

This is absolutely true.

But it took two things to fulfil the Law. 1.

To obey it perfectly and earn life by it.

"This do," said the Lord to the lawyer who tempted Him concerning the law, "and thou shalt live."

(Luke 10:28.)

2.

To undergo the sentence of death against sin.

Our Lord did both.

He magnified the law and made it honorable in and by His life. He so kept the law as "minister of the circumcision for the truth of God," that He could challenge the Jews about Him and say unto them— "Which of you convinceth me of sin?" (John 8:46.)

He so kept the law that He earned eternal life.

By this it is not meant to say He did not already have it; but, rather, by the keeping of the law He justified Himself as that eternal life which was with the Father, as the one who had the right to it.

He not only magnified the law and made it honorable by His life, He did so by His death.

On the cross as the burnt offering He fulfilled that side of the law which demands the surrender of self in unmeasured devotion to God—even unto death.

On the cross as the sin offering, "made sin for us," treated as "sin in the flesh," the nature of sin, He justified the law of God in its edict of death against sin and the sinners He represented.

That He fulfilled all the law's demands in death is proclaimed by His resurrection from the dead and His ascension to, and session, on the throne of God. Risen, ascended and seated in glory, having fulfilled the law, He has legal right to give the eternal life He earned for others to all who shall believe.

What the law demanded man should earn He freely and fully bestows. This is what is meant by the Lord's fulfillment of the law.

But because He met all the demands of the law in life and death does not mean that He puts that law in any respect upon those who have been owned of God to have died in His death, risen in His resurrection and in Him, representatively, are seated in Heaven. Such a conclusion from His fulfillment of the law would be childish reasoning, if it were not so monstrous.

Nay! His fulfillment of the law delivers them from the law, not that they may become lawless, but bound unto Him as their true law, as their new and spiritual life, owning Him as their law; wherefore it is written: "Not without law to God, but under law (literally enlawed) to Christ." (1 Corinthians 9:21.)

There is another scripture quoted continually by those who insist the Christian is under law.

This is the familiar and oft repeated passage : "The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ." (Galatians 3 :24.)

As this epistle was written to Gentile believers in Galatia, it is confidently asserted that in using the pronouns we and us the Apostle was involving the Gentiles with himself as both being under the law.

But, if this were so, then those who quote it as proving Christians are now under law are cleanly knocked down by their own argument; for, the succeeding verse declares these Galatian believers were no longer under a schoolmaster.

Hear what the verse says : "But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster." (Galatians 3:25.)

This is just as plain as language can make it; for, even if the Gentile Galatians had been under the law, since the schoolmaster is a symbol of the law, and they were, after faith, no longer under a schoolmaster, then by every line and link of logic—they would be no longer under law.

But by the very use of the pronouns "we" and "us" the Apostle conclusively proves the Gentiles never were, and now that they believed, never could be, under the law.

For when the Apostle uses these personal pronouns in relation to the law in this epistle he is making a distinction between Jews and Gentiles.

The proof is to be found in his own words : "We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles." (Galatians 2:15.)

By all these facts it is evident— The law is not the rule of life to the Christian.

The law as already seen is not the ministration of life, but death.

It would be impossible for those who are risen and living in Christ, and in whom Christ is living by the indwelling Spirit, to go by such a rule or regulation as that.

There is a rule, a clear and definite rule, by which the Christian is to live and walk every day; as it is written: "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.

"And as many as walk according to this rule (canon), peace be on them, and mercy, and upon the

Israel of God." (Galatians 6:15-16.)

The rule is stated in verse 15. "A new creature."

Literally, "a new creation."

Scripture tells us clearly what that new creation is: "If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature (creation): old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new." (2 Corinthians 5:17.)

This new creation signifies: "Christ in you, the hope of glory." (Colossians 1:27.)

The Apostle puts it in unqualified language: "I am (was) crucified with Christ : nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me." (Galatians 2:20.)

The life of the risen Christ in the believer, that is the rule, the canon, the law and regulation for the Christian's daily life.

If the Christian yield to this life it will lead him to glorify God in his body and spirit and be a blessing to his fellow men.

And now, mark you, side by side with this clear enunciation that the Christian is not under the law of Sinai, but under the indwelling power of the life of a risen Christ, the Holy Spirit has given us the most monumental witness that the Gentile believers are not spiritual Jews, but that believing Jews become themselves spiritual Jews and constitute those of whom Paul speaks as being such "inwardly."

You have it in the expression— "And upon the Israel of God." The emphatic and turning word is-the conjunction—and.

Peace and mercy upon all Gentile believers who walk according to Christ in them—and—upon the Israel of God. And who, I ask you, can the Israel of God in a Gentile Church in addition to the Gentile believers be —but Jews, Hebrews who, by the grace of God, had been led to accept Jesus of Nazareth as their crucified and risen Messiah, their Lord and Master?

These and these only form the Israel. of God in this age.

They are the "remnant according to the election of grace" of whom the Apostle speaks in the eleventh chapter of his epistle to the Romans.

And these all, both Gentile and Jewish believers, are to walk as new made persons, as persons who have been made over, created anew in Christ. They in Christ and Christ in them.

How far is this law of life, this life that becomes a law, above the stony writing, the terrifying thunder and the blazing, flashing fire and smoke of Sinai, in the presence of a trembling crowd of self righteous, yet condemned and sinful people!

This then is the law for the Christian— Christ reincarnated in the soul.

The Holy Spirit in the name of a risen and ascended Christ dwelling in the believer's body as His proxy, manifesting Him to the consciousness .of the believer so that Christ may actually dwell in that body and exercise His own faith and power as when He was on earth.

It is life—not law—contained in commandments that will produce devotion to God and consideration of man for man.

If a mother does not love her child, all the law and all the renewed legislation in the world will not make her love it. If she have a true mother heart, she will need no law to make her love her child.

All the law accented by thunder and illuminated by lightning 4annot make human beings love God or be unselfish in relation to one another.

But when the life of Christ is in the soul; when the believer gives the right of way to that life in him, he needs neither the reverberating crashes of Sinai, nor its fiery challenge, nor the threatening whiplash sting of command to love God, or be interested in the soul of another.

For those who live in the Spirit, walk in the Spirit and bring forth the fruit of the Spirit, it is written: "There is no law." (Galatians 5:23.)

The preaching and teaching that would put the Christian under the law and call him to live on Jewish ground began with the very beginning of Christianity. As already stated it came up as a disturbing issue in the first great Church council held at Jerusalem, the very hotbed of Judaizing and

legalizing preachers.

So widespread, perverting and disturbing was this heresy, that the Apostle, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, was set to writing the epistle to the Galatians as a divine treatise on Law and Grace.

The distinction between the two is easily summed.

The Law brings a work to do.

Grace brings a word to believe.

The Law says do and live.

Grace says believe and live.

The Law tells you what man ought to do. Grace tells what God has done.

Law is a "yoke of bondage," "unbearable servitude," and the end—death.

Grace is the bestowal of life, the service of free men and—the power of an endless life.

The epistle to the Galatians teaches that the Christian has been removed from the plane of law and lifted into the plane of life—even the life of God in the soul.

So false, disastrous and rapidly widespread was this contagion of legal teaching, so upsetting to faith and spiritual peace, so turning the believer away from the finished work of the cross and the emancipating and sustaining power of the resurrection, that the Apostle writing to the Galatian Church utters the most intense and terrific of denunciations, He says: "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you unto the grace of Christ unto another Gospel: "Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the Gospel of Christ.

"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other Gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."

(Galatians 1:6-9) Those who today are preaching and teaching the law; who are demanding Christians shall keep the Jewish sabbath (and let it be remembered the Jewish sabbath, the seventh day, is an inseparable part of the law), who pervert the Gospel, rob the cross of its glory, grace of its virtue, put the yoke of bondage on the freemen of Christ, make them the keepers of times and seasons, such troubling and perverting teachers would do well to hear the solemn denunciation of the Holy Spirit coming through the ordained and .Heaven-given words of the Apostle.

"Let him be accursed," are words spoken of any teacher who shall pervert the Gospel of the grace of God and put the blood-ransomed believer under the law of condemnation and death.

Because of the grace that has sought and found those of us who believe, this grace that can keep us, we should, indeed, live in the Spirit, walk in the Spirit and bring forth the fruit of the Spirit.

Because of this grace that holds back judgment and speaks with the voice of invitation, every soul who hears the Gospel message should turn, and turn at once, before grace gives way to judgment; for, always, and unfailingly, rejected grace becomes added judgment.

Remember—not law, but grace, the rule of life for the Christian.

Remember—not law, but grace, the offer of mercy for the sinner.

The Road & Way Bookmark

W

“ The

“I

aY

”

set before you the way of life, and the way of death…In the beginning God created the

heaven and the earth...And God said, Let there be light: and there was light....And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul....Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them; While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened, nor the clouds return after the rain: In the day when the keepers of the house shall tremble, and the strong men shall bow themselves, and the grinders cease because they are few, and those that look out of the windows be darkened, And the doors shall be shut in the streets, when the sound of the grinding is low, and he shall rise up at the voice of the bird, and all the daughters of musick shall be brought low; Also when they shall be afraid of that which is high, and fears shall be in the way, and the almond tree shall flourish, and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire shall fail: because man goeth to his long home, and the mourners go about the streets: Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern. Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.....The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.…God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth....Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty....call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me....Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me: and to him that ordereth his conversation aright will I shew the salvation of God. {that…: Heb. that disposeth his way}...But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men....If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me:...The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.... ¶ For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and

godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of God,...Which made heaven, and earth, the sea, and all that therein is: which keepeth truth for ever:....Behold, The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction…let him be your fear, and let him be your dread. And he shall be for a sanctuary;…For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones....The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard.…For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:…God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.…Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.…God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men’s hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us: For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man’s device.

And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead {hath given…: or, offered faith}.…Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed. {Labour not: or, Work not} ¶ Then said they unto him, What

shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent....This poor man cried, and the LORD heard him, and saved him out of all his troubles. The angel of the LORD encampeth round about them that fear him, and delivereth them. O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him. O fear the LORD, ye his saints: for there is no want to them that fear him. The young lions do lack, and suffer hunger: but they that seek the LORD shall not want any good thing....We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein: Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways. Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.…But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.…But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.…God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt offering: In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen {Jehovahjireh: that is, The Lord will see, or, provide}....For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed....And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as

this publican. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.‌For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved....And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation....He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God....For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them....then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.‌By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.‌And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away....And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters....And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life:

and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.

And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works {hell: or, the grave}. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire.

This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not....Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the LORD of hosts. Who art thou, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it....That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth....These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly: But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. {ground: or, stay} And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory....The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also finish it; and thou shalt know that the LORD of hosts hath sent me unto you. For who hath despised the day of small things? for they shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel with those seven; they are the eyes of the LORD, which run to and fro through the whole earth....Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not

make haste.

Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place. And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it....he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it....And he said unto them, Is a candle brought to be put under a bushel, or under a bed? and not to be set on a candlestick? For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad. If any man have ears to hear, let him hear....Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.... But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel. See that ye refuse not him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from heaven: Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain.....And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given. For he that hath, to him shall be given: and he that hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he hath....Fear not, little flock; for

it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom....And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed into the ground; And should sleep, and rise night and day, and the seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how. For the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear. But when the fruit is brought forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is come. {brought…: or, ripe}...and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn....There shall be an handful of corn in the earth upon the top of the mountains; the fruit thereof shall shake like Lebanon: and they of the city shall flourish like grass of the earth. His name shall endure for ever: his name shall be continued as long as the sun: and men shall be blessed in him: all nations shall call him blessed. {endure: Heb. be} {his name shall be…:Heb. shall be as a son to continue his father’s name for ever}......And he said, Whereunto shall we liken the kingdom of God? or with what comparison shall we compare it? It is like a grain of mustard seed, which, when it is sown in the earth, is less than all the seeds that be in the earth: But when it is sown, it groweth up, and becometh greater than all herbs, and shooteth out great branches; so that the fowls of the air may lodge under the shadow of it....And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen....And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach. {let…: Heb. let thy name be called upon us} {to take…: or, take thou away}...Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. ¶ But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things....For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. Knowing therefore

the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; Beloved, now are we the sons of God, 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. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure... For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons....after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God,....I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine....Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus....The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.…how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?…For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.…And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.…All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: {teach…: or, make disciples, or, Christians of all nations} Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.…Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. {again: or, from above} The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.…For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) But

what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.…For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.…This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.…Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.…Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him: If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself.…

We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is meet, because that your faith groweth exceedingly, and the charity of every one of you all toward each other aboundeth; So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:...Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer: Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, {his…: Gr. the angels of his power} In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: {taking: or, yielding} Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day. …But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end....Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one

another.... Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: {let‌ or, let us hold fast} For our God is a consuming fire...And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.

They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed. In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the field, let him likewise not return back. Remember Lot’s wife. Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall preserve it.... Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?...what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die. Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame....I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left....Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together....Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed....But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. {prevent: or, come before, or, anticipate, or, precede}. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet

the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. {comfort: or, exhort}....For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? {grave: or, hell}. The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ....Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord....Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?...For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator....For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him....Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life. But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.‌Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good? So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.‌ And many false prophets shall rise, and shall

deceive many. And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.‌But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.‌When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might

be full. This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you.…According to the days of thy coming out of the land of Egypt will I shew unto him marvellous things. The nations shall see and be confounded at all their might: they shall lay their hand upon their mouth, their ears shall be deaf. They shall lick the dust like a serpent, they shall move out of their holes like worms of the earth: they shall be afraid of the LORD our God, and shall fear because of thee. {worms: or, creeping things} Who is a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth in mercy. He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea. Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old.…

Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love. We love him, because he first loved us.…For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.…

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.… amend your ways and your doings.…Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls.…Set thee up waymarks, make thee high heaps: set thine heart toward the highway, even the way which thou wentest: turn again.…Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding….In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. …But the path of the just is as the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.…And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein. {but…: or, for he shall be with them}…Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.… And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. {diversities: or, kinds} Are all apostles? are all {workers…: or, powers?}

prophets? are all teachers? are all workers of miracles?

Have all the gifts of healing? do all speak with tongues? do all interpret? But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet shew I unto you a more excellent way….”

“ Charit y .” † †charity in the 13th chapter of 1st Corinthians (King James Authorized Version of the HOLY BIBLE) vs. love (all new versions) Magnus[Magnus, M., Gods of the Word: Archetypes in the Consonants, Kirksville, Missouri: Thomas Jefferson University Press, 1999. (great linguistics; non-Christian

world view)] states that r has “rules and regulations imposed from without...r is the one that reasons things out. l feels them.” ‘R’ has a head; l does not have a head. Therefore

the word ‘love’ cannot be substituted for ‘charity.’ C h a r i t y is love that grabs (c) hold (h) and (a) rules (r) itself (i), reaching out to (t) many (y), in spite of feelings.

A merica ! A merica ! a

N ation A drift

Introduction: Is the great American dream turning into a nightmare?

America has rejected God in dealing with the issues of life.

God has showered upon America 200 years of blessing. As she acknowledged and obeyed her Creator, God elevated her from infancy to a place of world leadership. He has allowed her to enjoy unprecedented wealth, freedom and influence.

America has led the world in medical and technological advancement. The nation has pioneered in space, pushed back the frontiers of science and given its citizens the world's highest standard of living.

America has opened her arms to millions of immigrants and refugees, first from Europe, then from the Far East, add to this the stream of new residents from Mexico and other Latin countries.

While other nations build barbed wire fences to keep people from getting out, America greets a long line of people waiting to get in.

With grateful and humble hearts, Americans once honored the God who granted her blessings and freedoms. But slowly she began to attribute her blessings not so much to God, but to man.

A FATAL LAPSE OF MEMORY. Forgetting to acknowledge “the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation,” her citizens began to congratulate themselves on their own achievements to celebrate man, while relegating God to the back seat. The god of secular humanism began to infiltrate all of her institutions.

Wallowing in materialism, self-centeredness and pride, many Americans decided that they really did not need God after all. Some began to tamper with God's absolute standards, and to tolerate what they would never have allowed before in their own lives or in society around them.

That which God says is never right could be sometimes right, depending on the situation. Courts that had once legislated against immorality began to grant freedom to every man to “do that which was right in his own eyes.” This happened in (Genesis 6:5) just before God past judgment on the earth. And God tells us in (Matthew 24:37-39) Read also (Judges 17:6; 21:5). Lines of right and wrong blurred. In time, all sorts of ungodly behavior became acceptable even admired. Americans no longer were shocked. Eyes grew, “accustomed to the dark.” Few citizens rose up in outrage.

When God fades from a nation's conscience, one can justify almost anything.

NEW AMERICAN MEANINGS FOR OLD WORDS God says, "Thou shalt not Kill." Americans gave murder a new name and indifferently aborted 1,374,000 unborn babies.

Many tried to camouflage sin with new terminology. God calls it “drunkenness.” We call it "alcoholism- a social disease.” God calls it "Sodomy."

We call it “homosexuality - gay rights, an alternate lifestyle.” God calls it, “perversion.” We call it “pornography - Adult entertainment.” God calls it “immorality.” We call it the “new morality.” God calls it “cheating.” We call it “abnormal social development.”

With the dissolving of absolutes, America's crime rate has spiraled, until it costs taxpayers $2 billion a year.

A serious crime is committed every 3.5 seconds, one robbery every 83 seconds, one

murder every 27 minutes. Drug addiction and alcoholism are rampant. Suicide is the second largest killer of teenagers. Teenage pregnancies, incest and sexual child abuse draw national attention. More than 2 million Americans a year contract gonorrhea. Pornographic magazines and books crowd the newsstand.

Video—cassette stores now market the products of X—rated theaters.

One out of every two marriages ends in divorce. Some 1.3 million unmarried couples now live together, according to the United Sates Census Bureau.

America once legislated against those things that God said to be wrong. But gradually we began to tolerate, then accept, then condone openly and even promote, that which was once unthinkable.

The perversion and degradation that once made us blush are now flaunted before the eyes of a nation that was conceived in the fear of God. It has happened, little by little, right before our eyes, not because someone forced it on us, but seemingly because we did not care. We just didn't care.

And so, we are living out the truth of God's Word given to a past generation: (Deut. 6:10-12; 8:17).

I. A Nation Adrift.

A. American Institutions under attack. A ferocious assault on Christian faith and morals, first on the part of the intellectual community, and then on the part of the government.

Israel in their time also opted for the "New Morality." (Judges 17:6) "In those days, there was no king in Israel; but every man did what was right in his own eyes."

B. When did we begin to drift away from our Christian heritage? I think we reached that point when many Americans turned away from the idea of salvation through Christ to that of salvation through technology or science or material affluence.

C. America's only hope is looking to the Lord Jesus Christ.

II. The Myths That Could Destroy America.

A. The Definition of a myth is a traditional story of unknown authorship, any fictitious story.

B. It is a dangerous thing when we too easily accept new ideas as truth.

1.

Myth number one: The Battle isn't real. A new reporter asked a pedestrian. “Do you know what the two greatest problems in America are?” “I don't know and I don't care!” responded the man. “Then you've got both of them!” was the reply. Our nation is rotting on the inside and hostile forces are determined to take away our freedom, and many people who neither know nor care.

2.

Myth number two: Life Began with Blind Chance.

3.

Myth number three: We can have Morality without religion. God clearly pronounces judgment on those who "Call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness" (Isa. 5:20).

4.

Myth number four: Whatever is Legal is Moral. People today have been brain washed to believe that whatever is legal is moral. But what men make legal is not necessarily moral.

5.

Myth number five: Morality cannot be legislated. Yet secular humanism is imposing its own morality on the American public. It does so through the media, the schools and the courts.

6.

Myth number six, The Role of Men and Women is Interchangeable.

7.

Myth number seven, A Fetus is not human.

8.

Myth number eight, Pornography is a Harmless Adult Pleasure.

III. The Family Is Being Destroyed.

A. More and more mothers have to work outside the home. In 1948 18% of the mothers worked outside the home. Today it is over 50%.

B. Changing Ideas about Motherhood, it is frowned upon by many.

C. Uncontrolled behavior, promiscuity and perversion. Many parents today often resent children because they interfere with their life.

IV. The Porno Plague.

A. Can anyone deny that movies are dirtier than ever? They do not call it dirt. They call it "realism." T.V. also.

B. God tells us in His Word that the seeds of destruction are contained in every sin. (James 1:15) "Then when lust hath conceived it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it "is finished, bringeth forth death." (Gal. 6:7-8). Someday, if America does not return to righteousness, America will reap what she has sown.

C. We do not call it Pornography we call it Adult entertainment. A casual glance at the lists of the sins of the flesh recorded in the New Testament will reveal that the sins of sexual looseness are grouped together with the sins of violence. They always go hand in hand. We should not be surprised to see it today. (Rom. 1:26-31; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:3-11).

D. Staying Pure in an Impure World.

1.

Covenant with your eyes Job did, (Job 31:1). The eyes provide the window- to the mind.

By the power of the Spirit we can discipline our eyes.

2.

Consecrate your mind. The mind is the battleground upon which every moral and spiritual battle is fought.

Our thinking ultimately determines our character. Solomon said in Proverbs 28:7; "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he”. See what Jesus said in Mark 7:21-23.

[*]

3.

Commit yourself to Bible study and memorization (II Corinthians 10:5) "bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ."

There is only one way to accomplish this goal: We must fill our minds with God's Word. The Psalmist had this in mind in (Psalm 119:9, 11).

4.

Don't knowingly put yourself in the place of defeat: (Romans 6:13) “Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.”

D. We do have a message of Hope and Forgiveness for anyone. (Isaiah 1:18) "Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though yours sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow, [†]

though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool”; see also (I John 1:7) .

1.

Paul reminded the Corinthians that even though some of them had been fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, abusers of themselves with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revelers, and extortioners, yet nonetheless they had been washed clean "in the name of the Lord Jesus. (I Corinthians 6:11).

V. With A Rise In "New Morality," America Is Becoming "New Sodom." Is Homosexuality An Alternate Lifestyle?

A. What does God think of Homosexuality? It was God's plan for sexual relations to be in the form of man-woman union; man and wife become "one flesh"(Gen. 1:27; 5:2; Gen. 2:24).

1.

We are told in God's Word (Lev. 18:22; Lev.20:13).

2.

Jesus is the only hope for the homosexual, (Rom. 3:23-24; I Cor. 6:11; I Tim. 1:15).

VI. God's Judgment On Nations.

A. Why Did the Roman Empire Fall? The events that led to the collapse of the Roman Empire are startlingly similar to the events occurring in our nation today.

1.

Strong Families: Rome was founded on high moral standards. Each father was respected as the head of the family. In the early republic, the father had legal authority to discipline rebellious members of his family.

2.

Home education: The education of the children was the responsibility of the parents. This further strengthened the children's honor and respect for their parents and deepened the communication and understanding between parents and children.

3.

Prosperity: The Roman armies were victorious in war. The wealth of conquered nations increased Roman prosperity and prestige.

4.

National Achievements: Great building programs began in Rome. A vast network of roads united the empire. Magnificent palaces, public buildings and coliseums were constructed.

5.

Infiltration of “The lie”: As Roman families prospered, it became fashionable to hire educated Greeks to care for the children. Greek philosophy, with its humanistic and godless base, was soon passed on to the roman families. Women demanded more rights and, in order to accommodate them, new marriage contracts were designed, including “open marriages.”

6.

Big Government: By the first century A.D., the father had lost his legal authority. It was delegated to the village, then to the city, then to the state, and finally to the empire.

In Rome, citizens complained about housing shortages, soaring rents, congested traffic, polluted air, crime in the streets, and the high cost of living.

Unemployment was a problem. To solve it, the government created a multitude of civil service jobs, including building inspectors, health inspectors and tax collectors.

7.

Decline and persecution: The problem of big government only multiplied. Meanwhile, Rome was persecuting God's people. Rome was quite tolerant of all religions except Christianity.

Christianity was banned and Christians were persecuted, burned, and thrown to the lions.

Why? Because the very nature of Christianity is intolerant of “the lies” of Satan which is the basis of every other religion.

B. The ruins of Greece, a civilization that rejected God and worshiped the human mind and body.

1.

The basic philosophy of Greece was, “Man is the measure of all things. Man, not the gods, the relative, not the absolute.” Only the strong survived in Greece. Deformed or weak children were hurled from cliffs or abandoned by their fathers to die.

Seven-year-old boys were sent off to learn war. The human body was idolized. A man who could not swim or wrestle was scorned. As immorality increased, the human mind became supreme. Reason itself was worshipped. The Greeks' search for knowledge was unending. Their probing produced a pantheon of skeptics, cynics, stoics and epicureans. Soon the government became a bureaucracy bound in red tape and taxation. At one time there were 218 taxes.

There was even a tax on tax receipts. God's judgment came upon the Greek civilization according to the promise of His Word. “The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God” (Ps. 9:17).

C. America: Next on the List? Is God blind to the sin of our own nation? Will He continue to bless us as He looks on our idols of silver and gold, on our pride of personal achievement, on our prevailing rebellion against Him? The Bible repeatedly warns that, without repentance, judgment is inevitable. “Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” America is not big enough to shake her fist in the face of a holy God and get away

with it.

1.

Sexual promiscuity (sin) the root of the problem. The American public expresses its outrage at the growing problem of child abuse and sexual molestation. But is such behavior really very surprising in a sex-craved society that exalts moral perversion on television, in movies and magazines, and when pornography is pumped wholesale into the living room of America?

2.

The sin of self-centered lifestyle comes back on both Individuals and society. Civilizations do not just die. Their leaders and people are first deceived; then they are destroyed by God. "Let no man deceive you with vain words; for because of these things (immorality, covetousness, worship of false gods, etc.) cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience (Eph. 5:6). The deception comes in the form of “the lie”; “...God shall send them strong delusion that they should believe the lie” (II Thess. 2:11). “The Lies” was first given to Eve in the Garden of Eden: “...ye shall be as gods, knowing (deciding for yourselves) good and evil.” (Gen. 3:5).

3.

When a Nation listens to "The lie" it dethrones God and deifies man’s achievements. It exalts human reason as supreme. It trusts education and science to solve its problems.

It believes that man is evolving into perfection. It replaces God's moral standards with situational ethics. It promotes sensual pleasure and instant gratification. It strives for a world utopia of prosperity and peace. It makes the State the sovereign dictator over everyone.

Conclusion: In April 1912, the largest and most luxurious vessel ever built set forth on its maiden voyage. The British liner Titanic had a doubled bottomed hull, divided into sixteen watertight compartments. Because as many as four of these could be completely flooded without endangering the ship's buoyancy, the Titanic was considered unsinkable.

On the fateful night of April 14, shortly before midnight, the great liner was steaming through the foggy North Atlantic when it collided with an enormous iceberg. A 300-foot gash was ripped in the ship's right side rupturing five of its watertight compartments. The Titanic sank into the icy depths, claiming over 1,500 lives.

A tragic, though often untold story about that night concerns one man on another ship, less than 20 miles away from the Titanic. The other vessel was the Californian, and it could have come to the rescue of the sinking liner if only someone had been listening. But the radio operator had fallen asleep on duty! When help did finally reach the disaster area, it was too late to save more than a few.

The very greatness of the Titanic had caused her crew and passengers to feel inordinately confident. “Unsinkable” was such an assuring term. But it proved a fatal misjudgment.

Like the Titanic, our great ship of state, America, has gone adrift and is headed for a potentially fatal collision. Many feel she, too, is unsinkable; but that assessment is rooted in feeling, not fact.

The truth of the matter is that America has already run into some “icebergs” that have damaged her hull, and caused not a few leaks. She is in grave danger. [‡]

[§]

God tells us in His Word to wake up as His people. (Romans 13:11-14 ; Ephesians. 5:1-21 ).

See also The Shed Blood That Justifies and this brief on Those who call themselves Jehovah's Witnesses by R.A. MacIntee

[†]

But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. [‡]

And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in

strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof. [§] Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children; And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.

But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints; Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks. For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye therefore partakers with them. For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light: (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;) Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord. And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light. Wherefore he saith, Awake thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light. See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, Redeeming the time, because the days are evil.

Wherefore be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is. And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God. Â

Back to Shayne's Home Page

Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice . - Philippians 4:4 KJV

REPENT AMERICA: LEST A WORSE THING COME UNTO THEE It is amazing how different modern America is from the America of just 100 years ago. Today multitudes of women look and act like men and many men look and act like women. Our modern nation, by and large, even condones blatant sin against the laws of conscience, which are clearly written in the heart of every man. But one change is significant in light of the anniversary of 9-11-01. Only a century ago, any national calamity was immediately seen as a reason for national humiliation, confession of sin, repentance, and prayer to the God of the Holy Bible. However, today, a national calamity is a time to offer a pitiful, self-centered, lazy, fast-food, “moment of silence” to nothing. Prayer to the God of the Christian Bible is now seen as bigoted and narrow-minded. And to preach that any national calamity is a NATIONAL JUDGMENT is to commit the unpardonable sin. But the Christians of America, and throughout the world, need to ignore these politically correct, emotion-driven “standards.” The preachers of this country have had too many “moments of silence.” It is time to cry out and call every man to repentance.

1. God uses calamities to punish cities, nations, and kingdoms that get lifted up in selfishness and sin:

Jonah 1:2 Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry against it; for THEIR WICKEDNESS is come up before me. 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown. 5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

Matthew 11:20 Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not…

When Rome continued to ignore the light of conscience and fall into debauchery, God sent BARBARIANS to TERRORIZE their kingdom. These attacks by the Goths continued until proud Rome fell. Does not this serve as a warning to proud, gluttonous America?: “The Pagan historians of Rome have branded and immortalized the vices and crimes of the Caesars: the misanthropy, cruelty, and voluptuousness of Tiberius; the ferocious madness of Caius Caligula, who had men tortured, beheaded, or sawed in pieces for his amusement, who seriously meditated the butchery of the whole senate, raised his horse to the dignity of consul and priest, and crawled under the bed in a storm; the bottomless vileness of Nero, ‘the inventor of crime,’ who poisoned or murdered his preceptors Burrhus and Seneca, his half-brother and brother-in-law Britannicus, his mother Agrippina, his wife Octavia, his mistress Poppaea, who in sheer wantonness set fire to Rome, and then burnt innocent Christians for it as torches in his gardens, figuring himself as charioteer in the infernal spectacle; the swinish gluttony of Vitellins, who consumed millions of money in mere eating; the refined wickedness of Domitian, who, more a cat than a tiger, amused himself most with the torments of the dying and with catching flies; the shameless revelry of Commodus with his hundreds of concubines, and ferocious passion for butchering men and beasts on the arena; the mad villainy of Heliogabalus, who raised the lowest men to the highest dignities, dressed himself in women’s clothes, married a dissolute boy like himself, in short, inverted all the laws of nature and of decency, until at last he was butchered with his mother by the soldiers, and thrown into the muddy Tiber. And to fill the measure of impiety and wickedness, such imperial monsters were received, after their death, by a formal decree of the Senate, into the number of divinities and their abandoned memory was celebrated by festivals, temples, and colleges of priests!….The wives and mistresses of the emperors were not much better.

They revelled in luxury and vice, swept through the streets in chariots drawn by silver-shod mules, wasted fortunes on a single dress, delighted in wicked intrigues, aided their husbands in dark crimes and shared at last in their tragic fate…From the higher regions the corruption descended into the masses of the people, who by this time had no sense for anything but [circuses] and, in the enjoyment of these, looked with morbid curiosity and interest upon the most flagrant vices of their masters…No wonder that Tacitus, who with terse eloquence and old Roman severity exposes the monstrous character of Nero and other emperors…foreboded the fearful vengeance of the gods, and even the speedy destruction of the empire. And certainly nothing could save it from final doom, whose approach was announced with ever-growing distinctness by wars, insurrections, inundations, earthquakes, pestilence, famine, IRRUPTION OF BARBARIANS, and prophetic calamities of every kind.” (Schaff, “History of the Christian Church,” chapter VIII)

Even pagans philosophers, with only the light of conscience, could see God’s JUDGMENT in national calamities. There was certainly a time when practically every God-fearing Christian used every destructive “act of God” to call the world to repentance. For example, D.M. Panton, in the 1920′s, provided a BIBLICAL response to the great earthquake in Japan: “In comparably the greatest visible act of God since the War has been the earthquake in Japan (Sept. 1, 1923), another ominous thunder – an earthquake among the greatest recorded in the history of the world….The number of deaths at the lowest is estimated (“Times,” Sept. 14, 1923) at 165,000….a million and a half people were rendered homeless…It is tragic to listen to the Church assuring Science that the world has nothing to fear… ‘On the third day,’ an eye witness writes, ‘a heavy storm visited the capital, and millions of refugees had no shelter, nor food…It is right that we should not shrink from seeing what God intends all the world to see – its horror…. ‘Tokyo,’ says one eye-witness, ‘was a living hell,’…’Many thousands,’ says yet another eye-witness, ‘were roasted alive.’…The reasons of any earthquake can be fully apparent only to God….Nevertheless probably no great earthquake has been without its moral clues….Japan, which, in the exhaustion of Europe and the chaos of China, threatened a possible world-dominance, has been reduced for decades, by this act of God, to a second rate, harmless power…Two or three months before [this earthquake in Japan], Dr. Chas. Inwood said: ‘While I was in Tokyo one of the leading journals of the city declared, in reference to the reading books in the hands of the people: ‘Most of the books being read by the people, men and women, are so obscene that they could not be translated into English.’ Dr. D.S. Spencer, a missionary of forty years’ standing in Japan, says: ‘Japan alone among the leading nations publicly licenses prostitution. Social vice fostered by the government is undermining the family…endangering the church, destroying the life of young manhood and womanhood, and eating out the heart of Japan.’…As the home of idolatry, India, with its 350,000,000 gods is also the house of famine, so the home of emperorworship for two thousand years, Japan, is also the home of earthquake and convulsion. In the last fifteen centuries Japan has had an earthquake every ten years; in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, she has one every five years. A Japanese gentleman in London, not a Christian, exclaimed: ‘This has come from Heaven! Japan was sunk in materialism, and something had to happen!’” --(D.M. Panton, “The Panton Papers,” 1928)

How far we have strayed from this type of preaching! Today, most preachers in the public eye are puppets. They are paid and praised to make men feel comfortable as they rest in only a form of godliness (2 Timothy 3). When calamity strikes, they are immediately brought forth to comfort a whole nation in its sins.

2.

Often, the specific judgment is in the form of human enemies the Lord raises up to terrorize and afflict the

nation under judgment: Judges 6:1 And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD: and the LORD delivered them into the hand of Midian seven years. Judges 13:1 And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD delivered them into the hand of the Philistines forty years. 2 Chronicles 21:16 Moreover the LORD stirred up against Jehoram the spirit of the Philistines, and of the Arabians, that were near the Ethiopians: 1 Kings 11:4 For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the LORD his God, as was the heart of David his father. ...14 And the LORD stirred up an adversary unto Solomon, Hadad the Edomite: he was of the king’s seed in Edom. ...Isaiah 10:1 Woe unto them that decree unrighteous decrees, and that write grievousness which they have prescribed; ...5 O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation. 6 I will send him against an hypocritical nation, and against the people of my wrath will I give him a charge, to take the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread them down like the mire of the streets. ...7 Howbeit he meaneth not so, neither doth his heart think so; but it is in his heart to destroy and cut off nations not a few. ...15 Shall the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith? or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? as if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood.

3.

The proper response to these attacks is self-examination, confession, repentance, and forsaking of the

national sins – even though specific individuals who are harmed in a national calamity may or may not be culpable: Luke 13:1 There were present at that season some that TOLD HIM of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.

The Lord did not watch the murders on TV, again and again! They came and told Him. I have never seen a plane crash into the buildings. I have not seen video images of the destruction. But today, we have millions of people who can’t wait to get home to turn on the Roman Circus in their living rooms. If God has not provided them with images of a suicide or some other live destruction, they will turn over to HBO and watch a “simulated” version. With modern

technology, it appears real enough to momentarily satisfy their lust for blood. These images, repeatedly replayed as entertainment, or to satisfy carnal curiosity (Acts 17:21), only cause people to become increasingly desensitized to the horrors of violence.

But Jesus answered these people. He was aware of the horrible tragedy: Luke 13:2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? 3 I tell you, Nay: but, EXCEPT YE REPENT, YE SHALL ALL LIKEWISE PERISH. 4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Therefore, we are to realize that individuals who perish in national tragedies are not necessarily worse sinners than those who escape them. We must not make the mistake of Job’s friends. However, what is important here is that Jesus USED the horrible tragedies to PREACH REPENTANCE! The “Jesus” of many of these modern preachers, in the public eye, would never have used such horrible tragedies as a sermon-text to preach repentance and the fear of God! Yet these modern preachers are not only out of touch with Jesus 2000 years ago, they are out of touch with their OWN COUNTRY JUST OVER A CENTURY AGO! In the 19th century, families in the U.S. were devastated by the Civil War. How did the government leaders respond to the national tragedy? Did they offer up a pathetic moment of silence? Did they pretend to salute Allah or Buddha? Did they pray to God for comfort without repentance or confession of sin? No! On March 2, 1863, Senator James Harlan introduced the following Resolution in the Senate. The Resolution beseeched President Lincoln to proclaim a national day of prayer and fasting. It was adopted on March 3, and signed by Lincoln on March 30. Read the words of this Resolution and see how different they are from the politically correct, hypocritical, smooth-talking dribble of our nations leaders today. Remember, the following Resolution was signed by the President: “Whereas, the Senate of the United States, devoutly recognizing the Supreme Authority and just Government of Almighty God, in all the affairs of men and of nations, has, by a resolution, requested the President to designate and set apart a day for National prayer and HUMILIATION. And whereas it is the duty of nations as well as of men, to own their dependence upon the overruling power of God, to CONFESS THEIR SINS and transgressions, in humble sorrow, yet with assured hope that genuine REPENTANCE will lead to mercy and pardon; and to recognize the sublime truth, announced in the Holy Scriptures and proven by all history, that those nations only are blessed whose God is the Lord.

And, insomuch as we know that, by His divine law, nations like individuals are SUBJECTED TO PUNISHMENTS and chastisements in this world, MAY WE NOT JUSTLY FEAR THAT THE AWFUL CALAMITY OF CIVIL WAR, which now desolates the land, MAY BE BUT A PUNISHMENT, inflicted upon us, for our presumptuous sins, to the needful end of our national reformation as a whole People? We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power, as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own.

Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become TOO SELF-SUFFICIENT to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, TOO PROUD to pray to the God that made us! It behooves us then, to humble ourselves before the offended Power, to confess our national sins, and to pray for clemency and forgiveness. Now, therefore, in compliance with the request, and fully concurring in the views of the Senate, I do, by this my proclamation, designate and set apart Thursday, the 30th. day of April, 1863, as a day of national humiliation, fasting and prayer. And I do hereby request all the People to abstain, on that day, from their ordinary secular pursuits, and to unite, at their several places of public worship and their respective homes, in keeping the day holy to the Lord, and devoted to the humble discharge of the religious duties proper to that solemn occasion. All this being done, in sincerity and truth, let us then rest humbly in the hope authorized by the Divine teachings, that the united cry of the Nation will be heard on high, and answered with blessings, no less than the pardon of our national sins, and the restoration of our now divided and suffering Country, to its former happy condition of unity and peace. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the City of Washington, this thirtieth day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty seventh. – By the President: Abraham Lincoln, William H. Seward, Secretary of State.” (“The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln,” Roy P. Basler) 4.

Obedient Christians must lead the nations and help them to understand the ways of God: Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and TEACH ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matthew 5:14 Ye are THE LIGHT OF THE WORLD. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

5.

Spreading false assurances of comfort and safety, regardless of any true confession and repentance, is sin;

it is not the role of God’s people to give messages of false hope and comfort: Jeremiah 8:11 For they have healed the hurt of the daughter of my people slightly, saying, Peace, peace; when there is no peace. Isaiah 57:21 There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked. 58:1 CRY ALOUD, SPARE NOT, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and shew my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. 2 Yet they seek me daily, and delight to know my ways, AS A NATION THAT DID RIGHTEOUSNESS, and forsook not the ordinance of their God: they ask of me the ordinances of justice; they take delight in approaching to God.

Many of the leaders of America are using God’s name in public speeches (“God bless America,” etc.), and offering up token prayers, while in the next conversation they take His holy name in vain. They act as if we are a nation that does not DESERVE to be destroyed! But how can this be? We are a nation that has embraced sodomy and perfumed the killing of infants in the womb. The entertainment of the deluded masses is perverted and debased. Shall we pretend to offer up prayers to God with no confession of sin, no repentance, no humbling of ourselves as a nation?

6.

In the past, God has used the king of Babylon to punish the proud, rebellious nations of the earth for their

sins. He will do so again in the last days: Jeremiah 25:5 They said, Turn ye again now every one from his evil way, and from the evil of your doings, and dwell in the land that the LORD hath given unto you and to your fathers for ever and ever: ...8 Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts; Because ye have not heard my words, 9 Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north, saith the LORD, and Nebuchadrezzar the KING OF BABYLON, MY SERVANT, and will bring them against this land, and against the inhabitants thereof, and AGAINST ALL THESE NATIONS round about, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, and an hissing, and perpetual desolations. ...12 And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, saith the LORD, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans, and will make it perpetual desolations. ...15 For thus saith the LORD God of Israel unto me; Take the wine cup of this fury at my hand, and cause all the nations, to whom I send thee, to drink it. ...31 A noise shall come even to the ends of the earth; for the LORD hath a controversy with the nations, he will plead with all flesh; he will give them that are wicked to the sword, saith the LORD. 32 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, Behold, evil shall go forth from nation to nation, and a great whirlwind shall be raised up from the coasts of the earth. Jeremiah 27:8 And it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve the same Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the LORD, with the sword, and with the famine, and with the pestilence, until I have consumed them by his hand. 9 Therefore hearken not ye to your prophets, nor to your diviners, nor to your dreamers, nor to your enchanters, nor to your sorcerers, which speak unto you, saying, Ye shall not serve the king of Babylon: Jeremiah 37:8 And the Chaldeans shall come again, and fight against this city, and take it, and burn it with fire. 9 Thus saith the LORD; Deceive not yourselves, saying, The Chaldeans shall surely depart from us: for they shall not depart.

10 For though ye had smitten the whole army of the Chaldeans that fight against you, and there remained but wounded men among them, yet should they rise up every man in his tent, and burn this city with fire. Habakkuk 1:6 For, lo, I raise up the Chaldeans, that BITTER AND HASTY NATION, which shall march through the breadth of the land, to possess the dwellingplaces that are not theirs. 9 They shall come all for violence: their faces shall sup up as the east wind, and they shall gather the captivity as the sand. 10 And they shall SCOFF AT KINGS, and the princes shall be a scorn unto them: they shall deride every strong hold; for they shall heap dust, and take it.

These Scriptures are double prophecies. They speak of the old king of Babylon AND the king of Babylon in the last days. Saddam Hussein may, or may not, be the last days’ king of Babylon (which is distinct from the final Antichrist of Revelation 13). Yet, he is certainly in the spirit of this ancient, bitter and hasty king!

7.

The four Kingdoms of Daniels prophecy will be restored again in the last days. The first Kingdom God

uses to judge the world in the tribulation period will again be Babylon: Daniel 7:3 And four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another. 4 The FIRST was like a lion… 17 These great beasts, which are four, are four kings, which SHALL ARISE out of the earth. Daniel 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold. ...44 And IN THE DAYS OF THESE KINGS shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and CONSUME ALL THESE KINGDOMS…

Many of the prophecies of Daniel are dual. Iraq will once again be used to PUNISH the world. How far this goes

in the present, depends, to some degree, upon how mankind responds to God’s warnings.

8.

God has specifically promised judgment upon every nation that turns from the light of truth: Psalms 2:10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. 11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and YE PERISH from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

9.

God will often show mercy to a condemned city or nation in response to mass repentance, and will

postpone its final overthrow: Jonah 3:8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and CRY MIGHTILY unto God: yea, let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the VIOLENCE that is in their hands. 9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not? 10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not. Jeremiah 18:7 At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; 8 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.

9 And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; 10 If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.

America has been warned. One day, perhaps tomorrow, the tribulation period will begin. Iraq will once again be used as God’s hammer. Will you not seek God for His mercy upon our nation? It is a nation with bloody hands.

It is time to be an example to the lost and get on our faces before the Lord and repent. Church-going Christians can begin by repenting of their gluttony, lack of prayer for national leaders, gluttony, lack of discipline and sacrifice in tithes and offerings, friendship of the world, indulgence in worldly TV and movies, railing, sowing discord, gluttony, sending the mother out of the home to work, lack of standards, gluttony, lack of Biblical separation, immodest and perverted clothing, disobedience or disrespect to husbands, fathers, bosses, pastors and other leaders, sharpness toward wives and children, gluttony, adultery, fornication, lack of deep Bible study for the purpose of growing in personal holiness, lack of regular soul winning, lack of regular family devotions, etc.

Perhaps this article has made you mad because you have poison that needs to come out of your heart (see 2 Timothy 4:3 and Titus 2:1-15). This kind can come forth by nothing, but by prayer and fasting!

Change Must Begin at the House of God! And it must begin with the fear of God, which is the beginning of wisdom. Order The Rod: and see! ******************************* THE ROD: WILL GOD SPARE IT? ******************************* 440 pages of Biblical and rare historic documentation on the Judgment Seat of Christ.

Paperback: $20.00 (shipping included) Hardback: $24.00 (shipping included) Change Must Begin at the House of God! And it must begin with the fear of God, which is the beginning of wisdom. Order The Rod: and see!

Back to Shayne's Home Page

Two Historic Errors[*] “The two schools of thought [Calvinism and Arminianism], both composed of deeply spiritual saints, has run riot for many years. Each school is antagonistic to the other; each claims to found its contentions on Scripture ... [†]

...Frankly, we feel that both schools have failed to catch the Holy Spirit's message...” -R.Ε. Neighbour (1872-1945) “It has surely been a lamentably successful wile of the enemy of truth to persuade Christians to hurl these classes of passages at one another from opposing camps, instead of them being seen as complementary and in full harmony with the facts concerning both God and man.”[‡] -G.H. Lang (1874-1958) “The fact is that only when opposing Scriptures have been joined and balanced do we find the truth...”

D.M. Panton (1870-1955)

[§]

-

Many wrongly interpret the many warnings to Christians in the Bible to teach that God's true children can ultimately lose salvation in eternity. This view has traditionally been referred to as Arminianism.

To counter this claim, many, attempt to argue that the warnings are not really addressed to true Christians. This is the doctrine usually taught by the Hyper-Calvinist or Reformed advocates.

Unfortunately, both views miss the mark. The first view raises the entire foundation and makes salvation dependent on works. It obscures the salvation message for the lost and steals precious salvation assurance from multitudes of those already born again. The second view is forced to likewise turn salvation into a mere hope. Under this system, salvation assurance is obtained ultimately only through endlessly attempting to somehow prove through works that one is saved. According to this view, if a person is continuing in sin, he is not a real Christian. Ironically, since there is no objective, standard for what continuing in sin absolutely means (i.e. exactly how long), this often results in a certain degree of lawlessness, leaving professed Christians without accountability and without anything to really fear [**] (Jude 1.4)!

The truly humble will doubt they have enough fruit to qualify; the prideful will be inclined to rest self[††]

[‡‡]

assured (Luke 18:12 , Romans 10:3) .

Standing between these two extremes is found the sublime truth that is able to unify all the Scriptures addressed to Christians. When rightly interpreted in the light of this truth, the warning passages to the saints are seen to be parental in nature. God is simply- warning His children about the bitter rod of discipline that they are in danger of receiving if they do not behave and do as He commands. The fact that these warnings might appear to be extreme is no argument against their application to real Christians. There is a considerable margin between actually losing salvation and not being punished at all. Therefore, there is plenty of room to apply the warnings at face value without teaching a loss of eternal salvation.

There have been many Calvinists and Arminians who have momentarily caught glimpses of the truth in the middle of the two extremes.

Ironically, James Arminius himself (of whom conditional security is named) almost stumbled onto the truth. He wrote: I here overly and ingenuously affirm, I never taught that a true believer can either totally or finally fall away from the faith, and perish; yet I will not conceal, that there are passages of scripture which seem to me to wear this aspect; and those answers to them which I have been permitted to see, are not of such a kind as to approve themselves on all points to my understanding. On the other hand, certain passages are produced for the contrary [§§] doctrine which are worthy of much consideration."

The answer lies between the two errors. The warnings are literal and real; yet, they do not threaten a loss of eternal salvation. These warnings will be examined in detail in later chapters.

The Reality of the Carnal Christian This truth of Christian accountability is the golden mean between prodigal lawlessness on one side, and a Romish hope of salvation through fruitbearing on the other. It can only rest upon the holy foundation of salvation by grace through faith alone in Jesus Christ: 1 Corinthians 3:12,15 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;... If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

It can be seen from 1 Corinthians 3:15 that if a Christian accomplishes nothing at all worthy of reward in his life (the highest degree of unfruitfulness that can possibly be imagined) he is still ultimately saved.

He will “suffer loss” for

[***]

his irresponsible stewardship; but God will not take His lovingkindness from His child (Psalms 89:30-33)

.

Salvation

[†††]

in eternity cannot be lost (John 6:39-40) .

It can also be seen from 1 Corinthians 3:15 that it is an error to teach that there is no such thing as a carnal Christian. The sad reality of carnal believers is also taught in 2 Timothy: 2 Timothy 2:20, 21 But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work.

In general, there are two types of Christians. There are many other Scriptures that demonstrate that true saints may walk in such a way as to be absolutely unworthy of reward in all that they do (Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 4:15; 1 John 2:28, [‡‡‡] etc.).

If Hyper-Calvinists will not blame God for their own sins, then they must confess that they freely choose to rebel against Him at times. If they can choose to rebel against Him, then they can choose to rebel against Him enough to merit the punishments of which the Bible warns!

Christians are to watch to make sure they do not fail of the gracious, sanctifying power of God in their lives.

They are to strive to walk in all its fullness: Hebrews 12:15,16 Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.

The Bible teaches that believers can receive the sanctifying grace of God (in regard to the Christian walk) in [§§§]

vain" (Psalms 78:41; 1 Corinthians 15:10; 2 Corinthians 6:1; 2 Timothy 2:1) .

If a Christian can resist sanctifying grace once, he can resist it twice. A Christian may stay in a state of rebellion and refuse to repent to his own hurt. To do so would not be wise or comfortable; and it certainly should not be the norm! Yet, it is possible: 2 Corinthians 12:20 For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes, backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults: 21 And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.

Who is Paul addressing (the “you”) in these verses? The answer is given at the start of the same Epistle: 2 Corinthians 1:1,2 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia: Grace be to you and peace from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul is addressing true saints, the children of God; he considers it possible for real Christians to fall into great sins and not repent. The same sad reality may be gleaned elsewhere in 1 Corinthians: 1 Corinthians 1:1-3 Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Again, these Corinthians are said to be children of God “our Father.” They are “sanctified.” This must refer to positional sanctification (i.e. the forgiveness of sins that makes one a Christian) since we learn later in the same Epistle that the Corinthians are not walking sanctified. Instead, they are walking just like the lost: 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

1 Corinthians 6:7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

Many point to the fact that Paul teaches that the Christian is a “new creature.” They interpret this to mean that no Christian can walk the way he or she did before salvation: 2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all

things are become new.

This verse refers to position and provision; it is not absolute in regard to practice. It would be nice if all saints [****]

were like the holy Thessalonians (1 Thessalonians 1:7, 9, 10)

.

This should be the normal state of the Christian. [††††]

However, unfortunately, this is not always the case (Revelation 3:1-3, etc.) .

Positionally, every Christian is washed and perfectly sanctified in Christ.

Provisionally, every Christian has the power of a new man available. Jesus has purchased all the good works needed for the saint to “put on” as a child of God. Jesus has not only paid for the adoption, He has paid for the fine, clothes to wear in the household of God. Christians have the indwelling Spirit convicting them of sin. There is therefore no excuse for any Christian to live a defeated life! This is the reason the warnings addressed to such Christians are so severe.

The Imροrtance of Assurance in Practical Sanctification If a person does not have absolute assurance that he is saved, he cannot have absolute assurance that the Holy Spirit is positionally dwelling within him. If he does not know for sure that he possesses the Holy Spirit, he cannot know for sure that he possesses the power to truly please God and fight sin as a Christian: Romans 6:11,12 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. [‡‡‡‡]

Lost people are not “dead indeed unto sin.” Positionally they are “dead in sin” (Ephesians 2:1) .

Therefore, absolute assurance of salvation is a prerequisite to Christian maturity. A person cannot absolutely “reckon” himself to be “dead unto sin” (i.e. possessing the power to overcome it) if he is using his abstinence from sin as a proof he is “dead unto sin” in the first place! Notice how Paul argues contrary to the illogical doublespeak of both the Hyper-Calvinist and Arminian systems: 1 Corinthians 3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?

1 Corinthians 6:15, 18, 19 Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye. have of God, and ye are not your own?

Paul does not argue backwards like many theologians.

He does not tell the Corinthian saints to look at their works to see if they are temples of the Holy Ghost. He instead argues that since they are temples of the Holy Ghost, they had better not fornicate or defile their holy temples! Unbelievers are not temples of the Holy Ghost (2 Corinthians 6:14[§§§§]

16).

Contrary to the teaching of the apostle Paul, both the Hyper-Calvinist and Arminian doctrines leave believers with no absolute assurance the Holy Spirit indwells them positionally. How can they? Without an absolute knowledge of where the line is for losing salvation or the point of disobedience that constitutes continuing in sin, there is no way to know for sure whether or not one is still or in reality a child of God. Even if one presumptuously professed to know such standards, the Bible warns against arriving at absolute [*****]

assurance based on fruitbearing (see Psalms 139:23-24)

:

1 Corinthians 4:4 For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.

1 Corinthians 10:11,12 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.

Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

Paul in 1 Corinthians 10 is telling Christians not to be too confident that they are practically standing in God's approval. This has to do with sanctification in the Christian walk, not salvation in eternity. Christians are to continually examine themselves to gain confidence that they are walking a life of manifested faith (1 John 3:21; 2 Corinthians [†††††]

13:5) .

This faith has to do with the judgment seat of Christ and the great doctrine of reward. Every Christian is therefore warned against absolute assurance in regard to reward. However, it is assumed that every Christian possesses absolute assurance in regard to eternal salvation, since salvation in eternity is not given through works but by grace through faith alone.

[*]

From The Rod: Will GOD Spare It? An Exhaustive Study of Temporary Punishment for Unfaithful Christians at the Judgment Seat and During the Millennial Kingdom by J. D. Faust; 2007 Edition; chapter 3.{www.KingdomBaptist.org} [†] [‡] [§]

R.Ε. Neighbour. If They Shall Fall Away (Cleveland: Union Gospel Press, 1940's; reprint, Miami Springs: Conley & Schoettle, 1984), Introduction The Dawn (August 1944), 677.

The Dawn (August 1944). 677.

[**]

For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. [††]

I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

[‡‡]

For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. [§§]

The Works of James Arminius, Vol. I. 664-667 [book on-line]; available from Christian Classics Ethereal Library, Calvin College, http://www.ccel.org; Internet.

[***]

If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; Then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. [†††]

And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. [‡‡‡]

“Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,” “But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men’s matters.” “And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.” [§§§]

“Yea, they turned back and tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.” “But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.” “We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain.” “Thou therefore, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus.” [****]

"So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia....For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come." [††††]

"And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars; I know thy works, that thou hast a name that thou livest, and art dead. Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God. Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee." [‡‡‡‡]

And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;

[§§§§]

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. [*****]

Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.

[†††††]

Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God. + Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves.

Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

Back to Shayne's Home Page

"It is as binding on the Church now to preach the Gospel to the Jew for the conversion of “the remnant according to the election of grace,” (Rom 11:5) as it is binding on the Church now to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles “to take out of them a people for His name.”-(Act 15:14) An election of individuals now—Jews and Gentiles—to form a new body— the Bride of Christ; then the blessing of the nations in millennial times, after the return of the Lord."-- from "ISRAEL MY GLORY” Israel’s Mission, and Missions to Israel by John Wilkinson The Founder and Director of the Mildmay Mission to the Jews.

Israel My Glory

Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father'shouse, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a greatnation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be ablessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseththee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.--Genesis12:1-3

See also: Numbers 24:5-9 and Psalms 48:1-3; 51:18; 87:1-7; 137:5-7and Isaiah 62:1, 6-7 and Jeremiah 51:50 and Zechariah 2:5 and Romans11:1-36 and Revelation 21:1-4, 5-8, 9-12, 13-16, 17-20, 21-24, 25-28.

Benjamin Disraeli (Lord Beaconsfield), the prime minister of Englandand himself a Christian Jew, said, “The attempt to extirpate the Jewshas been made under the most favorable auspices and on the largestscale and for the longest period of time. Egyptian Pharaohs, Assyriankings, Roman emperors, Scandinavian crusaders, Gothic princes and holyinquisitors have alike devoted their energies to the fulfillment ofthis common purpose: annihilation, exile, captivity, confiscation andmassacre on the most extensive scale have been tried in vain. The Jewhowever, remains.”

Frederick the Great asked a court chaplain during the 18th century,“What one word is proof that the Bible is inspired?”

The chaplainlooked back at Frederick the Great and he replied, “The Jew, yourMajesty.”

Mark Twain said, “All things are mortal but the Jew. All other forces pass but he remains.”

“Israelis yet one of the most powerful witnesses for the truth of revelation. No

othernation has been so preserved in its dispersion. But all this is found in theprophecy concerning Israel. The proposition of the “Jew” is the one unanswerableargument for the inspiration of the Bible with all infidels. On all otherquestions they can find a fairly satisfactory answer to themselves but theycannot get by the “Jew.” He is the one unanswerable argument for the truth ofour religion to the skeptic. “That Jew, that Jew; what shall we do with thatJew?”” - AnInterpretation of the English Bible THE PROPHETS OF THE ASSYRIAN PERIOD by B.H. CARROLL on Isaiah 43-45.

Teachings of Dr.Charles Halff from the ChristianJew

Foundation.

The Law of Moses and the Grace of God 12 pages

Dr. Halff contrasts the concepts of law and grace,showing how the New Covenant of Jesus the Messiah has superseded the OldCovenant of Moses.

Purchase the CD or tape accompaniment by the sametitle in Dr. Halff's CD or Tapes section.

Should We Tithe?

19 pages

Dr. Halff asks and answers the questions, "Towhom was the law of the tithe given?" and "What about thestorehouse?" Is tithing a part of the law, i.e. are we required to titheto receive the Lord's blessings? How should Christians give in this age ofgrace? What are the rewards of giving?

Purchase the tape or CD accompaniment by the sametitle in Dr. Halff's Tapes or CDs section.

Should the Sabbath Be Observed Today?

16 pages

SomeChristians ask, "Should we keep Saturday or Sunday?" When studyingthe Bible about this--and any other subject--there are three things to keep inmind: who is speaking, who is being spoken to, and what is being spoken about.Applying this approach, Dr. Halff answers these questions: Which day is theSabbath? When and to whom was the Sabbath given? What is the penalty for breakingthe Sabbath? Is the Sabbath still in effect today?

 See also Jones’: StandingFast In The Truth, TheSabbath Day and Freedom From The Law and Spiritual Growth.

Back to Shayne's Home Page

IS THERE A DIFFERENCE

?

IN THE CHURCHES DEDICATED TO BETHEL BAPTIST CHURCH

MORRILTON, ARK. WHICH I ORGANIZED AND SERVED AS PASTOR FOR SIX YEARS.

Organized in 1930

by

G. E. JONES

PREFACE

I

n this treatise it is not the writers intention to unchristianize anyone. While he believes there are some churches whose preaching is entirely foreign to the plan of salvation, yet there are others though Un-scriptural in origin and church policy, which preach the plan of salvation. The writer rejoices to believe that there are many saved people in the latter class of churches. While not questioning their salvation, the writer believes their church relationship and baptism to be unscriptural.

Missionary Baptists are often misrepresented in their preaching. They are often accused of teaching that no one but Baptists are saved. On the contrary they have ever been those who championed the cause of salvation apart from church membership, baptism, or other human works and merits. One night the writer preached for an hour on the subject, “Is Baptism Essential to Salvation?” He showed that salvation was wholly by grace, and not dependent on baptism or other works. One man went out from that service and accused him of preaching that no one but Baptists would be saved. Those who thus misrepresent Baptists do so wilfully or they are certainly lacking in comprehension, or have been misinformed. We do not believe other religious bodies to be Scriptural churches, but do contend for the salvation of all their people who have repented toward God and have believed in Jesus Christ.

In putting forth this work the purpose is to seek to awaken the minds of people to search the Scriptures and think upon matters that the vast majority accept without thought or reason. Reader, if you are a Methodist, you should have some good reason for being one. That reason should be based upon the Word of God and not personal desires or relationship. If the Methodist doctrine and practice cannot be justified by the Bible you should be willing to sever your relationship with such a body. The same thing is true in application to the Presbyterians, Nazarenes, Baptists, or whatever one might be in a religious way. In the day of judgment, we shall not be judged by what we wanted to do, or our kindred or friends wished us to do, or by what is popular, but by the Word of God. That service which is of men, though done in the name of Christ will come to naught. Only that which is in keeping with the Word of God will have the divine approval. We are strictly admonished, “Let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.” I Cor. 3:10.

In this work it has been the writers policy to assume nothing. He puts forth only that which can be proven by Gods Word. This has ever been his method in preaching. He has never felt or insisted that people should accept his bare statement. Neither my opinion, nor the opinion of any other man is worth anything unless that opinion is founded on the Bible. Too many people follow their preachers rather than the Scriptures. This is a mistake. Let a thing first be proven before accepted. We are accountable unto God as individuals, and should each, for himself, weigh the evidence given to sustain each thing we are called upon to believe or practice.

Neither has it been the purpose of the writer to point out the Scriptural church so much as to help the reader find it for himself. It has ever been the belief of the writer that if a child of God honestly desires to find the true Scriptural church, and will earnestly search the Scriptures with a will submitted to follow wherever the Word of God may lead, he shall surely find the right way.

Finally, “Prove all things; hold fast that which is good,” I Thessalonians 5:21. Be like the Bereans who “searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11). If the writer has said some things you do not like, before you fall out with him, ask yourself the question, “Is this the truth?” “Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?” Gal. 4:16. If I have told you the truth, accept it for the sake of the Lord and your own good. If I have not proven my positions by the Word of God, you are under no obligation to accept them.

IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN THE CHURCHES? We are living in an age of loose thinking along Scriptural lines. There is much sickly sentimentalism and very little conviction. Few people act from convictions founded upon the Word of God. The vast majority are moved by personal feelings and popular opinions.

They think more about how their actions will be considered by their kindred and acquaintances than as to how they will be judged by the Lord. I have known many to attach themselves to a certain church, not because they are convinced by the Bible that they should do so, but because it happens to be more popular in that locality to belong to that particular church. Again, I have known of husbands to be urged to join a certain church just because their wives belonged to that church, and the other way around. Business and professional men will attach themselves to those churches which they think will enhance their business. On one occasion this writer was preaching on the subject of baptism. A doctor who was present and who was supposed to be a Baptist turned his face toward the back of the house in disapproval. He was afraid that some of his patrons would take offense. Is such service as this acceptable in the Lords sight? Are we to please God or men in our religious actions? The Apostle Paul wrote “If I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ,” Gal. 1:10. Are not such as are doing what men would have them do making use of a religious form to promote their own interests?

Those who follow their own desires, rather than Gods Word, justify their actions by saying that one church is as good as another. Many put forth this statement as though it settled the question forever and that there was no need of going into a Scriptural investigation of the comparative merits and demerits of different religious bodies. Such a statement may satisfy those who do not think upon these matters but it will not stand the light of the truth. But many who realize the weakness of their position prefer that their teachings and practices be accepted as a matter of fact, instead of being examined in the light of the Word of God. Those who are conscious of having the truth welcome a thorough investigation of their position.

Is one church as good as another? We might as well say that one woman is as virtuous as another, or that one man is as honest as another. To say that one woman is as virtuous as another would mean that all women are virtuous or that none are virtuous. To say that one man is as honest as another means that all men are honest or that all are dishonest.

None of these conclusions are true. Neither is it true that one church is as good as another. There are some that will practice only what they find the Word of God to teach. There are others who will practice things for doctrine they do not try to justify from the Word of God. Some churches will practice three kinds of baptism when the Bible teaches only “One Baptism,” Eph. 4:5. If the Word of God tells us there is only one baptism and some churches practice three then those churches are practicing at least two that are commandments of men. Jesus said, “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”

Matt. 15:9. If such churches are worshipping Christ in vain are they as good as the one that teaches only that baptism the Lord commanded? Which is the best child, the one that is obedient or the one that is disobedient?

The following excerpt is taken from the Nazarene church manual. See Page 23.

“Baptism may be administered by sprinkling, pouring, or immersion, according to the choice of the applicant. In case a pastor, when requested to administer baptism in a mode which he deems to be unscriptural, has conscientious scruples against so administering the ordinance, he shall not be required to do so; but he shall see that the candidate for baptism shall be baptized in the mode desired by the candidate.”

Did Jesus tell us to baptize the candidate in any way he desired to be baptized, or did He tell us to teach them to observe all things whatsoever He had commanded?

[Mt. 28:20] Which church is carrying out His will, the one that teaches believers to observe things as He has commanded or the one that teaches that you may do things your own way? Which is seeking to please God and which is seeking to please men? Is the preacher who is required by his church to have baptism administered in a way he deems unscriptural any less guilty than he would have been had he done the work himself? If I get some

other man to steal for me am I not guilty, myself?

When I was living in Plumerville, Arkansas, there came an evangelist to that town who held a meeting for the Methodists. He publicly stated that he had immersed many people, but that he did not believe in immersion. Did he not then sin in the act? “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin,” Romans 14:23. Was he not also guilty of hypocrisy? In the pulpit he said he did not believe that Christ commanded immersion. In the creek he lifts up his hand toward heaven and says he is performing that act in the name of the Holy Trinity. Is such a preacher and such a church that permits and endorses such action, as good as those who refuse to baptize only in the way God commands?

Let us examine the Word of God on this line.

“Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Matt. 5:19.

This verse of Scripture implies that just such men as mentioned above would come and teach men to break the commandments of Christ. They shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven. Those who keep and teach them would be called the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. The Missionary Baptist will teach and accept nothing but immersion, and that by proper administration. Some who administer only immersion themselves will take immersion no matter by whom administered. Now let us think a little upon this matter. The church that will accept alien immersion would have to receive a person who had been immersed by that preacher who said he did not believe in immersion but did administer it. If he did not believe in it, and therefore sinned according to Romans 14:23, was such baptism acceptable in the sight of God? If so, will God accept a sinful act as service to Him? If God does not accept such baptism, should we accept it? Does not the church that accepts immersion from other churches therefore have to accept such baptism as is unacceptable in the sight of God? Before leaving this part of this treatise let us consider another popular saying. We often hear it said that “we are all trying to go to the same place.” First of all, I wish to say that we are not going to heaven by trying to get there. We are not saved by our doing, but by the grace of God. “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.”

Eph. 2:8-9.

Next, I wish to say that two men may be seeking the same place and actually going in the opposite directions. One day I was coming out of Damascus, Arkansas, and traveling to Morrilton. Presently I was stopped by a stranger who was headed toward Damascus. He asked if that was the way to Morrilton. Here were the two of us seeking Morrilton and going in opposite directions. When I told him that he was going away from Morrilton, he very wisely turned around and went in the opposite direction from which he had been traveling. Had he acted upon the principle that so many act upon in a religious way he would have said, “Oh, well, we are both seeking the same place, you in your way and I in my way, what difference does it make?” He certainly would have found out in the long run that it did make a difference. So will men find out in eternity that it does make a difference what we believe and teach.

There may be some things that men err on that will not affect their salvation, but if not their salvation it will most certainly affect their rewards in the world to come. Not everything about the human body is necessary to life, but everything is necessary to well-being.

I could live without either hands or feet, but both hands and feet are necessary to my well-being. There are some truths that are essential to salvation just as there are some organs in the human body that are essential to life. Then there are other things, while not essential to spiritual life, are essential to our spiritual progress.

non-essentialS Today we hear a lot about things that are non-essential. Men excuse themselves for ignoring certain things on the ground that they think those things are non-essential. A certain Pedo-Baptist once said to

a Missionary Baptist that the more spiritual he became the less attention he paid to non-essentials like baptism and the Lords Supper. The Baptist preacher asked him how spiritual a man had to become before it was not a sin to refuse to keep a commandment of Christ. This question still remains unanswered. Jesus said, “If ye love me, keep my commandments,” John 14:15. He also said, “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me:” John 14:21. What right then has a man to claim to love Christ and then deliberately refuse to heed what He has commanded? How can such claim to be spiritual?

We would like to know on what grounds any doctrine or precept in the Word of God can be called a non-essential. Some things are not essential to salvation, but they are essential to the purpose for which they were given. Baptism, while not essential to salvation, is an essential monument in the preserving of the doctrine of the resurrection, which doctrine is essential to salvation. The same is true of the Lords Supper. There is no saving virtue in the Lords supper so far as the one is concerned who is eating the supper, but it helps to preserve the truth of Christs death for sinners, which most certainly must be believed to be saved. Everything the Lord commanded His people to do and preach was for some good purpose, whether we understand that purpose or not. If He has commanded a certain thing, it is sufficient to know that He has commanded it. If we set aside that thing as non-essential, we question the wisdom of Christ. Certainly He has some wise purpose in commanding us to do whatever He has taught, and when we set something aside as of no consequence, that He has commanded, we set our wisdom up against the wisdom of Christ. Here is the soil in which modernism flourishes. When we set aside anything that the Lord commanded, for the sake of expediency, or with the expectation that the cause of Christ be benefited, and the fellowship of His people will be advanced, we virtually say that the Lord unwisely commanded this thing. What is this but veiled modernism? It is my opinion that had we not been so troubled with the non-essentialist in the past, we would not now be so cursed with the modernist who denies things that are considered essential. The non-essentialist, while professing to believe the Bible to be inspired and accepting it as a rule of faith and practice, turns around and sets aside that inspired rule on things in which he desires to be broad. The modernist sets aside certain things as of no consequence because he considers all religious practice to be simply a matter of human development instead of a divine revelation. To say the least, the modernist is the most consistent of the two classes. If all religious practice is simply a matter of human development, then for the sake of harmony we should be willing to set aside that which would prevent people coming together. On the other hand, if we have a divinely given rule of faith and practice we question the wisdom of God when we dare to set aside the least jot and tittle of that rule.

But let us examine the Word of God on this matter. We shall find that it strongly condemns any such action on our part. When God commanded Noah to make the ark, He gave him complete instructions how to make it. He told him what kind of wood to use, how long, how wide and how high it should be.

Nothing was left to human ingenuity or fancy. When God told Noah to use gopher wood, that did not permit him to use some other kind. We read that Noah did according to ALL that God had commanded him. There is no room here for the non-essentialist. (See Gen. 6:14-22). The same thing was true when He had Moses to construct the tabernacle: “For, see, saith he, that thou make ALL things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount,” Heb. 8:5. This same principle was involved when Jesus gave the great commission. He commanded His church to teach them to observe “ALL things whatsoever I have commanded you,” Matt. 28:20. We are under as much obligation to do all things as the Lord has commanded as was Noah or Moses. We must build according to the pattern He gave us. What would we think of a tailor, when asked to make a dozen suits of clothes according to a certain pattern, would to suit his own convenience, make them from patterns of his own choosing. He would most certainly forfeit his claim for pay for his work. So those who choose to change the pattern and build according to the notions and desires of men rather than the Word of God forfeit their right to rewards for their work.

In conclusion of this part of this treatise, the writer wishes to call attention to the example of King Saul and David. Saul changed the Lords command concerning Amalek and lost his kingdom. David

committed adultery with Uriahs wife and later took her for his own, yet he did not lose his kingdom. In the sight of God the sin of Saul was the greater. (If the reader doubts that one sin is greater than another, let him read John 19:11). Saul was commanded to destroy all the cattle, sheep and people. He destroyed all the people but the king, and all the cattle and sheep but the best. He thus changed the commandment of God. For thus doing he lost his kingdom. Davids sin was much greater in the eyes of men, but, while it brought upon him the chastening of God, it did not cause him to lose his kingdom. In the eyes of the religious world it is commendable to condemn such sins as David committed, but very unpopular to condemn the actions of those who, like Saul, change the commandments of God. Saul changed the commandment of God because he feared the people, and obeyed their voice. [See I Sam. 15:24]. “Saul said to Samuel, I have sinned: for I have transgressed the commandment of the Lord, and thy words: because I feared the people, and obeyed their voice.”

Is this not exactly what the man does who, for the sake of pleasing the people, agrees to baptize in any way the people may want to be baptized? Is it not the fear of the people that causes some preachers to keep their mouths shut concerning the sins of those who preach and practice things that are not according to the Word of God? We venture the prediction that if some preachers who are bold to denounce the modernist would also raise a protest against those who change the Word of God on so-called non-essentials, these same preachers would soon lose much of their popularity.

IS THE CHURCH A LOCAL BODY OR A UNIVERSAL AFFAIR COMPOSED OF ALL THE REDEEMED EVERYWHERE? The word church is thought by many to include all the children of God everywhere.

All the saved are in the family of God, but not in a church, or the churches of Christ. There is no such thing as “The Church” in the sense of including all Christians, or all believers even of the same faith and order. A church is an as­sembly of baptized believers joined together in the doctrine and fellowship of the gospel.

The term does not extend beyond the local body. In the beginning there was only one church, the church at Jerusalem. Later on there sprang up other churches at Antioch, at Corinth, in Galatia, at Ephesus and various other places. These churches, however, were all patterned after the first church which was at Jerusalem. After Saul was saved we read: “Then had the churches (plural) rest throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria,” Acts 9:31.

We see from this that there came to be many churches.

Not only do we read of churches (plural), but we read in various places where the whole church was gathered together. “Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the WHOLE CHURCH, to send chosen men of their company to Antioch,” Acts 15:22. “If therefore the WHOLE CHURCH be come together in one place,” etc., I Cor. 14:23. From these passages of Scripture we see that the term “church” is not ex­tended beyond the group that can be assembled to­gether.

The passage in Ephesians 5:23 is often quoted to prove the universal idea. “The husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church.”

If this teaches that there is one big universal church which is composed of all the smaller or local churches, then it teaches that there is a big universal wife who is composed of all the wives everywhere. If all those churches throughout Judea.

Galilee, Samaria and else­where made one great universal church, then Jones wife, Browns wife, Smiths wife and all the other wives go to make up one great wife. Paul simply meant that Christ was head of the church at Ephesus, even as a man was head of his wife. So is Christ the head of all New Testament Churches.

A church has two kinds of officers; bishops and deacons. The bishop in the New Testament sense was nothing but a pastor. Paul gives the qualifications for these in I Tim. 3:1-15. When the apostle had finished giving the qualifications of those officers he closed by saying, “These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly; but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.”

Only a local, visible body has pastors and deacons. Thus we see that the term “church” is applied to a local body of believers, and not to all the redeemed everywhere. We

must have an organized body to have deacons and pastors. Again, it is the local body that contends for the truth. Many of the redeemed teach things that are contrary to the truth. We must have an organized body of peo­ple agreeing in what they believe to uphold the truth.

The Greek word which has been rendered “church” is “ekklesia.” According to Greek lexicons the word means an assembly, or congregation of persons called out from among the people for a specific purpose. Liddell and Scott, in their lexicon, define the word ekklesia, “An assembly of citizens summoned by the crier, the legislative assembly.” To be an assembly the people must be assembled together. The word cannot be applied to an indefinite number of people whom it is impossible to assemble. In a worldly sense a church was any group of people legally summoned. Dean Trench says, “The Ekklesia, as all know, was the law­ful assembly in a free Greek city of all those possessed of the rights of citizenship, for the purpose of trans­acting public affairs.” This was a world assembly or church. A New Testament church would therefore be a group of people assembled according to the laws of Christ, for the transaction of spiritual affairs. When Jesus said (Mt. 16:18), “On this rock I will build MY church,” the pronoun “MY” distinguished that church as His church.

This personal pronoun set that church apart from all other assemblies.

If the world assembly was lawful it had to be legally called together. In the 19th chapter of Acts we have an example of an illegal world assembly. When a tumult was raised by Demetrius, the silversmith, against Paul and his companions for preaching against idol worship, they seized Gaius and Aristarchus and rushed them into the theater. After crying for two hours, “Great is Diana of the Ephesians,” the crowd was stilled by the town clerk, who rebuked them for their rash act. He said, “If Demetrius, and the craftsmen which are with him, have a matter against any man, the law is open, and there are deputies; let them implead one another. But if ye inquire anything concerning other matters, it shall be determined in a LAWFUL ASSEMBLY.” (The word for assembly here is ekklesia, the word that is translated church in other places.) This mob was not a lawful, but an illegal assembly. The clerk said, “We are in danger to be called in question for this days uproar, there being no cause where by we may give an account of this concourse.” After this he dismissed the assembly, (the ekklesia). “That was an illegal assembly or church of the world.” See Acts 19:24-41.

From the above we see the difference between an illegal world assembly and a legal one. To be a lawful assembly it had to be called together by those legally empowered to do so, and according to civil laws. A New Testament assembly or church, therefore, would have to be assembled according to the laws of our Lord, and for a Scriptural purpose. All others would be illegal spiritual assemblies. They might claim to be churches of Christ and might have many good men and women in them, but they could not be rightly called “Churches of Christ.” A group of good men and women called to­gether by Brown, Smith, or Jones might pass upon the guilt or innocence of an accused party, but their decision would not free the man, nor condemn him. The case would have to be tried in a court assembled according to the laws of the land. So any man, or number of men, may gather together religious bodies and designate their followers as churches of Christ, but that does not make them Scriptural churches.

The writer wishes to say in this connection that he has as much Scriptural right to start a new religious body and make rules governing that body, and call that body a church of Christ as did Martin Luther, John Calvin, John Wesley, Alexander Campbell, William Bresee, or any other man. So does the reader have the same right.

F

WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO CONSTITUTE A SCRIPTURAL CHURCH?

irst, a Scriptural church or assembly must have had its origin from the first church at Jerusalem.

Many ignorantly think that all churches had their origin from the Roman Catholic Church. The first church was at Jerusalem. Many other churches were established in Judea, Samaria, Galilee and other places before the church at Rome came into existence, and that first church at Rome was not a Catholic church. The Roman Catholic Hierarchy was not developed for some centuries. Since Jesus promised to be with His church to the end of the world, that church has had a perpetual existence to this time. “Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end,” Eph. 3:21. Soon after our Lord went back to heaven the church at Jerusalem was

scattered by a great persecution. The disciples were scattered abroad everywhere and they went preaching the Word. From these scattered disciples new churches arose all over the country. They continued to spread until they reached all Europe and from Europe to America.

Since the apostolic times many men have started new religious movements and those bodies today are claiming to be Scriptural churches. We can find in history this side of Christ where all churches except the Baptist church started, and the very men that started them. Below we give a partial list of the dates when different churches were started, and the men that started them.

The Catholic by Constantine in A.D. 325. The pope did not claim universal authority until 606.

The Lutheran Church, by Martin Luther in 1530.

The Presbyterian Church, by John Calvin in 1535.

The Episcopal Church, by Henry VIII in 1540.

The Methodist, by John Wesley in 1729.

The Free Will Baptist, by Benjamin Randall in 1784.

The Campbellite Church, by Alexander Campbell and others in 1827.

The Hardshells, by Daniel Parker in 1830.

The Nazarene Church, by S. F. Bresee in 1885.

The Missionary Baptist Churches are the only churches that have not had their origin this side of Christ. Dr. Ypeig and Rev. Dermott, who were appointed by the king of Holland to prepare a history of the Dutch reformed church had the following to say about the Baptists: “We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Ana-baptists, and in the latter times Mennonites, were the original Waldenses, and who have long, in the history of the church, received the honor OF THAT ORIGIN. On this account, the Baptists may be considered as the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the apostles.”

Alexander Campbell, in his debate with McCalla says, “From the apostles to the present time, the sentiments of Baptists, and their practice of baptism have had a continual chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced,” (Campbell-McCalla Debate; P. 378).

S

econd, a church to be Scriptural must be made up of Scriptural subjects. We find in the second chapter of Acts that they are baptized believers, who continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship.

“Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”

Acts 2:41-42.

From the above passage of Scripture we learn that the steps to the Lords Supper are, first salvation (gladly receiving the word) second, baptism; third, continuing in the apostles doctrine; fourth, fellowship; and then the Lords Supper. No one who has not been Scripturally baptized can come to the Lords supper. No one who is not in the apostles doctrine is qualified to come to the table. Paul wrote to the church at Corinth: "For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. {divisions: or, schisms} For there must be also heresies among you,

that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. {heresies: or, sects} When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper. {this…: or, ye cannot eat}" I Cor.11:18-20.

If those in the same church cannot take the supper when there are divisions among them, then why should we be expected to eat with those of other denominations who differ from us?

T

hird, A Scriptural church is one that proclaims and guards the truth. “The church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” [I Tim. 3:15] A pillar is a support. The church then is something that upholds the truth and defends it against error. “It was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints,” Jude 1:3. To be a Scriptural church, an assembly must contend for the faith. This means that it must denounce error. The body that does not do this is not a New Testament church. Since the Word of God teaches “One baptism” [Eph.4:5] it must contend for one and only one. There must be no compromising with those who teach three. To fellowship with those who teach doctrines contrary to the Word of God would weaken or nullify our testimony against error. A church that practices three baptisms, or other things that are unscriptural, in order to please men, is most certainly not contending for the truth.

Many speak harshly of those who expose the error of others, and call them fighters. But the Apostle Paul said of himself, “ I have fought a good fight,” II Tim. 4:7. He admonished Timothy to “ reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. Those who call this prejudice, do not know the difference between prejudice and conviction. There are those who would take refuge under a cloak of charity, from having their unsoundness exposed. They speak smooth, oily words about love, as though love bids us close our mouths and let false teachers spread religious poison. If I know someone is seeking to give my neighbor poison food, love does not require me to keep my mouth shut, but to warn my neighbor. I would probably incur the disfavor of the one giving out the poison food, but it is my duty to warn my neighbor, nevertheless. So, when I see people preaching false doctrines, that would poison the minds of men, love bids me speak out and warn people about the same. Love rejoices in the truth, I Cor. 13:6. That subtle teaching that would forbid the exposure of false doctrine is from the pit and not from God. Not long since, a certain man asked me why we did not do constructive work, rather than destructive work. He had reference to the writers book exposing the doctrines of Campbellism. I told him it was some­times necessary to do some destructive work before we could do a work of construction. When a field has become grown up in briars, it is necessary to cut off and destroy those briars, before that field can be cultivated. The same is true in religious work. It is necessary ofttimes, to clear away the rubbish from the minds of people, before their minds can receive the truth. A New Testament Church must contend for the truth without fear or favor. It must reprove, rebuke, and exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. It will consider itself responsible to God, and not to men, for what it teaches. Throughout the Old Testament, we find the prophets of God denouncing the errors of false religion. The same is true with the apostles and teach­ers of New Testament times. It is also true of the real churches of Christ, today.

A New Testament Church is a peculiar church. “Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people,” I Peter 2:9. We are not to be like other people. We are to stand separate and apart from those who do not teach and walk according to the Word of God. When Israel wanted to be like the nations about them, and demanded a king, they started in the wrong direction. This choice on their part, ultimately, carried them into Babylonian captivity. So when churches desire to be like other people around them, they are headed for religious Babylon. Last year I was visiting in Kansas. I found, by inquiring, that there was not a single Baptist church in that county, where I was visiting. Why had Baptists ceased to exist in that part of the country?

The Northern Baptist people had affiliated and compromised with other denominations until they had become completely swallowed up. Baptists must contend for their princi­ples and their peculiarity of separation from other denominations.

But, thank God, there will always be some churches that will contend for the truth, once for all delivered unto the saints.

CAN DOCTRINES, WHICH ARE OPPOSED TO EACH OTHER, BOTH BE RIGHT? If one church is as good as another, then doctrines which are opposed to one another, would all have to be right. Can this be true? Does God forgive the sins of some people before baptism, as Baptists and some others teach, and the sins of others in the act of baptism, as Campbellites and others teach? If God forgives sins before baptism, then is it not an error to teach that they are not forgiven until baptism?

(For full discussion of this subject see my book, “The Tribe of Ishmael.” If God forgives sins before baptism, the one who goes into the water expecting to receive remission of sins in that act, will most certainly not receive remission of sins at all. His faith has been misplaced. The same principle applies to all other doctrines.

There can only be one kind of churches that is right. “There is One Faith, One Lord, and One Baptism,” Eph. 4:5. The one faith means one system of doctrine. There can no more be two or more correct systems of doctrines than there can be two or more Lords. There cannot be more than one baptism any more than there can be more than one Lord. Several churches differing in doctrine from one another cannot all be right. If three men counted a flock of sheep, and they counted ninetyeight, ninety-nine, and one hundred, respectively, they could not all be right. They might all be wrong, but they COULD not all be right. Only ONE could be right.

So, a dozen or more churches, teaching doctrines that differ, cannot all be right.

Only ONE can be RIGHT. If Baptist churches are right, others are wrong. If Baptist churches are wrong, then some other kind is right. Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, Campbellites, and various others, cannot all be right.

If Baptist churches are TRUE churches, then they are the ONLY TRUE churches. If Baptist churches are NOT true churches, then other churches are inconsistent in receiving Baptist baptism. If Baptist churches are true churches, then they are consistent in rejecting the baptism of others. This much must be conceded by other denominations.

All truth is narrow. Two and two make four and not six. Neither can we compromise the matter and make two and two equal five. If a man proceeded upon this principle in every day matters he would soon find himself in the greatest of confusion. If New York is twelve hundred miles away, and some one says its only eight hundred miles away, it would be folly to compromise and say it is only a thousand miles away. Suppose I proceed upon that theory and borrowed enough money to take me a thousand miles and back. I would find myself four hundred miles away from home when my money was spent on the return trip. So it is with religious truth. It is narrow, like all other truths. The world likes to speak of those who stand ready to fellowship anything and everything that comes in the name of Christ as being broad.

Those who refuse to fellowship those whom they consider in error, the world terms as narrow. In reply to this I refer you to the words of Christ in Mat 7:13-14 –“Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Baptists accord to others the right to read and interpret the Bible for themselves, but at the same time we consider it. our duty to expose what we believe to be error in others.

To be consistent we must refuse to exchange pulpits or hold union meetings with them or accept their baptism. If others believe themselves to be right and us to be wrong, then, to be consistent they should expose what they believe to be wrong and refuse to fellowship the same. It is very inconsistent to say that a thing is wrong and then be willing to practice and support the same. If sprinkling is the baptism our Lord commanded, then it is a sin to practice any other. Why then, will some practice sprinkling and other forms? The church that does that stamps itself at once as not contending for the truth, and therefore being unscriptural. In substance it says “we believe in both truth and error and will uphold both.” All who sprinkle will also practice immersion. This eliminates all bodies that sprinkle for baptism and leaves the field open to those who practice immersion only, in our search for a New Testament Church. We do not have to go two hundred years back to find the Missionary Baptists standing alone for immersion only. Campbellites, Free Wills, Advents, Christadelphians, and Hardshells had not come into existence at that time.

IS ERROR AS GOOD AS TRUTH?

To say that one church is as good as another is to say that error is as good as truth, or that no church teaches the truth. We read in Psalm 100:5, “His truth endureth to all generations.”

We read in Jude 1:3, that the faith “Was once for all delivered to the saints.”

(R. V.) This Greek word “hapax” means that a thing is so done as to never need to be repeated. Is error as good as truth in temporal things? I recently read where a boy picked up a torpedo from a candy counter thinking that it was candy. He bit down on the torpedo and had his mouth badly torn by the explosion. The truth about the matter was that it was a torpedo and not candy.

The boy was in error thinking that it was candy. The truth would certainly have been more profitable on that occasion. One time I came very near giving one of my children carbolic acid thinking it was paregoric. The paregoric bottle and the carbolic acid bottle were the same size and looked very much alike, and somehow had been placed on the same shelf. Fortunately I smelled the carbolic acid in time to avoid making a fatal blunder. The boy mentioned above did not lose his life, but was painfully injured. Some err in spiritual things to their destruction, and others, while not erroring in things so vital, bring upon themselves a spiritual loss.

To seek to fellowship and uphold both truth and error would be like teaching one boy that torpedo was candy, and teaching another the truth about it. Would it be candy to one boy and a torpedo to another? Would that carbolic acid have been paregoric to one child and a deadly poison to another? No sane person would think so. Why not use the same judgment about spiritual matters that we do about temporal things? No right thinking person would commend the one who would knowingly stand by and watch that boy mistake the torpedo for candy, without warning him. Why, then, will they censure those who seek to warn people about spiritual errors? It is important to have the truth in temporal matters, how much more important that we be right in spiritual matters! The boy mentioned above honestly thought that the torpedo was candy. That honestly did not save him from being seriously injured. So people may honestly think they are right in spiritual matters and yet lose their rewards or miss being saved. Saul of Tarsus thought he was right when he was persecuting the followers of Christ, but he found out that he was a lost man. “There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death,” Prov. 14:12; 16:25.

The writer is not asking the reader to take his conclusions without them being duly weighed. He is only trying to get the reader to realize that spiritual truths are definite and positive, and that just any old thing in the name of Christ is not sufficient. We are admonished in the Word of God to examine ourselves and to prove ourselves, 2 Cor. 13:5. Again we are admonished to “Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear,” I Peter 3:15.

ARE THOSE WHO PREACH AND PRACTICE THINGS CONTRARY TO THE WORD OF GOD AS PLEASING IN HIS SIGHT AS THOSE WHO ARE SCRIPTURAL IN DOCTRINE AND PRACTICE?

Some people seem to think that God is pleased with the preaching and worship of all churches, no matter what they may preach and practice. If this be so, then why would He not be pleased with my preaching all the different contradictory doctrines? Today I would preach that it is impossible for a child of God to lose his salvation. Tomorrow I would preach that he could lose his salvation.

One day I would preach that immersion of a believer is the only baptism.

Another time I would preach that baptism was good if administered by sprinkling and pouring. One day I would preach that we are saved before and independent of baptism. The next day I would preach that we are not saved until baptized. I would preach that there was a hell, and then turn around and preach that there was no hell. Then why would it not be right to preach them in the same sermon?

One minute I would be contending for the doctrine of eternal punishment, and the next I would be denying it. Would God be pleased with such contradictory preaching? What would be the influence of such preaching on those who heard it?

Surely they would think that I was a fit subject for the insane asylum. Then why believe that God is the author of such

confusion and folly?

Does God send out all these preachers and churches to confuse the minds of people?

Surely not.

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. {confusion: Gr. tumult, or, unquietness}” I Cor. 14:33.

A wholesale firm would not send out a dozen salesmen and give each instructions to contradict the sales talk of the others. Then why think that God is pleased with all these contradictory doctrines?

Let us examine the Word of God on this line. “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the LEAST in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven,” Matt. 5:19.

If there is a difference in the least and the greatest then surely there is a difference in the men and churches that do and teach His commandments and those who break them, and teach men so. When a preacher or church is teaching people that it does not make any difference how they are baptized, are they not teaching men to break His commandments? Jesus said, “Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you,” John 15:14.

How can men and churches love Christ and teach people to ignore or change His commandments? Baptists believe in practicing that which the Lord has commanded us, and in the way He commanded us to do those things. We do not believe that baptism and the Lords supper are essential to salvation but they are essential to the purpose for which given. We do not believe that any preacher or church has a right to change them. We believe that those who play loose in these matters, in order to please men or to accommodate someones belief or prejudice, will certainly be called to account for so doing. If they are regenerated they will not be lost themselves, but will certainly lose their rewards.

Let us now take an Old Testament example. During the times of Eli the children of Israel had taken the ark of the Lord into battle. Because of their wicked­ness the Lord had delivered them into the hands of the Philistines. They were defeated and the ark had been captured by the enemy. God plagued the Philistines because of the ark. They finally placed it on a wagon and hitched some milch cows to the wagon. These cows carried it back into the country of the Israelites. It was placed in the house of Abinadab, When David came to the throne he purposed to bring the ark back and place it in the tabernacle where it belonged. That was the right thing to do but they went about it in the wrong way.

The law specified that the ark should be carried on the shoulders of the Levites. David and his people did not search the Word of God to see how it should be carried. Very likely they thought like many people today, that it did not make any difference how the thing was done, just so it was done. They placed the ark on a wagon and hitched some oxen to the wagon. The ark jolted and Uzzah thrust forth his hand to stay the ark, and God struck him dead on the spot. Then David had the Levites to sanctify themselves, that they might bring up the ark. He said, “Because ye did it not at the first, the Lord our God made a breach upon us, FOR THAT WE SOUGHT HIM NOT AFTER THE DUE ORDER,”I Chron. 15:12-13. From this we see that God requires that our services toward Him be done after the due order. It must be done as He has instructed in His Word. The second time they went out the Lord was with them and they brought the ark back with shouting and rejoicing.

We are admonished by the Apostle Paul to take heed how we build upon the foundation. “Every mans work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every mans work of what sort it is. {it shall be: Gr. it is} If any mans work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any mans work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.”

I Cor. 3:13-15. Everything that is done that is not according to the Bible will be burned as wood, hay and stubble. Jesus said, “In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men,” Matt. 15:9. Does this sound like it makes no difference how one is baptized?

Will not those who have been so broad as to change the commandment of Christ to observe the traditions of men find that they have labored in vain? “Thus have ye made the com­mandment of God of none effect by your

traditions,” Matt. 15:6. Jesus accused the Pharisees of rejecting the commandment of God, that they might keep their own traditions. (See Mark 7:9.) Is this not what men do today who will practice three modes of baptism, to please the people? When the Lord judges the works of His people, such as these will find themselves reckoned as least in the kingdom of heaven. “Many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first,” Matt. 19:30. The judgment of men as to the worth of the servants of God will be reversed. Those whom the world lauded as being great and broad will find them­selves placed as last.

Those the world called narrow and little will be given the first place by the Lord. Reader, let no man deceive you. In that day you shall find that it does make a difference as to what church you belong, and as to what you practice for doctrine. “Let no man beguile you of your reward,” Col. 2:18. “Hold fast that thou hast, that no man take thy crown,” Rev. 3:11.

THERE IS NO SLIDING SCALE OF WORSHIP AND SERVICE I find many who think there is a sliding scale of worship and service which every man may adjust to his own conditions. Not long ago, I found a man who thought that part of the Bible taught Missionary Baptist doctrine, while other parts taught Methodist doctrine, and yet other parts taught Campbellite doc­trine and on and on through the various catalogue of different doctrines. To him the Word of God was just like a Piggly-Wiggly store. Each man could go to the Bible and take what he wanted and leave the rest for others to take. I have seen men proceed upon this line in a debate. Instead of taking up the argument of their opponent and showing where he had made a wrong application they present an opposing line of argument. The Word of God does not teach different systems of doctrine opposing to one another. Rightly divided, the Bible will harmonize. Any system of doctrine that cannot be harmonized with the rest of the Word of God is false and should be avoided. As an ex­ample, we are distinctly told that we are not saved by works. “Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our own works,” II Tim. 1:9. “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us,” Titus 3:5. “And if by grace, then it is no more works: other­wise grace is no more grace,” Romans 11:6. To offset these plain passages of Scripture those who believe in salvation by works will quote James on Abraham being justified by works when he offered up Isaac.

(James, Chapter two). But James does not say that Abraham was saved by works. He only says he was justified by works. There is a justification in the sight of God, and a justification in the sight of men. “If Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God,” Romans 4:2.

Then Abraham was not justified before God by his works. His justification by works was in the sight of men, only. This interpre­tation harmonizes with the statements that we are not saved by works. To apply this to our salvation makes the Bible teach two opposing lines of doctrine. This is handling the Word of God unskillfully, if not deceitfully. (See II Cor. 4:2).

In many meetings today people are told to join the church of their choice. This preacher has never been guilty of doing that yet. The Lord told us to “Teach them to observe all things whatsoever I have com­manded you, Matt. 28:20. He did not say to tell the people to join the church of their choice or to be baptized in any way they might prefer. We are to teach them the will of the Lord in the matter.

Having done that we have discharged our duty. If the other person chooses not to act upon those instructions then the matter is between him and the Lord. But we have not discharged our duty until we have taught the will of the Lord in these things.

Does one have a right to a church of his own choice? Do people have the right to be baptized as they please? So far as man is concerned, they may, but before the Lord they do not. Christ has made the choice for us. He has marked out that way. We have no more right to set our own standard of service than we have to set our own standard as to what is a bushel of potatoes. Suppose a wholesale merchant had engaged a thousand bushels of potatoes at $1.00 per bushel. When they bring their potatoes in, each man claims the right to set his own standard of a bushel. Smith claims the right to have fifty-five pounds as a bushel, Williams sets forty pounds, Brown thirty-five, and so on, each man having a different standard for a bushel. When the merchant has let each man set his own standard and purchased the potatoes, he finds his buyer insists on getting seventy pounds for a bushel. Would this not work untold confusion? Would those farmers be justified in criticizing the merchant if he refused to accept their

different standards, and instead insisted upon the standard that was fixed by law? No right-thinking person would think so. There must be some fixed standard by which we are to conduct business affairs.

This standard must be fixed by law. That standard is the standard for Brown, Smith, Jones and everyone else.

So it is in spiritual affairs. There must be some fixed standard for every man.

The one who refuses to be guided by that standard is guilty of causing discord and con­fusion. The one who insists on staying with that stand­ard cannot be justly blamed for the wide-spread con­fusion that prevails today in religious matters.

Since we must have a fixed standard of worship, what is to be the standard? It must be the Word of God. No man or set of men have a right to legislate for the people of God. Only the great head of the church, Jesus Christ, Himself, has the right to fix rules regulating the worship and service of His people.

This He has already done. Having done this He told His church to teach them to observe all things that He had commanded. A Scriptural church must do this, no more, and no less. Any church that adds one thing or takes away one thing from what He commanded to be observed, cannot rightly be called a Scriptural church.

Those who insist that something else is just as good, question the wisdom of Christ and are guilty of causing confusion and division.

SHOULD BAPTISTS HOLD UNION MEETINGS OR EXCHANGE PULPITS WITH OTHER DENOMINATIONS? In some places people who claim to be Baptists will exchange pulpits and hold union meetings with other denominations. To do this means to put the other churches on the same level with Baptist churches and to give the world the idea that there is no difference in the churches. The world gets the idea that one church is as good as another. Either this is true or it is not true. If a man calls himself a Baptist and thinks that other churches are as good as the Baptist churches then he should, in all consistency insist on the abolish­ment of Baptist Churches. If other churches are just as good as Baptist churches and preach the truth as well, then there is no need of a Baptist church. We could abolish the Baptist churches and we would have that much less division. On the other hand if other churches are not as good as Baptist churches there is no need for other churches. What truths do they preach that the Baptists do not preach? If the world did not have them it would have just as much truth as it now has, and a lot less of error. If we join with them in a union service and leave the impression with the world that there is no difference, then we are a party to teaching the world something that is not true. Can we do that and be blameless?

If we do not believe that other churches are Scrip­tural churches, then to join in with them and pretend that they are equally as sound as Baptist churches is to pretend to believe what we do not think is so. This is hypocrisy. “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin,” Romans 14:23. We do not ask it, nor expect it of other churches. If they believe they have the truth and that we do not, then consistency would demand that they refuse to affiliate with us. It is wrong to ask people to do that which they think is wrong, unless you can first teach them that they are wrong in their posi­tion. A union meeting would not last long where each party was doing his best to convince the other of his error.

Again, if we took part in a union meeting and did not teach all things that Christ commanded we would be unfaithful to Him. How could a Baptist teach and contend for immersion only while in a meeting with people who believe in sprinkling? If we invited people to join the church of their choice, then we would leave the impression that sprinkling was just as good as immersion for baptism. If we engaged in a union serv­ice and left off the matter of baptism altogether, then we allow men to persuade us not to teach something that Christ told us to teach. By what process of reason­ing can we conclude that it would be profitable to keep silent on some things that Christ told us to teach? This is the same as saying that we know better than Christ what would best promote the cause. Is this not veiled modernism?

Not long ago I was in the city of St. Louis, Missouri. At that time the American Federation of Churches held a great rally in that city. They were launching what they called the American Preaching Mission. In that heterogeneous mass of religionists, represent­ing most of the leading denominations, were modernists and those who were supposed to believe in the inspired Word. Dr. Geo. Truett, one of the prominent men of the Southern Baptist Convention was one of the main speakers. Dr. Stanley Jones, a modernist, was another. Mr. Jones said that one of the purposes of the meet­ing was to bring denominations closer to each other and to pray for the success of each other. How could one who believes in the divinity of Christ pray for God to bless the work of the man who is trying to keep people from believing in that doctrine? How could one who believes in the necessity of the new birth pray for God to bless the work of those who do not teach the new birth. Can I consistently ask God to bless both the truth and error? This is the logical outcome of unionism. It would not stop at shutting our mouth on the question of baptism, but would soon stop our mouth on the doctrines of the resurrection, virgin birth, and the new birth. Not long ago I heard where some of the British missionaries in India were leaving the name of our Lord out of their songs and prayers to keep from offending the Hindus.

But what does the Word of God say on this line? We are told to “Mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them,” Romans 16:17. When some legalistic teachers were disturbing the churches of Galatia, the apostle wrote and said, “If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed,” Gal. 1:9. Does this sound like praying for God to bless the work of these false teachers? The apostle even went so far as to say, “I would they were even cut off which trouble you,” Gal. 5:12. To bid a person God speed is to be a partaker of his deeds. “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds,” II John 1:10-11. If any should say that John had reference here to the coming of Christ in the flesh, we reply that the same principle applies to other things that are un­scriptural. If we pray for God to bless those who teach sprinkling and encourage them in this false practice, would we not be partakers with them in that false practice? But, as shown above, the union movement would not stop until it had delivered us into the camp of the modernist. “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump,” Gal. 5:9. It has long been my opinion that the door was opened for modernism to creep into the ranks of Christians by this shut mouth policy on the part of so many. If I keep my mouth shut and wink at the errors of some on baptism and the Lords Supper, then presently some other men are demanding that I also keep my mouth shut when they question the inspira­tion of the Word and the divinity of Christ. A little hole in a levee might seem a trivial matter to some, but if it is left unguarded it soon means that the whole levee is broken. In 1935 the Arkansas River bottom below Morrilton was overflowed. I was told that holes made in the levee by moles had so undermined the levee that the whole thing was caused to give away.

For years the pacifists have been seeking to bring a com­promise between those who hold the truth and those who hold to error. Little by little this compromising spirit has been eating at the bulwarks of faith until today many have been swept away with the flood waters of modernism. The safest policy is to stay with the Word of God on every point and compromise on nothing.

From Genesis to Revelation, the Word of God calls upon us to come out and separate ourselves from error. The ante-diluvian world was corrupted because the true worshippers of God, “The sons of God,”[Genesis 6:1-2] married the daughters of men. Abraham was called upon to come out from his country and his people. The children of Israel were forbidden to intermarry with the nations about them lest they should lead them away from the true worship of God. Solomon disregarded this teaching and some of his foreign wives led him into idolatry. When some of the other tribes wished to go info a union affair with Zerubbabel. and the Jews in the build­ing of the Temple they received this reply, “Ye have

nothing to do with us to build an house unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the Lord God of Israel,” Ezra 4:3.

Perhaps, the most striking example of the evil con­sequences of one who has the truth, going into a union with one who holds to error, is that of Jehoshaphats alliance with Ahab. Jehoshaphat was a worshiper of God; he walked in the first ways of David, and sought not after Baalim. Ahab while

claiming to be a follower of the Lord had mixed the worship of Baalim with his religion. These two joined affinity. Ahab wished to go out to battle and desired that Jehoshaphat go with him. Jehoshaphat desired to inquire of the Lord about the matter. Ahab had a bunch of men-pleasing prophets who knew what Ahab wanted to do so they told him to go up against Ramoth—gilead to battle and prosper. Jehoshaphat was not satisfied with these prophets.

Perhaps, he discerned the man-pleasing spirit they had. He wanted to know if there were not a prophet of the Lord besides these of whom they might inquire.

Ahab said there was one other, Micaiah, the son of Imla, but he said, “I do not like him for he does not prophesy good, but evil concerning me.” Micaiah was sent for by the request of Jehoshaphat. When he came, Ahab professed to want nothing but the truth in the name of the Lord. Micaiah prophesied that the expedition would fail and Ahab would be killed. Then Micaiah was abused and put in prison for telling the truth. Ahab played a trick on Jehoshaphat by having him to go into battle with his kings robes on, while Ahab disguised himself.

When the enemy saw Jehoshaphat with his kings robes on they thought he was Ahab, whom they wished to kill. Only the mercies of God kept them from killing Jehoshaphat. Ahab was killed despite his disguise. Then Jehoshaphat returned to his own land. He was met by Jehu who said, “Shouldest thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?” II Chron. 19:2. After this Jehoshaphat did all he could to make amends for this foolish step. He instituted many reforms and tried not only to turn his people away from idolatry, but those of the Northern King­dom as well. But the seeds were sown.

His son had married the daughter of Ahab. After the death of Jehoshaphat his son and his evil wife undid all the good work of his father. This is a most solemn lesson. It shows us the far-reaching consequence of a com­promising step. While in a union meeting with others, seeds would be planted in the minds of the younger generation that might lead them away from the truth.

Right here I desire to warn our preachers against an evil that is rapidly growing among us. In most cities and towns preachers of all denominations form themselves into what they call a “Ministerial Alliance,” or a “Ministerial Association.” This scribe has always steered clear of such an organization and looked upon it as an unholy alliance.

He considers it an opening wedge on the part of unsound preachers to secure recognition for their false claims to being true ministers of Christ. By such alliances Baptists have everything to lose and nothing to gain. When Baptist preachers join such alliances or associations they virtually ac­knowledge and recognize preachers of all faiths as true ministers of Christ and thereby put them on the same level with themselves. If they do not believe that preachers of all denominations should be recognized as being equally Scriptural with Baptists, then they are acting hypocritical when they so pretend by joining their alliances. Moreover, they put themselves in an embarrassing situation.

Unscriptural movements and programs will be proposed in these alliances, which no true Baptist can afford to endorse. He must keep his mouth shut and have the appearance of endorsing some things which he does not believe to be Scriptural or else find himself in a hopeless minority in objecting to such movements.

Let us remember the mistake of Jehoshaphat in his unwise alliance with Ahab, and the evil consequences of that alliance.

Remember the words of Jehu, “Should­est thou help the ungodly, and love them that hate the Lord?” II Chron. 19:2. We should also remember that Jesus said, “If a man love me, he will keep my words,” John 14:23. “And he that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings,” John 14:24. If preachers are unwilling to keep the sayings of Christ, how are we to know they love Him? Then, pray tell me, what fellowship can Baptists have with them?

In this connection I wish to say it is not the preach­ers business to so preach as to keep everybody in his community on good terms with one another. Jesus said, “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on the earth? I tell you, Nay, but rather division: for from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two,” etc., Luke 12:51-52. It is our duty to faithfully declare the Word of God without com­promise. This will most certainly bring opposition from those who hold to error. Truth exposes error, and those who have their unscriptural practices exposed will become offended and start an opposition against those who expose their error. It was our Lords exposure of the sham and unscriptural practices of the Pharisees that brought about their opposition of Him, which

opposition brought on His crucifixion.

Not long ago I read in a magazine where a certain writer said there was something he could not under­stand about Christianity. It was supposed to bring peace and instead of doing that he had seen it divide households. I said to myself that this man had not read his Bible closely. Jesus taught us that His teach­ings would divide households. Not because there is anything wrong with His teachings, but because, “The carnal mind is enmity against God,” Romans 8:7.

Those who hold to false doctrines will listen placidly to others preach false doctrines which they do not be­lieve, but when someone so preaches as to expose their error they become offended at once. Mr. Kagawa, the famous Japanese who has been speaking in this coun­try does not believe in the divinity or the vicarious death of Christ. Many who went to hear him speak believed in these doctrines. Yet they gladly listened to him and did not become offended. But had some Missionary Baptist exposed their false practice on infant baptism and sprinkling and episcopacy they would have been greatly offended. It is the truth that hurts and causes men to take offense. When Christ re­buked the Pharisees, for making the Word of God of none effect, by their traditions, they became offended, Matt. 15:1-12.

Though people may become offended, yet it is our duty to warn them of false doctrines and rebuke their error. “Reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine,” II Tim. 4:2. “Rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith,” Titus 1:13.. If our preaching does not stir up opposition, then it is a good sign that we are not loyal to the truth. Jesus said, “The servant is not greater

than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.” John 15:20.

PERSECUTION, A MARK OF THE TRUE CHURCH It would be out of place in closing this treatise, to omit the subject of persecution. A Scriptural church will be a persecuted church. It will be criticized, mis­represented, and called an ignorant, narrow, conceited sect. All forms of worldly tactics and arguments will be employed to make life miserable for those who dare to stand out from those who preach and practice un­sound doctrine. Had Paul been willing to compro­mise with the legalism of the Pharisees, he would not have suffered persecution. “And I, brethren, if I yet preach circumcision, why do I yet suffer persecution? Then is the offense of the cross ceased,” Gal. 5:11. The preaching of salvation by grace, apart from the works of the flesh gave offense, and brought on persecution. The same is true today. Those who dare to preach the grace of God alone and disregard all human works and human commandments, are likewise persecuted. It is the fear of persecution that causes many to com­promise the truth and refuse to separate themselves from those that live in error.

Persecution is one of the marks by which we may know a true child of God and a true church.

“All that will live godly in Christ SHALL suffer persecution.” II Tim. 3:12. “Before all these they shall lay hands on you, being brought before kings and rulers for my names sake. And it shall turn to you for a testimony,” Luke 21:12, 13. “And ye shall be hated of all men for my names sake,” Luke 21:17. The followers of Christ was the sect everywhere spoken against. “For as con­cerning this sect, we know that everywhere it is spoken against,” Acts 28:22.

What church fulfills these predictions more than the Missionary Baptist Church?

Reader, have you been guilty of censuring the Baptists for refusing to hold union meetings, practic­ing restricted communion, and being peculiar? If so, you are only pointing out the Baptists, as Gods pe­culiar people. Jesus said, “Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven,” Matt. 5:10. Are you guilty of reviling Baptists for being peculiar, when Jesus said we were to be a peculiar people? Do you speak evil of us for being separate, when we are told to come out from among them and be separate? II Cor. 6:17. You should read where Jesus said, “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake,” Matt. 5:11. You are only helping to point us out as being Gods peculiar people.

You are also branding yourself as being ignorant of the Word of God, if not an unsaved person. When Jesus was telling His disciples that they would be persecuted for their preaching, He said, “But all

these things will they do unto you, for my names sake, because they know not him that sent me,” John 15:21. These are plain words, but they are the words of the Master. Do these words offend you?

Then you had better take an inventory of your standing before God. Reader, are you persecuted and reviled because you are a Baptist? Do your companions, friends, or rela­tives say hard, cruel, cutting things against you because of your stand? If so, then you should rejoice and leap for joy. Remember the words of Christ, “Re­joice and be exceeding glad for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you,” Matt. 5:12. If we are persecuted, it is a sign that we are walking in the steps of our Lord and Master. The trials that we have to endure, He also endured; the thorns that pierce our feet, pierced His; the scorn that we have to endure, He had to endure. This should make us rejoice, for it is a sign that we are walking according to His Word. A few years ago, I made a trip to central Oklahoma to hold a meeting. When I reached the town of Roff, about eight oclock that night, I inquired the way to a certain country church. The instructions I received were so complicated that I did not know for sure that I was carrying them out, until I reached a rocky lane leading up a hill. I was told that when I struck that rocky lane leading up the hill, I was near the church house. When I reached it, every time the car jolted over the rocks it was an assurance to me that I was traveling the way I wanted to go. So, when we meet with these persecutions, and trials, along lifes way, it is an assurance that we are walking in the way of our Lord.

Then, we are told, “If we suffer with him, we shall also reign with him:” II Tim. 2:12; Romans 8:17.

After the suffering comes the glory; after the cross comes the crown.

“Must Jesus bear the cross alone, And all the world go free?

No, theres a cross for every one, And theres a cross for me.

O precious cross! O glorious crown! O resurrection day!

Ye angels from the stars come down, And bear my soul away.

Upon the crystal pavement down, At Jesus pierced feet, Joyful Ill cast my golden crown, And His dear name repeat.”

Then he answered and spake unto me, saying, This is the word of the LORD unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the LORD of hosts. Who art thou, O great mountain? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a plain: and he shall bring forth the headstone thereof with shoutings, crying, Grace, grace unto it.

ZECHARIAH chapter 4

Got PDF? See also these by Elder Jones: Standing Fast In The Truth and Is There A Difference In The Churches? and The Sabbath Day & Questions for Tithers and "FREEDOM FROM THE LAW of Moses and Spiritual Growth in CHRIST." [This electronic edition was prepared with some editing of typos and adding of Scripture especially what follows. This reproduction was undertaken with desire to promote the Kingdom of our dear Lord and permission granted from a recollection of a phone conversation with Mrs. J.N. Loleta Jones Farish; Cave Springs, Ark. It is believed that Bro. Jones would have approved. Forty years ago this book and the grace of GOD made a Baptist out of me and it should make one of any reasonable GOD fearing person, if the LORD please. - Eric Nelson] “…God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;…” – Romans 3:4

The Shayne Moses Project

Got PDF?

The Origin and Perpetuity of the Church of JESUS CHRIST

by F. L. DuPont*

It’s ORIGIN CHAPTER I. The time, place and circumstances of the origin and establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ, is a subject concerning which, there is and has been for years, a wide diversity of opinion extant in the Christian world, and over which there has been many a hotly waged theological contest. The three principal positions respecting this matter, as held and advocated by their respective adherents, are as follows: 1. The great mass of the Pedobaptist world, including Methodists, Presbyterians, and their numerous branches, advocate the view that the Church was established at the time, and formed on the Covenant that God made with Abraham, as recorded in Genesis 12:1-8; 15:18-21; 17:1-14.

There are a few others among the Pedo-baptists, who try to find a church away back in the Garden of Eden, and although they are a small minority, yet with the generally prevailing idea of Church salvation which obtains among them, it should be an argument greatly in their favor.

For, if the Covenant of Salvation was not made until the days of Abraham, we would asks how, and by the provisions of what covenant, were those saved such as Abel, Enoch, Noah, etc., who lived during the two thousand years prior to that time? Can any Pedo-baptist answer? That the Church was not established in the days of Abraham, we refer the reader to the chapter on the “Covenants.”

2. The second theory is, that the Church of Christ was established on the day of Pentecost.

But notwithstanding the advocates of this view have been most earnestly entreated, times without number, to point out just one passage, only one, which says that any organization of any sort, kind or character, bearing the least resemblance to a Church, was effected on that occasion, or that they possessed any powers, (save that of speaking with tongues), enjoyed any privileges, administered any ordinances, or transacted any business, on or after that day, that they did not have before, they have been as silent as the grave, save and except a bold and blatant reiteration of their unfounded assumption.

Indeed, it has always been a profound mystery to the author, why men claiming to be followers and lovers of the Lord Jesus Christ should persistently seek to rob Him of the honor and glory of founding His own Church, and try to confer this honor and glory upon some mere man. Perhaps, it is because they desire to have a seeming precedent and authority for the Luthers, Calvins, Wesleys, Campbells, et mul al, who have founded organizations, from time to time, claiming to be “Churches” or “Branches” of the Church of Jesus Christ.

3. The Baptist idea and the Bible idea is, that Jesus Christ founded His own Church, and while I shall establish this fact from the Scriptures, I shall also show that both of the preceding theories are false, and therefore dishonoring to the great Head of the Church. “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” Isaiah 8:20

I. Proposition.

A succinct statement of the proposition to be established in the following pages would be—, “Missionary Baptist Churches are, in Origin, Perpetuity, Polity, Doctrine and Practice, identical with the Church established by Jesus Christ during His personal ministry on earth.”

The arguments in support of this proposition, have been put to the severest test on many a hard fought theological field, by the representative men of both the Pedobaptist and Campbellite churches, and, like the “Rock of Gibraltar,” they have stood the attack unmoved and unshaken, from the simple fact, that they are founded upon the immutable Rock of God’s eternal truth.

It is absolutely necessary to the fair and candid discussion, as well as the perfect understanding of a proposition, that the terms in which it is stated be so clearly defined that there may be no misapprehension of their meaning, and no ambiguity in their use.

II. Definition of Terms.

1. “Church.”

“We believe that a visible church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers, associated together in the faith and fellowship of the gospel; observing the ordinances of Christ; governed by His laws, and exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them

by His Word, and that its only Scriptural officers are bishops, (elders or pastors), and deacons.”

This definition is from Pendleton’s Church Manual, and expresses the Baptist idea very clearly.

Another definition as given in the “Thirty-nine Articles of Religion,” of the Episcopal church, and copied into the disciplines of the M. E. churches, is as follows: “The visible church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the sacraments duly administered according to Christ’s ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same.” This definition is very good if we understand by the term, “faithful men,” believers, men and women; and by the term “sacraments,” merely the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, divested of saving efficacy.

2. “Baptist churches” are distinguished from all others principally by the following peculiarities, viz.: a. The Bible only as our all-sufficient rule of faith and practice. b. The baptism of believers only by immersion. c. A regenerated church membership. d. Admission to the Lord’s Supper of those only who have been Scripturally baptized, and are in full fellowship in doctrine and practice, with the church celebrating the ordinance. e. The administration of the laws and ordinances of the gospel, committed to the churches as the executive bodies of Christ upon earth. f. The validity of the ordinances depend upon their being administered by Scriptural authority, for a Scriptural purpose, to scripturally prepared subjects, in a Scriptural manner, and with a Scriptural design. g. That Christ organized His during His personal ministry on earth, and that there have been an uninterrupted succession of churches characterized by gospel principles and practices from that time to the present, and that they will continue until He comes again. h. That a church of Christ is a local, visible congregation of baptized believers, independent of all other such bodies, and complete in itself.

i. That a church of Christ is not a legislative, but an executive body, having no lawgiver in Zion, but the Lord Jesus Christ only. He having given by the pen of inspiration all laws, rules and regulations necessary for its government as recorded in the New Testament. j. That we have no “lords over God’s heritage,”( 1 Peter 5:3) but tenaciously hold to the doctrine taught by our blessed Redeemer, when he said: “Ye know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them; not so shall it be among you.” “Neither be ye called master, for one is your Master, even the Christ, and all ye are brethren,” Matthew 20:25-26; 23:8-10.

3. Missionary Baptist churches are contra-distinguished from Anti-Missionary Baptist churches, principally by their efforts to carry out the commission which Christ gave to His churches: “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.”

Matthew 28:18-20. These efforts we call Home and Foreign Missions.

Webster defines the term, “Missionary,” one who is sent on a mission; especially one sent to propagate religion.”

4. “Origin,” beginning; commencement, source.

5. “Perpetuity,” continuous duration without cessation 6. “Polity” form of government and administration of discipline.

7. “Doctrine,” that which we believe and teach as gospel truths.

8. “Practice,” putting into practical operation the teaching of the New Testament concerning the laws, ordinances, rules and regulations for the preaching and support of the gospel; the establishment and government of churches; the reception of members, etc., according to our understanding of said teaching.

9. “Identical,” precisely the same; just like.

Having clearly defined Our proposition, it will be seen that we are to prove that the Missionary Baptist churches of today, are just like those of the New Testament in doctrine, polity and practice, and that they have continued in uninterrupted succession from the days of Jesus Christ and His apostles, down to the present time.

Our arguments shall be mainly predicated upon the Scriptures themselves, supported by whatever facts of ecclesiastical history as may be necessary to identify and distinguish the true churches of Christ from the false, during the eighteen centuries that have elapsed from the establishment of the first Christian church to the present.

We shall discuss the proposition in regular order, and proceed to establish it item by item, as it is stated above.

CHAPTER II. III. The Origin of the Church.

Our proposition asserts that “Jesus Christ established His church during His personal ministry on earth,” and this is the first thing that we shall undertake to prove.

The word ekklesia meaning to “call out” is the word translated “church” in the New Testament, and the same word is used in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, and is there translated, “congregation.”

There are two Hebrew words that are principally used to express this idea, Adah and Kahal.

The first place in which the word “congregation” occurs, is in Exodus 12:3, which was four hundred years after the days of Abraham. That there was an organization in the Jewish nation called the “congregation of Israel,” the “congregation of the Lord,” and such like terms, with Moses as its leader and founder, and which had Aaron as its first high priest, and the sons of Levi for a perpetual priesthood in the tabernacle and temple service, and which had forms of service and worship, sacrificial offerings, which continued down to the days of Christ and His apostles by divine appointment, is beyond dispute. But when Christ came, all these types, shadows and symbols of the old Jewish tabernacle and temple service, were done away forever; since they were fulfilled in Him who was the great Antitype to which they all pointed, and hence there was no longer any use for them.

Indeed, this was one of the main arguments in some of Paul’s letters; as for instance, Ephesians second chapter, and almost the whole of his letter to the Hebrews. We shall present some arguments along this line further on.

As preliminary, and preparatory to the establishment of the Church of Jesus Christ on earth, there was a divinely called, and supernaturally qualified messenger sent into the world,—a man “filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb,”—whose mission was, to “make ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

Let us take a brief survey of this wonderful and unique personage.

IV. John the Baptist, the Forerunner of Christ.

1. PROPHECIES CONCERNING HIM: “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 40:3.

“But the angel said unto him, fear not, Zacharias: for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear thee a son, and thou shalt call his name John. . . . And he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb. And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he shall go before him in the Spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord,” Luke 1:13-17.

“His father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, . . . And thou, child, shall be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; to give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins, . . . To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.” Luke 1:67, 76-79.

2. THESE PROPHECIES FULFILLED: “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger-before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. Thevoice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,” etc. Mark 1:1-12; Matthew 3:1-17; Luke 3:2-18.

From these Scriptures we learn that John was sent on a special mission, and a part of that mission at least, was to “prepare a people for the Lord.” Let us see how he performed his mission.

How did he go about the work of preparing a people for the Lord?”

3. HE PREACHED REPENTANCE TO THE PEOPLE, AND DEMANDED THAT THEY SHOULD BRING FORTH THE EVIDENCES OF IT. “In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, And saying,

Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. . . . But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham. And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” Matthew 3:1-2, 7-12.

These Jews evidently thought that they would be admitted to all the privileges of the kingdom, which John was proclaiming as “near at hand,” on the ground of natural relationship to Abraham; but John calls them a “generation of vipers,” and demands that they shall produce the evidence of their having repented of their sins, just as Baptist preachers do nowaday.

4. HE PREACHED FAITH IN CHRIST. “There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.” John 1:6-7.

“John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. . . . The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand. He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”

John 3:27-36.

Jesus said that John preached repentance and faith.

“For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.” Matthew 21:32.

The Apostle Paul declared the same fact.

“Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”

Acts 19:4.

5. THE PEOPLE HAVING REPENTED AND BELIEVED, HE BAPTIZED THEM, JUST AS BAPTIST PREACHERS DO NOW. “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.” Mark 1:4-5.

“Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Acts 19:4-5.

It is clearly shown from these passages, that John “prepared a people for the Lord”: 1. By preaching repentance.

2. By preaching faith in Christ.

3. And then baptizing all who repented and believed.

CHAPTER III. Having seen how John the Baptist fulfilled his mission, in so far as it embraced the work of “preparing a people for the Lord,” let us now turn and look at the work of Christ, and see what “the Lord” wanted with the people who had thus been “prepared,” and how he utilized them in the organization, and establishment of His church or kingdom on earth. That He had some particular use for them is plainly evident, else John his forerunner, would not have been specially commissioned by the God of heaven, to “prepare them” and have them “ready for the Master,” when He should make his appearance. This the following arguments will clearly show.

Our next argument that Jesus Christ organized, or established His church during His personal ministry on earth, is based upon the following Scriptures.

V. The Establishment of the Church Is Represented Under the Figure of Building A House.

1. THE CHURCH IS CALLED A “HOUSE.” “That thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” 1 Timothy 3:15; Hebrew 10:21 1 Peter 4:17.

2. THE FIRST THING TO DO IN BUILDING A HOUSE, IS TO LAY THE FOUNDATION. No one would dream of putting up the walls, or nailing the roof on a building, without first laying the foundation. But this is just the absurd position to which our Pedo-baptist friends are forced, when they attempt to establish the church of Jesus Christ in the days of Abraham.

3. PROPHECIES RELATING TO THE LAYING OF THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH. “Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying, The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands shall also finish it; and thou shalt know that the LORD of hosts hath sent me unto you. For who hath despised the day of small things? for they shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel with those seven; they are the eyes of the LORD, which run to and fro through the whole earth.” - Zechariah 4:8-10.

Note the following points: (a) “Zerubbabel” is a prophetic name for Jesus Christ; as all commentators agree. (b) “This house” refers to the church of Christ. In this all are again agreed. (c) “The hands of Zerubbabel” were to “lay the foundation” of it, that is, Christ was to lay the foundation of His church. (d) “His hands also shall finish it,” that is, Christ. will complete the work which He has begun.

If you were to say to a contractor, “Did you build that house?” and he would reply, “Yes, I did the work with my own hands,” you would understand at once, that he did the work personally, and not that he did it by proxy, or that he merely superintended the workmen who did build the house.

He teaches this same glorious truth in Luke 14:28-30.

“For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.”

Here He teaches that He has counted all the cost, and is abundantly able to complete the

building of the church, of which he has laid the foundation.

The prophet Isaiah also prophesies: “Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.”

Isaiah 28:16.

That “Zion” was a prophetic name for the Church is clearly seen from the following, as well as many other Scriptures: “Sing praises to the Lord, which dwelleth in Zion,” Psalm 9:11.

“Is not the Lord in Zion: Is not her King in her?” Jeremiah 8:19.

“There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and he shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob,” Romans 11:26; Isaiah 59:20.† 4. THESE PROPHECIES FULFILLED. “Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.” 1 Peter 2:5-6.

In the Septuagint version, which was the version according to the ablest biblical scholars, from which the Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles always quoted, the word translated “tried” is “electon,” which means “chosen,” or “elected,” and the Apostle Peter quotes Isaiah’s language exactly, and applies it to Jesus Christ.

Paul says: “Other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ,” 1 Corinthians 3:11. Having discovered the foundation of this “house,” the next thing is to ascertain— 5. WHEN AND WHERE THIS FOUNDATION WAS LAID. Prophecies respecting the time and place of laying this foundation: “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 unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.”

Isaiah 2:2-3. Also Micah 4:1-2; [cf. Ezekiel 17:22-24.-ed.]

The original word translated “established” here and in Micah, is “kon,” and means “to be set up; to raise up; to be prepared,” according to Gesenius, and the word “prepared” is found in the margin of our English Bibles. This is one of those numerous prophecies found in the Bible, which clearly foretells within the compass of a few lines, the beginning or “setting up,” of Christ’s church or kingdom on earth, its growth or development, and its glorious and triumphant consummation, when “he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” verses 3&4. There are two or three things

contained in this prophecy, which I desire to be borne in mind.

Notice—

(a) The “setting up” of the Lord’s house,” was yet future when Isaiah and Micah wrote these prophecies, about 750 B. C. Then it was not in existence at, or prior to this time.

(b) The context, as well as the phrase, “the last days,” show that the prophecy refers to Christ (c) The “Lord’s house” was to be “established,” or ‘set up” in the ‘top of the mountains.” We beg the reader to bear these arguments in mind, while we introduce another line of Scriptural proof-texts, which represent the establishment of the Church under another figure, closely allied to the preceding.

VI. The Organization of the Church Represented Under the Figure of Building A Temple.

1. THE CHURCH IS CALLED A “TEMPLE.” “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.”

I Corinthians 3:16-17.

(By the way, what a fearful risk do those people incur, who are doing all in their power to overthrow the church of the Living God!) “And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” 2 Corinthians 6:16.

2. THE FIRST THING IN BUILDING A TEMPLE, AS IN BUILDING A HOUSE, IS TO LAY THE FOUNDATION. JESUS CHRIST IS THE CHIEF CORNER-STONE OF THIS FOUNDATION. “Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; In whom all the building” (or Gr. “every building”.) “fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.” Eph. 2:19-22.

3. CHRIST HIMSELF WAS TO BE THE BUILDER OF THIS TEMPLE. “Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD: Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both. . . . And they that are far off shall come and build in the temple of the LORD,” etc., Zech. 6:12-15.

Notice:

(a) Jesus Christ is called “the Branch,” or the “offspring of God.” (Gesenius).

(b) He is to “build the temple of the Lord.” The Hebrew word, “banah,” means to “build,” or “erect.” If Christ was to build or erect this temple, it could not have been in existence before; for it does not say that He was to “rebuild,” “restore,” or “repair” this temple, but “build” it. (c) The “temple of the Lord” clearly refers to the church of Christ. (d) He was to “bear”—the original means “receive”—the “glory,” although a great many of His professed followers are trying to rob Him of it. Note, that the same “he” that was to “receive” the glory, and that was to “sit and rule on His throne,” was the same “he” that was to “build the temple of the Lord.” (e) He was to “rule upon his throne,” that is, be a king and law giver. (f) He was also to be a “priest,” to offer sacrifice and make intercession in this temple.

(g) “They that are afar off”—the Gentiles—“shall come and build in the temple of the Lord,”—shall come and be united to the church of Christ. Fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, and in the apostolic age. (h) All this was yet future, when the prophet Zechariah wrote about 500 B. C. 4. THE PSALMIST DAVID ALSO FORETOLD WHERE THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH WAS TO BE LAID, AND WHO WAS TO BUILD IT. “His foundation is in the holy mountains. The LORD loveth the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob. Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God. Selah. And of Zion it shall be said, This and that man was born in her: and the highest himself shall establish her.” Psalm 87:1-5.

Suppose you were to ask your friend, “Did you make that crop of cotton yourself, or did you hire it done? and he should reply, “Yes, I made it myself,” would you not understand that he did the work in person, and not by proxy? So it is declared by the inspired penman, that Jesus Christ was to found His church Himself and not by proxy.

5. IT WAS TO BE FOUNDED IN THE MOUNTAIN, AND ITS FOUNDATION LAID IN PRAYER. “Yet have I set my King upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession,” etc., Psalm 2:6-12.‡ “Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called a house of prayer for all people.” Isaiah 56:7.

From all these passages of Scripture we learn: 1. That Jesus Christ was the foundation of the “house,” or “temple of God,” that is, the church.

2. That He was the “founder” and builder of this house or temple, i.e., the founder and builder of His church, that “the Highest Himself shall establish her.”

3. From David, that “his foundation is in the holy mountains;” and from Isaiah and Micah, that the Lord’s house should be “established,” or “set up” in the “top of the mountain.” cf. Psalm 72:16.

4. From Isaiah that it was to be a “house of prayer.” Remembering that the word “ekklesia,” translated Church, means “called out,” let us see, how wonderfully all these prophecies were fulfilled.

“And he goeth up into a MOUNTAIN and CALLETH unto him whom he would; and they came unto him. And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach,” Mark 3:13-19.

“And it came to pass in those days that he went out into the MOUNTAIN to pray, and continueth all night in prayer to God. And when it was day he CALLETH unto him his disciples; and of them he chose twelve, whom he also named APOSTLES,” etc., Luke 6:12-16.

Here is the fulfillment of all those prophecies to the very letter: Here is the organization of the first church, A. D. 28. “Clark’s Harmony.” Here are those people whom John “prepared for the Lord.” See John 1:35-51. That John’s disciples left him and became the disciples of Jesus, is not only learned from the facts narrated in the first chapter of John, but also from the statement of John himself, that “he must increase, but I must decrease,” John 3:30. This can mean nothing else than that the disciples of John forsook him, when he pointed out the Messiah

to them, and became the followers of Jesus. Peter also declares that one of the necessary qualifications for the apostleship in the case of the one chosen to fill the place of Judas, was that he should be a witness of everything that transpired in the life of Jesus, “beginning from the baptism of John,” Acts 1:21-22. And if this was a necessary qualification in the case of one of the apostles, it must have been equally necessary in the case of all of them. Jesus has also said, “And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.” John 15:27. Mark tells us when that “beginning” was. “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. . . . John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins,” Mark 1:1-4. “The law and the prophets were until John, since that time the kingdom of God is preached and all men press into it,” Luke 16:16.

Besides, if “the Lord” did not use these people in the organization and establishment of His church, and if this was not the reason why they were thus “prepared” by John, let some doubting Pedo-baptist or Campbellite assign a better and more Scriptural one.

Thus we see how the numerous prophecies relating to the work of Christ in building Hi church, were fulfilled.

1. Christ Himself—not Abraham—not Peter—was the foundation of it, the chief cornerstone.

2. Jesus Christ during His personal ministry—not Abraham—not the twelve apostles on the day of Pentecost —was the founder and builder of His church.

3. It was “set up” or established on the “top of the mountain”—not in a house in Jerusalem on Pentecost.

4. It was composed of the very persons who had been specially prepared under the ministry of John, the forerunner of Christ, and we have seen how the Master utilized them in the organization of His church.

5. The organization was accompanied by prayer. Lest there should be a “doubting Thomas,” the inspired apostle Paul sets the matter forever at rest, by declaring, “And God hath set some in the church, FIRST apostles,” etc., 1 Corinthians 12:28.

“And it came to pass in those days (A. D. 28), that he went out in a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God. And when it was day he calleth unto him his disciples and of them he chose twelve, whom he also named apostles,” etc., Luke 6:12-16.

1. Whom does Paul say was “first set in the church?”

APOSTLES. 2. Whom does Luke say Christ “called unto him in the mountain” when He called out “his church?” APOSTLES. This settles the question beyond all possibility of cavil.

CHAPTER IV. The following arguments in support of our proposition, are introduced in this connection, because they sustain such close relationship to those already presented, and because their logical force and sequence will be more plainly apparent, while those arguments and the passages of Scripture by which they were supported, are still fresh in the reader’s mind.

Besides, the natural order of the line of Scripture reasoning to be hereafter presented, will be less disturbed by this arrangement, than if they were introduced later on.

VII. Moses as the Head and Founder of the Old Testament Church or Ekklesia, Was A Type of Christ as the Head and Founder of the New Testament Church or Ekklesia.

1. The Greek word “Ekklesia,” meaning “calling out,” from “ek,” “out of” and “Kaleo,” “to

call,” is used in the Septuagint version of the Old Testament, and is translated “congregation” in our English Bibles, and the same word is used by the writers of the New Testament, and is most generally translated “church.” The first time the word “congregation” occurs in the Bible, is in Exodus 12:3, where God gives Moses instructions for killing the passover lamb. There is not the slightest mention of a congregation prior to this time. The numerous rites, forms, ceremonies, rules and regulations for the government of the Jewish church or congregation, from this time forward, were all typical of gospel principles, doctrines and practices.

The original Hebrew word in this place is “Adah”, and is translated by the seventy, by the word “sunagoge” English, “synagogue.” The first place the word “ekklesia” occurs in the Septuagint, is in Deut. 32:1, (English Bible, ch. 31:30), and is there the translation of the Hebrew “Kahal.” All these words mean simply and briefly, “an assembly of people called together for some special purpose.”

2. Remembering that the church is called a “house,” 1 Timothy 3:15,§ et al., I invite attention to the following Scriptures: “Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also Moses was faithful in all his house. For this man was counted worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who hath builded the house hath more honour than the house. For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God. And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.” Hebrews 3:1-6.

3. From this and other passages of Scriptures we make the following: DEDUCTIONS: a. The churches both of the Old and New Testament are figuratively called a “house.” b. The “house of Moses” and the “house of Christ,” are two separate and distinct things. c. The former “house” is a type of the latter. And the “glory of this latter house shall be greater than the former,” Haggai 2:9.** d. As Moses was “faithful as a servant in all his house,” so Christ is also “faithful as a son over his own house.” e. “Every house is builded by some man,”—some person. f. As Moses was the founder and builder of “his house,” so Christ is the founder and builder of “his own house.” g. As “Moses’ house” was built during his personal ministry, so “Christ’s house” was built during His personal ministry. h. Paul and the “holy brethren” to whom he was writing, were members of this church, “whose house are we.” This had not always been the case, for Paul declares that when he was a member of the old Jewish church, and an extremely zealous advocate of the “religion” of that church, that he “persecuted the church of God, and wasted it.”

“For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers....And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.” Galatians 1:13-14, 22-23.

“My manner of life from my youth, which was at the first among mine own nation at

Jerusalem, know all the Jews; Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.” Acts 26:4-5.

Hence, the two were entirely distinct and separate organizations.

In the further elucidation of this argument, we shall now indicate some of the principal points in the Old Testament type, which find their analogy in the New Testament ante-type.

4. Moses, as the head and founder of the Old Testament church, was a type of Christ as the head and founder of the New Testament church. a. As Moses was a prophet in his church, so Christ is a prophet in His. “ This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear. This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:” Acts 7:37-38, cf. Deut 18:15-19, and Acts 3:22-23. b. As Moses was the Deliverer or Savior of national Israel, so Christ is the Deliverer or Savior of spiritual Israel. “This Moses, *** God sent to be both a ruler and a deliverer, (Gr. Redeemer,) with the hand of an angel, which appeared to him in the bush.” Acts 7:35, cf. Exodus 3:7-10, with Luke 4:18, et al. c. As Moses was the leader of his people, so Christ is the Leader of His. ‘This man led them forth, having wrought wonders and signs in Egypt, and in the Red Sea, and in the wilderness forty years,” Acts 7:36, cf. Ps. 77:20, Isa. 63:12, with Isa. 55:4, John 10:3-4, Rev. 7:17. d. As Moses was the only Mediator between his people and the Lord, so Christ is the only Mediator between God and His people. “I stood between the Lord and you at that time, to show you the Word of the Lord,” etc., Deut. 5:5.†† “There is one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus,” 1 Timothy 2:5. He that loveth me not, keepeth not my sayings; and the Word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me,” John 14:24, et al. e. As Moses was an intercessor for his people, so Christ intercedes for His. “Moses said unto the people, ye have sinned a great sin; and now I will go up unto the Lord; peradventure I shall make an atonement” (reconciliation) “for your sin,” etc., Exodus 32:30-32. “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous,” 1 John 2:1, cf. Num. 14:13-19, et al, with John 14 ch. et al. f. As Moses was the law-giver to national Israel, so Christ is the Law-giver to His spiritual Israel. “For the law was given by Moses; but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ,” John 1:17.

“There is one lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy:” James 4:12, cf. John 7:19; Galatians 6:2; Romans 8:2. g. As Moses was a judge over his people, so Christ is a Judge over His. “And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses set to judge the people,” etc., Exodus 18:13-16.

“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. et mul al. h. “The Passover Lamb,” directions for observing the feast of which is found in Exodus 12th chapter, was a type of Christ. Paul says: “For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us,” 1 Corinthians 5:7. As the passover lamb was killed in the Old Testament Church, so Christ our Passover Lamb was sacrificed in the New Testament Church, John 1:29, 1 Pet. 1:19-21. And as the children of Israel were to eat the passover lamb, so must his spiritual Israel eat of Christ. cf.

Exodus 12:8-10 with John 6:53-56,63.‡‡ i. As the Israelites were “baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea,” as their deliverer and leader, so His spiritual Israel are baptized unto Christ as their Saviour and leader, 1 Corinthians 10:1-2, cf. Gal. 3:27.

Notice:

The Israelites were not baptized unto Moses, in “order to” make him their deliverer, but because he was already such; so Christ’s spiritual Israel are not baptized into Him “in order to” make him their Saviour, but because He is already their Saviour. Nor were they baptized to make them the Children of Israel, for they were already such, so believers in Christ are not baptized to make them Children of God, for they are His children the moment they believe in Him, John. 1:12-13; Galatians 3:26; 1 John 5:1. §§ j. As the blood of the passover lamb was sprinkled on the lintels and door-posts of their houses (Exodus 12:7)*** before their baptism unto Moses, so the blood of Christ our passover, is to be sprinkled on the hearts of His believing followers, before they are baptized unto Him. “Having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed in pure water,” is the divinely appointed order. Hebrews 10:22. First, the “cleansing of the heart,” by the “sprinkling” of the “blood of Christ, which cleanses from all sin,” and then the “washing of the body in pure water”—baptism. Blood, and then water, not water “in order to” the blood, as some falsely teach. Christ first, and joining the church afterward: not joining the church “in order to get to Christ.” The saved were added to the church, not sinners in order to save them. [Acts 2:41-42, 47.]

CHAPTER V. Paul says that the Red Sea baptism, as well as many other incidents in the history of the children of Israel “happened unto them as types for us,” as that is the literal meaning of the word “tupoi,” which he uses in 1 Corinthians 10:6-11. Guided by the statement of the apostle, we therefore deduce an argument based on the fact, that:

VIII. The Building of the Tabernacle

by Moses Was A Type of the Building of the Church by Jesus Christ.

Moses, as we have already seen, was a type of Christ, as a Prophet, Deliverer, Leader, Mediator and Law-giver, as well as the Head and Founder of the Old Testament Ekklesia, or Church; and now, we call attention to the fact, that as the builder of the Tabernacle, he typified Christ in building His Church.

1. THE CHURCH OF GOD IS CALLED A TABERNACLE. “One thing have I desired of the Lord, that wilt I seek after; that I may dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord and to enquire in his temple. For in the time of trouble he shalt hide me in his pavilion; in the secret of his Tabernacle shall he hide me: he shall set me up on a rock. And now shall my head be lifted up above mine enemies round about me; therefore will I offer in his Tabernacle sacrifices of joy; I will sing, yea, I will sing praises unto the Lord,” Psalm 27:4-6, cf. Psalm 15:1; 76:2; 84:1.

2. From the 25th chapter of Exodus to the end of the book, we have the history of the building of the Tabernacle. We call attention to the following particulars in this history: a. The pattern or model of this tabernacle was divine. Moses received it direct from the hand of God. Exodus 25:9, 40; 26:30.††† “Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle; for see, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount,” Hebrews 8:5.

So also the church of God is of divine origin. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself planned it. b. As the material was all “made ready”—“ prepared” beforehand, for the building of the tabernacle, so the material was all “made ready’ ‘—“prepared” by John, for the building of the

church of Christ. c. Moses himself as the type of Christ, “set up,” or “reared up” the tabernacle. “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, on the first day of the first month shalt thou set up the tabernacle of the tent of the congregation,” etc. “And Moses reared up the tabernacle,” etc., Exodus 40:1, 1833.‡‡‡ So Christ Himself “set up” the church. “We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched and not man,” Hebrews 8:1-5. Could language be plainer or stronger than this? d. This first tabernacle as a place of sacrificial offerings and intercessions therein, was a type of the Church. The first tabernacle was built expressly as a place in which these sacrifices should be offered, and as a place in which the high priest should make intercession for the sins of the people. The tabernacle was built first, and the forms of service, sacrifices, etc., arranged subsequently, Exodus 25th chap. et seq. So the church was built first, as a place in which Christ as our High Priest should offer up the sacrifice of Himself, and make intercession for the sins of His people. Zechariah foretold that “he should be a priest on his throne,” Zech. 6:13. Paul says, “For there was a tabernacle made, the first, wherein was the candle-stick, and the table, and the shew-bread; which is called the Holy place, and after the second veil. the tabernacle, which is called the Holiest at all.*** The priest went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God, But into the second went the high-priest alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people the Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet Standing—which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience.. . . But Christ being come, an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building; neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood, he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us,” etc., Hebrews 9:1-14, 25-28, et al.

This tabernacle was not only built in order that Christ as our High Priest, might offer up a sacrifice “once for all” therein, but that in it He might also make intercessions for His people.

“Every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins. . . . So Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest; but he that said unto him, . . . Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications. with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death,” etc., Hebrews 5:1-7; cf. John 17th chapter. et al. e. This sacrificial offering for sin was made in the Church or Tabernacle here on earth, by our High Priest, and not after He had ascended to heaven, as some falsely teach.

“Every priest standeth daily ministering and offering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but this man. after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God. . . . For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified,” Hebrews 10:11-14. “For such an high priest became us, who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people’s: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.” Hebrews 7:26-27; 9:25-28; 10:4-5, 9-10. “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, 1 Pet. 2:24, et mul al. f. All the sacrificial offerings, etc., of the tabernacle and temple service, were but figures,

types, and shadows of the glorious reality, and when Christ, the great Ante-type, had come, there was no longer any necessity for them, and hence, they were taken away.

“The law having a shadow good things to come. and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect. etc. Then said he, Lo, I come, to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second, ” Hebrews 10:1-10.

Notice:

(1). The “first” must be “taken away,” before he can “establish” the “second.” (2). He— Christ, not only takes away the “first,” but also, He—Christ Himself—establishes the “second.” As Paul says in Eph. 2:15, “Having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in Himself of twain one new man so making peace.” g. The Tabernacle was also intended as a dwelling place for the Lord, and a place where He could meet. with His people.

“Let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them, etc., Exodus 25:8. “There will I meet with the children of Israel to speak unto them, and the tabernacle shall be sanctified by my glory. . . . And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God,” Exodus 29:42—45, et al.

So the Church was a dwelling place for Christ, and a place where He could meet with, and speak to His people during His personal ministry on earth, and where He has promised to meet with them in all the ages which were to come.

“The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” John 1:14. Speaking directly of the Church. Jesus says, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them,” Matthew 18:20. See context. “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world,” Matt 28:20; cf. 2 Corinthians 6:16, et al. h. The Ark of the Covenant was deposited in the Tabernacle.

“And he took and put the testimony into the ark, and set the staves on the ark, and put the mercy-seat above upon the ark; and he brought the ark into the tabernacle,” etc., Exodus 40:20-21.

All commentators are agreed, that this “ark of the covenant” was a type of Christ, and just as the ark was put in the tabernacle as its abiding place, so Christ abode in His Church, during His personal ministry on earth. See Scriptures quoted above. i. The glory of the Lord filled the Tabernacle, and was the manifestation of His presence therein.

“There will I meet with the children of Israel, and the tabernacle shall be sanctified by my glory,” Exodus 29:43. “Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle,” etc., Exodus 40:34-38, et al.

This was both a type and a prophecy of the manifestation of the glory of Christ in His Church. See its wonderful fulfillment while He was here on earth “And . . . he took Peter, and John, and James, and went up into a mountain to pray. And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and glistering; and behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias, who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jerusalem. . . .

When they were awake, they saw his glory, and the two men that stood with him. . . . Peter said unto Jesus, Master it is good for us to be here; let us make three tabernacles; one for

thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias; not knowing what he said. While he thus spake, there came a cloud and overshadowed them.” (Just as the cloud overshadowed the tabernacle.) . . . “And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, this is my beloved son; hear him,” Luke 9:28-35. So the Lord talked with Moses, out of the cloud. See Exodus 33:7-11. et al. John says, “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, as the only begotten of the Father), full of grace and truth,” John 1:14.

IX. The Building of King Solomon‘s Temple Was A Type of the Building of the Church By Jesus Christ.

See 1 Kings 5th chapter, et seq. (Lat. and the following).

As numerous arguments have been already introduced in connection with the preceding propositions, which are equally applicable in support of this, we shall give only a brief synopsis of them, in order to save time and space.

1. The Church is called a “temple,” 1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 2 Corinthians 6:16, et al.

2. Solomon was a type of Christ as a king, in wisdom, and in the peacefulness, power and glory of his reign. The word “Solomon” means “peaceable.”

3. The material was all prepared, before it was brought to the site of the temple.

“And the house, when it was in building, was built of stone made ready before it was brought thither, so that there was neither hammer, nor ax, nor any tool of iron heard in the house. while it was in building,” 1 Kings 6:7.

So John the Fore-runner of Christ, “made ready a people prepared for the Lord.”

4. As Solomon laid the foundation of his material temple, so Christ laid the foundation of His spiritual temple.

5. As Solomon completed his temple, so Christ completed His. “The hands of Zerubbabel have laid the foundation of this house; his hands also shall finish it,” Zech. 4:9.

6. As Solomon received the glory of building his temple, so Christ was to receive the glory of building His. “Even he shall build the temple of the Lord, and he shall bear (orig. receive) the glory,” Zech. 6:13.

7. As Solomon dedicated his temple with prayer, so Christ dedicated His, 1 Kings 8:22, et seq., cf. Luke 6:12. Other analogical statements might be deduced, but these are sufficient.

In view of the numerous Scriptural arguments we have presented, the conclusion is irresistible, that if Christ did not Himself build His church, and was therefore without one during His personal ministry on earth, the entire meaning and significance of all these prophetic types, so plainly indicated in these Scriptures, must have been a signal and deplorable failure! Who will assert this? Jesus said in His memorable prayer to the Father, “I have finished the work thou gavest me to do,” John 17:4. If, as the Scriptures plainly declare, it was intended that He should “build the temple of the Lord,” during His. personal ministry on earth, and He did not do it, His life work, so far as this important matter is concerned, was a lamentable failure!

Who will take such a position? Surely, those only, who, like Sam Jones, have so little reverence for the Son of God, as to maintain that “Jesus Christ never preached but one sermon on regeneration, and that was a failure!”

CHAPTER VI.

We shall now proceed to the discussion of the subject, as it is presented in the Scriptures, under the form of the establishment and perpetuation of a “kingdom.” The phrase “kingdom of God,” or “kingdom of heaven,” is used in several senses in the Bible. It is used to indicate— 1. God’s universal empire.

“The Lord hath prepared his throne in the heavens; and his kingdom ruleth over all,”

Ps.

103:19; cf. I Chronicles 29:10-12, et al.§§§

2. The ancient commonwealth of Israel, is called the “kingdom of the Lord.”

“And now ye think to withstand the kingdom of the Lord, in the hand of the sons of David.” etc. 2 Chronicles 13:8. This kingdom was organized under the immediate direction of Moses, as a political power among the nations of the earth, and was composed of all the members of national Israel, the regenerated as well as the unregenerated.

3. The ultimate residence of the people of God, and the triumphant and glorious reign of Christ as their King.

“The Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom,” 2 Timothy 4:18; Matthew 7:21; 8:11; 25:31-34; Acts 14:22; 1 Corinthians 15:49-50, et mul al.**** 4. This phrase “kingdom of God,” and “kingdom of heaven,” also refers to the spiritual government organized by the Lord Jesus Christ, during His personal ministry on earth.

As Supreme King and Lawgiver, He has given to His subjects all laws, rules and regulations, necessary for their government.

It is to this last application and use of the term “kingdom,” as found in the Sacred volume, to which we now desire to direct the reader’s attention. Our next argument is therefore based upon those Scriptures which represent:

X. The Organization of the Church of Christ, Under the Form of “the Setting Up” Or Establishment of A Kingdom.

Let it be borne in mind in the consideration of this argument, that in the beginning, the Church at Jerusalem and the Kingdom were co-extensive, but after the organization of other churches, the kingdom became enlarged to the extent of embracing all those churches within its boundaries, and so today, the Kingdom of Christ embraces all of the Churches of Christ, no more, and no less.

1. PROPHECIES RELATING TO THE “SETTING UP” OF THIS KINGDOM. “And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall

never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.” Daniel 2:44.

Notice: that the prophet foretells—

1. That a kingdom shall be “set up.” Then this kingdom had not been in existence before. It was not a kingdom “restored,” but “set up,” established, founded— something entirely new and distinct from all others.

2. The “God of heaven” was to do this work, not some man, or set of men.

3. It was to be . . . . . “set up. . . . . . in the . days of these kings.”

By reference to the dream of Nebuchadnezzar, and its interpretation by Daniel, it will be seen, that there were four great empires to follow each other in regular succession. These empires were: (1) The Babylonian. (2) The Medo-Persian. (3) The Macedonian.

(4) The Roman Empire, as we learn from the pages of history. It was in the days of these Roman Emperors, as all biblical scholars are agreed, that this kingdom was to be founded.

4. It was to “break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms” and it was to “stand for ever.”

2. FULFILLMENT OF THIS PROPHECY.

1. Did the “God of heaven” appear on the earth at this time?

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . .

And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” John 1:1-14. “Of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever,” Romans 9:5.†††† “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest In the flesh,” etc., 1 Timothy 3:16.‡‡‡‡ “But unto the Son, he saith, Thy throne, 0 God, is forever and ever.” etc., Hebrews 1:8. “This is the true God, and eternal life,” 1 John 5:20, et mul al. Thus it is shown, that Jesus Christ, was the “God of heaven,” our Campbellite and Unitarian friends to the contrary, notwithstanding.

2. Did the God of heaven “set up a kingdom,” at this time?

Proofs: What did John the Baptist say at the beginning of his ministry? “Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand,” Matthew 3:2.

What did Jesus say at the commencement of His ministry? “Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matthew 4:17. a. When did Jesus begin to preach? After His baptism and temptation, and just after John was cast into prison, Matthew 3:16; 4:1, 12, 17.§§§§ b. What did he say about the “kingdom” at that time? That it was “at hand.” c. What did He mean by the expression, “at hand?” Near by, close, in reference to time.

This is the meaning of enggike, everywhere in the New Testament, when used with reference to time; as, “behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners,” Matthew 26:45-46; Luke 21:8, 20, 28; Romans 10:8, et mul at. d. Was this the “kingdom of grace?” No, for that kingdom had been in existence thousands of years—ever since the days of Abel, at least.

3. WHAT STATEMENT DID JESUS MAKE CONCERNING THIS KINGDOM? “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.” Luke 16:16.

1. Logical statement.

a. What was “until” John? The “law and the prophets.” b. When was John? Just before Christ. c. What was “since” John? The “kingdom of God.”

Therefore, this kingdom of God did not exist prior to John, or during the ministry of John, it was “since” John.

2. Logical statement.

a. The “kingdom of God” spoken of here, is something entirely different and distinct, from the “law and the prophets.” b. Men were saved during the dispensation of the “law and the prophets.” c. Men were saved during the dispensation of the “law and prophets,” by entering the “kingdom of grace.” d. Therefore, this “kingdom of God” spoken of here, is something distinct from the “kingdom of grace,” or salvation.

3. Logical statement.

a. Note the fact, that the “kingdom of God” is preached. It is here, men hear and know of it. b. Those who hear and heed the preaching, enter it.

c. Therefore, it must have had a visible and tangible existence, else men could not have entered it.

First Syllogism.

(a) The “kingdom of God” was preached since the days of John, and men entered it. (b)The “God of heaven” was to set up or establish a kingdom, and Jesus Christ is the God of heaven. (c) Therefore, the kingdom of God was set up, established, or organized by Jesus Christ.

Second Syllogism.

(a) Entrance into an organization can be effected only, when such an organization exists. (b) Men entered the kingdom in Christ’s day,—before Pentecost. (c) Therefore, the kingdom existed in Christ’s day,—before Pentecost.

4. THE KINGDOM SUFFERED VIOLENCE IN THE DAYS OF CHRIST. “And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.” Matthew 11:12-13.

The great German commentator Meyer, comments on this passage, thus: “Jesus now continues His testimony regarding John, and in order to prove what He had just said of Him in verses 10, 11, He calls attention to the powerful movement in favor of the Messiah’s kingdom, which had taken place since the commencement of the Baptist’s ministry. . . . It is taken possession of by force, is conquered. . . . In this way is described that eager, irresistible striving and struggling after the approaching Messianic kingdom, which has prevailed since the Baptist began to preach; it is as though it were being taken by storm. . . . Such is now the character of the times, that those of whom the Biazetai holds true, achieve a speedy success, in that, while they press forward to join the ranks of my followers, they clutch at the approaching kingdom as though they were seizing spoils, and make it their own. So eager and energetic, (no longer calm and expectant) is the interest in regard to the kingdom. The Biastai are, accordingly, believers struggling hard for its possession.”

Rotherham, in his Emphatic translation, and also Wilson in the Emphatic Diaglott, translate, “the kingdom of heaven is invaded, and the invaders seize upon it.”

Thayer’s Grimm-Wilke’s Lexicon defines Biazo; “to use force, to apply force; tini, to force, inflict violence on one; the Act, is very rare and almost exclusively poetic. In Matthew 11:12, the kingdom of heaven is taken by violence, carried by storm, i.e. a share in the heavenly kingdom is sought for by the most ardent zeal, and the intensive exertion. The other explanation, the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence from its enemies, agrees neither with the time when Christ spoke the words, nor with the context; cf. Fritzche, De Wette, Meyer, ad loc . . . In Matthew 11:12 those are called Biastai, by whom the kingdom of God Biazetai, i.e., who strived to obtain the privileges with the utmost eagerness and effort.” Thus, the meaning of the passage is clearly settled by the ablest biblical scholars and critics.

[J. R. Graves considered John Baptist as part of "the kingdom of heaven" that had "suffered violence." See Seven Dispensations; Part III, Eschatology, Chapter 2: "I translate the whole passage: 'Verily I say unto you, among them that are born of woman there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist; notwithstanding he that is later in the

kingdom of heaven is greater than he. From the days of John the Baptist until now the visible kingdom of Christ has been violently assailed, and its enemies have sought to destroy or overpower it.' This passage, properly translated, determines three facts: 1.

That Christ's visible kingdom was at that time--in the first year of his ministry--in existence; and 2. That it was most violently opposed and sought to be destroyed by its enemies; and 3.

That this kingdom has been continuously in existence 'from the days of John the Baptist until' this day. This passage is conclusive proof that the kingdom of Christ has been in existence from John's day until this, since it could not have been constantly assailed unless it has continuously existed; [and as to] the translation [of Luke xvi. 16], 'The kingdom of heaven is preached and every man is violently opposing it.' I, therefore, conclude that (1) the kingdom of Christ not only existed in the days of John the Baptist, but, (2) he was himself recognized by Christ as a member of it. Prof. J. R. Boise, D.D., LL.D., [agrees adding that] 'This view of the verses in question is adopted by Lightfoot, Schneckenberger, and Hilgenfeld.''"

Also Henry Morris Bible Notes: "When John the Baptist came preaching the kingdom of heaven, he also came condemning sin and urging repentance and baptism to a new life. Some responded positively, but more reacted violently, as is often true when the gospel is preached.

Those who react against the gospel would destroy the kingdom of heaven if they could, but must settle for destroying as many of its servants as they can. John himself was soon put to death, as was Christ and eventually the apostles, as well as multitudes of Christ’s followers through the centuries. John was not the last of the Old Testament prophets, as some have thought, but the first of the New Testament prophets." Also in John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible, covering all bets he adds: "or of the Gospel's suffering violence by the persecutions of its enemies opposing and contradicting it, reproaching it, intimidating the professors of it, and seeking to take away the life of Christ, the great subject of it:"-esn] 1. Logical statement.

(a) What “suffered violence,” or was “invaded?” The “kingdom of heaven.”

(b) How long had it “suffered violence,” or been “invaded?” “From the days of John the Baptist.” (c) When was John? Just before Christ.

2. Logical statement.

(a) What prophesied “until” John? The “prophets and the law.” (b) What was “since” John? The “kingdom of heaven.”

(c) Then this “kingdom of heaven,” must have been something entirely different and distinct, from the “prophets and the law,” since the Saviour puts them in such striking contrast to each other.

3. Logical statement.

(a) What “suffered violence, and was forcibly seized by the violent,” or “was invaded and seized by the invaders?” The “kingdom of heaven.” (b) An “invisible kingdom of grace” cannot suffer violence, or be seized upon by force. (c) This “kingdom of heaven” did suffer violence and was invaded by the force of which Jesus speaks, therefore, it was not the invisible kingdom of grace.

4. Logical statement.

(a) This “kingdom of heaven” was invaded, as an institution entirely new and distinct from any that had previously existed. (b) Those who “invaded,” or entered this institution, were Jewish men and women, who were at that time members of the old Jewish church.

(c) This “kingdom of heaven” then, must have been something entirely different and distinct from the old Jewish church, since these people could not have entered an institution of which they were already members.

First Syllogism.

(a) Violence cannot be exerted upon an institution which does not exist. (b) This “kingdom of heaven” did suffer violence while Christ was upon the earth—before Pentecost. (c) Therefore, this “kingdom” existed during Christ’s personal ministry on earth—before Pentecost.

Second Syllogism.

(a) People cannot enter an institution of which they are already members. (b) Members of the old Jewish church did enter this kingdom. (c) Therefore, this “kingdom of heaven” was not the old Jewish church.

CHAPTER VII. 5. The kingdom “shut up” during the personal ministry of Christ.

“But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.” The Emphatic Diaglott translates “neither enter yourselves, nor permit those approaching to enter, Rothenham translates, “For ye are not entering, neither those about to enter are ye permitting to enter,” Matthew 23:13. Meyer says on this verse, “the approaching kingdom of the Messiah, is conceived of under the figure of a Palace, the doors of which have been thrown open in order that they may enter.

But such is the opposition offered to Christ by the Scribes and Pharisees, that men withhold their belief from the Messiah who had appeared among them, and show themselves indifferent to the righteousness necessary, in order to gain admission into the kingdom from which they are consequently excluded. They thus shut the door of the kingdom in men’s faces, . . . who are endeavoring to obtain admission,” 1. LOGICAL STATEMENT. (a) What rebuke was given to the Scribes and Pharisees? They would not “enter” the kingdom of heaven. (b) If there was no kingdom to enter, was this rebuke just? Certainly not. (c) Therefore, the Saviour justly rebuked these Scribes and Pharisees for not entering this kingdom.

2. LOGICAL STATEMENT. (a) These Scribes and Pharisees were leading members of the old Jewish church, at the time that the Saviour thus rebuked them. (b) If the Christian Church or kingdom was a continuation of the old Jewish church, how could they enter an institution to which they then belonged? (c) Therefore, there must have been a kingdom in continuation of the old Jewish church.

3. LOGICAL STATEMENT. (a) What else did these Scribes and Pharisees do? By their influence and example, they prevented others from going in, who were desirous of entering into this “kingdom of heaven.” (b) If there was no “kingdom” into which they could enter, how could they keep these “others” out?

(c) Therefore, there must have been a kingdom in existence at that time,—during the personal ministry of Christ,—and before the day of Pentecost.

4. LOGICAL STATEMENT. (a) These Scribes and Pharisees, as well as the other Jewish men and women, were members of the Jewish church at the time Christ uttered this rebuke. (b) If the Christian Church was a continuation of the Jewish church, how could they keep these people out of an institution of which they were already members? And how reconcile this idea, with the declaration of the Saviour in the fifteenth verse? “ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.” (c) Therefore, the Christian Church is not a continuation of. the old Jewish church.

First Syllogism.

(a) A rebuke to men for refusing to enter an organization that did not exist, was a manifest injustice, not to say an absurdity. (b) Jesus did rebuke these Scribes and Pharisees for refusing to enter this “kingdom.” (c) Therefore, if there was no kingdom in existence at that time into which they could enter, Jesus was clearly unjust and absurd in thus rebuking them.

Second Syllogism.

(a) There was a kingdom in existence at the time Christ was speaking, and it was the duty of these Scribes and Pharisees to enter it. it.

(b) They refused to enter it themselves, and did all they could to keep others from entering (c) Therefore, Christ was perfectly justifiable in thus rebuking them.

Third Syllogism.

(a) The charge of injustice against Christ, in rebuking the Scribes and Pharisees for not entering this kingdom, is little short of blasphemy, and can arise only from an erroneous and unscriptural doctrine. (b) But the doctrine, that Jesus had no kingdom at that time into which they could enter, makes the charge unjust, because it was an utter impossibility for them to enter an organization which had no existence!

(c) Therefore, the doctrine of the non-existence of the Church or kingdom of Christ, during His personal ministry on earth, is erroneous and unscriptural.

Fourth Syllogism

(a) To charge Jesus Christ with rebuking a people for not entering an organization of which they were already members, is to charge Him as being guilty of an absurdity, and can only result from an erroneous and unscriptural position. (b) But the doctrine that the Jewish church and the Christian church is identical, would make Christ to be guilty of this absurdity, since these people were already members of the old Jewish church. (c) Therefore, the doctrine that the Jewish church and the Christian church is identical, is erroneous and unscriptural.

6. The “Publicans and harlots” entered into the kingdom, or Church of Christ, during His personal ministry on earth.

“Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God

before you. For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him.” (“Yet you, having seen it, did not afterward repent, so as to believe him.”—Em. Diaglott.) Matthew 21:31-32; cf. Luke 3:12; 7:29-30.

1. LOGICAL STATEMENT. (a) Who were the “publicans and harlots”? Jewish men and women. (b) What did they go into? The “kingdom of God.” (c) Then there must have been a “kingdom of God” in existence at that time, for them to “go into.” (d) Also, this “kingdom of God” must have been something entirely different and distinct from the old Jewish church, since they could not “go into” an institution of which they were already members! (e) People enter into the “kingdom of grace,” or are saved, the moment they repent and believe. (f) These publicans and harlots had repented and believed during the ministry of John, and had been baptized by him, Luke 3:12; 7:29-30. (g) Therefore, they were already members of the “kingdom of grace”—saved, at the time Christ said they were entering this “kingdom of God,” and hence, this “kingdom” they were then entering, was something entirely different and distinct from the “kingdom of grace” or salvation.

First Syllogism.

(a) Publicans and harlots, as live, active, visible men and women, could not have entered a nonexisting, invisible church or kingdom. (b) They did enter this “kingdom of God.” (c) Therefore, the kingdom or church of God, was an actual, visible church or kingdom of God, composed of live, active men and women, during the personal ministry of Christ on earth.

Second Syllogism.

(a) Christ could not have said, that the “publicans and harlots” went into this kingdom “before” the chief priests and elders, if the Church or kingdom of Christ was identical with the old Jewish church, since the chief-priests and elders were already members of the latter. (b) But they did go into this kingdom “before” them. (c) Therefore, this church or kingdom was not identical with the old Jewish organization.

Third Syllogism.

(a) These publicans and harlots had entered the “kingdom of grace”—had been saved as well as baptized, through the ministry of John. (b) They were entering this “kingdom of God” during the ministry of Christ. (c) Therefore, this Church or kingdom of God, is something distinct from the “kingdom of grace.”

7. The Kingdom of God is come unto you.

“But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.”

Mat 12:28; Luke 10:9-11; 11:20.

1. DEDUCTIONS.

(a) From Matthew 12:28, et al, we learn that Jesus cast out devils during His personal ministry on earth.

(b) He declares that this was an evidence that the “kingdom of God” had come unto them. (c) If it had “come unto them,” they did not have it before, First Syllogism.

(a) If Jesus cast out devils, the “Kingdom of God” had come unto them. (b) He cast out devils during His personal ministry. (c) Therefore, the Kingdom of God was in existence during the personal ministry of Christ.

Second Syllogism.

(a) The “Kingdom of God,” had come unto them,—was not among them prior to this time. (b) The Jewish church was among them at that time. (c) Therefore, the “Kingdom of God” and the old Jewish church were not identical.

CHAPTER VIII. 8. The Kingdom of God is among you.

“And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation.” (“With outward show.” Margin, and Em. Diaglott.) “Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.” (“among you,” Margin, Em. Diaglott, and Rotherham, “in your midst,” margin of Rev. Version), Luke 17:20-21 “Entos, within, inside with Gen. Entos humon, within you; i.e., in the midst of you, Luke 17:21; others, ‘within you’ (i.e., ‘in your souls’), a meaning which the use of the word permits, but not the context,” Thayer’s Grimm-Wilkes’ Lexicon.

“In the midst of them the Messianic kingdom was, so far as He, the Messiah, was and worked, cf. Luke 11:20, Matthew 12:28, among them. . . . If others have explained ‘entos humon,’ by ‘In your souls,’ there is, it is true, no objection to be raised on the score of grammar; but it is decidedly opposed to this, that ‘humon’ refers to the Pharisees, in whose hearts nothing certainly found a place less than did the ethical kingdom of God,”-Meyer.

DEDUCTIONS. 1. The “Kingdom of God” was in the midst of the Jews. The Saviour said so.

2. They did not know it, and were therefore, looking for something else.

3. Hence, it was not the old Jewish church, but something entirely different and distinct from it.

First Syllogism,

a. The kingdom or Church of God was in the midst of the Pharisees, and they had not recognized it. b. They did recognize the old Jewish church, of which they were leading members. c. Therefore, this “kingdom of God” was not identical with the old Jewish church, but something distinct from it.

Second Syllogism,

a. The “Kingdom of God” was an institution in the midst of the Jews, at the time Jesus uttered these words. b. This was during the personal ministry of Christ. c. Therefore, the Kingdom or Church of God was in existence during the personal ministry of Christ, and before Pentecost.

Third Syllogism.

(a) Jesus said that the “kingdom of God” should not come with “outward show,” that is, its establishment should not be accompanied with a great noise and parade, or be distinguished by extraordinary outward or visible demonstrations, verse 20. (b) But the “day of Pentecost” was accompanied with such a noise and parade, and was distinguished by such outward and visible demonstrations, Acts 2:1-3. (c) Therefore, the kingdom, or Church of God, was not established on the “day of Pentecost.”

Fourth Syllogism.

(a) Jesus said, that the people should not say, “Lo here, or Lo there!” (Gr. idou! idou!) that is they should not be astonished, or express their amazement at the signs and wonders accompanying the coming or establishment of His church or kingdom, verse 21. (b) But the people were “amazed” at what they saw and heard on the “day of Pentecost,” and expressed their astonishment by saying, “Behold,” etc. (Gr. idou! the very word Jesus said they should not use on the occasion of the establishment of His kingdom), Acts 2:1-12. (c) Therefore, the Church or kingdom of God was not established on the “day of Pentecost.”

Thus we see from the express statements of Jesus Christ Himself, that the idea, that the Church or kingdom of God was established or “set up” on the “day of Pentecost,” is without the slightest foundation in the Word of God!

9. The Kingdom to be taken away.

“The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof,” Matthew 21:43. Read from verse 33, to the end of the chapter.***** DEDUCTIONS (1) The Church or Kingdom of God was first established among the Jews, as a people.

(2) As a people, they rejected it, John 1:11-12.††††† (3) In the parable it is said, that “He sent His servants” to the husbandmen, vs. 34. The twelve were first sent out, and commanded to “go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand,” Matthew 10:5-7; cf. Luke 9:1-6.

(4) Then “He sent other servants more than the first,” vs. 36. This was fulfilled when He sent forth the “seventy,” and told them to preach. “the kingdom of God is come nigh unto you,” Luke 10:1-11.

(5) “Last of all He sent His Son,” etc., vs. 37. “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,” Matthew 15:24. “Now, after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent ye, and believe the gospel,” Mark 1:14-13.

(6) When they had rejected it, it was “to be taken from them and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof,” vs. 43. “Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold and said, It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you; but seeing ye judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, Lo, we turn to the Gentiles. For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth,” Acts 13:46-47, cf. Matthew 28:19-20.

(7) Since it was not the Jewish church that was taken from the Jewish people and given to the Gentiles, the “kingdom of God” was not the Jewish church.

(8) The Jews as a people, were in possession of this “kingdom of God” at the time the Saviour was speaking, else it could not have been “taken away” from them.

First Syllogism.

(a) The Jewish church was never taken from the Jews and given to the Gentiles. (b) This “kingdom of God” was thus taken away. (c) Therefore, this kingdom of God was not identical with the old Jewish church.

Second Syllogism.

(a) Christ could not have said, “this kingdom shall be taken” from the people whom He was addressing, unless it had been in existence at that time. (b) But He did make such a declaration. (c) Therefore, this “kingdom” was in existence at the time Christ spake, and hence, BEFORE PENTECOST.

10. It was not a worldly, but a spiritual Kingdom.

“Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a King, then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world,” etc., John 18:36-37. The word translated “servants” in verse 36, is the same word exactly that is translated “officers” in verses John 18:3, 12, 18, 22 and in many other places, and “officers” is put in the margin of the Rev. Version, and is the translation given by Rotherham and the Emphatic Diaglott.

DEDUCTIONS. 1. Christ’s kingdom was not a worldly kingdom, nevertheless it was a kingdom in the world, composed of men and women chosen out of the world, John 15:19; 17:14, 16; 8:23. It is a spiritual kingdom not political or secular.

2. As a King, He had subjects—servants or officers—who were ready to fight for Him, Matthew 26:51-52.

3. As a King, He gave laws for the government of His subjects, Matthew. 5th to 7th, and 18th chapters.

4. He confessed to Pilate that He was a King, and had come into the world for this very purpose!

5. His kingdom was not the Jewish church or nation per se, for it was the “chief priests and elders” of this church, that were His most inveterate enemies, and were the immediate cause of His death. And if this was the institution of which the Saviour claimed the spiritual head-ship, then we have the marvelous spectacle, of a body committing spiritual suicide by cutting off its own head, and yet continuing to live!

6. The Jewish kingdom was a secular power, but the kingdom of Christ was a spiritual institution.

First Syllogism.

(a) A King without a kingdom is not really a King. (b) Jesus said He was a King when He stood before Pilate. (c) Therefore, He had a kingdom at that time.

Second Syllogism.

(1) Five things are essential to a kingdom:(a) A King; (b) subjects; (c) laws; (d) territory; (e) power, or authority.

(2) Jesus was (a) a King; He had (b) subjects; He gave (c) laws; He possessed (d) territory; He had (e) power, or authority, John 17:2; Matthew 28:18, et al.

(3) Therefore, He was a King and had a kingdom while He was on earth.

Third Syllogism.

(a) Christ’s kingdom was “not of this world,”—not a secular or political kingdom, else His servants would have fought to prevent His deliverance into the hands of His enemies. (b) The Jewish kingdom was a secular or political institution, and were constantly engaged in fighting with their enemies. (c) Therefore, the kingdom of Christ and the Jewish kingdom were not identical.

11. The executive management of the affairs of Christ’s Kingdom transferred to the Apostles.

“And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” Luke 22:29-30. Rotherham and the Em. Diaglott translate “Diatithemi,” by the word “covenant.” instead of “appoint.”

“Diatithemi,—to place separately. dispose. arrange. appoint. (1)To arrange, dispose of one’s own affairs, i.e., of something that belongs to one; with dative of person added, in one’s favor, to one’s advantage; hence, to assign a thing to another as his possession, Luke 22:29.” (Thayer’s Grimm—Wilkes’ Lex.) DEDUCTIONS (1) The Father had appointed or covenanted unto the Son a kingdom. “I have set my King upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree,” Psalm 2:6-7.

(2) As Supreme Ruler in this Kingdom, He had a right to make such arrangements for its future management, and such disposition of its blessings and honors, as He saw proper.

(3) This He did by appointing the future management and control of the affairs of His kingdom, to his disciples as a body, (and not to any one of them, as the Catholics falsely claim), and distributing the honors of His kingdom to them equally.

(4) While He did this, He still retained His kingship and sovereignty in it—they were to “Sit at my table in my kingdom.”

(5) In the final triumphant consummation, they were to “sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.” This was to be their especial prerogative. “Do not ye judge them that are within?” etc., 1 Cor. 1:12. “Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world,” etc.? I Corinthians 6:2-3.[ Matthew 19:28; Daniel 7:22 ‡‡‡‡‡-esn ] First Syllogism.

(a) A person cannot appoint or covenant to another, that which he himself does not possess. (b) Jesus did appoint or covenant a kingdom unto. His disciples. (c) Therefore, He possessed a kingdom while He was on earth.

Second Syllogism.

(a) Jesus appointed a kingdom unto His disciples, as His Father had appointed unto Him.

(b) These disciples were in real, actual possession of His kingdom after this appointment, and ate and drank, and exercised ecclesiastical power therein. [ cf. Luke 22:16; 24:41-44 -esn §§§§§ (c) Therefore, Jesus was in real, actual possession of His kingdom during His personal ministry on earth, Third Syllogism.

(a) The kingdom, or Church in which the Apostles ate and drank, and in which they

exercised ecclesiastical authority, was not the Jewish kingdom or church. (b) It was the same kingdom that had been appointed unto Jesus Christ by the Father. (c) Therefore, the Church, or kingdom of Jesus Christ was not the old Jewish church or kingdom.

CHAPTER IX. 12. Argument Based Upon Those Scriptures Which Represent the Church or Kingdom of Christ As A Body, of Which He Is the Head.

“The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power, Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.” Ephesians 1:18-23; cf. 1 Corinthians 12:12-28; Ephesians 1:18-23. 4:12-32; Colossians 1:18-24, et al.

DEDUCTIONS (1) The word “church” is used in this, and kindred passages, by a figure of speech called “synecdoche,” to represent the church institution, or church organization. It does not mean that Christ is the “head of the church” only “at Ephesus,” or “at Colosse,” nor does it mean that He is the Head of a great big, universal church, composed of all the lesser churches, or of all the saved taken together, for there is no such an institution. But the word “church” is used in these passages, just as we use the word “oak” in the sentence, “the oak is the monarch of the wood,” or the word “eagle,” when we say, “the eagle is the king of birds.” We do not mean one particular oak or eagle, nor yet, an oak composed of all the oaks in the world, or of an eagle composed of all the eagles in the world. There is frequent use of this figure of speech by the inspired writers.

For example: “The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib,” Isaiah 1:3. The inspired penman did not mean just one special, or particular “ox” and his “owner,” or one particular “ass” and his “master,” Neither did he mean one big, universal ox composed of all the oxen on earth, owned by one big, universal owner composed of all the owners on earth, etc. But the word “ox” is used as a representative of the class or species of the oxen, as distinguished from all other animals, and so of the other words in the quotation, The word “church” is thus used in the above passages.

(2) “And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church,” evidently means, that the dominion and government arid control of all things in the church was given into his hands. When was this done? “Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He was come from God, and went to God,” etc., John 13:3. “All things are delivered unto me of my Father,” etc., Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22; John 3:35, 17:2. “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth,” etc., Matthew 28:18, et al.

1. Syllogism.

(a) Dominion, power, government and control, cannot be exercised over a non-existent Church or kingdom. (b) Jesus possessed and exercised this dominion, power, government, and control, during His personal ministry on earth. (c) Therefore, He possessed a Church or kingdom, over which He exercised this dominion, power, government and control, during His personal ministry on earth.

13. Christ is Called a Bridegroom, and the Church a Bride.

“Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him. He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must increase, but I must decrease.” John 3:28-30. [cf. Genesis 2:2125; 2 Corinthians 11:2-esn]****** DEDUCTIONS (1) Christ is here called a “bridegroom.”

(2) A bridegroom is impossible without a “bride.” The church is the bride of Christ, Ephesians 5:22-32 et al.

(3) Moreover, John says, “he that hath the bride, is the bridegroom.” Present tense.

(4) The bridegroom was to be taken away from the bride. “Then came to him the disciples of John, saying, Why do we and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?— And Jesus said unto them, can the children of the bridechamber mourn as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the day will come when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then they shall fast,” Matthew 9:14-15.

(5) John rejoiced, that he could “hear the bridegroom’s Voice,” while he was here on earth.

(6) Christ must; “increase”—His kingdom must be enlarged!

(7) John must “decrease.” His followers must become fewer and fewer in number. They must be taken to increase the kingdom of Christ. He was sent to “prepare a people for the Lord.” The Lord was taking this people whom He had prepared, therefore his “joy was fulfilled.”

First Syllogism.

(a) A bridegroom without a bride is impossible. (b) Jesus Christ was a Bridegroom while He was on earth. (c) Therefore, He had a bride while He was on earth.

Second Syllogism.

(a) Jesus Christ had a bride while He was on earth. (b) The Church is called the bride of Christ. (c) Therefore, He had a Church while He was on earth,

Third Syllogism.

(a) The children of the bride-chamber were to mourn when He was taken away. (b) The members of the old Jewish church did not mourn—on the contrary, they rejoiced.

(c) Therefore, the members of the old Jewish church, were not members of the bride-chamber ——the church of Christ, i.e., the two churches were not identical.

14. This Bride or Church of Christ Is Called a City.

“And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.”...“Come hither, I will show thee the bride, the Lamb’s wife. And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God. . . .

And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb,” etc., Rev. 21:2-27.

DEDUCTIONS 1. John saw the bride, or church of Christ. under the figure of a “City.”

2. Carrying out the figure,—in the construction of this city. John saw the “twelve foundations.”

3. Recorded in these foundations, were “the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb,” thus showing that they were the first, or original members in the foundation of His church.

4. Paul also taught that the Ephesians (one of the churches to which John wrote, Rev. 2:1), had been “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself, being the chief corner—stone,” etc., Eph. 2:20.

5. If they were the “foundation stones” of this city, it did not have an existence prior to the time they were placed in the foundation As to when that was done, see Mark 3:13-19.

“And he goeth up into a mountain, and calleth unto him whom he would and they came unto him. And he ordained twelve.” etc. “And of them he chose twelve, whom, he named apostles,” etc., Luke 6:13-16.

First Syllogism.

(a) A city cannot exist before laying the foundation.

(b) The “calling” or ‘ordination” of the “twelve Apostles,” was laying the foundations of this city. (c) Therefore, this city did not exist before the calling or ordination of the twelve Apostles.

Second Syllogism.

(a) The Church or bride of Christ is called a “city.” (b) The calling and ordination of the twelve Apostles, was laying the foundation of this city.

(c) Therefore, the calling and ordination of the twelve Apostles, was laying the foundation of His church.

15. The Gospel of the Kingdom Was Preached By the Saviour During His Personal Ministry On Earth.

“Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.” Mark 1:14-15.

(1) The kingdom of God has a “gospel.” Evaggelion, the word translated “gospel,” is thus defined. 1. A reward for good tidings. 2. Good tidings. . . .

In the New Testament specially. (a) The glad tidings of the kingdom of God soon to be set up, and subsequently, also of Jesus, the Messiah, the founder of this kingdom, Mark 1:14-15, et al.

“After the death of Christ, this term comprises also the preaching of (concerning) Jesus Christ as having suffered death on the cross, to procure eternal salvation for men in the kingdom of God, but as restored to life, and exalted to the right of God in heaven, thence to return in majesty to consummate the kingdom of God; so that it may be more briefly defined as the glad tidings of salvation through Christ; the gospel.”

Thayer’s Grimm-Wilke’s Lex. Jesus proclaims the “good news,” the “glad tidings,” that “the kingdom of God is at hand.”

(2) “The time is fulfilled.” The prophecies which foretold the establishment of the kingdom, e.g., Daniel 2:44, by the “God of heaven,” are fulfilled.

“And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people,” Matthew 9:35.

1. LOGICAL STATEMENT. (a) The kingdom of God has a gospel.

(b) A non-existent organization could not have a gospel. (c) Therefore, the kingdom of God was a real, literal, existing institution.

2. LOGICAL STATEMENT. (a) The prophecies which related to the establishment of this kingdom, could not have been “fulfilled” while it was still non-existent, (b) But these prophecies were fulfilled, while Christ was here on earth. (c) Therefore, the kingdom was in existence during His personal ministry on earth.

16. This Gospel of the Kingdom Is To Be Preached To All Nations As A Witness Before the End of This Dispensation.

“And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Matthew 24:14. See references.

DEDUCTIONS. 1. John the Baptist preached this “gospel,” Matthew 3:1-12; Mark 1:1-5; John 1:6-15, 3:36.

2. Jesus Christ preached it, Mark 1:14-15, et at.

3. The Apostles preached it, Mark 6:12; Luke 9:2-6.

4. The Seventy preached it, Luke 10:1-20.

5. We preach it. No other people do!

6. When this “gospel of the kingdom” shall have been preached in all the world—“among all nations”—then shall the end of this “age” come.[Mt. 24:14] 7. The wonderful revival of interest in missions began among the Baptists in England, in the year 1792. In view of the fact, that we have “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, we are under peculiar and special obligations, to preach this gospel of the kingdom to all nations. None others can!

1. Logical statement.

(a) A commission to preach “this gospel of the kingdom,” when there was no kingdom in existence to preach,. would be a commission to preach a falsehood. (b) Christ commissioned the preaching of such a gospel. (c) Therefore, the kingdom existed when Christ gave this commission, since He could not and would not commission the preaching of an untruth.

17. Is Based Upon the Line of Distinction Between the Church and the World, Drawn by Our Saviour, During His Personal Ministry on Earth.

“Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain. . . . If ye were of the world, the world would love his own; but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you,” John 15:16-18.

“I have manifested Thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world,” etc. “They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world,” John 17:6, 16. “My kingdom is not of this world,” etc. John 18:36.

DEDUCTIONS (1) In these passages, Jesus Christ, draws a line of distinction between His disciples, and the rest of mankind, whom He called “the world.”

(2) This distinction is based upon moral or spiritual qualifications, and is as clearly defined, as the distinction between Himself and the “world.”

(3) He declares, that he has “chosen them OUT of the world,” and “ordained them, that they should go and bring forth fruit.” This was done when He called them out and ordained them apostles, as recorded in Mark 3:13-19, and Luke 6:13-16.

(4) This choosing out, or separation from the world, was clone shortly after He entered upon His ministry, and was just as complete a separation from the world, as that which exists between His Church and the world today.

(5) As regards the religious standing of men in the world they may be either in the “Church,” or in the “world,” either in the “kingdom of God,” or the “kingdom of Satan.” But as regards their moral or spiritual state before God, they are either the “servants of righteousness,” or the “servants of sin”; either the “children and heirs of God,” or the “children and heirs of the devil,” Matthew 6:24. Admission into the “Church” or “kingdom of heaven” however, does not depend exclusively on moral qualification. Immoral men have, and will enter the Church. See 1 Corinthians 5:1-13; John 6:64, 70, cf. Matthew 8:21-23; 13:36-43.

First Syllogism.

(a) Men cannot be “in the Church” and “in the world” at the same time.—Jesus. (b) The disciples were not “in the world,”—they had been “chosen out” of it.—Jesus. (c) Therefore, they were in the Church.

Second Syllogism.

(a). These disciples were “in the Church” during the personal ministry of Christ on earth. (b) Men cannot be in an institution of this kind that does not exist. (c) Therefore, the Church was in existence during the personal ministry of Christ on earth.

18. Christ Taught By Parables, That His Church Or Kingdom Was An Entirely New and Distinct Institution, From Any Which Had Preceded It. “No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse.” {new: or, raw, or, unwrought} Matthew 9:16.

DEDUCTIONS 1. “Old garment,” evidently the old Jewish church.

2. “New cloth.” evidently a new system of church government, rites, ceremonies. etc.

3. Therefore, the church or kingdom of Christ., was not the old Jewish church reformed, or “patched up.”

“Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.” {bottles: or, sacks of skin, or, leather} Matt. 9:17.

1. “Old bottles,” old Jewish church organization.

2. “New bottles,” new church organization.

3. “New wine,” new doctrine, new practices, etc.

4. “Both are preserved,” these new doctrines, new practices, new ordinances, etc., belong to an entirely new and distinct institution, and they are both to be “preserved”—perpetuated.

CHAPTER X. 19.

The Church Was Complete and Perfect in its Constitution and Organization, the Members Enjoying and Exercising All the Rights,

Privileges and Immunities, of Membership Therein, During the Personal Ministry of Christ on Earth.

Let us again define a Church: “A Church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers, associated together in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel; observing the ordinances of Christ, governed by His laws, and exercising the gifts, rights and privileges, invested in them by His Word.” Bap. Con. of Faith.

Or take another definition, which, with a very little explanation, any Baptist would endorse: “A visible Church. of Christ, is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure Word of God is preached, and the sacraments duly administered according to Christ’s ordinance, in all those things that are requisite to the same.” Dis. of M. E.. Church, S. If we understand by the phrase “faithful men,”— believing men and women, and by the term “sacraments,” the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper merely, without any saving efficacy, we can readily accept this definition of a Church.

Now let us apply these definitions, and see whether’ there was such an institution under the personal ministry of Christ.

1. Here was a “congregation of faithful men,”—believers. “And His disciples believed on (eis, in) Him.”— John 2:11. “For the Father Himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God,” etc., John 16:27-31, cf. John 17:8, 14-20, et al.

2. They were “baptized believers.” John the Baptist was sent to “prepare a people for the Lord,” and while engaged in that work he said, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance; but He that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire,” Matthew 3:11. Here it is declared that the same persons John baptized “with (Greek en, in) water,” Christ was to baptize “with (Greek, en) the Holy Ghost.” Accordingly, we find the Saviour calling their attention to John’s baptism, just before His ascension, saying, “For John truly baptized with water (ebaptisen hudati, immersed in water); but you shall be baptized (en pneumati hagioi) in the Holy Ghost, not many days hence,” Acts 1:5. From the second chapter of Acts, we find that the twelve disciples were the ones who were baptized in the Holy Ghost, and hence, they were the ones whom John had baptized in water.

Additional weight is given to this argument, if any such weight were necessary, when it is remembered, that an essential qualification for an apostle to be selected in the place of the traitor Judas, was that he should “have companied with them all the time the Lord Jesus went in and out among them, beginning from the baptism of John,” Acts 1:21-22, cf. John 1:35-37.

3. “Associated together in the faith and fellowship of the gospel.” They “companied” together during Christ’s ministry.

4. “In which the pure Word of God is preached.” See Matthew 5, 6, and 7 chapters; Luke 6:2049; John 14, 15 and 16 chapters, et mul al. Surely if the “pure Word of God” was ever preached on this earth, it was preached by the Lord Jesus Christ, during His personal ministry on earth.

5. “And the ordinances rightly administered.” (a) Baptism. “And after these things came Jesus and His disciples into the land of Judea, and there He tarried with them and baptized,” John 3:22. “When, therefore, the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (though Jesus Himself baptized not, but His disciples,), John 4:1-2. (b) The Lord’s Supper. “And He took bread and gave thanks, and break it, and gave it to them, saying, this is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me.

Likewise, the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which is

shed for you,” Luke 22:19-20, cf. Matthew 26:26-30; Mark 14:22, 26; 1 Corinthians 11th chapter. Certainly this ordinance was observed as a Church ordinance.

The Psalmist David had foretold, “I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the congregation (ekklesia) will I praise thee,” Ps. 22:22. The Apostle Paul quotes this language, and applies it to Christ; “For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one; for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare Thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the Church (ekklesia) will I sing praise unto thee,” Hebrews 2:11-12. According to Paul’s interpretation and application of David’s prophecy, Christ was to “sing praise in the midst of the Church.” When was that prophecy fulfilled? Matthew and Mark say, at the close of the supper, that “when they had sung an hymn, (margin, psalm), they went out into the Mount of Olives,” Matthew 26:30; Mk. 14:26. This is the only place in the New Testament, where Jesus Christ is ever said to have engaged in singing, and we find that He sang in the “midst of the Church!”

Hence it follows, as clear as the noon-day sun, that He had a Church during His personal ministry on earth!

SYLLOGISM. (a) Christ was to sing, and did sing “in the midst of the Church,” David and Paul. (b) He sang at the close of the institution of the “Lord’s Supper,” Matthew and Mark. (c) Therefore He had a Church at that time—during His personal ministry on earth.

6. Exercised discipline in the Church, “And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of Heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.”

Matthew 16:19. “Keys” are symbols of authority, and the Saviour here bestows upon the disciples power to receive and expel members, and exercise authority in the Church, as His executive body on earth. Not to Peter alone, but the entire twelve. See John 20:19-23, et al††††††.

When a contractor builds a house, he does not deliver the keys until the building is complete. They were to exercise discipline in the Church or Kingdom. so as to maintain peace and fellowship. “Moreover, if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it to the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church. let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. Verily. I say unto you. whatsoever ye shall bind on earth. shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven.” Matthew 18:15-18.

Thus it is seen that the Church was the Court of last resort among those disciples.

7. They met together for the purpose of engaging in prayer and the worship of God. “These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women and Mary, the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren,” Acts 1:13-14.

8. They transacted Church business, by electing Matthias to the apostleship in place of the traitor Judas.

“And they prayed, and said, Thou Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast’ chosen. That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. And they gave forth their lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles,” Acts 1:24-26. Jesus had previously told them, “That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything, that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father,

who is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together In my name, there am I in the midst of them,” Matthew 18:19-20. Also any action they performed in their capacity as a Church on earth, should be ratified “in Heaven,” Matthew 18:18.‡‡‡‡‡‡ It is asserted by our Campbellite friends, that the action of the disciples in electing Matthias to the apostleship was unwarranted, and that he was never recognized as an apostle, because forsooth, his name is not mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, in connection with their work; and this, too, in the face of the declaration of their divine Master that their action should be ratified. The mere fact, that the name of Matthias is not mentioned subsequently, is of no force in disproving his claims to the apostleship, for neither are the names of some of the other apostles mentioned after this time, e.g., Andrew, Bartholomew, Thomas, Philip and Simon Zelotes. On the other hand, the inspired penman Luke, declares that their action was the fulfillment of a prophecy in the Psalms: “Let his dwelling be desolate, and let no man dwell therein; and let another take his office,” Acts 1:20; (Rev. Version, Em. Dia., Rotherham, and margin of A.V.) And he further declares that “he was numbered with the eleven apostles,” verse 26. And that he was in truth and verity an apostle, equal with the others, is seen from the fact that he was. with them on the day of Pentecost, and received the baptism of the Spirit on that occasion, Acts 2:14. If Matthias was ever rejected, and Paul was the one chosen to fill the place of Judas, as our Campbellite friends teach, surely Luke would have recorded so important a fact. But he has not said one word intimating such a procedure. Nor does Paul In any of his writings, ever hint of such a thing, although he frequently speaks of himself in connection with the other apostles. But it is characteristic of the advocates of error, that they are compelled to flatly contradict the teachings of the Scriptures, in order to maintain a false and unscriptural creed.

20. The Church of Christ Is Represented Under the Figure of a “Wife,” Beloved of Her Husband.

“For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ. is the head of the Church. . . .

Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.

Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave Himself for it; that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word, that He might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.” etc., Ep. 5:23-33.

DEDUCTIONS (1) The relationship existing between Christ and His Church, Is here represented under the figure of that bond of love, which unites the husband and wife.

(2) He declares, that as “the husband is the head of the wife, so Christ is the Head of the Church,” and therefore, “as the Church is subject unto Christ, so the wives should be in subjection to their own husbands in everything,” cf. 1 Pet. 3:1-6. For a Church of Christ to acknowledge the authority of any one else, except her Divine Lord and Master, by rendering obedience to other than His divine commands, is simply to confess herself an “ecclesiastical harlot!”

(3) He further exhorts the husband to love his wife, “even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it.”

(4) Paul declares that the object which prompted this love, was “that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might cause it to stand by his side,” (Greek, Em. Diaglott’, et mul al) “a glorious church,” etc.

Just. as a bride stands by the side of her husband at the altar, when the marriage ceremony

is being performed, arrayed in spotless white, indicative of her pure and unsullied virtue and innocence, so time redeemed church, when she shall have been completed, is to stand by the side of her Divine Husband and Lord, clothed in the robes of spotless righteousness wrought out for her, and hear those blessed words of joy and gladness, which are to unite her to Him, to enjoy His presence, and share His glorious inheritance forever. John, in the Apocalyptic vision beheld this glorious consummation, and thus describes it: “Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.

And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they who are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb,” Rev. 19:7-9, cf, Matthew 22:2-14,. 25:1-13; Rev. 21:2-9.

(5) Prompted by the love Christ bore for His church, “He gave himself for it,” i.e., He died on the cross for her salvation.

It would have been impossible for Paul to have used the above figure, as it is used in this passage, if the Church as an institution, had not been in existence at the time Christ died for it.

As an illustration, take the passage, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,” etc., John 3:16. It would have been impossible for God to have loved the “world” at all, if there had been no world in existence to love, and in like manner, it would have been impossible for Christ to have loved the “Church,” if there had been no Church in existence to love. And just as it would have been impossible for God to have given His Son to die for the “world,” if there had been no world in existence for which to die, so it would have been impossible for Jesus Christ to have given Himself for the “Church,” if there had been no Church in existence for which to make this sacrifice.

First Syllogism.

(a) A husband cannot “give himself,” that is, die for a wife, who does not really exist.

(b) Jesus Christ as such a “husband,” “gave Himself,” i.e., died for His Church, while He was here on earth. (c) Therefore, the Church had a. real existence while He was here on earth.

Second Syllogism.

(a) A husband cannot love a wife, so as, prompted by that love, he would die for her,. who does not really and actually possess a wife for which to die. (b) Jesus Christ, as such a “husband” “loved the Church.” and prompted by that love, He died for her. (c) Therefore, His Church had a real, actual existence prior to His death!

And so, in whatever light the subject is presented by the inspired penmen, whether viewed under the figure of a house, temple, tabernacle, bride or wife, or whether presented in its real character as a Church or Kingdom, it has been proven over and over again, by Scripture and logic, if it is possible to prove anything in this world, that Jesus Christ had a Church while He was on earth, and that it was organized or established under His personal supervision and direction, and thus He accomplished one of the principal objects of His mission in this world!

CHAPTER XI. Having established the fact that Jesus Christ organized His Church during His personal ministry on earth, beyond the possibility of successful refutation, we pause to notice what kind of a Church it was that He founded, and which was to be perpetuated until He should come again.

That it was neither the Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist or Campbellite churches that He established, is manifest from several considerations, viz:

1. Neither of them claim Jesus Christ as their Founder, and hence, do not profess to be His ecclesiastical descendants, whatever may be their claims, as respects other, and purely spiritual relationships. This is sufficient of itself, to invalidate any and all pretentions that either of them may lay claim to, of being a “Church of Christ,” or even a “Branch” of the same, and therefore, it falls to the Baptists by virtue of the “Law of inheritance,” since they are the only people on the face of the earth who make this claim, and establish it by unanswerable proof, even the Word of the living God! 2. The man, or set of men, who founded them, the date, and the place of origin, of all these organizations, can all be pointed out, and none of them are old enough b several hundred years to be the true Church established by Jesus Christ. The Baptist Churches, and the Roman Catholic hierarchy, are confessedly the two oldest denominations of professing Christians on earth today, and surely, that ecclesiastical body, which John calls the “Mother of harlots and Abominations of the earth,” and “who was drunken with the blood of the saints,” cannot be the Church founded by the meek and lowly Saviour!

3. Not one of them possesses the Scriptural characteristics of doctrine and practice, to entitle it to be regarded as the Church founded by Jesus Christ. If it was none of these, what kind of a Church was it which He founded, and is it in existence today? A very important question, truly. Let us try to answer it in the light of God’s Word, and the facts of history.

21. Our Position Is, That the Church Organized By Jesus Christ, Was, in Doctrine and Practice, and in All of the Essential Elements of Its Constitution, A Missionary Baptist Church.

Let us restate some of the principal characteristics of doctrine and practice, in a Missionary Baptist Church.

1. A regenerated Church membership.

2. The baptism of believers only, by immersion.

3. The administration of the laws and ordinances of the Gospel, committed to the Churches, as the sole executive bodies of Christ on earth.

4. The validity of the ordinances, depend upon their being administered by Scriptural authority, for a Scriptural purpose, to Scripturally prepared subjects, in a Scriptural manner, and with a Scriptural design.

5. The restriction of the Lord’s Supper to those only, who have complied with the divinely established pre-requisites for admission to the table.

6. A Church of Christ is a local, visible congregation of baptized believers, associated together in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel.

7. Jesus Christ is the only Lawgiver to His people.

8. Definition. “A missionary is one sent on a mission; especially one sent to propagate religion.” Webster. Now with these characteristics and definitions before us, let us take a rapid review of our position, beginning with John’s preparatory work.

1. JOHN, THE FORERUNNER OF CHRIST, WAS A MISSIONARY BAPTIST PREACHER. We learn from the Scriptures: (1) That he was a “preacher.” “John did . . . preach the baptism of repentance, etc. . . .

And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me,” etc., Mark 1:4, 7.

(2) That he was a “Baptist preacher.” The reader will note the fact that he was called “The Baptist” by the Holy Spirit before he had baptized any body, and not on account of his baptizing the people. “

In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea,” etc., Matthew 3:1.

He was not only a “Baptist preacher” because the Holy Spirit calls him such, but also because his teaching and practice was that of a Baptist preacher. (a) He preached “repentance.”

“And saying, repent ye; for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand,” Matthew 3:2, et al. him.

(b) He required the evidences of repentance before he would baptize those who came to

“But when He saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? bring forth therefore, fruits meet for repentance: and think not to say within yourselves, we have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham,” Matthew 3:7-9. (c) He preached “faith in Christ.”

“The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the light, that all men through him might believe.” “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him,” John 1:7, 3:36. (d) He baptized those who repented and believed.

“Then said Paul, John did verily baptize with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Jesus; and having heard, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus,” Acts 19:4, (Em. Dia. Rotherham) cf. John 1:15-34, 3:23-36, et al. (e) He baptized those who “confessed their sins.”

“Then went out to him Jerusalem, . . . and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins,” Matthew 3:5-6. (f) He baptized by “immersion.”

“And were all baptized of him in the river Jordan,” etc. “Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. And straightway coming up out of the water,” etc., Mark 1:5, 9-10. [Mt. 3:16; John 3:23-esn] (3) He was a “missionary.”

“There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.” “He that sent me to baptize in water,” etc. “I am not the Christ, but I am sent before him,” John 1:6, 33; 3:28, 34.

First Syllogism.

(a) “A missionary is one sent to propagate religion by preaching the Gospel,” dic’y. (b) John was sent to preach the Gospel, Mk. 1:1-7. (c) Therefore, John was a missionary.

Second Syllogism.

(a) A Missionary Baptist preacher, is a Baptist preacher who is sent to preach the Gospel, and who baptizes those who repent, and believe in Christ. (b) John was a Baptist preacher, who was sent to preach the Gospel, and who baptized those who repented, and believed in Christ. (c) Therefore, John was a Missionary Baptist preacher.

Third Syllogism.

(a) John baptized Christ to declare the fact, that He was the Son of God, and not to make Him the Son of God, John 1:31. (b) Missionary Baptist preachers baptize people, to declare the fact, that they are the sons and daughters of God, and not to make them such. (c) Therefore, John was a Missionary Baptist preacher, as regards this point of doctrine and practice.

Fourth Syllogism.

(a) John preached the divinely appointed order, that men should (1) repent; (2) believe; (3) be baptized. (b) Missionary Baptist preachers preach the divinely appointed order, that men should (1) repent; (2) believe; (3) he baptized. (c) Therefore, John was a Missionary Baptist preacher, as regards this point of doctrine and practice.

2. JESUS CHRIST WAS A MISSIONARY BAPTIST PREACHER. (1) He was a “preacher.” (a) He preached the “Gospel.”

“And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.” Matthew 4:21. (b) He preached “repentance.”

“From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matt. 4:11. (c) He preached “faith.”

“Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.” Mark 1:14-15.

(2) He was a “Baptist.” (a) Because he was baptized by a Baptist preacher.

We have already proven that John was a Baptist preacher.

“And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan.” Mark 1:9. (b) He was baptized by “immersion.” “In Jordan.”

“And straightway coming up out of the water,” etc., Mark 1:9-10, et al. (c) He was baptized by “divine authority.”

“He that sent me to baptize in water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw and bare record that this is the Son of God.” “that he should be made manifest unto Israel, therefore am I come baptizing in water,” John 1:31-34. (d) Because that in His baptism, He declared the fact that He was the Son of God. His baptism did not make Him the Son of God, but simply proclaimed His Sonship to the people assembled on that occasion.

When the Pharisees sent messengers to inquire of John who he was, and why he was

baptizing, he replied to this latter question, “that he should be made manifest unto Israel, therefore,”—for this reason,—am I come baptizing in water,” John 1:31, 32-36. “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased,” Matthew 3:17. (e) Because in His baptism He typified His burial and resurrection. “Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness,” Matthew 3:15.

“All righteousness” was really and actually “fulfilled,” by the death and resurrection of Christ.

“And therefore it was imputed to him (Abraham) for righteousness. Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification,” Roman 4:22-25, cf. Roman 10:4; 2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:13. Baptist preachers declare the same fact in this act, Roman 6:1-6 (3) He was a “missionary.”

“For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. . . . And this is the will of him that sent me,” etc., John 6:38—40; 9:4. “And he said unto them, I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also; for therefore am I sent.. And he preached in the synagogues of Galilee.”

Luke 4:43-44.

First Syllogism.

(a) A missionary is one sent to preach the Gospel. (b) Jesus Christ was sent to preach the Gospel. (c) Therefore, Jesus Christ was a missionary.

Second Syllogism.

(a) A Missionary Baptist is one who has been baptized by a Missionary Baptist preacher, by divinely invested authority, in a divinely appointed manner, with a divine purpose, and for a divinely ordained design. (b) Jesus Christ was baptized by a Missionary Baptist preacher, by divine authority, in a divinely appointed manner, with a divine purpose, and for a divine design. (c) Therefore, Jesus Christ was a Missionary Baptist.

Third Syllogism.

(a) A Missionary Baptist preacher first “makes disciples,”—believers,—-by preaching the Gospel, and then baptizes them. (b) Jesus Christ first ‘made disciples,” and then “baptized them,” John. 4:1, (c) Therefore, Jesus Christ was a Missionary Baptist preacher, as regards this point of doctrine and practice.

Fourth Syllogism. (a) Missionary Baptist preachers preach the divinely appointed order, that men should, (1) repent; (2) believe; (3) be baptized. (b) Jesus Christ preached the divinely appointed order, that men should (1) repent; (2) believe; (3) be baptized. (c) Therefore, Jesus Christ was a Missionary Baptist preacher, as regards this point of doctrine and practice.

3. THE FIRST CHURCH AT JERUSALEM, WAS A MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH. (1) As we have seen, the mission of John the Baptist was “to make ready a people prepared for the Lord” and “to give knowledge of salvation unto His people by the remission of their

sins;” “to guide their feet into the way of peace,” Luke 1:16-17,76—79. This He did by preaching to the people that they should repent of their sins, and believe in Christ, and then baptizing those who thus repented and believed. He thus “made ready a people prepared for the Lord,” and the Lord took this prepared material, and organized them into a Church, as we have conclusively shown in former chapters. See John 1:35-47; Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16; 1 Corinthians 12:28, et al. Thus we have a “congregation of baptized believers, associated together, in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel.”

(2) They were “missionaries” sent to preach the Gospel.

“Then he called his twelve disciples together, . . . and he sent them to preach the kingdom of God,” Luke 9:1,2. (a) They preached “repentance.”

“And they went out and preached that men should repent,” Mark 6:12. (b) They preached the Gospel.

“And they departed and went through the towns, preaching the gospel, and healing everywhere.” Luke 9:6. (c) They baptized those who repented and believed.

“When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard, that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples)”, John 4:1-2.

First Syllogism.

(a) A Missionary Baptist Church is a Church composed of members who have been baptized by a Missionary Baptist preacher, upon a profession of their faith in Jesus Christ. (b) The members of this Church were professed believers in Christ, who had been baptized by John, who was a Missionary Baptist preacher. (c) Therefore, it was a Missionary Baptist Church.

Second Syllogism.

(a) A Missionary Baptist Church is a Church organized by a Missionary Baptist preacher. (b) This Church was organized by Jesus Christ, who was a Missionary Baptist preacher. (c) Therefore, it was a Missionary Baptist Church.

Third Syllogism.

(a) A Missionary Baptist Church is one that obeys the command of Jesus Christ. to “go and preach that men should repent and believe the gospel.” (b) The members of this Church went forth in obedience to Christ’s command, and preached that men should repent and believe the Gospel, (c) Therefore, it was a Missionary Baptist. Church,

Fourth Syllogism.

(a) A Missionary Baptist Church, is one that “makes disciples” by preaching the Gospel, and then baptizing those who repent and believe. (b) The members of this Church “made disciples” by preaching the Gospel unto the people, and then baptized those who repented and believed it. (c) Therefore, it was a Missionary Baptist Church.

If the kingdom was not set up until the day of Pentecost, then the material which John made ready for the Master’s use, was all cast aside as worthless, and his mission was a failure. Not only so, but the Master Himself, the King of this kingdom, is by this theory thrust out of His kingdom, since it was not organized until after He was dead, buried, risen and ascended to heaven. We are not willing to accept a doctrine that dethrones the King of Zion, and makes the life work of Himself, and His divinely appointed forerunner an ignominious failure! Can you?

PERPETUITY CHAPTER XII. 22.

The Church Organized By Jesus Christ Was To Be Perpetuated Unto the End of the Gospel Dispensation.

Having established the fact, that the Church organized by Jesus Christ was, in all of the essential and component elements of its constitution, a MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH, beyond the possibility of a Scriptural or logical refutation, we shall now proceed to establish by the same irrefragible proof, viz., the Scriptures of eternal truth, that this Church was to be perpetuated until the end of this Gospel dispensation, at least.

1. OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECIES. And in the days of these kings, shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom, shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever, Dan. 2:44.

We learn from this prophecy: (1) That the “God of heaven should set up a kingdom.” We have proven in former chapters, (a) that Jesus Christ was this “God of heaven”; (b) and that He “set up” a kingdom.

“And the kingdom, and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him,” Daniel 7:27.

(2) That this kingdom “shall never be destroyed,” and that “it shall stand forever!”

How long is “forever?” If it “shall never be destroyed,” it is certainly in existence today, and will continue to exist as long as God's eternal throne shall stand, unless the Holy Spirit that inspired Daniel's prophecy, (2 Pet. 1:21), inspired him to foretell a falsehood ! Who will say it?

(3) It was not to be “left to other people.”

It was not to apostatize, or be triumphed over by its enemies.

From these prophecies we learn, that notwithstanding the saints of the Most High were to be most dreadfully persecuted by the fourth kingdom, and by the little horn kingdom,—Anti-christ, as nearly all commentators agree,—still they were not to be entirely destroyed, but on the contrary, they were to “possess the kingdom forever and ever!”

The Hebrew word, “Y'keel” in the 21st verse, means simply to “prevail against, to overcome,” according to Gesenius, but does not mean to destroy, in the sense of utter destruction. So B'lah translated wear out, in the 25th verse, means to afflict, to trouble, according to the same authority. Thus while they were to be afflicted, and troubled by their enemies, and while they were to be prevailed against for a season, yet they were to ultimately triumph under the leadership of the "Ancient of days," the Lord Jesus Christ.

2. NEW TESTAMENT PROPHECIES. “And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it,” Matt. 16:18. ("Shall not triumph over it,” Em. Diaglott).)

(a) “Thou art petros;” “a piece of rock, a stone, and thus distinguished from petra,” Liddell and Scott's Lex. The Saviour evidently knew the unstable character of Simon, notwithstanding his protestations of fealty to Him, and his readiness to “confess him” at that time. On another occasion when Peter had professed his willingness to go with Him to “prison,” or even "unto death," Jesus foretold the fact that he should deny Him repeatedly, when the time should come that was to test the faithfulness of His followers. See Lu. 22:31-34 and parallel

passages.

The reason, doubtless, that the Saviour gave him this name was because He knew his unstable character—“a petros,” “a movable stone.” (b) But “upon this petra,”—this immovable rock,— this “sure foundation,” Isa. 28:16 —“I will build my church.”

We have shown in former chapters that Jesus Christ Himself was the foundation of His Church. See 1 Cor. 3:11; Eph. 2:20, et al. The Saviour thus presents in striking contrast, what an unstable, yielding, unenduring foundation His disciples—even the boldest of them would be, because a human foundation merely, compared with the firm, enduring foundation upon which He would build His Church, because that foundation is divine. (c) “The gates of hell”—“hades, the under world” evidently the baleful, destructive powers of darkness, or the grave “shall not prevail against it.”

While the enemies of Christ should “prevail against, overcome,” “wear out,” “afflict and torment,” the “saints of the Most High,” for a season, nevertheless, they should not utterly destroy His Church and triumph over it. In other words, while they should be persecuted, and thousands of them put to death, yet they should not utterly annihilate them, and His Church should “stand forever.” (d) If there was not a page of ecclesiastical history confirming this declaration, and showing a continuous succession of Churches from the days of Jesus Christ until the present, His statement that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it,” is sufficient for me.

Logical statement.

(a) If the Church established by Jesus Christ ever apostatized, or was triumphed over by her enemies, then He prophesied falsely. (b) Jesus Christ was not a false prophet. (c) Therefore, His Church has continued in uninterrupted succession until the present time, and will be perpetuated until He comes again.

(2) “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: {teach…: or, make disciples, or, Christians of all nations} Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” Matt. 28:18-20. (a) Jesus says to His disciples, “Go and matheteusate,” “make disciples,” of the “nations,” and assures them that He would be with them, “pasas tas hemeras” “all the days”—every day, cf. John 8:35; 12:34. (b) Not only was He to be with His disciples “every day” during the lives of the apostles, but He would be with them “unto the end of the “aion”—age, that is, unto the end of the gospel age, or dispensation.

1. Logical statement.

(a) If the Church of Jesus Christ ever apostatized, or ceased to exist for any length of time whatever, then He could not have been with it “all the days” or “every day.” (b) But He promised to be with His disciples “every day.” (c) Therefore, His Church has been perpetuated “every day,” from its organization to the present.

2. Logical statement.

(a) If the Church of Christ ever ceases to exist, He cannot be with them at that time. (b) But He promised to be with them “all the days,” even “unto the end of the age.”

(c) Therefore, His Church will be perpetuated until the end of the Gospel dispensation.

(3) “For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till

he come,” 1 Cor. 11:26. Read context, and parallel passages in the Gospels.

1.

Logical statement.

(a) The Lord's Supper is one of the ordinances of the Church.

(b) It was to be observed

by His disciples in their Church relationship “until he comes” the second time. (c) This ordinance has been perpetuated until the present, and therefore the Church of which it is an ordinance, has also been perpetuated.

2. Logical statement.

(a) If the Church of Christ ever has, or ever does apostatize, this ordinance could not be observed “till he come,” and Paul was a false prophet. (b) But Paul was not a false prophet. (c) Therefore, the Church of Christ has not, and never will apostatize!

(4) "Unto

him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus, throughout all ages, world without end," Eph. 3:21.

Logical statement.

(a) Glory is to be ascribed to God by Jesus Christ in the Church. (b) This is to be done “throughout all ages, world without end.”

(c) Therefore, the Church has existed in all “ages,” and will continue to exist, “world without end,” from “the ages to the ages.”

(Note.—The word “Church” is used as a representation of the Church “institution,” by that figure of speech called “synecdoche,” i.e., Substituting a more inclusive term for a less inclusive one or vice versa.

(5) “Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably

with reverence and godly fear: {let…: or, let us hold fast}” Heb. 12:28.

(“Asaleutos, unshaken, unmoved, Acts 27:41. Not liable to disorder and overthrow; firm, stable, Heb. 12:28.”—Thayer's Grimm-Wilkes' Lex.) 1. Logical statement.

(a) Paul and those to whom he was writing had “received a kingdom.” (b) This kingdom could not be “shaken,” it was firm, stable, immovable. (c) Therefore, it could never be destroyed.

2.

Logical statement.

(a) That which cannot be shaken or destroyed, will be perpetuated until the end of the age, at least. (b) This kingdom cannot be shaken or destroyed. (c) Therefore, this kingdom has been perpetuated from that time to the present, and will continue until the .end of the age.

(6) “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church; and he is the Saviour of the body. . . . Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself,” (Gr. literally, place by his side) “a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle,” (Gr. blemish), “or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. He that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it even as the Lord the church; for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one

flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the church.” Eph. 5:23-32.

DEDUCTIONS. (1) Paul in these passages, (as in others,) compares the relationship that exists between Christ and the Church institution, to the divinely ordained relationship of a husband and wife united by the ties of marriage, cf. Romans 7:4.

(2) As the husband is the head of the wife, so Christ is the head of the Church. (a) “Adam was first formed and then Eve,” 1 Timothy 2:13. So Christ first existed and then the Church. (b) As Eve derived her life and being from Adam, so the Church derived its life and being from Christ. (c) As Eve was to be a “help-meet” for Adam, so the Church is to be a “help-meet” for Christ. (d) “And Adam said, this is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh,” Gen. 2:23. So “we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones,” verse 30. (e) As Adam was to “rule over his wife,” Gen. 3:167 cf. 1 Tim. 2:11-12, so Christ is to rule over His Church, Matt. 23:8, 10, Jas. 4:12.

(3.) “Christ loved the church and gave himself for it.” Will such an invaluable gift be in vain?

(4.) He is to “sanctify and cleanse it,” that it may stand by His side a glorious Church, without spot or blemish.

(5.) As a man “nourisheth and cherisheth,” and taketh care of his own body, so the Lord is to take care of His Church.

(6.) “For we are members of his body, his flesh, and of his bones,” and will He allow that body to perish? Nay, verily, for has He not said, “They shall never perish?” “Because I live, ye shall live also.” “The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Will He allow His body to be mutilated? Never, for it is to be “without spot or blemish.”

1. Logical statement.

(a) The Church is the bride of Christ, and when He comes they are to sit down together at the “marriage supper of the Lamb,” Rev. 19:7-9. (b) If the Church ever apostatized or ceased to exist,. the “marriage supper” could not take place. (c) But it will take place; therefore, the Church of Jesus Christ has continued down to the present, and will continue until He comes again.

2. Logical statement.

(a) Jesus Christ is to “place the Church at His side,” a glorious Church without spot or blemish.” (b) An apostate Church is certainly a “blemished” Church. (c) Therefore, the Church of Christ has not, and will not apostatize.

3. Logical statement.

(a) If the Church of Christ ever apostatized, then He possessed a “mutilated body.” (b) Jesus Christ never had, and never will have such a body. (c) Therefore, the Church of Christ never has and never will apostatize.

4. Logical statement.

(a) If the Church of Christ ever apostatized, she became an ecclesiastical “harlot.” (b)The Church of Christ never has and never will become an ecclesiastical harlot. (c)Therefore, she never has, and never will apostatize.

5. Logical statement.

(a) Jesus Christ was the head, of which the Church was His body, when Paul wrote, and a head cannot exist without the body, nor a body without the head. (b) If the Church of Christ apostatized, or ever ceased to exist, we have the strange anomaly of a living head without a body! (c) Therefore, the Church of Christ has never apostatized or ceased to exist.

CHAPTER XIII. Our next line of argument in support of our Proposition, is based upon the parables which teach the Perpetuity of the Church.

1. Parable of the Mustard Seed.

“Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field; which indeed is the least of all seeds; but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof,” Matthew 13:31-32.

DEDUCTIONS. (1) In this parable, the Saviour compares, see Mark 4:30-32, the small and insignificant beginning of the kingdom of heaven to a grain of mustard seed which is the “least of all seeds,” while its perpetuity and ultimate triumph is likened to the growth and development of the mustard plant.

(2) If this kingdom was not in existence at the time Christ was speaking, He could not have said, “it is like,” present tense.

(3) This kingdom of heaven could not have been the old Jewish Church, for: (a) It could not have been likened to a grain of mustard seed in its smallness and insignificance, since Palestine alone contained at least three and a half million Jews, not to mention surrounding countries. (b) Nor was this Church to grow and develop into a tree whose branches would afford protection to others, but on the contrary, they were to be slain, impoverished, and scattered broadcast among the nations of the earth, and they were to become so despicable that their names were to become a “hiss and a byword,” 1 Kings 9:7-9; Amos 4:8-9, et al. (c) This “kingdom of heaven” could not have meant the “kingdom of grace” in the hearts of the children of men, for that kingdom has been in existence for thousands of years, and by no principle of interpretation with which I am acquainted, can it be said of this kingdom, that the “fowls of the air lodge in the branches thereof.” It must therefore mean the visible Church or kingdom of Christ on earth.

(4) If this mustard plant was ever dug up and destroyed, it never could have become such a large tree as the one described in the parable, unless there had been a subsequent replanting of the seed, which the Saviour has never done, nor authorized anyone else to do for Him. (5) Therefore, Christ not only established His kingdom during His personal ministry on earth, by planting the mustard seed, but it has also been perpetuated to the present time, and

will continue to be perpetuated on down through the ages, until He shall come again “the second time without sin unto salvation.”

2. Parable of the Leaven.

“Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened,” Matthew 13:33.

(Note, “a measure of meal” equals nearly 1½ pecks.)

DEDUCTIONS. (1.) Leaven in the Scriptures usually represents false doctrine as well as moral corruption, but in this parable, Christ does not compare the doctrines or teaching of the kingdom to “leaven,” but “the kingdom of heaven” itself, is like “leaven which continues its quiet, perpetual working, until the whole is leavened.” He certainly teaches by this parable that the kingdom of heaven, though small and insignificant in its incipiency, is to continue its active, undemonstrative, persistent, perpetual working, until it “fills the whole earth.”

(2.) If there was no kingdom in existence when Christ uttered this parable, He could not have said, “it is like”—present tense.

(3.) If the kingdom ever ceased to exist., then it could not have been aptly compared to “leaven”; for when that has become dead and inert, it can never be restored to vitality again; hence, all efforts to “restore primitive Christianity,” and “re-establish the kingdom of Christ,” are miserable failures, not to say unwarrantable presumptions.

(4.) The “leaven” was not developed out of the meal, but was something entirely foreign and distinct from it and taken by the “woman” and “put in” the meal. So the kingdom of heaven— the Church of Christ—was not developed out of the old Jewish Church—nor out of the worldly formalism, ritualism and hypocrisy which characterized it; neither was it the old Jewish institution reformed and remodeled, or modified in any way, but it was an entirely new and distinct organization founded by Jesus Christ, and “put into” the world.

1. Logical statement.

(a) If the Saviour does not teach by the “leaven” “put into” the “meal,” that this kingdom is an entirely new organization founded by Him, and put into the world as a distinct institution, then He is justly chargeable with making an inapt and unmeaning comparison. (b) But Jesus Christ never made inapt and unmeaning comparisons. (c) Therefore, this “kingdom of heaven” was an entirely new and distinct institution, and founded by Christ and established in the world during His personal ministry on earth.

2. Logical statement.

(a) If the Saviour does not teach by the persistent working of the “leaven,” by the phrase “till the whole is leavened,” that this “kingdom” was to continue its perpetual, active working, until the whole earth is permeated by its influence, then the comparison is inapt, unmeaning and incomprehensible. (b) But the Saviour never made such faulty comparisons. (c) Therefore this “kingdom” is to continue its persistent and active influence, until the “whole earth is filled with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea,” and the “kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and of his Christ,” Isaiah 11:9, Revelation 11:15.

3. Parable of the Wheat and the Tares.

“Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed

tares among the wheat, and went his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.” Matthew 13:24-30.

The Saviour’ s Explanation: “Then Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the tares of the field. He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; {things…: or, scandals} And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.

Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Matthew 13:36-43.

From this parable, and its explanation by the Saviour, we make the following...

DEDUCTIONS: (1) The “kingdom of heaven is like a man that sowed good seed in his field,”—the “kosmos”— the “world.” The kingdom is in the world, but not of the world. “My kingdom is not of this world.”

(2) The ‘owner’ of the field is Jesus Christ, and as the “sower of the seed,” He established or founded this kingdom during His personal ministry on earth.

(3) “Is likened,” shows that it was in existence at the time He spake this parable.

(4) The good seed, are the truly regenerated persons of whom His kingdom was to be composed.

(5) The “tares,”—”darnel” or “cheat”—are unregenerated Church members, sown by the devil during the unwatchfulness of men—while they “slept,” cf. Gal. 2:4; 2 Peter 2:1; Jude 4.

(6) The “servants” and “reapers” are the “angels” who can distinguish the tares from the wheat, although His people may not be able to do so.

(7) The “harvest” is at the “end of the aion”—age, the gospel dispensation—and the servants are commanded to “let the wheat and the tares” “grow together until the end of the age.”

(8) This “kingdom” cannot be the “kingdom of grace,” for there are no “children of the wicked one” nor those who do “iniquity” in that kingdom. “Except a man be born from above he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (9) Therefore, it must be His visible kingdom on earth.

(10) The “angels” will “gather the tares out of His kingdom and burn them,” cf. Matthew 7:21-22.

(11) Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.

1. Logical statement.

(a) The “wheat,” regenerate persons, and the “tares,” counterfeit Christians, hypocrites, are both “growing together” in this kingdom. (b) They do not grow together, there are no “tares,” unregenerate sinners in the “invisible” kingdom of grace. (c) Therefore, this kingdom is Christ’s visible kingdom, or Church on earth.

2. Logical statement.

(a) The “wheat,” regenerate persons, and the “tares,” counterfeit Christians, hypocrites, are in this visible kingdom. (b) They are to “grow together” until the end of the age. (c) Therefore, this kingdom has been, and will be perpetuated until the “end” of the Gospel dispensation.

4. Parable of the Net. “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind, which when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world (age): the angels shall come forth and sever the wicked from among the just, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”

Matthew 13:47-50.

DEDUCTIONS. (1) The Saviour in this parable compares the kingdom of heaven to a “net cast into the sea.”

He had previously said to His disciples, “Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men,” Matthew 4:19.

(2) The “sea” evidently refers to the world of mankind, and the drawing of the net to shore,” clearly means the end of the Gospel dispensation, when the work of preaching the gospel to “all nations” shall have ceased.

(3) The “kingdom of heaven” in this parable, is certainly a visible kingdom, as the expressions, “gathering of every kind,”—“good and bad,”—i. e. righteous and wicked, —“gathering the good into vessels, but casting the bad away,” most undoubtedly shows; for surely, “every kind,”—“good and bad,”—righteous and wicked, are not gathered into the “invisible kingdom,” if there be such an institution.

(4) The “angels” are to do this work of separation at the end of the Gospel age, as the word “aion,” translated “world” in these passages, most certainly means.

(5) That the angels are to “sever the wicked from among the just” at the end of the Gospel dispensation, clearly establishes the fact, that the “kingdom” is to continue in unbroken succession down to that time.

(1) Logical statement.

(a) “Every kind,”—“good and bad,”—“righteous and wicked,” are not gathered into the “invisible kingdom of grace,” (if there be such a thing.[emphasis mine- better call it, “the family of God,” the Father of all who’ve made peace with Him on His terms; cf. Acts 10:34-35; 1 Peter 1:17.- esn]) (b) They are gathered into the visible kingdom of Christ on earth, John 6:64-70. (c) Therefore, it was His visible kingdom of which Christ was speaking in this parable.

2. Logical statement.

(a) If this visible kingdom was not in existence at the time Christ was speaking, and if it is not to continue to the end of the Gospel age, then it is not “like a net cast into the sea,” and

Jesus Christ is made to teach falsely. (b) But Jesus Christ was not a false teacher. (c) Therefore, this visible kingdom of which Christ was speaking, not only existed at that time, but has also continued on down in uninterrupted succession to this good hour, and will so continue unto the end of the Gospel age.

5. Parable of the Tower.

“For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish.” Luke 14:28-30.

DEDUCTIONS. (1) The establishment, development, and completion of the Church, is here compared to a man “intending to build a tower.”

(2) Jesus Christ evidently intended to build the Church, and certainly He has “counted all the cost,” and is abundantly able to “finish” what He has undertaken, cf. Zechariah. 6:12-13, with 4:9, Isaiah 53:10-11, and Philippians. 1:6, et al.

(3) If the Church of Christ ever apostatized, then He was not able to finish the work He has undertaken, and hence, He would justly lay Himself liable to the “mockery” of His enemies, verses 29-30.

Logical Statement.

(a) To say that the Church of Christ apostatized or ceased to exist, is to subject Jesus Christ to the mockery of His enemies. (b) Jesus Christ has not, and will not be thus mocked. (c) Therefore the Church of Christ has been perpetuated to the present moment, and will continue to be so perpetuated, until its final triumphant and glorious consummation.

6. Parable of the King Going to War. “Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace.” Luke 14:31-32.

DEDUCTIONS. (1) Jesus Christ as the “King of glory” is engaged in a war against the devil as the “Prince of the power of the air.”[Psalm 24:7-10; 110:1-7; Eph. 2:2] (2) The army of Jesus Christ is His visible Church, and although comparatively few in numbers, they shall finally triumph over the “powers of darkness,” under the leadership of the “Captain of their Salvation.” As the poet victoriously sings:[Eph. 6:12; Heb. 2:10] “Thy saints in all this glorious war, Shall conquer though they die; They see the triumph from afar, By faith they bring it nigh.”

“He shall reign until he hath put all enemies under his feet; the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” And “the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdom of our God and of his Christ.” [1 Cor. 15:25-26; Revelation 11:15]

Logical statement.

(a) If the Church of Christ ever apostatized, Jesus Christ as her Captain and King suffered an inglorious defeat. (b) But He was not, and will not be thus defeated. (c) Therefore, the Church of Christ has not and will not apostatize.

7. The Promise of the Abiding Comforter.

“And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.” John 14:16-17.

DEDUCTIONS. (1) Jesus Christ here promises to send the Holy Spirit as a comforter to His disciples, and declares that He is to “abide with them forever.”

(2) He also declares that the “world cannot receive” Him, and hence, if the Church ever ceased to exist, He was either a houseless, homeless wanderer, or else the earth was entirely bereft of His presence and influence, and the salvation of sinners was an impossibility! But it is to just such absurd conclusions as the above, that the advocates of the doctrine of the apostasy of the Church of Jesus Christ are compelled to arrive, when their position is reduced to its logical consequences.

1. Logical statement.

(a) If the Church of Christ ever apostatized or ceased to exist, the promise of the Saviour to His disciples could not have been verified, and was therefore false. (b) But Jesus Christ never made a false promise. (c) His Church has not, and will not apostatize.

2. Logical statement.

(a) If His Church ever ceased to exist, the Holy Spirit was reduced to the absurd necessity of becoming a “homeless wanderer” in the earth. (b) But he never was, and never will be reduced to any such absurd necessity. (c) Therefore, the doctrine of the apostasy of the Church of Christ, is illogical and unscriptural.

CHAPTER XIV. Our next line of argument, in support of the perpetuity of the Church organized by Jesus Christ during His personal ministry on earth, and, we might add of its identity also, is based upon the fact, that this Church was to suffer persecution at the hands of its enemies in every age, and in every clime. And in this connection, we may say, that this is a divinely ordained characteristic possessed by no organization claiming to be a Church of Christ upon the face of the earth, other than Baptist Churches. However loudly, boldly and persistently, other institutions may prefer their proud claims to be regarded as “a Church of Christ,” or “the Church of Christ,” the distinguishing mark foretold by Jesus Christ Himself, that His Churches were to be persecuted “among all nations, for my name’s sake,” is lacking in each and every one of them, and is borne by none, but those only wearing the appellation, or possessing the peculiar characteristics of doctrine and practice, which have ever distinguished those Churches called Baptist Churches.

1. Persecution Foretold.

Read carefully the following passages: “Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the Son of man’s sake.” Luke 6:22.

“But . . . they shall lay their hands on you, and persecute you, delivering you up to the synagogues, and into prisons, being brought before kings and rulers for my name’s sake; and it shall turn to you for a testimony. Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before what ye shall answer; for I will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist. And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death. And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake,” Luke 21:12-17.

“They shall put you out of the synagogues; yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service,” John 16:2. [ “This is He Who came by (with) water and blood His baptism and His death, Jesus

Christ (the Messiah)--not by (in) the water only, but by (in) the water and the blood.

And it is the Holy Spirit Who bears witness, because the Holy Spirit is the Truth. So there are three witnesses {in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are One; and there are three witnesses on the earth: } the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree are in unison; their testimony coincides. If we accept as we do the testimony of men if we are willing to take human authority, the testimony of God is greater (of stronger authority), for this is the testimony of God, even the witness which He has borne regarding His Son.” AMP.- cf.

1 John 5:all. - esn] Let the blood of multiplied thousands [50 millions during the "Dark Ages"-esn] of Baptist martyrs, slain by the “Woman drunken with the blood of the saints,” Revelation 17:6, attest the truthfulness of this prophecy, as well as its applicability to them as the people to whom the Saviour referred!

“And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.”

“After this I beheld, and lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands; and cried with a loud voice, saying, Salvation to our God which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb. . . . And one of the elders answered, saying unto me. What are these which are arrayed in white robes? and whence came they? And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said unto me. These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”

“And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars: {wonder: or, sign} And she being with child cried, travailing in birth, and pained to be delivered. And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten

horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. {wonder: or, sign} And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born. And she brought forth a man child, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and to his throne. And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days. And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.

And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time. And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.

And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood. And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.

And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”

Revelation 6:911; 7:9-14; 12:1-17.

DEDUCTIONS. (1) The almost universal consensus of expositors is, that the “woman” in this passage represents the Church, and by far the larger majority of them say, that it is the “Christian” or “New Testament” Church that is meant. A few deterred by the statements made in verses 2, 4, and 5, think that it is the “Old Testament” or Jewish Church, but verses 14 to 17, are fatal to this view. If we had a literal translation, the greater part of the difficulty would vanish. For instance in verse 5, “And she brought forth a Son, a male,” etc. And in verse 13, the word “child” does not occur, but simply “the woman which brought forth the male.” In fact, there is a sense, in which Christ is the son of the virgin Church. The prophet Isaiah foretold His birth in this language: “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given,” etc., Isaiah 9:6-7. Again, “Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel,” etc., Isaiah 7:14. This prophecy was literally and actually fulfilled, by His being born of the virgin Mary, and ecclesiastically fulfilled, by His public manifestation at His baptism, among the people whom John had “prepared,” which was virtually the Church in her “virgin” state. Paul speaks of having “espoused” the Church at Corinth “to one husband,” that he might “present it as a chaste virgin to Christ,” 2 Corinthians 11:2. With this view of these Scriptures, it is easy to understand how Christ could be “brought forth” by the Church.

(2) Notice that the “woman” was to be “fed,” verse 6, or “nourished,” verse 14, (the same Greek word in both places), while she was in the “wilderness.” Food and nourishment is given to sustain life, and during the entire period of the “wilderness” existence of the Churches of

Christ, commonly called the “Dark ages,” they were fed and supported by Him who had declared, that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it,” and that He would “be with them every day, even unto the end of the world.”

(3) Notice also, that the “woman” still continued to bring forth “seed,” and this seed also suffered persecution. The Church continued to bear spiritual children, and these children were characterized as “keeping the commandments of God, and having the testimony of Jesus Christ.” During the wilderness period, there were only two classes of people who claimed to constitute the true Church or Churches of Christ on the earth, Roman Catholics and Baptists, or Ana-baptists as their enemies persistently called them, a term of reproach which our Baptist forefathers have just as persistently repudiated. Which of these two peoples think you reader, is really His Church?

The red-handed and bloody Roman Catholic Church led by her wicked and licentious Popes, or the poor, pious, godly, persecuted inhabitants of the Alps, Apennines, Pyrenees, and other mountains and valleys of Europe and.

Wales, the history of whose unwavering fidelity to the “Word of God and the commandments of Jesus Christ,” is. written in the indelible blood of the thousands of their slaughtered innocents, the victims of Romish rage and hate!

Ah! Let us read the description of the great ecclesiastical “harlot” as penned by the inspired Revelator, John: “So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: {decked: Gr. gilded} And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. {harlots: or, fornications} And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I wondered with great admiration.”

Revelation 17:3-6.

The entire world of biblical scholars and critics, except Roman Catholics themselves, declare that it is the Roman Catholic Church which is here represented by the “woman” in this passage.

If this be the correct interpretation of this figure, which we cannot for a moment doubt, then she is not, and cannot be the Church established by Jesus Christ, and which was to be persecuted among “all nations for His name’s sake”; for while they were to be persecuted even unto death, they were never to persecute anyone else! On the contrary, the Master sent His disciples forth as “lambs among wolves, and charged them to be “as wise as serpents and as harmless as doves,” and the page of authentic history which records the fact, that Baptists have ever persecuted anyone on account of a difference in religious opinions, in any age or in any clime, has yet to be written by friend or foe? Indeed, while monuments of the sufferings of our Baptist brethren may be found in Wart-burg castles, Lollard towers, Bedford prisons, Smithfield fires, Boston whipping-posts, Fredericksburg and Havana jails, as well as in hundreds of other places, made sacred by martyr’s blood, still they have ever been found in the front rank, as the firm and unswerving friends and advocates of civil and religious liberty.

Persecuted? Yes, so bitterly, that even their enemies have been compelled to bear testimony to the fact. The Roman Catholic Cardinal Hosius, president of the Council of Trent, in 1650, was forced to an impartial historian to declare: “If the truths of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinion and persuasion of no sect can be truer and surer, than that of the Ana-baptists (Baptists), since there have been none for the PAST

TWELVE HUNDRED YEARS, that have been more generally punished, or that have more cheerfully and steadfastly undergone, and even offered themselves to the most cruel sorts of punishment, than these people.”

Reader, what do you think of the testimony of this great Catholic dignitary, who certainly had no special love for Baptists, but whose knowledge of the incontrovertible facts of history, forced him to declare, however unpalatable the statement may have been to him as a Catholic, that the Baptists, on account of their religious opinions, had “suffered the most cruel persecution for twelve hundred years past!”

Subtract 1200 from 1650, and it carries us back to the year, A. D. 350, a date in which and from which, according to the testimony of our enemies themselves, the Baptists have not only existed, but also suffered persecution. Surely, these are the people of whom the Saviour said, “Ye shall be persecuted among all nations for my name’s sake,” since there is not a nation on the face of the earth where the blood of Baptist martyrs has not been shed!

Another historical fact of which our people may be justly proud, is that Baptists in all ages have ever been found the brave and unselfish champions of civil and religious liberty, and have ever plead for the right of freedom of conscience both for themselves and others, and while they have endured the most bitter persecutions on this account, yet they have never persecuted others because they differed from them in religion!

On this point, Francis Wayland in “Principles and Practices of Baptists,”§§§§§§page 139, says: “When they have obtained the power to persecute, in turn, they used that power only to return good for evil, and, by granting to their persecutors every right which they claimed for themselves. When any sect can lay claim to higher or more honorable distinction, we will bow before them, and cheerfully yield them Christian precedence.”

As to their championship of civil and religious liberty, let us hear the testimony of some of the leading historians of the world, not Baptists, on this point.

Bancroft, the great historian of the United States, declares: “Freedom of conscience was from the first, a trophy of the Baptists,” Vol. II, pages 66, 67.

Judge Story, the learned jurist and historian says: “In the code of laws established by them in Rhode Island, we read for the first time since Christianity ascended the throne of the Caesars, the declaration that conscience should he free, and that men should not be punished for worshipping God in the way they were persuaded He requires.” (Am. Cyclopedia, Vol. 2, p. 600).

In the first “Confession of Faith” ever published by the Baptists in England, which was in the year 1611, this glorious doctrine of religious and soul-liberty was clearly enunciated. And in 1614, the first modern treatise on this subject, was written by Leonard Busher, a Baptist, and was entitled, “Religious Peace, or a Plea for Liberty of Conscience.”

The celebrated philosopher, John Locke, while refusing to accept the unmerited honor which Lord Chancellor King desired to thrust upon him, as being the author of religious liberty, had the honesty and manhood to declare: “The Baptists were the First and Only Propounders of Absolute Liberty, Just and True Liberty, Equal. and Impartial Liberty!”

Thank God, for this grand and glorious legacy

CHAPTER XV. In this closing chapter, we propose to introduce a few statements from some of the principal ecclesiastical historians of the world, none of whom are Baptists, but all of whom testify to the fact, that the Churches of Jesus Christ have continued on down through the ages in uninterrupted succession from the days of Christ and the apostles to the present, and that they have ever been characterized by those Gospel principles and practices, which distinguish the Missionary Baptist Churches of today from all others claiming to be churches of Christ.

1. Let us hear first, the testimony of the great German Lutheran historian:

Dr. Mosheim.******* “It may be observed in the first place, that the Mennonites are not entirely in error when they boast of their descent from the Waldenses, Petrobrusians and other ancient sects who are usually considered Witnesses of the truth in times of general darkness and superstition.

Before the rise of Luther and Calvin there lay concealed in almost all the countries of Europe, particularly in Bohemia, Moravia, Switzerland and Germany, many persons who adhered tenaciously to the following doctrine, which the Waldenses, Wickliffites and Hussites have maintained, some in a more disguised and others in a more open and public manner, viz: 'That, the kingdom of Christ, or visible Church which He established upon. earth, was an assembly of true and real saints and ought, therefore, to be inaccessible to the wicked and unrighteous, and also exempt from all those institutions which human prudence suggests to oppose the progress of iniquity or to correct and reform transgressors.' This maxim is the true source of all those peculiarities that are to be found in the religious doctrine and discipline of the Mennonites; and it is most certain that the greatest part of these peculiarities were approved by many of those who, before the dawn of the reformation, entertained the notion already mentioned, relating to the visible Church of Christ.” History of the Christian Church, p. 491.

(Note.—Those whom Dr. Mosheim calls Mennonites in one place, and Ana-baptists in another, he also styles Baptists in yet others. For instance, on page 500, he says: “The sectaries in England who reject the custom of baptizing infants, are not distinguished by the title of Ana-baptists but by that of Baptists.”)

Let the reader carefully note this testimony. (a) Every sentence in this quotation from the Confession of Faith of these ancient Christians can be heartily indorsed by the Baptists of today. Read it carefully again. (b) Mosheim declares that these Baptists existed “before the rise of Luther and Calvin,” and “before the dawn of the reformation,” and hence, the idea that the Baptists originated with either Roger Williams or John Smith, is forever exploded by the testimony of this great Lutheran.

As to their origin, hear him again: “The true origin of that sect which acquired the denomination Ana-baptists by their administering anew the rite of baptism to those who came over to their communion, and derived that of Mennonites from the famous man to whom they owe the greatest part of their present felicity, IS HID IN THE DEPTHS OF ANTIQUITY, and is, of consequence, extremely difficult to be ascertained.” (Church History, page 490).

Dr. Mosheim virtually admits that their origin cannot be found on this side of the New Testament age!

2. Drs. Yepij and Dermout, two learned members of the Dutch Reformed Church, were appointed by the King of Holland to write a history of the different religious denominations of the country, and this is their testimony as to the origin of the Baptists: “We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Ana-baptists, and in later times, Mennonites, were the original Waldenses, and who have long in the history of the Church received the honor of that origin. On this account, the Baptists may be considered as the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the apostles, and as a Christian society, which has preserved pure the doctrines of the gospel in all ages. The perfectly correct external and internal economy of the Baptist denomination, tends to confirm the truth, disputed by the Romish Church, that the Reformation brought about in the sixteenth century, was in the highest degree necessary; and, at the same time, goes to refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics, that their communion is the most ancient.”

This testimony deserves to be indelibly engraven upon the tablets of the memory of every true Baptist!

3. Hear Zwingle, the great Swiss reformer: “The institution of Ana—baptism is no novelty, but for 1300 years has caused great disturbance in the Church, and has acquired such a strength, that the attempt in this age to contend with it, appeared futile for a time.”

Take 1300 from 1530, the date at which Zwingle wrote, and we have A. D. 230, a date reaching nearly the apostolic age, according to this great reformer.

4. Ree, in his “Reply to Wall,” page 20, says: “The Ann-baptists are a pernicious sect, of which kind the Waldensian brethren seem to have been. Nor is this heresy a modern thing, for it existed in the time of Austin.”

(Note.—Austin, a monk to whom Ree refers, lived A. D. 354).

Ree calls these Ana-baptists “heretics,” because, as the celebrated philosopher, Sir Isaac Newton, declared, “the Baptists are the only body of Christians that has not symbolized with the Church of Rome!”

5. Now hear Mr. Alexander Campbell, the great preacher, and founder of the Campbellite church.

“We can find an unbroken series of Protestants—a regular succession of those who protested against the corruptions of the Romish Church, and endeavored to hold fast the faith once delivered to the saints, from the first schism, 251 A.D., to the present day.”

(Campbell-Purcell Debate, page 77.

Hear Mr. Campbell in his debate with McCalla: “From the apostolic age to the present time, the sentiments of Baptists and their practice of Baptism, have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced!”

With this testimony we close, although scores of statements equally strong, might be adduced. Well might we exclaim, Their rock is not as our Rock, our enemies themselves being judges! Reader, the Scriptures, the arguments and the evidences are before you, and we ask you to weigh them in view of that great day, when the Master will say to His obedient ones, Well done, thou good and faithful servants!

For Bible references see: Blue Letter Bible. “(KJV - King James Version).” Blue Letter Bible.

1996-2010. 19 Nov 2010. http://www.blueletterbible.org †††††††

* Frank L. DuPont -- author KY; TN; TX; circa 1881-1901; in 1879, Bro. J.N. Hall “engaged with Elder F. L. DuPont in publishing the Baptist Gleaner, at Fulton, Ky. Bro. Du Pont, owing to failing health, withdrew from the paper, and for some time Bro. Hall edited and published the paper alone.”-- Baptist History Homepage J. N. [John Newton] Hall By Ben M. Bogard, 1900 p. 443.

“In 1922, Frank Lascelles DuPont made some statements which show another aspect of the seriousness of pulpit affiliation as a threat to the major tenets of Landmarkism. He warned: It will be a sad...day...when Baptist churches surrender their claim to be the only lineal and true descendants of the church founded by Jesus Christ himself, during His [sic] personal ministry on earth! When, if ever, they surrender this claim..., they will have surrendered their right to the custodianship of each and every tenet of New Testament faith and practice committed to them by our Divine Lord, and will merit the Judas-infamy of having betrayed him not "with," but "FOR a kiss!".. ... ... ... ...And mark you: When...Baptist churches through their love of popularity and liberalistic practices lose their identity as the only New Testament churches on this earth, with them will go every distinctive Bible doctrine, faith and practice, to preserve which, millions of our forefathers and mothers have laid down their lives from the days of John the Baptist to the present time.(30) .. ... ... ... ...DuPont issued this warning "in view of the gradually increasing Liberalism among Baptists."(31)Among the liberal practices he mentioned "Union Meetings," "Church Federation Movements," "Alien Immersions," "Pedo-baptist Sprinklings," and "Open Communion." DuPont was persuaded that something was needed to be done "to stem the tide of our people who are drifting away from their Bible moorings."(32) .. ... ... ... ... William Jennings Burgess included nine items in a "Doctrinal Comparison" in corroboration of a similar claim.(167)He also placed in his book a similar list of eight "Baptist Distinctives."(168)Similarly, F. L. DuPont stated that "our position is, that the church organized by Jesus Christ was, in doctrine and practice, and in all of the essential elements of its constitution, a Missionary Baptist Church."(169)He listed eight of "the principal characteristics of doctrine and practice [of]... a Missionary Baptist Church."(170)Through an elaborate system of syllogisms, DuPont endeavored to show also that John the Baptist and Jesus were "Missionary Baptist preacher[s]" and that "the first church at Jerusalem was a Missionary Baptist Church."(171)Gillentine took an approach very similar to DuPont's but without the syllogisms.(172)He also listed eight "characteristic features held by Baptists."(173) .. ... ... ... ... Using an elaborate system of syllogisms, F. L. DuPont used most of the above arguments, as well as certain of Jesus' parables, to give further New Testament proof of the doctrine of perpetuity. These include: the Mustard Seed (Matt. 13:31-32), Leaven (Matt. 13:33), Wheat and the Tares (Matt. 13:24-30), Net (Matt.

13:47-50), Tower (Luke 13:28-30), and the King Going to War (Luke 14:31-32).(189)DuPont also believed that Daniel 2:44 was prophetic of church perpetuity: "and it [the kingdom] shall stand forever."(190)Willis A. Jarrel agreed, stating that "every promise of preservation and perpetuity, made to the kingdom, is a promise to the churches of which it is composed and vice versa."(191) .. ... ... ... ... 30. F. L. DuPont, "DuPont's Dashes," BP, April 27, 1922, p. 2. .. ... ... ... ... 88. Jackson, Studies, pp. 28-29. F. L. DuPont, "The 'Kingdoms' of the Bible," BP, November 6, 1919, p. 20, took a similar approach: "Baptism is not THE door, nor even 'A' door. If, as some argue, baptism is THE door into the church or kingdom, then those who join by letter, etc., must get in through the 'window,' or climb down the 'chimney.'

Baptism and the Lord's Supper are CHURCH ordinances and NOT 'Kingdom' ordinances." .. ... ... ... ... 104. Ibid., p. 28.

Gillentine's whole approach was very similar to that of F. L. DuPont, The Origin and Perpetuity of the Church of Jesus Christ[cited hereafter as Origin and Perpetuity] (Texarkana, Arkansas-Texas: Baptist Sunday School Committee, n.d.). .. ... ... ... ... 150. Clover, p. 28.

See also Frank L. DuPont, "The 'Kingdoms' of the Bible," pp. 3-4; and "Correction," BP, November 13, 1919, p. 6; for a similar approach. He identified six kingdoms. † And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: Rom 11:26 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the LORD. - Isa 59:20 KJV ‡ Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give [thee] the heathen [for] thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth [for] thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish [from] the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed [are] all they that put their trust in him. - Psalm 2:6-12 § But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth. ** The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the LORD of hosts: and in this place will I give peace, saith the LORD of hosts. †† (I stood between the LORD and you at that time, to shew you the word of the LORD: for ye were afraid by reason of the fire, and went not up into the mount;) + For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom

for all, to be testified in due time.++ If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.+++ For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes. ‡‡ Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.+ It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:53-56,63 §§ But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: {power: or, the right, or, privilege} 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. John 1:12-13; Galatian 3:26; 1 John 5:1. *** And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it. Exodus 12:7 ††† According to all that I shew thee, after the pattern of the tabernacle, and the pattern of all the instruments thereof, even so shall ye make it. ... And look that thou make them after their pattern, which was shewed thee in the mount. - Exodus 25:9, 40 And thou shalt rear up the tabernacle according to the fashion thereof which was shewed thee in the mount. - Exodus 26:30 ‡‡‡ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, ... And Moses reared up the tabernacle, and fastened his sockets, and set up the boards thereof, and put in the bars thereof, and reared up his pillars. ... And he reared up the court round about the tabernacle and the altar, and set up the hanging of the court gate. So Moses finished the work. - Exodus 40:1, 18, 33 §§§ I Chron. 29:10-12 “Wherefore David blessed the LORD before all the congregation: and David said, Blessed be thou, LORD God of Israel our father, for ever and ever. Thine, O LORD, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all. Both riches and honour come of thee, and thou reignest over all; and in thine hand is power and might; and in thine hand it is to make great, and to give strength unto all.” **** Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. - Mat 7:2 And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. - Mat 8:11 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: Mat 25:31-34 Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God. - Act 14:22 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 1 Corinthians 15:49-50 †††† For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. - Rom 9:3-5 ‡‡‡‡ And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. - 1 Timothy 3:16 §§§§ And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: - Mat 3:16 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. ... Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee; ... From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

- Mat 4:1, 12, 17 ***** Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far country: And when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of it. And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than the first: and they did unto them likewise. But last of all he sent

unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance. And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.

When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husbandmen? -They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen, which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. - Mat 21:33-43 ††††† He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: - John 1:11-12 ‡‡‡‡‡ And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. - Mat 19:28 Until the Ancient of days came, and judgment was given to the saints of the most High; and the time came that the saints possessed the kingdom. - Dan 7:22. §§§§§ For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God. - Luke 22:16 And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. And he took it, and did eat before them. And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. - 24:41-44 ****** ¶ And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. {made: Heb. builded} And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. {Woman: Heb. Isha} {Man: Heb. Ish} Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.-- Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. {indeed bear…: or, indeed ye do bear with me} For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. {with him: or, with me} †††††† Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. ‡‡‡‡‡‡ Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. §§§§§§ Original Publisher: Sheldon, Blakeman & Co. - New York Original Pub. Date: 1857 "Francis Wayland was president of Brown University from 1827 - 1855. His object in this volume is to present a popular view of the distinctive beliefs of the Baptist denomination.

The book is both popular and practical, extending counsel to the churches themselves as well as informed apologia to the non-Baptist world.

Wayland's special emphasis is on the ministry: how defined, how enrolled, how prepared, and how then to serve its function." AYER COMPANY PUBLISHERS *******Johann Laurenz von Mosheim (1694? - 1755). Known as the father of modern church history, this Lutheran was no friend of Baptists, but gets high marks for his attempt at honest reporting of the facts. He has been praised as follows: "...von Mosheim, a German preacher, university professor at Goetingen, and noted scholar, was the first to attempt to write Church history objectively. Instead of publishing history to produce propaganda, von Mosheim tried to examine the development of the Church without bias or party line." -William P. Barker, WHO'S WHO IN CHURCH HISTORY, (Grand Rapids, Baker, 1977), p. 198. ††††††† For Bible references see: Blue Letter Bible. "(KJV - King James Version)." Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2010. 19 Nov 2010. http://www.blueletterbible.org

THE BAPTIST WAY-BOOK A Manual Designed for use in Baptist Churches By Ben M. Bogard, LLD.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (II Timothy 3:16-17).

CONTENTS PART I

The Scriptural Way I. The Way of Salvation II. The Way of Baptism III. The Way of the Lord's Supper IV. The Way of Church Polity V. The Way of Mission Work VI. The Way of Providence PART II

The Historical Way VII. The Way Our Fathers Trod, or Baptist Doctrine and Polity in History VIII. The Way of Mission Work in History IX. The Way of Blood, or Baptist Martyrs in Every Century X. The Way Traced From America To Palestine XI. The Historical Way Attested by Scholars PART III The Present Way XII. The Way to Organize Churches XIII. The Way Churches May Associate XIV. The Way of Church Letters, Ordinations, Marriages, Funerals, etc Doctrinal Statement of the American Baptist Association Declaration of Faith Church Covenant Origin of Denominations Index

The Baptist Way PART I

The Scriptural Way

he Bible is the all-sufficient rule of faith and practice and it is as much a rule of practice as it is of faith.

The commission given by our Master in Matt. 28:19-20, commands the church to teach all things whatsoever I

T

have commanded you. The specification of one thing in law is the prohibition of everything else. Since what the church is to teach is specified, viz., all things whatsoever I have commanded, it follows that all things not commanded are forbidden. It follows that the church is shut up to the things commanded. There is therefore no place for the exercise of private opinion except it be in our effort to understand the things commanded. Any doctrine or institution that is outside of the purview of the Scriptures is wrong.

In II Tim. 3:16, 17, we read: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

If this is true, and to dispute it is to contradict the words of inspiration, it follows that we are throughly furnished unto all good works.

Then we do not need to invent plans for work, since the Scriptures throughly furnish us unto all good works. If the work we propose to do is good we can learn all about it in the Scriptures for the man of God is throughly furnished unto all good works.

From these passages we are compelled to conclude that there must be a thus saith the Lord for all we do. We dare not organize a church, a prayer meeting, a convention, an association, a school, a board, a committee, an evangelistic movement, or anything else without a thus saith the Lord, because the Scriptures throughly furnish us unto all good works, and we are to observe all things whatsoever the Master has commanded, no more no less.

By the Scriptures, the all-sufficient rule of faith and practice, must every doctrine and every truth be tried. If it be allowed that reason or sanctified common sense shall determine in matters of faith and practice, it shall still be an open question as to whose reason and whose sanctified common sense shall make the decision. If reason or common sense shall be the rule of any part of faith and practice then it is certain that we shall see division, contention, strife. Let the Bible be the rule of faith and practice and our only difficulty shall be understanding our rule.

The primary difference between Baptists and Roman Catholics is that Baptists contend that the Scriptures are the allsufficient rule of faith and practice, while the Catholics deny this and claim that reason, or sanctified common sense, of the church should be the rule of faith and practice.

If Baptists forsake this cardinal and fundamental principle, it shall not be long until they shall cease to be Baptists. They shall be at sea without chart or compass.

In the following chapters we shall examine what the Scriptures teach concerning the Way of Salvation, Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Church Policy, Missions, and Providence. While we hear the Word of God on these subjects, let us remember that this Word is the only and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice.

CHAPTER I

The Way of Salvation

Eph. 2:8-10: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, etc.

Salvation by grace is a fundamental Baptist doctrine.

The Scriptures are clear and plain on the doctrine. The passage quoted teaches us that good works have nothing to do in obtaining salvation, and that instead of works bringing salvation, it is salvation that causes good works.

Rom. 11:6-7: And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work. What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it and the rest were blinded {blinded: or, hardened} This passage perfectly exposes the error that salvation results from a mixture of grace and works. If salvation is by grace at all it is altogether by grace; and if it is by works at all it is altogether by works.

Salvation is by grace. Work follows as a result of salvation. Faith without works is dead, but the faiththe live faithis exercised first and the works follow. Titus 3:8: This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men. The

kind of faith which does not result in works is not the saving faith referred to in Eph. 2:8-10.

The meritorious ground of salvation is the suffering and death of Christ Eph. 1:7: In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;.

There is no good in men. That which we call good is unclean in Gods sight. Isa. 64:6: But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

The sinner obtains salvation the moment he exercises faith in Christ. The following passages make this clear: The believer is not under condemnation. John 3:18: He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. The believer shall never perish. John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

The believer has everlasting life. John 3:36: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

The believer is justified. Rom. 5:1: Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

The believer is a child of God. Gal. 3:26: For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

Granting that the following verse means the ordinance of baptism, it does not mean that we literally put Christ on in baptism, but only that being actually children of God by faith we symbolically put Christ on in baptism, i.e., we imitate Him. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Gal. 3:27.

The heart is purified by faith. Acts 15:8: And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

The believer is born of God. I John 5:1: Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. {Is born: Gr. has been born} The believer is saved. Eph. 2:8: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: If anything is clearly taught in the Scriptures it is that salvation is by grace through faith, and not by works or ceremonies.

CHAPTER II

The Way of Baptism

hen the Lord commanded the church to baptize those who had become disciples, Matt.

28:19-20, what did He intend should be done? When He said baptize the newly made disciples He used a Greek word. To learn the meaning of a Greek word we should look for its meaning in a Greek dictionary. A few samples of what the Greek Lexicons say will suffice: Liddell & Scott: Baptism, to dip.

Bagster: Baptism, to bathe, immerse.

Sapulo: Baptism, to dip, to immerse.

There is no Greek Lexicon that does not give to dip or immerse as the primary meaning of baptism.

If the Lord had meant for the church to sprinkle the new disciples He would have used the word rantizo, which primarily means to sprinkle.

If He had meant for the church to pour water on the heads of the new converts He would have used the word echeo, which primarily means to pour. If the Lord meant to sprinkle or to pour, why did He use a word which primarily means to dip? This fact in itself is sufficient to establish the truth that He meant for the church to dip all who became disciples.

John the Baptist baptized in a river. Mark 1:5: And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of

W

Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

Jesus, our Master, was baptized in a river. Mark 1:9-10: And it came to pass in those days, that Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee, and was baptized of John in Jordan. 10 And straightway coming up out of the water, etc.

The case of Philip and the eunuch shows that immersion was the act. Acts 8:38-39: And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

And when they were come up out of the water, etc.

Baptism is called a burial. Rom. 6:4-5: Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ

was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection.

Baptism is not a saving ordinance. It should never be administered to any except to those who are already saved. When Saul was told to arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, it only means the symbolic washing away of sins.

When Peter, on the day of Pentecost, said: Be baptized for the remission of sins, he used the word for in its secondary sense, which means with reference tobe baptized with reference to the remission of sins. A man is put in the penitentiary for stealing, that is, on account of stealing; certainly not in order to stealing. So we are baptized for remission of sins, but not in order to the remission of sins.

Only believers were baptized in Apostolic times, and we have already seen that believers are saved, hence only saved persons should be baptized.

Cornelius and his household were saved before they were baptized. Acts 10:44-48: While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

Those who believe that baptism is necessary to salvation generally try to make it appear that this is a special case and not the rule. But Peter says in Acts 15:8-9, that God put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

The church only has authority to baptize. It was to the church the commission was given. That to which the commission was given had the promise of continued existence to the end of the world, for after giving the command, the Lord said, Lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world. The individual Christians to whom He spoke lived only a few years after this commission was given, hence the Master could not have made such a promise to them. The apostles lived only a few years after these words were spoken, hence the Master could not have made the promise to them. But the church has had a continual existence and shall have to the end of time. Eph. 3:21: Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages.

The church institution was the only thing present when the commission was given that could continue to the end of the world. It was therefore to the church that He spoke when He said: Go teach all nations, baptizing them and, lo, I am with you alway, even to the end of the world. Amen.

The church only having authority to baptize, it follows that all baptisms administered without church authority are null and void. For this reason Baptists have in all ages refused t0 recognize the baptisms of those who were not baptized by the authority of a Scriptural church. It was to the church the commission was given and the church institution to which the commission was given is in the world today, and if the Lord meant what He said, He is with that church today. The baptisms of that institution are valid and no other is.

Scriptural baptism is the immersion of a saved person by authority of a Scriptural church.

Since God called the forerunner, John the Baptistthe baptizercalled him Baptist because he did the baptizing, it follows that, if God made no mistake, that a CHURCH THAT BAPTIZES should be called a Baptist Church; a baptizing church.

Since the baptizing church is a missionary church it is perfectly right to call it a Missionary Baptist Church. Â Â

CHAPTER III

The Way of the Lord's Supper Â

he Lord's Supper is a commemorative ordinance to be observed by the church in memory of the broken body and shed blood of the Savior. I Cor. 11:24: This do in remembrance of me.

Only baptized believers have a right to partake of the Supper. The commission given by our Master commands that the newly made disciples be baptized and then teach them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, Matt. 28:19-20. One of the things the Lord had commanded was the partaking of the Memorial Supper. The new disciples were first to be baptized then taught to observe the other things which had been commanded. To partake of the Supper before baptism is to violate this law, and if we encourage any to thus violate the law of the Lord on this subject we shall be partakers of their sin. To invite un-baptized people to partake of the Lord's Supper is a sin. Open Communion is therefore a sina transgression of the Masters law concerning the Supper.

Acts 2:41-42: Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in

T

breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Note the order here indicated:

1. Gladly received his word: disciples.

2. were baptized: baptized disciples.

3. The same day were added: church members.

4. Continued in apostolic doctrine: sound in faith.

5. And in fellowship: united in faith and love.

6. Lastly, breaking of bread: partaking of the Lord's Supper.

This is the Divine order, and no man has a right to change it. If we observe this order we have Close Communion, the doctrine for which Baptists have always contended.

Paul forbade the Corinthian church to partake of the Supper while divisions continued in the membership, I Cor. 11:1620. If division in a local congregation disqualifies that congregation to partake of the Supper, what should be said of members of the various rival denominations coming together to eat the Supper? It takes a united congregation to scripturally partake of the Supper. To partake of the Supper when divisions or schisms exist is to violate the law concerning the Lord's Supper. To violate law is sin. Open Communion is therefore a sin. To encourage the transgression of law is sin. We, therefore, sin when we invite or encourage persons of different factions or schisms to come together for the purpose of celebrating the Lord's Supper. Is Christ divided?

In addition to all these restrictions, the individual must examine himself before eating, I Cor. 11:28. The object of this self-examination is to ascertain whether we have met all the requirements made of those who would partake of the Supper. Some think that self-examination is the only prerequisite to the Supper, when, in fact, it is only one of many prerequisites. The New Testament teaches Close Communion.

CHAPTER IV

The Way of Church Polity

There are three forms of church government or polity: the Episcopalian, the Presbyterian, and the Congregational.

Episcopacy is government by bishops; Presbyterianism is government by presbyters or preachers; Congregationalism is government by the people a pure democracy.

Baptists are Congregationalists. They do not claim the right to make or repeal laws, but recognize and obey the unchanging law of their King Jesus Christ. But in the execution of these laws of the Lord there is a pure democracy.

Baptists regard the Scriptures as the only and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice, II Tim. 3: 16, 17. The church has no fight to change one word of the Scriptures. It is the duty of the church to obey the Scriptures. The Scriptures teach that each congregation is entirely independent of every other congregation, and that each congregation the Commission was given. Each congregation is a complete church in itself. It is therefore not correct to speak of The Baptist Church. There is no such thing. There are thousands of Baptist churches, as each congregation of baptized believers is a church, but these congregations are not combined in any way so as to make the one great Baptist Church. There are many trees in the forest, but there is no such thing as THE TREE. In speaking of the duties and doctrines of the church we mean any Scriptural church, just as we speak of the duties of the husband and the wife.

When we say the husband or the wife we do not mean that there is a great HUSBAND composed of all the husbands, and when we say the wife we do not mean a large WIFE composed of all the wives. Even so, when we speak of the Commission being given to the church" we do not mean a great Universal Church, but we mean each individual congregation. The following passage indicates the New Testament idea, Eph. 5:23: For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church.

As well talk about a great Universal Husband, a great Universal Wife as to talk of a great Universal Church.

In the New Testament we learn the following facts: 1. The congregation received members. Rom. 14:1: Him that is weak in the faith receive ye. The membership is here commanded to receive into their fellowship the weak in the faith. It is certain that the membership is told to do the receiving because the epistle is addressed, not to the bishops, not to the session, but to all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints. The whole church must therefore receive the new converts. The specification of one thing in law is the prohibition of everything else.

Since therefore the whole church is commanded to receive it follows that the pastors, the session, or anything else violates the law of God when they presume to receive members. This duty must continue to rest on the church as a whole.

2. The congregations excluded members from their fellowship. I Cor. 5:1-5: It is commonly reported that there is

fornication among you . . . In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power (authority) of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan, for the destruction of the flesh, etc.

The church must be gathered together, to exclude the fornicator. There was no board of deacons or board of stewards, or session or bunch of elders to get off in a corner and do this work.

The power to exclude carries with it the power to restore. In II Cor. 2:6-8, we read that this fornicator should be restored after he had repented: Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many.

So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, etc.

We note the fact that Paul says this punishment was inflicted of the many; literally, by the majority. Pleionon is the Greek word used.

In case of personal offenses, the party offended must first labor for reconciliation between him and the offender alone.

This failing, he must take witnesses with him, and in the presence of these witnesses, make another effort for reconciliation. If this second effort fails, he must tell it to the church, and if this fails, excommunication follows. Let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. (Matt.

18:16-18.)

3. The congregations elected their own officers. Acts 6:1-6:Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men, etc.

The multitude had been called together and the apostles instructed the whole multitude to look out among you seven men.

The selection or election of the multitude was accepted by the apostles. Then the apostles prayed and laid their hands on themordained them, as Baptists do today.

Acts 14:23: And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord. The Greek, of which this passage is a translation, literally means: And when they had elected elders in every church by a show of the hands. The Greek word used is cheirotonein, meaning to stretch forth the hand. Phillip Schaff, the modern Lutheran historian, in his great book, Apostolic Church, page 501, says: As to Presbytersbishops (pastors) Luke informs us (Acts 14:23) that Paul and Barnabas appointed them to office in the newly founded congregations by taking the vote of the people, thus merely presiding over the choice. Such, at least, is the original and usual sense of cheirotonein.

4.

The congregations elected their own missionaries. Acts11: 22-24: Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem; and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch . . . he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord.

This fact is set forth plainly by J. M. Pendleton in his Church Manual, page 110: The churches in Apostolic times sent forth ministers on missionary tours. When Antioch received the Word of God, the church at Jerusalem sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch, Acts 11:22. His labors were successfulmuch people was added to the Lordand at a subsequent period the church in Antioch sent out Saul and Barnabas, who made a long journey, performed much labor, returned and reported to the church all that God had done with them, Acts 13:1-3; Acts 14:26; 27. With what deferential respect did these ministers of the gospel treat the church that sent them forth!

When Dr. Pendleton wrote his Manual (1867), all Baptists agreed that churches should send out missionaries, but some are disputing this Apostolic practice now.

The conclusion is clear. It was to the church that the Commission was given. It is therefore the duty of the congregation to do all that the Commission enjoins. The congregation is the unit in all the work contemplated in the Commission.

There is not the slightest hint in the New Testament of their being authority on earth above a congregation of baptized disciples. Where we read of elders that rule well, the literal rendering is the elders that lead well. The elder or bishop, which is the Scriptural terms for pastor, is a leader of his flock over which the Holy Ghost has made him overseer. But he leads by teaching, by example, and not by authority. To exercise authority is expressly forbidden by our Master. Matt.

20:25, 26: Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you. In I Peter 5:3: Neither as being lords (masters) over Gods heritage, but being examples to the flock.

The Episcopal and Presbyterian bodies have men of authoritymen in control. The Master said: It shall not be so among you. The superintendent of missions, so common among Baptists, has authority to superintend the work of missionaries.

The Master said: It shall not be so among you. Baptists should recognize only one Master, even Jesus Christ and only one Superintendent of Missions, even the Holy Spirit.

A gospel church may exist with or without officers. The churches (Acts 14:23) in which elders were elected existed as gospel churches before they had elders, and if they could exist as gospel churches before they had elders, it follows that if the elders should die or move away, the churches could exist again as gospel churches without them. Elders or pastors are not necessary to the existence of a church. A church is a gospel church with them or without them. So with the deacons. The church at Jerusalem was a gospel church (Acts 6) before the deacons were elected. If all the deacons should die or move away, it would continue to be a gospel church. As Pendleton put it in his Church Manual: Officers

are not necessary to the being of a church, but they are necessary to its well being.

CHAPTER V

The Way of Mission Work  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. {throughly: or, perfected} II Â

Tim. 3:16, 17

Is missionary work a good work? To ask the question is to answer it. Then the man of God is thoroughly furnished by the Scriptures for this good work. All that we need to know about mission work, all that we need to do in mission work, is necessarily revealed in the Scriptures if the Scriptures thoroughly furnish us unto every good work.

The commission (Matt. 28:19, 20) was given to the church as such. This has been made clear in the preceding pages of this book.

The church as such is, therefore, the unit in missionary operations. Since mission work is preaching the gospel to every creature, it follows that the church must do the preaching. We therefore see the reason why the Jerusalem church sent forth Barnabas (Acts 11:22), and why the Antioch church sent Paul and Barnabas (Acts 13: 1-6), and we also see why these missionaries returned and reported their work to the church which had sent them out (Acts 14:24-27).

Individual church members wherever they go may tell the story of salvation to those with whom they come in contact (Acts 8:4), and whoever even hears the message o~ salvation should pass it on to others. (Rev. 22:17)Let him that heareth say, Come. But the only organized effort recognized in the New Testament for the work of missions is the local congregations of baptized believers. This is confessedly true, even the leaders of conventionism being witnesses. None pretended to find Scripture for such organizations as the Southern Baptist Convention or the Missionary Union. These organizations are confessedly outside of the purview of the Scriptures.

Since the commission to evangelize the world was given to the churches, it follows that the churches are the only organizations authorized to do mission work. Any other organization that may undertake the work is a usurper, a lawbreaker, no matter how good the intention of such organization may be. To illustrate: In most of the states the county sheriff is the tax collector. In some other states the tax collector is called a trustee. The sheriff or trustee has a commission from the state to collect taxes. As long as he holds the commission no other man or organization has a right to collect taxes. No matter if he has poor business methods, no matter if he be incompetent, his poor business methods and his in competency do not alter the fact that he and he alone has the authority, the commission, to collect taxes.

Suppose some citizens of the county should get together and organize a convention and appoint one of their numbers to collect the taxes, because they were not satisfied with the way the man who held the commission was doing the work?

The whole outfit would be arrested and possibly imprisoned. Why? Because the sheriff has the commission to collect taxes, and whether he works to suit the people or not he, he only, has authority to collect taxes so long as he holds that commission.

The Lord gave the commission to evangelize the world to the church. The church still holds that commission and any convention or board that presumes to do the work is going into the work without a commission and is a usurper, a violator of Divine law. The work must remain in the hands of the churches until the Master revokes the commission.

Congregations may co-operate in the evangelization of the world, but they must do it as churches. The missionary Paul was sent out by the congregation at Antioch (Acts 13:1-6), but the churches co-operated in his support. II Cor. 11:7, 8: Have I committed an offense in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached unto you the gospel of God freely? I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.

From this specification as to how the work was done we may learn how we should engage in mission work. Paul was sent out by a churchjust one church. But he was endorsed and supported by churches took wages of churches.

Sent by one and only one and supported by several. Only one church should do the sending but the support may come from as many as choose to co-operate and contribute. The writer did not invent this way of doing mission work; he only reads it in the New Testament. The only cooperation that can be discovered is in the matter of supporting the work. For this reason Baptists have associations of churches that the churches may work together in missionary work.

Eph. 3:10 (revised version). To the intent that now unto the principalities and the powers in heavenly places might be known through the church the manifold wisdom of God. The work of making known the gospel must therefore be through the churches. God is the author of this way of missions. Dare any man to try to establish a new way!

In II Cor. 8:18-19 we read: And we have sent with him (with Titus) the brother, whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the churches; And not that only, but who was also chosen of the churches to travel with us with this grace (gift), which is administered by us to the glory of the same Lord, and declaration of your ready mind:.

Note the fact that here is a committee of the churches and for the churches, consisting of Paul, Titus and the brother whose praise was in all the churches; a committee of, at least three, an inter-church committeea committee not of one

church only, but a committee chosen of the churches,a joint committee. The duty of this committee was to travel with this grace (gift) and to minister this grace or gift to the glory of the Lord according to the declaration (instructions) of your (the church) ready mind.

The gift or grace referred to was a contribution for the poor saints at Jerusalem. Thus we see a committee, acting under the instructions of co-operating churches, handling the finances of churches in benevolent work.

This is altogether different from a board or committee engaging in a work on their own motion and incurring expenses, acting without instructions and then calling on the churches to pay the bills. This committee was appointed by the churches, and acted under instructions from the churches according to the declarations of their ready minds. Thus far may we go and no further.

Nowhere in the Scriptures do we read of a convention appointing a board or committee for any purpose whatever. Such a thing as a convention is unknown to the Scriptures. Such a thing is therefore a usurper, a violator of Divine law and should not be tolerated by the churches. It was to the churches the commission was given and these churches themselves are under the law of their Master. The churches are free and independent within the limits of the New Testament law.

Short of what the New Testament teaches they dare not stop; beyond what is there taught these churches dare not go, since the Scripture is the all sufficient rule of faith and practice in missionary work as well as all other church Work.

CHAPTER VI

The Way of Providence

is meant the care and superintendence of God over His people.

ByIsProvidence there danger that the child of God may apostatize and be finally lost in hell? It is the belief of Baptists that no such danger exists and they think the following passages of Scripture abundantly prove their belief to be correct: John 3:36: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life. If the life the believer now has is everlasting, then it can never end, and therefore apostasy is absurd.

Psalm 37:23, 24: The steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord; and he delighteth in his way. Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down; for the Lord upholdeth him with his hand.

Thus we see that a child of God shall not stay in a fallen condition, even though he fall, for the Lord will lift him up again.

Rom. 8:28: We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. It is certain that if a man apostatizes and goes to hell it is not for his good. Then nothing can bring this fearful condition to pass as we know all things work together for the good of them that love God. There are some seeming cases of apostasy. Men seem to run well for a while and drop out of the race, go to ruin and die in that condition.

What about them? Let the Scripture answer: I John 2:19: They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

An explanation would spoil this clear Scriptural answer.

All of the arguments favoring apostasy are at best conjectures. To prove apostasy one must first prove that a man was actually in a saved condition and that he fell from that happy state and was lost in hell.

Such a proposition is not provable. Here are some of the common conjectures favoring apostasy: Adam fell.

Yes, but since Christ had not died and was not even promised, he could not have fallen from grace. He was standing on his own merits and fell from that, not from grace. But did Adam go to hell? Let him who dares try to prove it.

The angels fell. The Saviour did not die for angels. They stood on their own merit and fell from that. The angels never received the benefits of the Saviours blood as have Christians.

Judas fell. Yes, but from what? He fell from his office, his bishopric. (Acts 1:20) Judas did not fall from grace for he was a devil.

John 6:64-71: But there are some of you that believe not.

For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him . . . Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

When the parables are used to prove apostasy it is sufficient to reply that parables must not be made to go on all fours.

After a doctrine has been established by plain statements of Scripture the parables may be used to illustrate the truth thus established. If we go beyond that we shall be involved in many absurdities.

Evils of the Doctrine of Apostasy 1. It is based on the doctrine of salvation by works.

The idea is that final salvation depends on what we do for ourselves rather than on what the Lord does for us.

2. It makes our final salvation depend on the, mercy of the Devil. The only way Satan can get a child of God is to overcome the power that keeps him, it is Gods power that keeps us. Then to get a child of God into his clutches the Devil must overcome God. If he overcomes God to get one, while he has God in his power, if he does not get all, will it not be because he does not want all? If the Devil, having God in his power, could get all and does not, ought we not to thank the Devil for permitting us to go to heaven?

3. It gives Satan more power than God. 4. It reflects on the merits of the Saviours blood.

5. It nullifies the work of the Holy Spirit.

6. It makes void the mediatorial work of Christ.

7. It makes God swear a falsehood. (Heb. 6:16-18.)

8. It leaves the world without hope.

9. It declares that God was either not wise enough, or not good enough, or not strong enough to effectually save a believer.

How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord, Is laid for your faith in His excellent Word, What more can He say than to you He hath said You who unto Jesus for refuge have fled.

The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose, I will not, I Will not, desert to his foes, that soul though all hell should endeavor to shake. Ill never, no never, no never, forsake.

Baptists glory in the providence of God. With them the doctrine is fundamental.

Psalm 23: The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want.

PART II

T

The Historical Way

o establish our doctrine and practice by the New Testament is of chief importance. But the New Testament makes some declarations concerning the history of churches. When our Lord established His church He declared He would build it up, edify it, enlarge it, and the gates of hell should not prevail against it. (Matt. 16:18.) The Greek word oikodomeso, in Matt. 16:18 translated will build means will build up, enlarge, edify. His church was already in existence when He uttered these words, as can be proved by numerous passages; hence we are forced to so understand this passage.

When did the company or congregation of baptized believers begin? Peter answers the question in Acts 1:21: Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, etc.

This passage affirms that certain men companied with Jesus and that this company began with the baptism of John.

This makes it clear that the Lord had a company of baptized believers, a church with Him all through His personal ministry. He called it together Himself, choosing the material John the Baptist had made ready for Him, for John came to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. (Matt. 3:3; Luke 1:17.) These prepared people Jesus called into His company or congregation.

In Luke 6:12-18, we find this company clearly distinguished from the mixed multitude.

He took this company up with Him into a mountain to pray. He did not go to the mountain to originate His company or church, because He took it with Him into the mountain. While there He chose His apostles: Of them (the company) he chose twelve, whom he named apostles. Then the names of the apostles are given, and he came down with them and stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great multitude of people. The inspired writer speaks of the company of the disciples and a great multitude of people. There is no way to torture this language so as to fail to see that the Lord's little company was separate and distinct from the multitude, even while mixing and mingling with that multitude.

Peter says this company began with the baptism of John. All the Master did on the mountain was to pray and choose His apostles. The apostolic office was the Lord's first spiritual gift bestowed on the church. In I Cor. 12:1, we learn that the subject there under discussion is SPIRITUAL GIFTS: Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant. In discussing spiritual gifts, the apostle declares that the first spiritual gift put in the church was the apostolic

office. I Cor. 12:28: And God hath set some in the church, first apostles. It would have been impossible to set apostles or anything else in the church if the church had no existence. So the fact that Christ set the apostles in the church proves that the church existed before going up on the mountain.

Eph. 2:20: Are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.

This is an instance when the possessive case is expressed by the preposition of.

To illustrate: We say, That is the capital of Mississippi when we mean it is Mississippis capital.

That is the farm of Johnson when we mean it is Johnsons farm. So we are built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, that is, on the apostles and prophets foundation. In other words they have no advantage of us since we are built on the same foundation they are.

The apostles and prophets form no part of the foundation of the church. I Cor. 3:11: For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Thus we see that the church is founded on Christ Himself, that the Lord Himself established it during His personal ministry, using the people made ready for Him by John the Baptist, and that this company, or church, traveled with Him during His personal ministry, and that the apostolic gift was the first set in the church, and that this was done on the mountain, and it was to this church the Master gave the commission promising it perpetuity to the end of the world.

(Matt. 28: 19, 20.)

Eph. 3:21: Unto him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages. It therefore follows that the church should live in all ages, for there could not be glory in .a dead church. Neither should the church apostatize, for there could be no glory in an apostate church.

If it can be shown that Baptist churches have existed in all ages since Christ, it will confirm our faith in the Lord's words.

If, on the other hand, it can be shown that no church institution in existence has come down uncorrupted through the centuries, it will be enough to make infidels of us all; for if the Lord's promise has failed, if His Word be proved false, what confidence could we place in Him as our Saviour?

The Lord's promise has been kept. There has never been a day since He ascended in the presence of His church that a church just like the one which saw Him ascend could not be found on the earth. History abundantly establishes this position. Â

CHAPTER VII Â

The Way Our Fathers Trod, or Baptist Doctrine and Polity in History Â

The purpose of this chapter is to show by standard historians that Baptist churches are in every essential the same as the churches which we claim as Baptist churches that existed through the centuries of darkness.

Mosheim, Vol. I, page 92, says: The churches in those ancient times were entirely independent; none of them subject to any foreign jurisdiction, but each governed by its own rules and its own laws. For though the churches founded by the apostles had this deference shown them, that they were consulted in difficult and doubtful cases; yet they had no judicial authority, no sort of supremacy over the others nor the least right to enact laws for them.

Nothing, on the contrary is more evident than the perfect equality that reigned among the primitive churches. If Mosheim speaks the truth, where go the claims of the Roman Catholic Church that the Roman church is and always has been supreme, and that Peter was the first pope, and all that? Mosheim was a Lutheran historian and he struck a death blow to his own church when he used this language, because Lutheran churches are not organized in that independent congregational way. Gibbons Roman Empire, Vol. I, page 555: Such was the mild and equal constitution by which the Christians were governed for more than a hundred years after the death of the apostles. Every society formed within itself an independent republic; and although the most distant of these little states maintained a mutual, as well as friendly intercourse of letters and deputations, the Christian world was not yet conducted by any supreme authority or legislative assembly.

If Gibbons speaks the truth all Episcopal or Presbyterian succession is here cut off. Neither the one nor the other can get within a hundred years of the apostles. It also destroys the claim of the Roman Catholic Church because there was no such organization during the first five hundred years after the death of the apostles. During the Apostolic age and for a hundred years after we find only Baptist church polity and government. And when we remember that the Saviour said that the church He started should continue to the end of the world, it becomes certain that none of the Catholic, Episcopal or Presbyterian bodies can be the true church. Mosheim, page 491, says, in describing the Waldenses, Wickliffites, and Hussites, called by these names because of the prominence of Waldo, Huss and Wickliffe, that they believed: That the Kingdom of Christ, or the visible church which He established upon earth, was an assembly of true or real saints, and ought to be inaccessible to the wicked and unrighteous, and also exempt from all those human institutions

which human prudence suggests to oppose the progress of iniquity, or to correct and reform transgressors.

Since nobody disputes that the people who in history are called Waldenses, Wickliffites, Hussites, etc., have existed from the earliest centuries, it is interesting to note the fact that they believed: Christ established His church, that the church is an assembly that only converted people should be in it, and they would have nothing to do with human institutions which human prudence suggests.

They were Baptists, no doubt, but not Convention Baptists, because institutions which human prudence suggests were opposed by them.

Erasmus, writing of these Hussites or Waldenses, says: The Hussites renounced all rites and ceremonies of the Catholic Church; they ridicule our doctrine and practice in both sacraments; they deny orders and elect officers from among the laity; they receive no other rule than the Bible; they admit none to their communion until they, are dipped in water or baptized; and they reckon one another without distinction or rank to be called brothers and sisters. (Ivemys History of

Baptists, Vol. 1, page 70.)

Erasmus was a Roman Catholic and speaks of the Catholic doctrine and practice as our doctrine and practice. What he said of these Hussites he said as their enemy. Let us note what he said: They had nothing in common with Catholics, renounced all rites and ceremonies of the Catholics.

They denied orders and were therefore congregational in government.

They had no rule but the Bible. The Bible was therefore their only rule of faith and practice.

They were close communionists since they admitted none to their communion until they were dipped.

If such people were not Baptists, we have no Baptists now.

Philip Schaff, in the Baptist Quarterly Review of July, 1883, pages 72-73, quotes Grebel, the great Ana-Baptist preacher and writer, concerning what was believed and practiced by them. Schaff is a Lutheran and has no interest in the matter beyond his reputation as an Ecclesiastical Historian. Here is what Grebel says: From the Scriptures we learn that baptism declares that by faith and the blood of Christ our sins have been washed away, that we have died to sin and walked in newness of life; that assurance of salvation is through the inner baptism, faith, so that water does not confirm and increase faith as Whittenburg theologians say, nor does it save. This quotation

abundantly proves that the ancient Ana-Baptists were in harmony with Baptists of today concerning the way of salvation and baptism. They were neither Catholics nor Lutherans. This very extract from Grebels writings is in opposition to Whittenberg theology, the headquarters of Lutherism. What would such people be called now if they were among us?

They would not be in agreement with Campbellites, they are opposed to Lutherans, and their doctrine is the direct opposite of Catholicism. Is it not clear that they were Baptists? But let us hear Grebel further, He says: In order to live a Christian life, there must be a change in the natural man, who is by nature sinful; and with no remedy in himself by which the wounds that sin has made can be healed. When a man has received this new life he confesses it before the church of which he is to be made a member, according to the rule of Christ; that is, he shows to that church that, instructed in the Scriptures, he has given himself to Christ to live henceforth according to His will and teaching. He is then baptized, making in baptism a public confession of his faith . . . In other words, in baptism he confesses that he is a sinner, but that Christ, by His death, has pardoned his sins so that he is accounted righteous before the face of God.

Note the faith and practice of the ancient Ana-Baptists: 1. They believed that men are sinners by nature.

2. That men are helpless to save themselves.

3. That salvation consists of a new life.

4. That to become a member of the church a public confession or change of life must be made.

5. That he shows to the church that he is a changed man in order to become a church member.

6. That baptism is a public confession of sins already forgiven.

What would such people be called now? There is but one name for them. They were Baptists.

Petro-Brusians, so called because one of the greatest men among them was named Peter de Bruis. They did not call themselves by that name, but historians have dubbed them that. What did they believe?

Walls History of Infant Baptism, Vol. II, pages 256-259, says of their teaching: It is an idle and a vain thing for you to wash persons with water at such a time, when you may indeed cleanse their skin from dirt in a human manner, but not purge their souls from sin. But we do say till the proper time of faith and when a person is capable to know his God, and believe in him, then we do (not as you say, rebaptize him), but baptize him.

From this statement of their faith by Wall we learn that: 1. The Petro-Brusians refused to baptize infants.

2. That they did not regard baptism as essential to salvation.

3. That they believed in immersion, since, they called it washing the persons with water.

4. They denied being rebaptizers, for they did not regard the so-called baptisms of others as valid.

What were they? There is but one answer. They were Baptists.

Whether called Montanists, Novatians, Petro-Brusians, Hussites, Waldenses or Ana-Baptists, one and the same people is meant. Even today Baptists are called after the names of men as they were of old. Southern Baptists are frequently called Gravesites, because of the influence and prominence of Graves. Quite a number of Baptists have been called Crawfordites, because they agreed in their views of mission work with T. P. Crawford of China. A goodly number of Baptists have been dubbed Martinites, because they agreed with the great preacher, M. T. Martin in his views on the doctrine of Assurance. Thus the world has persisted in calling Baptists after the names of men. It is done by way of reproach, but Baptists have never acknowledged themselves to be the followers of men. So it was when Peter Waldo came among Baptists they were dubbed Waldenses. When Novatian came to the Baptists, bringing quite a party with him, they were dubbed Novationists. When John Huss became prominent among them they were dubbed Hussites and thus it has gone, but the Baptists have been contending for the same doctrines and practices under all these names. They were called Ana-Baptists very often because they re-baptized all who came to them, no matter by whom they had been previously baptized.

There were irregularities among these ancient people.

But there are irregularities among Baptists today. Some of them practiced sprinkling. Yes and some bearing the name of Baptists today practice sprinkling. This is common in England.

The local independence of Baptist churches permits a church to go very far wrong and still wear the name of Baptist.

The fact is, everything that opposed the dominant state churches was called Ana-Baptists, Waldenses, etc. Thus many were included under these names who were anything but Baptists. But there were true Baptists in great numbers among them, and the extracts which are given in this chapter from their leaders, and from their enemies, show they were Baptists in every essential.

That I am right in this conclusion will be seen by the following statements, made by standard historians: Mosheim, Cen. 14, Sec. 3, Chap. 3: They (Ana-Baptists) were subdivided into various sects which differed from each other in points of no small moment.

Fisher, speaking of the Munster rioters, says: Under the name of Ana-Baptists are included different types of doctrine and Christian life. It is a gross injustice to impute to all of them the wild, destructive fanaticism with which a portion of them are chargeable.

(Pages 424425) Philip Schaff says: The excesses of a misguided faction have been charged upon the whole body. They were made responsible for the peasants war and the Munster tragedy, although the great majority of them were quiet, orderly and peaceful citizens, and would rather suffer persecution than to do an act of violence.

(Schaff in Quarterly Review, Vol.12, No. 43) There have been advocates of Baptist doctrines and polity in every century since Christ. The Lord has not been left without a witness on the earth. The gates of hell have not prevailed against the church which the Master Builder promised to build up, enlarge, edify to the end of the world.

CHAPTER VIII

The Way of Mission Work in History

The Apostolic Baptists were Missionary Baptists. This is abundantly proved by the Masters commanding the church to go teach all nations, baptizing them. It is seen in the Jerusalem church sending out Barnabas and the Antioch church sending out both Saul and Barnabas. But these Apostolic churches were not Convention Baptists. I propose to prove by unquestioned historic records that the Baptists of history were! Neither Hardshells nor Conventionites.

Mosheim, page 491, says of the Waldenses, Hussites, etc.: Before the rise of Luther and Calvin, there! lay concealed, in almost all countries in Europe, particularly in Bohemia, Moravia, Switzerland and Germany many persons who adhered tenaciously to the following doctrine, which the Waldenses, Wickliffites and Hussites, but maintained, some in a more disguised, and others In a more open and public manner, viz.: That the kingdom of Christ, or the visible church which he established upon earth, was an assembly of true and real saints, and ought therefore to be inaccessible to the wicked and unrighteous, and also exempt from all those institutions which human prudence suggests to oppose the progress of iniquity.

It will be seen that these ancient Baptists opposed outside organizations, adhering to the church as the one institution for the work of the Master.

Orchard, speaking of the Paulicians, page 139, says:

An evident mark of Apostolic spirit possessed by this people must be admitted by all. Without any funds or public societies to countenance or support the arduous undertaking, otherwise than their respective churches, the Paulicians fearlessly penetrated to the most barbarous parts of Europe, and went single-handed and single-eyed to the conflict with every grade of character.

These were not Hardshells and they were not Conventionites. They had no organizations, otherwise than their respective churches, says Orchard. They practiced church missions.

Davis History of Welsh Baptists, page 31: At this time (1663) the Baptists met as Llantrisant.

In the association held at Abergavamy, this church proposed to revive the old plan of supporting ministers in weak and destitute churches: which was for the strongest to help the weakest. Wm. Thomas was appointed home missionary for six months, and received from Swansea five pounds; Llantrisant, two pounds, ten shillings; Carmarthen, two pounds, ten shillings.

These were not Hardshells. They had no board or convention. The churches were Scripturally associated in the work of missions.

It was no new thing among them, because it was proposed to revive the old plan.

They had only been neglecting their duty as thousands of Baptists today.

The Kehukee Association was organized in 1765. It was not a Hardshell Association, and it was not a Board Association. It has since its organization drifted into Hardshellism and is now a Hard-shell Association.

From Burkitts History, page 92, we read: This association agreed to consider the business of itinerant preaching.

A committee was appointed for that purpose, and after deliberation thereon reported as follows: That not only ordained preachers, but young gifts also be advised and called upon by the churches to which they belong, to engage in the work, not only amongst the churches, but in other places where it may appear necessary.

Whatever the Kehukee Association now is, it was at the beginning of its career, a missionary association. They believed in and practiced missions, but they had no board or superintendent to superintend the work. The missionaries to be sent out were to be called upon by the church to which they belonged to engage in the work. If the Kehukee Association has quit this way of doing and become a Hardshell Association, it is because they have departed from the faith and practice of their fathers.

Possibly, the oldest church in the world is Hill Cliff Church, Wales. It was organized, no doubt, as early as the year 600 A. D. Evidence is abundant to show that it was one of the churches hid in the wilderness to avoid the cruel persecution waged against Baptists for a thousand years. The church is still in existence, and has regular worship every Sunday, and the church occupies the third stone building that is certainly known. There might have been other buildings in the dark past, but evidence of three exists.

In 1653 the following significant action was taken by the church: Mr. Tillman, also, at this time was solemnly commended to the grace of God (like Paul when he left Antioch) in proceeding to Cheshire on a Missionary or Evangelistic tour.

(See History Hill Cliff Church, by James Kenworthy, pastor, p. 46.)

The author does not know what the custom of the Hill Cliff Church is now, but it did do mission work in ancient times without a board or convention. If it be now a board church, it has departed from its ancient practice.

There never would have been any such things as Hardshell churches or Convention churches if there had not been a departure from the faith and practice of the ancient churches. Hardshellism is a recent invention, and so is Boardism.

Both are in error. Hardshellism violates the Masters law by refusing to go. Boardism violates the law by trying to take the commission out of the hands of the churches, where the Master left it. Â

The Evils of Hardshellism  1. Hardshellism is a negative. It stands for nothing and opposes everything.

2. Hardshellism repudiates the Great Commission.

3. Hardshellism lives on the converts made by others.

It is a religious parasite.

4. Hardshellism logically repudiates baptism, since they repudiate the Commission, and baptism is a part of the Commission.

5. Hardshellism dries up benevolence and fosters covetousness.

6. Hardshellism makes beggars of their preachers.

Instead of receiving wages for their preaching they receive it as alms.

7. Hardshellism teaches that the gospel is not necessary to salvation, and, therefore, flatly contradicts the Scriptures.

8. Hardshellism is a schism and should be treated as such.

9. Hardshellism never built an orphans home for sheltering, protecting and educating helpless orphan children.

10. Hardshellism never led a soul to Christ nor has it ever been instrumental in saving a soul, they themselves being

witnesses.

11. Hardshellism was founded by Daniel Parker, and is of man, not of God.

Minutes Kentucky General Association, Oct. 20, 1837, page 11: The anti-missionary spirit owes its origin to the notorious Daniel Parker. He was the first person called Baptist that lent a hand to the infidel and papist in opposing the proclamation of the gospel to every creature.

This deliverance was made only five years after the division among Baptists over the mission question. The messengers of the churches who made this deliverance were personal ear and eye witnesses to the controversy which resulted in the split. They could not be mistaken, and if what they say is not true, we have the spectacle of a body of messengers from the churches putting to record for the deception of future generations, a positive and well known (at that time) falsehood.

We cannot conceive of such a thing being possible. If this deliverance is true, Daniel Parker was the originator of Hardshellism.

But let us hear Parker himself: It makes me shudder when I think I am the first one (that I have any knowledge of) among the thousands of zealous religionists of America that have ventured to draw the sword against this error, and to shoot at it and spare no arrows. (See Daniel Parkers address, p. 3) The question is settled. The Missionary Baptists, who were eye witnesses, declare Daniel Parker was the first to advocate Hardshellism, and Parker himself says he was the first.

It is therefore absurd to talk of Hardshellism tracing a line of succession back of Daniel Parker.

Evils of Conventionism

1. Conventionism ignores the law of Christ and sets up rules of its Own. 2. Conventionism gives one man authority over another, and the Master said, It shall not be so among you. (Matt. 20:25, 26.)

3. Conventionism tends towards centralization and destroys congregationalism.

4. Conventions are unknown to the Scriptures.

5. Conventionism fosters liberalism and decries orthodoxy.

6. Conventionism is an invention of man and not a revelation of God. 7. Conventionism is a breeder of strife and confusion among the churches.

8. Conventionism is a departure from the faith and practice of the fathers.

9. Conventionism incurs needless expenses, and unjustly calls upon the churches to pay the debts they had no part in making.

10. Conventionism has a bad spirit. Those it cant control it seeks to ruin.

11. Conventionism is responsible in a large measure for Hardshellism, since the extremes of Conventionism drove many into repudiating all mission work.

12. Conventionism is fast becoming a schism, and unless reform or revolution comes speedily it must be treated as such.

13. Conventionism and Hardshellism are both departures from the historic faith and practice of the ancient Baptists.

The great body of Baptists has never gone off with either faction and they never will.

The Baptists through whom our lines of history run were plain Missionary Baptists; neither Hardshells nor Conventionites.

CHAPTER IX

The Way of Blood,

or Baptist Martyrs in Every Century Since Christ

Baptist history can be traced in blood through the dark centuries of the past. Men and women have given up their lives for the doctrines and practices of Baptists. The way of Baptists has been a way of blood.

First Century

John the Baptist was the first Baptist martyr. For faithfully preaching the truth this first Baptist preacher became the first

Christian martyr. In Matt. 15:1-12, we read that he was beheaded by order of King Herod.

Stephen was stoned to death for preaching the doctrines held by Baptists, Acts 7:59-60, we read that while dying he prayed for his cruel persecutors.

The Apostles all died as martyrs, except John, and he was banished to a lonely island, where he wrote the Book of Revelation.

Second Century

Orchard, Vol. 1, page 163 (old edition), says: Tile City of Lyons were again visited with the vengeance of the emperor.

Severns treated the Christians of this city with great cruelty. Such was the excess of barbarity that the rivers were colored with human blood, and the public places of the city were filled with the dead bodies of professors.

Many other instances of cruel persecution could be given, but it is the purpose of this chapter to give only brief specimens of the way our fathers suffered in each century.

Third Century Jones History, page 145: After Perpetua had entered the theater among the wild beasts, singing praises to God, her execution is thus reported: Perpetua and Felicitus were first inclosed in a net and then exposed to a wild cow. But this struck the spectators with horror, as the former was a delicate woman, and the breasts of the latter were streaming with milk after her delivery. They were therefore recalled and exposed in a common loose dress.

Perpetua was first tossed by the beast and being thrown down, she had the presence of mind to compose her dress as she lay on the ground. Then rising and seeing Felicitus much more torn than herself, she gave her hand, and assisted her to rise; and for some time they both stood together near the gate of the amphitheater. Thither Perpetua sent for her brother, and exhorted him to continue firm in the faith, to love his fellow-Christians, and not to be discouraged by her suffering. Being in a mangled condition, they were now taken to the usual place of execution, to be dispatched with a sword, but the populace requesting that they should be removed to another place, where the execution might be seen to more advantage, they got up of their own accord to go thither; then having given each other the kiss of charity, they quietly resigned themselves to their fate.

How many Baptist women are there today who would thus suffer and die for their principles? No doubt, there are many.

Fourth Century

Baptist Martyrs, page 14: When Constantine and Licinian first came into power (A. D. 312) they gave equal religious toleration to all their subjects.

But the attempt to settle the controversy in North Africa, between the Catholics and Donatists, by imperial intervention (4. 0. 316), was a departure front this impartial protection and equality before the law; and from that fatal moment persecution began under the Christian name.

Orchard, Vol. 1, page 187 (old edition): The disputes between the Donatists and the Catholics were at their height when Constantine became fully invested with imperial power, A. U, 314.

The Catholic party solicited the services of the Emperor, who, in answer, appointed commissions to hear both sides; but this measure not giving satisfaction, he even condescended to hear the parties himself, but his best exertions could not effect reconciliation. The interested part that Constantine took in the dispute led the Donatists to inquire, what has the Emperor to do with the church? What have Christians to do with kings? Or what have bishops to do at court? Constantine, finding his authority questioned, and even set at naught by these Baptists, listened to the advice of the bishops and court, and deprived the Donatists of their churches. This persecution was the first which realized the support of a Christian. Emperor Constantine went so far as to put some of the Donatists to death.

Note the Donatists were what are now called Missionary Baptists. They were dubbed Donatists by their enemies, but they believed and practiced what Baptists believe and practice.

The Roman Catholic Church was, in the years 251-600 A. B., in its formative period. It was not born full grown. What the Catholic Church now is was the result of a growth, a tendency, beginning A. D. 251, when they first began to centralize power in the hands of a few, and continuing till A. B. 610, when Boniface III was made Universal Bishop, or Pope. From the time the Catholics split off from the Baptists persecution by them began.

Fifth Century

Orchard, Vol. 1, page 61: The Catholic party, now accumulating power, saw in other churches rebaptizing a virtual renunciation of the baptism they had conferred upon those who went over to the other party * * * consequently a spirit of persecution was raised against all those who rebaptized Catholics. In the fourth Lateran councils, canons were made to banish them as heretics and these canons were supported by an edict in 413 issued by the emperors, Theodosius and Honorius, declaring that all persons rebaptized, and the rebaptizers, should be both punished with death. Accordingly Albanus, a zealous minister, with others, was punished with death for rebaptizing.

What if it were punishable with death now for Baptists to baptize those who had been baptized by others? One thing is certain, alien immersionists, who are willing to take anybodys baptism, would not suffer; and another thing is equally certain, these alien immersionists have departed from a practice which ancient Baptists were willing to die for.

Sixth Century

Orchard, Vol. 1, page 101 (old edition) says: The Pope wrote to two African bishops, requiring them to exert themselves in every possible way to suppress the Donatists.

Under this instruction Baptists suffered terribly, but no concrete example is on record worthy of reproduction here.

Seventh Century

Orchard, Vol. 1, page 134: A Greek officer named Simmeon, armed with legal and military authority, appeared at Coronia to strike the shepherd, Sylvanus, and to reclaim, if possible, the lost sheep. By refinement of cruelty, this minister of justice placed the unfortunate Sylvanus before a line of his disciples, who were commanded, as the price of their pardon and as a proof of their penitence, to stone to death their spiritual father. The affectionate flock turned aside from the impious office, the stones dropped from their filial hands, and of the whole number only one executioner could be found. This apostate, Justus, after putting Sylvanus to death, gained, by some means, admittance into communion, and again deceived and betrayed his unsuspecting brethren, and as many as were treacherously ascertained and could he collected, were massed together in an immense pile, and by order of the emperor, were consumed to ashes.

Eighth Century

Orchard, page 135: From the blood and ashes of the first Paulician (Baptist) victims, a succession of teachers and congregations repeatedly arose.

The Greeks, to subdue them, made use of both argument and arms, with all the terror of penal laws, without affecting their object. The great instrument of this peoples multiplication was alone the use of the New Testament, The Baptists of the eighth century took the New Testament as their only rule of faith and practice and suffered for it.

Ninth Century

Orchard, page 137: The severest persecution experienced by them was encouraged by the Empress Theodora, A. D. 845. Her decrees were severe, but the cruelty with which they were put in execution by her officers was horrible beyond expression. Mountains and hills were covered with inhabitants. Her sanguinary inquisitors explored the cities and mountains in Lesser Asia. After confiscating the goods and property of one hundred thousand of these people, the owners to that number were put to death in the most barbarous manner, and made to expire slowly under a variety of the most exquisite tortures.

The Baptists must have been numerous in the ninth century for a hundred thousand of them to be put to death under the reign of one wicked empress.

Tenth Century

Orchard, Vol. 1, page 298 (old edition): During the kingdoms of the Goths and Lombard's the Baptists, or as they were called by the Catholics, AnaBaptists, had their share of churches and baptistries in these provinces, though they had no communion with Rome, Milan, Aquilia, Ravenna, or any other hierarchy. But the Jaws of the emperors deprived them of their edifices, and transferred them to the Catholic party.

Eleventh Century

Orchard, page 147: After the ruin of these kingdoms (the Goths and Lombards), laws were issued by the emperor, to deprive them of their baptismal churches and to secure them to the Catholic clergy. Consequently the brethren worshipped in private houses, under different names.

Note: After being driven out of their meeting houses they worshipped in private houses under different names. This gives occasion to remark that Baptists have never had a uniform name. Baptists today, believing and practicing substantially the same thing are called by various names. There are the Landmark Baptists, Regular Baptists, Missionary Baptists, Gospel Mission Baptists, United Baptists, etc. Yet they are all one and the same sort of Baptists. So in the past they were called Waldenses, Novationists, Petro-Brusians, Paulician, Ana-Baptists, etc.; called by various names but none the less they were one and the same people. What we shall be called next nobody knows.

Twelfth Century

Baptists Martyrs, page 40: About the year 1137, a reformer appeared in Italy, who proved himself a powerful opponent to the Church of Rome, and who, in fortitude and zeal, was inferior to no one bearing that name, while in talent and learning he excelled most. This was Arnold of Brescia, a man remarkable for force of piety anti austerity of manners. * * * The Romish church took alarm at his bold attacks, and in a council condemned him to perpetual silence. * * * At length the Pope laid an interdict on the city. As the sword was no weapon in Arnolds panoply, the noble champion retired to Tuscany. There he was seized, brought back to Rome, crucified and burnt. His ashes were thrown in the river Tiber.

On account of the prominence of this great man, the Baptists, among whom he labored, were dubbed Arnoldists.

But call them what you may they were Baptists still.

Thirteenth Century

Jones History (quoted by Ray, page 373): The penalty for giving food, or showing any other favor to the hated Waldenses, was death, as for high treason. It was considered a crime worthy of death for even a Catholic to favor one of them with shelter from a storm, a piece of bread or a cup of cold water. * * * These scenes of slaughter and devastation which had been carried on against the Albigenses in the southern provinces of France for more than twenty years during the former part of the thirteenth century. * * * During the said twenty years it has been computed that one million persons bearing that name were put to death.

Fourteenth Century Jones History: They fled to one of the highest mountains of the Alps with their wives and children * * * Their inhuman invaders, whose feet were swift to shed blood, pursued them in their flight until night came on, and slew great numbers of them before they could reach the mountains. * * * Four score of their infants deprived of life, many of their mothers also lying dead by their sides, etc.

Thus the Baptists of the middle ages suffered and died for their principles.

Fifteenth Century

Jerome of Prague and John Huss were put t0 death, being burned at the stake.

On account of the prominence of Huss the

Baptists were called Hussites by their enemies. While the flames leaped up about his body he sang a hymn and prayed for his persecutors.

Sixteenth Century Baptist Succession, page 376: In the early part of the sixteenth century the most cruel persecution continued to be urged against the Waldenses in the South of France; and in 1585 John Wiener led the Catholic forces against the Waldenses in Provence, France, and among other horrible cruelties, this inhuman wretch shut up about forty women in a barn full of hay and straw, and then set it on fire; and after that, the poor creatures, having attempted in vain to smother the fire with their clothes, which for that end they had pulled off, betook themselves to the great window, at which hay is commonly pitched into the barn, with an intention to leap out from thence, but were kept in with pikes and spears, so that all of them perished in the flames.

Seventeenth Century

Mosheim, page 105: There were certain sects and doctors (teachers), against whom the zeal, vigilance and severity of Catholics, Lutherans and Calvinists were united, and in opposing whose settlement and progress these three communions, forgetting their dissentions, joined their most vigorous counsels and endeavors. The object of their common aversion was the Ana-Baptists.

Eighteenth Century

Belchers History Religious Denominations, pages 161-165, tells of Baptists being persecuted on American soil: Three Baptist preachers were brought to trial for preaching. The indictment brought against them was: For preaching the Gospel of the Son of God, contrary to the statute.

Bloody persecutions were endured by the Baptists in the colonies of Massachusetts and Virginia. Baptists, smarting under these persecutions, organized the General Association of Virginia for the sole purpose of making a united effort to get a constitution and statutes in the United States guaranteeing religious liberty. They were successful and the clause in the constitution of the United States giving religious liberty to all was the work of Baptists. The American people owe their liberty of conscience to the much despised and terribly persecuted Baptists.

Cardinal Hosious said: If the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man or any sect shows in suffering, then the opinion and persuasion of no sect can be truer than that of the Ana-Baptists, since there has been none for these twelve hundred years past that have been more generally punished or that have more cheerfully and steadfastly undergone and even offered themselves to the most cruel kind of punishment than these people.

Note two things: Cardinal Hosious, a Roman Catholic, testifies that the people called Ana-Baptists had endured cruel persecution, and that they had suffered twelve hundred years, almost the exact number of years that the prophetic woman, the symbol of the church, should stay in the wilderness. (See Rev. 12:6-14.)

No other people have had a wilderness history. No other people have been compelled to hide from their persecutors for hundreds of years, hence no other denomination meets the conditions surrounding the woman of Revelation, who was to fly into the wilderness from the face of the serpent and there be sustained f or twelve hundred and sixty yearsa time, time, and half a time.

Baptists have a goodly heritage. Their cause was planted by Jesus Christ, and it has been fertilized by martyrs blood.

Shall we, like dogs, lick the hands that smote our fathers? Nay, verily, Baptists must remain a separate people.

CHAPTER X The Way Traced From America to Palestine The Baptists of America have direct connection with the Welsh Baptists.

The Penepek Church of Pennsylvania came from Wales in a body in 1701.

In 1663 John Miles, with several others, came from Swansea, Wales, and they organized a church in Massachusetts.

(Davis History Welsh Baptists, pages 39-40.)

When we get into Wales we find Baptists in large numbers as far back as the year 600 A. D. Benedict, page 343: But though the subject of baptism began now to be altered (597 A. B.), the mode of it continued in the national

church a thousand years longer, and baptism was administered by dipping. From the coming of Austin, the church in this island was divided into two parts, the old and the new. The old or Baptist church maintained their original principles. But the new church adopted infant baptism and the rest of the multiplying superstitions of Rome?

The Baptists were old in Wales in A. D. 597. The Catholics had not been there and Austin was the missionary of the Catholic Church, and his purpose was to gain these Welsh Baptists over to the Catholics.

He succeeded in gaining many of them and caused a split among them, the old church adhering tenaciously to their old doctrines and practices, while those that went after Austin became Catholics. Whence came the Catholic Church in Wales? From Baptists. Baptists, as we have seen in the preceding chapters, were the first in Italy and Africa and they were on the ground first in Wales.

In the year 597 the Baptists had been in Wales long enough to have at least one college and one association.

Benedict, page 344: They also give the names of Faganus, Damicanus, Alban, Aaron, Julius, Gildas, Dyfrig, Dynawt, Tailo, Padran, Pawlin, Daniel Dcwi or David, as noted Baptist ministers in the time of Austin's visit and that Dynawt was president of the college or monastery of Banor at that time and was chief speaker in a conference or association of Welsh ministers or messengers, who met the famous Roman reformer and had a debate with him on baptism.

On the same page Benedict says that the Welsh Baptists have the fullest confidence that their sentiments have always lived in their mountainous retreats, from the apostolic age to the present time.

Hear Benedict again: Welsh Baptists contend that Baptist principles were maintained in the recesses of their mountainous principality all along through the dark reign of popery. (Page 344.)

Between our time and the years 579-600 A. D. we have the Hill Cliff Church, which was beyond reasonable doubt organized A. D. 600.

While there was no record kept by the church because of their persecutors, there are records made in stone in the graveyard hard by, and the foundation of an ancient church with a baptistry was unearthed a few years ago, showing that far beyond the written records this church has lived. There stands the, old church. When did it begin?

The man who says it is of modern origin, let him prove it. The presumption is always in favor of existing institutions.

There stands the church, and its origin is hid in the remote depth of antiquity.

Davis History Welsh Baptists, pages 6-9, says that in A. D. 300 Welsh Baptists suffered terrible persecution. They must have been there if they suffered persecution.

This takes us back beyond the time when there was such a thing as the Roman Catholic Church and the Origin of the Welsh Christians still unaccounted for.

Davis History, page 187: We have every reason to believe that Welsh Baptists had their associations, and that Dyfrig, Illtyd, and Dynawt were leading men among them long before Austins attempt to convert them to popery * * * about the year A. D. 600.

The origin of the Welsh Baptists is accounted for by Davis in his history, page 6, as follows: In A. D. 63, while Paul was a prisoner at Rome, a Welsh lady and her husband, whose name was Pudens, visiting in Rome, were converted under Pauls preaching. They were referred to in Acts 28:30 and II Tim. 4:21. These people carried the gospel into Wales.

Thus, by the Welsh route, we find Baptists go back to the Apostle Paul.

These Welsh Baptists have always been Missionary Baptists.

Davis History, page 187: Every minister was both a pastor and a missionary.

Kenworthys History, Hill Cliff, p. 46 (1653): Mr. Tillman, also at this time was solemnly commended to the grace of God (like Paul when he left Antioch) in proceeding to Cheshire on a missionary or evangelistic tour.

The Ana-Baptist Route. s we have seen in the preceding chapters, Baptists have been called by various names, such as Montanists, Novatians, Donatists, Paulicians, Albigenses, Petro-Brusians, Waldenses, Ana-Baptists, Hussites, Arnoldites, etc. These names were not assumed by themselves, but were put upon them by their enemies.

They have not cared so much about names as they have about doctrines and practices.

In this Ana-Baptist route, the different periods of Baptist history shall be called links, and thus link by link a chain of Baptist history shall be formed from the Apostolic time to the present.

A

FIRST LINKThe Apostolic age continued through the first century.

SECOND LINKBaptists were called Montanists in the second century. (See Armitage, page 177; Kurtz, Vol. I, page 131.)

THIRD LINKBaptists were called Novatians in the third and fourth centuries and Robinsons Ecclesiastical Researches, page 126, says: A succession of them continued until the reformation FOURTH LINKThe Baptists were called Donatists in the latter part of the fourth and in the fifth and sixth centuries.

(Armitage, pages 200-201; Kurtzs History, Vol. II, p. 46; Schaff, Vol. I, p. 336.)

FIFTH LINKBaptists were called Paulicians in the seventh, eighth and ninth centuries. (Mosheim, Cent.

8, part 2, Sec. I; Hase History, p. 159; Benedict, p.

12; Kurtzs History, Vol. I, p. 271.)

SIXTH LINKBaptists were called Albigenses in the tenth, eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

(Mosheim, Cent.

II, part 2, chapter 3, verse 2; Encyclopedia Britannica, Article Albigenses.)

SEVENTH LINKBaptists were called Petro-Brusians in the latter part of the thirteenth and in the fourteenth century.

(Kurtzs History, Vol. I, page 456.)

EIGHTH LINKBaptists were called Waldenses from the fourteenth century to the reformation. (Armitage, pp. 302-303; Robinsons Eccl. Researches, p. 449; Jones History, p. 335.)

NINTH LINKBaptists were called Ana-Baptists during the reformation and for over a hundred years thereafter, through a period embracing the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth and a goodly part of the eighteenth centuries. They published a Confession of Faith in A. B. 1527. (See Armitage, p. 949.)

TENTH LINKModern Baptists. Mosheim, Cent. 16, part 2, chapter 3, section 2: Before the rise of Luther and Calvin there lay concealed in almost all the countries of Europe persons who adhered tenaciously to the principles of the Dutch Baptists.

Mosheim, Cent. 16, section 3, chapter 3: It may be observed that they are not entirely mistaken when they (the AnaBaptists) boast of their descent from the Waldenses and the Petro-Brusians.

New Royal Encyclopedia: They appear supported by history in considering themselves the descendants of the Waldenses.

Robinsons Eccl. Researches, pp. 126, 127: When penal laws obliged them (the Baptists) to lurk in corners and worship God in private, they were distinguished by a variety of names, and a succession of them continued until the Reformation.

A fitting close to this chapter will be the testimony of two learned Pedo-Baptist historians, Drs. Ypeij, professor of theology at Granigen, and J. J. Dermont, chaplain to the King of the Netherlands. These learned gentlemen were appointed to write a history of the Dutch Reform Church. Religious Encyclopedia, page 796, quotes them as follows: We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Ana-Baptists, and in later times Mennonites, were the original Waldenses, and who long in the history of the church, received the honor of that origin. On this account the Baptists may be considered as the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the Apostles, and as a Christian society which has preserved pure the doctrines of the Gospel through all ages. * * * And at the same time goes to refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics that their communion is the most ancient.

The aforementioned book was published in Breda, A. D. 1819. Space forbids the author running a line of church succession through the ages, beginning in America and running back to the Apostle John, but sufficient has been presented to convince any who are willing to be convinced by testimony. Baptists are the only people who have had unbroken continuity through the centuries to the apostolic time.

CHAPTER XI The Historical Way Attested by Scholars Alexander Campbell: From the apostolic age to the present time the sentiments of Baptists and their practice of baptism have had a continued chain of advocates, and public monuments of their existence in every century can be produced.

(Campbell-McCalla debate, p. 378, in 1824.) The Baptist denomination in all ages and in all countries has been as a body, the constant asserters of the rights of man and the liberty of conscience. (Campbell on Baptism, p. 409, in 1851.)

Campbell, being the founder of the Campbellite Church, commands attention that other men would not.

John Clark Ridpath: I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist church as far back as A. D. 100, though without doubt there were Baptists then, as all Christians were then Baptists. (See Baptists Church Perpetuity, p. 59.) Ridpath was a professor of history in DuPaw University and a Methodist.

Benjamin Franklin: If popery was not too late, or too young, to be the true church, what shall be said of those communions born in the past three centuries? They are all too young by largely more than a thousand years. NO church that has come into existence since the death of the apostles can be the Church of the Living God. (Living Pulpit, p. 348.)

Theodore Beza: As for the Waldenses, I may be permitted to call them the very seed of the Christian church, since they are those

that have been upheld, as is absolutely manifest, by the wonderful providence, so that neither those endless storms and tempests by which the whole Christian world has been shaken for so many succeeding ages, and the Western part at length so miserably oppressed by the bishop of Rome, falsely so-called, nor those horrible persecutions which have been expressly raised against them, were ever able so far to prevail as to make them bend, or yield a voluntary subjection to the Roman tyranny and idolatry.

(Jones History, p. 353.) Beza was a Presbyterian and the successor of John Calvin. Such testimony ought to have weight.

Oliver Cromwell. Speaking of Waldenses, he says: Next to the help of God it seems to devolve on you to provide that the most ancient stock of pure religion may not be destroyed in this remnant of its ancient professors. (Jones History, p. 530.) Oliver Cromwell was dictator of England, and he calls the Waldenses the most ancient stock of pure religion.

Dr. DAnvers: In the preface to the French Bible, and the first that ever was printed, they say that they have always had the full enjoyment of the heavenly truth contained in the Holy Scriptures ever since they were enriched with the same by the apostles themselves, having in manuscripts, preserved the entire Bible, in their native tongues, from generation to generation. (DAnvers on Baptism, p. 341.)

The French Bible was a Waldenses publication. In the preface they lay claims to having come from the apostles and of having preserved the entire Bible in manuscripts. So the Catholic boast that they alone preserved the Bible is found to be false. Baptists preserved the entire Bible during that awful period of darkness known as the Dark Ages.

PART III

The Present Way

he Master has not changed His method of work. If He has, it is certain that He has not notified His servants of it, and until He gives notice of a change of methods Baptists should continue to work by the methods revealed in the Scriptures.

The Scriptures are yet, as in the olden time, the only and all sufficient rule of faith and practice. Let us walk by that ruleto the law and to the testimony. The following pages shall briefly set forth the New Testament way of meeting present conditions.

CHAPTER XII

The Way To Organize Churches

he Scriptures teach that the disciples should statedly assemble themselves together. In commanding them to not forsake the assembling of themselves together (Heb. 10:25), nothing less is meant than the disciples should habitually and regularly assemble for worship. An assembly of baptized believers is a church. A correct translation of the Greek word ecclesia, which is the original for the word church in the New Testament, would be assembly or congregation. This is seen in the seven churches (congregations) of Asia, etc.

It is eminently proper for a congregation, as well as an individual, to give a reason of the hope that is in them with meekness and fear. (I Peter 3:15.) This reason concerning the hope that is in them may be stated orally or it may be written. If written, it is what is commonly called a Confession or Declaration of Faith. It surely is right for a church to tell the world what it believes the Bible to teach. Preachers do that every time they preach. Authors do that every time they write a book on religious topics, and why not a church of Christ do the same in writing concerning the things most certainly believed by its membership? Such declarations are not laws, but only statements of what the congregation understands the law of the Lord to mean.

The Baptist creed is the Bible, but what they understand this creed to teach they express in their Confession of Faith. To object to such a declaration of doctrine is puerile. To fail to publish such a confession is to have the world in doubt concerning what we believe.

The first step necessary in the organization of a new congregation or church is for as many as three baptized disciples to agree to meet statedly for worship, for mutual edification and united effort for the evangelization of the world. The object of a church is twofold, viz., that the membership may be mutually helpful to one another and to work for Gods glory in the evangelization of the world. The agreement to meet regularly for worship and work is commonly called a Church Covenant. The word covenant means agreement.

This covenant should be in writing, lest some misunderstand the terms. When this covenant has been entered into the church is fully organized. This covenant is the organization.

After the organization has been perfected by the members entering into the covenant with each other, the church (which

T

T

is just as much a church now as it will ever be) may elect officers. A pastor should be elected, and if possible, deacons.

Since it is proper that a record should be kept of the doings of the church, a clerk may be elected to commit to writing the business transactions of the congregation. In order to be known as a Baptist church a published Declaration of Faith should be spread on the minutes and made known to the public. If there is no Confession or Declaration of Faith already written that exactly expresses the doctrine of the newly organized church, let a committee be appointed to write a Declaration such as will express the doctrinal views of the new congregation.

It is not necessary, but it is customary, for a council of brethren from neighboring churches, to be called to assist in the organization of new churches. Usually this is best, since there is less liability to error when wise brethren are present with their council.

After organization, it is customary for the church to petition for membership in some association of churches. This is done by writing a letter, giving their Declaration of Faith and other matters of interest, such as the number of members, the name of the pastor and clerk, the amounts contributed toward the support of the pastor and for missions. Messengers should be elected to bear this letter to the association, which letter is kept by the messengers until petitionary letters are called for, and the bearer of the letter will then go forward and present the letter to the clerk of he association.

CHAPTER XIII

The Way Churches May Associate

There is no Scriptural way by which churches may combine, but they may associate as equals. This associating does not consist in meeting at a given place, but the churches associate in the work. They may elect messengers but these messengers are not the association. These messengers represent the churchesthe churches themselves constituting the association. The association, properly speaking, never meets. Only the messengers, from the churches composing the association, meet arid while it is common it is not proper to speak of the meeting of the messengers as being the association. These messengers are nothing more nor less than a joint committee appointed by the churches for the purpose of consulting about the work which the Master commissioned each of them to do.

Since the commission was given to the congregation as such, it follows that, the congregation as such are the units in all associate or co-operative work. They must, therefore, work together on terms of perfect equality. The large church or the rich is only a church and should have no special privileges on account of its size or wealth. Hence the numerical and financial bases of representation in associations or conventions are equally wrong. If the Lord gave the commission to individuals, the number of individuals should, of course, determine the number of messengers sent, or if the commission were given to churches according to their wealth, then the amount of money given should determine the number of messengers. But if the Lord gave the commission to the church, as such, it follows that an equal number of messengers should be sent from all the churches associating. There is no need of rehearsing the Scriptural arguments proving the commission was given to the churches, as such, for that ground has been fully canvassed in the preceding pages.

To contend logically for the convention system of co-operation one must contend that the commission was given to individuals, to argue for the association system of work one must contend that the commission was given to the churches as such. The whole matter rests right here. What is called the association is not an organization in the common acceptance of the term at all. It is only an intelligent working together of independent organizations. It is only associated work working at the same thing at the same time and the same way, but working as individual churches, independent and free. Beyond this they cannot go without violating the law of the Master, who told the individual church, as such, to go teach all nations, baptizing them, etc. (Matt. 28:19-20.) That churches did associate in the Masters work in apostolic times is seen in II Cor. 8:19-23. Here was a joint work of the churches through messengers, a joint committee. Whether any do enquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellow-helper concerning you: or brethren be enquired of, they are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ. Certainly the churches may elect messengers to carry on cooperative work, but they may not do it except on terms of perfect equality, and the churches as such must engage in the work.

CHAPTER XIV

The Way of Church Letters, Ordinations, Marriages, Funerals, Etc. Form of Church Letter of dismission

A church letter of dismission is only a recommendation of the member holding the letter. The letter of recommendation is of no value beyond the fact that it is a recommendation of the person holding the letter. That being the case, the letter should state the facts so that any other church, to which he may apply for membership, may know the character of the person applying. The person getting the letter retains membership in the church giving the letter until he becomes a member of another church. Getting a letter does not put the one holding the letter out of the church. Another church is not bound to receive a member because he comes with a letter. A letter is only a recommendation and is in no sense a transfer. Where a person is well known to a church, of which he wishes to become a member, there is no necessity for a church letter.

The church knowing him well, it does not need a recommendation of him. But, as a matter of courtesy toward the church of which a person is a member, it would be altogether right for him to ask for a letter before uniting with another church.

A common form of church letter is as follows: Little Rock, Ark., Jan.19 This is to certify that John Smith is a member of the church in good standing. At his own request he is hereby dismissed from us to unite with any other church of the same faith and order. His membership with us will cease when he shall have united with another church of the same faith and order.

Done by order of the church in conference Jan.-. ----, 19-.

JOHN JONES. Church Clerk.

When it is known what church a person wishes to join the letter may be written directly to the church. The following is a good form: Little Rock, Ark., Jan. ., 19..

The Baptist church at.....; to her sister church at Dear Brethren: This certifies that John Smith is a member with us in good standing and at his own request is hereby dismissed from us to unite with you. When he shall have been received by you, his connection with us will cease.

Done by order of the church.

JOHN JONES. Church Clerk.

Ordaining Preachers

The method of ordaining preachers is to invite a council of preachersa presbyteryand the church through this council examines the candidate for ordination concerning his call and qualifications for the gospel ministry. After a careful and prayerful examination, which would fittingly be accompanied by fasting, if the presbytery deems the candidate worthy of ordination, the church is notified. Then the church, by vote, receives or rejects the report of the presbytery, as it may choose, the entire responsibility for the ordination being in the church. If the church accepts the report of the presbytery, the ordination follows, which consists in prayer and the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

Form of Ordination Certificate

This is to certify that Brother was ordained to the work of the Gospel Ministry by prayer and the laying on of hands by the Presbytery, upon the authority of the church at on Nov 19 .The names of the elders comprising the Presbytery are______, _______...... . After a careful examination this Presbytery recommended his ordination. Our beloved brother, the bearer of this paper, has therefore, the entire approbation of the Presbytery recommending his ordination and of the church which ordained him, and is commended to the churches everywhere as being worthy and qualified for the work to which the Lord has called him.

(Signed) ELD. JOHN JOHNSON, Moderator. F. H. HOLMAN, Clerk.

Marriages

While marriage is a civil contract, made so by the laws of the land, it has become customary for preachers to perform the marriage ceremony. The matter of uniting a man and woman as husband and wife is a serious and solemn affair and should not be entered into lightly. A preacher should never perform a marriage ceremony where either party has been divorced, unless it be that the cause of the divorce was fornication or adultery. That should constantly be borne in mind.

Preachers should put the ban of their disapproval on all divorces, except for the one Scriptural ground for divorce. (Matt.

5:31-32.)

The author, in the year 1900, composed a marriage ceremony which he uses at all weddings.

Marriage Ceremony

od in His goodness saw that it was not good for man to be alone, and for this reason He created a helpmeet for him.

Thus we have Divine authority for the sacred rite of matrimony. Please to join hands, (The contracting parties then join hands.)

Today we stand before an altar which God Himself erected amidst the purity of Paradise, environed by the perfume of flowers, surrounded by angelic hosts and kissed into radiant beauty by the golden beams of youthful morn. This teaches that the purest state is that of marriage.

Paradise was lost, but there remains of it this altar, which has come down to us through the vicissitudes of time, undisturbed by the horrors of war nor forgotten in times of peace, a relic of primeval beauty with Gods smiles resting upon it.

Mr._____do you choose this woman to be your lawful and wedded wife, to love, cherish support, and comfort her through life, cleaving to her, and to her only, until parted by death? Answer: I do.

Miss____(or Mrs., if a widow), do you accept this man to be your lawful and wedded husband, to love, cherish, comfort and help through life, cleaving to him, and to him only, until parted by death? Answer: I do.

Then by the authority invested in me, as a minister of the Gospel, I pronounce you husband and wife, henceforth in interest and destiny one, to dwell together in the sacredness of wedded love until the last golden sunset of lifes journey, never to be separated until the last evenings deepening shadow, death. Let us pray.

Then follows such a prayer as the preacher may have in his heart to offer for the newly united pair.

Funerals

By all means avoid display at a funeral. A suitable scripture to read is the fifteenth chapter of I Corinthians. This read with brief comments and prayer, is enough religious exercises. On the life of the deceased, be careful not to make the impression that the wicked man has gone to heaven, and do not try to conceal the fact that even the best of Christians have their faults and that at best only the grace of God can save the soul. A word of warning to sinners is always in order at a funeral. Call attention to the certainty of death and of judgment. Urge them to prepare for the next world.

There should never be any ceremony at the grave beyond the singing of a hymn and prayer. To hold the people in the hot sun or in the cold wind and the damp ground for a great length of time is wrong. We greatly need reform in funerals at this point. When death has entered a home it gives a good opportunity for the preacher to win the unconverted in the family to Christ, and a minister is wise if he uses this opportunity.

G

Doctrinal Statement of the American Baptist Association

W

e, Your committee on

the statement of our doctrinal belief would respectfully submit the following and recommend:

That this body reaffirm its acceptance of the New Hampshire confession of faith; so long held by our American Baptist people, and that it be printed in full in the minutes of this session.

nd we would further recommend that in explanation of said Articles of Faith and in view of the attacks being made by the advocates of modern science, falsely so-called, on certain fundamentals of the revealed truth, do most positively emphasize our adherence to the following:

1. We believe in the infallible verbal inspiration of the whole Bible. II Tim. 3:16.

2. The Triune God. Matt.

28:19.

3. The Genesis Account of Creation.

A

4. The virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Matt.

1:20.

5. The deity of Jesus Christ.

6. His crucifixion and suffering as vicarious and substitutionary.

7. The bodily resurrection and ascension of Christ and the bodily resurrection of His saints. I Cor. 15:1-58

8. The second coming of Christ, personal and bodily, as the crowning event of this Gentile age. Acts1:11.

9. The Bible doctrine of eternal punishment of the finally impenitent. Matt.

25:46.

10. We also hold in common what real Baptists have ever held: That the great commission was given to the churches only. That in kingdom activities, the church is the unit, and the only unit that the churches have, and equal authority and responsibility should be met by them according to their several abilities.

11. That all co-operative bodies, such as Associations, Conventions and their Boards or Committees, etc. are, and properly should be, the servants of the churches.

12. We believe that the great commission teaches that there has been a succession of missionary Baptist churches from the days of Christ down to this day.

H.B. Pender, G. W. Crawford, J.H. Boyet, W. A. Jarrell, J. L. Brown, J. M. Stone, C. E. Smith, D.C. Dove, W. A. Crutchfield.

Respectfully submitted.

DECLARATION OF FAITH

I. Of the Scriptures

We believe that the Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired, and is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction; (II Tim. 3:16-17) that it has God for its author, salvation for its end (II Tim. 3:15), and truth without any mixture of error for its matter; (Prov.

30:5-6) that it reveals the principles by which God will judge us; (Rom. 2:12; John 12:47-48) and therefore is, and shall remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union (Phil. 3:16), and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds and opinions should be tried. (1John 4:1; Isa. 8:20).

II. Of the True God

We believe that there is one, and only one living and true God, an infinite, intelligent Spirit, whose name is JEHOVAH, the Maker and Supreme Ruler of heaven and earth; (John 4:24; Psalm 147:5; 83:18; Heb. 3:4; Rom. 1:20; Jer. 10:10) inexpressibly glorious in holiness, (Exod. 15:11) and worthy of all possible honor, confidence, and love; (Mark 12:30; Rev. 4:11) that in the unity of the Godhead there are three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; (Matt. 28:19; John 15:26) equal in every divine perfection (John 10:30), and executing distinct but harmonious offices in the great work of redemption. (Eph. 2:18; II Cor. 13:14)

III. Of the Fall of Man

We believe that man was created in holiness, under the law of his Maker; (Gen. 1:27, 31; Eccl. 7:29) but by voluntary transgression fell from that holy and happy state; (Gen. 3:6-24; Rom. 5:12) in consequence of which all mankind are now sinners, (Rom. 5:19; John 3:6; Psalm 51:5) not by constraint but choice; (Isa. 53:6; Gen. 6:12; Rom. 3:9-18) being by nature utterly void of that holiness required by the law of God, positively inclined to evil; and therefore under just condemnation to eternal ruin, (Eph. 2:1-3; Rom. 1:18, 32; 2:1-16) Without defense or excuse. (Ezek. 18:19-20; Rom. 1:20; 3:19)

IV. Of the Way of Salvation

We believe that the salvation of sinners is wholly of grace, (Eph. 2:5; 1 John 4:10) through the Mediatorial offices of the Son of God; (John 3:16; 1:1-14) who by the appointment of the Father, freely took upon Him our nature, yet without sin; (Phil. 2:6-7; Heb. 2:9, 14) honored the divine law by His personal obedience, (Isa. 42:21; Phil. 2:8) and by His death made a full atonement for our sins; (Isa. 53:4-5; Matt. 20:28; Rom. 4:25) that having risen from the dead, He is now enthroned in heaven; (Heb. 1:3-8; Col. 3:1) and united in His wonderful person the tenderest sympathies with divine perfections, He is every way qualified to be a suitable, a compassionate, and an all-sufficient Saviour. (Heb. 7:25-26; Col. 2:9; Heb. 2:18)

V. Of Justification

We believe that the great gospel blessing which Christ (John 1:16; Eph.3:8) secures to such as believe in Him is justification; (Acts 13:39; Rom. 8:1) that justification includes the pardon of sin, (Rom. 5:9) and the promise of eternal life on principles of righteousness; (Rom. 5:17; Titus 3:5-6) that it is bestowed, not in consideration of any works of righteousness which we have done, but solely through faith in the Redeemers blood; (Rom. 4:4-5) by virtue of which faith His perfect righteousness is freely imputed to us of God; (Rom. 5:19; 3:24-28) that it brings us into a state of most blessed peace and favor with God, and secures every other blessing needful for time and eternity.

(Rom. 5:1-3, 11; Matt.

6:33)

VI. Of the Freeness of Salvation.

We believe that the blessings of salvation are made free to all by the Gospel of Christ; ( Isa. 55:1; Rev. 22:17 ) that it is the immediate duty of all to accept them by a cordial penitent and obedient faith; (Rom. 16:26; Mark 1:15; Rom. 1:1517) and that nothing prevents the salvation of the greatest sinner on earth, but his own inherent depravity and voluntary rejection of the gospel of Christ; (John 5:40; Rom. 9:32) which rejection involves him in an aggravated condemnation.

(John 3:19; Matt.

11:20)

VII. Of Grace in Regeneration

We believe that in order to be saved, sinners must be regenerated, or born again; (John 3:3,6-7) that regeneration consists in giving a holy disposition to the mind, (II Cor. 5:17; Ezek. 36:26; Rom. 2:28-29) that it is effected in a manner above our comprehension by the power of the Holy Spirit, in connection with divine truth; (John 3:8; 1:13; James 1:16-18) so as to secure our voluntary obedience to the Gospel of Christ; ( I Peter 1:22-25; I John 5:1; Eph. 4:20-24 ) and that its proper evidence appears in the holy fruits of *repentance, and faith, and newness of life. (Eph. 5:9; Rom. 8:9; Gal. 5:1623; Eph. 3:14-21) *[or, newness of life because of repentance and faith--F.C. Miller]

VIII. Of Repentance and Faith

We believe that repentance and faith are sacred duties and also inseparable graces, wrought in our souls in regeneration (Mark 1:15; Acts 11:18; Eph. 2:8; I John 5:1) whereby being deeply convinced of our guilt, danger, and helplessness, and of the way of salvation by Christ, (John 16:8; Acts 2:37-38; 16:30-31) we turn to God with unfeigned contrition, confession, and supplication for mercy; (Luke 18:13; James 4:7-10) at the same time heartily receiving the Lord Jesus Christ as our Prophet, Priest, and King, and relying on Him alone as the only and all-sufficient Saviour. (Rom. 10:9-13; Acts 3:22-23; Heb. 1:8)

IX. Of Gods Purpose of Grace

We believe that election is the eternal purpose of God, according to which He graciously regenerates, sanctifies, and saves sinners; ( II Tim. 1:8-9; Eph. 1:3-14; Rom. 11:5-6 ) that being perfectly consistent with the free agency of man, it comprehends all the means in connection with the end; (II Thess. 2:13-14; Acts 13:48; John 10:16) that it is a most glorious display of Gods sovereign goodness, being infinitely free, wise, holy and unchangeable; (Exod. 33:18-19; Matt.

20:15; Eph. 1:11; Rom. 9:23-24; 11:28-36) that it utterly excludes boasting and promotes humility, love, prayer, praise,

trust in God, and active imitation of His Free mercy; (I Cor. 4:7; 1:26-31; Col. 3:12) that it encourages the use of means in the highest degree; (II Tim. 2:10; I Cor. 9:2; Rom. 8:28-30; John 6:37-40) that it may be ascertained by its effects in all who truly believe the Gospel of Christ; (I Thess. 1:4-10) that it is the foundation of Christian assurance; ( Rom. 8:2831; 11:29 ) and that to ascertain it with regard to ourselves demands and deserves the utmost diligence. (II Peter 1:10-11; Phil 3:12)

X. Of Sanctification

We believe that sanctification is the process by which, according to the will of God, we are made partakers of His holiness; (I Thess. 4:3; 5:23; II Cor. 7:1) that it is a progressive work; (Prov. 4:18; II Peter 1:5-8; Phil. 3:12-16) that it is begun in regeneration (John 2:29; Rom. 8:5; Phil 1:9-11) and that it is carried on in the hearts of believers by the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, the Sealer and Comforter, in the continual use of the appointed means especially, the Word of God, self-examination, self-denial, watchfulness, and prayer. (Phil. 2:12-13; Eph. 4:11-12; I Peter 2:2)

XI. Of the Perseverance of Saints

We believe that such only are real believers as endure unto the end; (John 8:31; I John 2:27-28; 3:9) that their persevering attachment to Christ is the grand mark which distinguishes them from superficial professions; (I John 2:19; Matt.

13:20-21) that a special providence watches over their welfare; (Rom. 8:28; Matt. 6:30-33) and that they are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. (Phil 1:6; 2:12-13; Jude 1:24-25)

XII. Of the Harmony of the Law and the Gospel

We believe that the law of God is the eternal and unchangeable rule of His moral government; (Rom. 3:31; Matt. 5:17; Luke 16:17) that it is holy, just; and good; (Rom. 7:12-14; Gal. 3:21) and that the inability which the Scriptures ascribe to fallen men to fulfill its precepts, arises entirely from their love of sin; (Rom. 8:7, 8; Jer. 13:23) to deliver from which, and to restore them through a Mediator t& unfeigned obedience to the holy law, is one great end of the Gospel of Christ, and of the means of grace connected with the establishment of the visible church. (Rom. 8:2-4; 10:4; Jude 1:20-21; Matt.

16:17-18)

XIII. Of a Gospel Church

We believe that a visible church of Christ is a congregation of baptized believers; ( I Cor. 1:1-13; Matt. 18:17; Acts 5:11; 8:1 ) associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel of Christ; (Acts 2:41-42, 47; II Cor. 8:5; I Cor. 5:12-13) observing the ordinances of Christ; (1 Cor. 11:2, 23; 2 Thess. 3:6; Rom. 16:17-20) governed by His laws; (Matt. 28:20; John 14:15, 21; I John 4:21) and exercising the gifts, rights, and privileges invested in them by His Word; (Eph. 4.7; I Cor. 14:12; Phil. 1:27) that its only Scriptural officers are bishops or pastors and deacons; ( Phil. 1:1; Acts 14:23; I Tim. 3:1-13 ) whose qualifications, claims, and duties are defined in the Epistles of Timothy and Titus.

XIV. Of Baptism and the Lord's Supper

We believe that Christian baptism is the immersion in water of a believer, (Acts 8:39; Matt. 3:5-6; John 3:22-23) into the name of the Father, and Son, and Holy Spirit; (Matt. 28:19: Acts 10:47-48) to show forth in a solemn and beautiful emblem our faith in the crucified, buried, and risen Saviour, with its effect, in our death to sin and resurrection to a new life; (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12) that it is a prerequisite to the privilege of a church relation; and to the Lord's Supper, (Acts 2:41-42; Matt.

28:19-20) in which the members of the church by the sacred use of bread and wine, are to commemorate together the dying love of Christ; (I Cor. 11:26; Matt. 26:26-29) preceded always by solemn self-examination. (I Cor. 11:28; 5:1, 8).

XV. Of the Lord's Day

We believe that the first day of the week is the Lord's Day; (Acts 20:7; Col. 2:16-17; John 20:19: I Cor. 16:1-2) and is to

be kept sacred to religious purposes, (Exod.

20:8; Rev. 1:10;Psalm 118:24) by abstaining from all secular labor and sinful recreations, ( Isa. 58:13-14; 56:2-8 ) by the devout observance of all the means of grace, both private (Psalm 118:15) and public; (Heb. 10:24, 25; Acts 11:26; 13:44) and by preparation for that rest that remaineth for the people of God. (Heb. 4:3-11)

XVI. Of Civil Government

We believe that civil government is of divine appointment, for the interests and good order of human society; (Rom. 13:1-7; Deut.

16:18; II Sam. 23:3) and that magistrates are to be prayed for, conscientiously honored, and obeyed; (Matt.

22:21; Titus 3:1; I Peter 2:13; I Tim. 2:1-8) except only in things opposed to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, (Acts 5:29; Matt.

10:28; Dan. 3:15-18; 6:7-10) who is the only Lord of the conscience, and the Prince of the kings of the earth.

(Matt. 23:10; Rom. 14:4; Rev. 19:16; Psalm 72:11) XVII. Of the Righteous and the Wicked We believe that there is a radical and essential difference between the righteous and the wicked; (Mal. 3:18; Prov. 12:26; Rom. 6:16) that such only as through faith are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and sanctified by the Spirit of our God, are truly righteous in His esteem; (Rom. 1:17; 7:6; 6:18-22; I John 2:29; 3:7)while all such as continue in impenitence and unbelief are in His sight wicked, and under the curse; ( 1 John 5:19; Gal. 3:10; John 3:36 ) and this distinction holds among men both in and after death.

(Prov. 14:32; 10:24; Luke 16:25; John 8:21-24)

XVIII. Of the World to Come

We believe that the end of the world is approaching (I Peter 4:7; I Cor. 7:29-31; Heb. 1:10-12; Matt. 24:35); that in the last days Christ will appear in the heavens (Acts 1:11; Rev. 1:7; Heb. 9:28; I Thess. 4:13-18; I Thess. 5:1-11); that at His coming the dead saints will be raised from their graves, and the living believers caught up with them to meet the Lord in the air (I Thess. 4:16-17; I Cor. 15:51-53); that the saints will be judged for rewards according to their works (II Cor. 5:10; I Cor. 3:11-15); that Christ will descend to the earth with His saints, personally and bodily (Jude 1:14; Zech.

14:4: Acts 1:11); that Christ will reign over the earth in peace for one thousand years (Isa. 2:1-4; Isa 65:18-25; Rev. 20:1-4); that at end of the thousand years the wicked dead shall be raised and forever consigned to the lake of fire (Rev. 20:5, 1115); that the righteous shall enter into eternal joy with the Lord (Rev. 7:15-17; 22:1-7); that these judgments will fix forever the final state of men in heaven or hell, on principles of righteousness ( Rom. 3:5-6; II Thess. 1:6-12; Heb. 6:1-2; Rom. 2:2-16 )

Church Covenant On profession of our faith, having been baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy

Spirit, we do now most solemnly and joyfully enter into covenant with one another as one body in Christ.

We engage, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, to walk together in Christian love; to strive for the advancement of this church in knowledge, holiness and comfort; to promote its prosperity and spirituality; to sustain its worship, ordinances, discipline and doctrines, to contribute cheerfully and regularly to the support of its pastor, the expenses of the church, the relief of the poor, and the spread of the gospel throughout the world by methods in harmony with Acts 11:22; 13:1-4; 14:25-28.

We engage to maintain family and secret prayer, to religiously train our children, to seek the salvation of the unsaved about us, to walk circumspectly in the world, to be just in our dealings, faithful in our engagements, upright in our deportment, to avoid tattling, backbiting and excessive anger; to abstain from the sale and use of intoxicating drinks, and to be

zealous in our efforts to advance the kingdom of our Saviour.

We further engage to watch over one another in brotherly love; to remember each other in prayer; to aid each other in sickness and distress; to cultivate Christian sympathy in feeling and courtesy in speech; to be slow to take offense, but always ready for reconciliation, and mindful of the rules of our Saviour, to secure it without delay.

We, moreover, engage that when we remove from this place we will as soon as possible, unite with some other church, where we can carry out the spirit of this covenant, and the principles of Gods Word.

ORIGIN OF THE DENOMINATIONS BAPTISTS, A.D. 31, by Jesus Christ.

CATHOLICS, separated from the Baptists in A.D. 251 and gradually drifted into the papacy. The first universal Bishop or Pope was Boniface III, who was made such by Emperor Phocas, A.D. 6o6.

LUTHERANS, A.D. 1530, by Martin Luther.

PRESBYTERIANS, A.D. 1535, by John Calvin.

EPISCOPALIANS, A.D. 1540, by King Henry VIII.

METHODISTS, A.D. 1729, by John Wesley.

CAMPBELLITES, A.D. 1827, by Alexander Campbell.

FREE WILL BAPTISTS, A.D. 1780, by Benj. Randall.

MORMONS, A.D. 1830, by Joseph Smith.

HARDSHELL BAPTISTS, A.D. 1832, by Daniel Parker.

QUAKERS, A.D. 1648, by Geo. Fox.

SEVENTH DAY ADVENTISTS, A.D. 1843, by William Miller.

NAZARENES, A.D. 1885, by S. F. Breese.

RUSSELLITES, A.D. 1884, by Pastor Russell.

HOLY ROLLERS (Church of God) in 1914.

McPHERSONITES by Aimee McPherson, 1925.

INDEX

Authority Forbidden 19 Apostasy, Evils of .. 28 Anna-Baptist Route ... 62 Association .. 71 Baptist Polity in History ............................

34 Baptism ........................................................ 7 Blood, The Way of ....................................

49 Catholics ..................................

3 Commission Given to Church 1, 9, 10, 18, 19, 22 Conventionism, Evils of ..............................

47 Church Covenant........................................ 89 Church Origin ........................................... 30 Congregational Discipline ....................... 16 Congregation Sends Missionaries........... 17 Co-operation.................................................

23 Declaration of Faith.................................... 8o Doctrinal Statement ................................... 79 Electing Officers..........................................

17 Excluding Members....................................

16 Financial Basis.............................................. 71 Historical Way.............................................. 30 Hardshellism................................................

45 Inspiration of Scripture.............................

1, 2 Letters, Church........................................ 74, 75 Mission Work............................................... 21 Missions in History ..................................

42 Munster Rioters Not Baptists...................... 40 Organization of Churches ...................... 68 Ordinations..................................................

75 Origin of Denominations ....................... 91 Providence....................................................

26 reason, or sanctified common sense................................................ 3 Pendletons Manual................................ 8, 9, Receiving Members.................................. 15 Salvation, The Way of............................... 4

Supper, The Lord's...................................

11 Traced, The Way.......................................

59 Back to Shayne's Home Page

Acts 11:22 Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas that he should go as far as Antioch.

Acts 13: 1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. {which: or, Herods foster brother} 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.3And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.4So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus.

Acts 14:25 And when they had preached the word in Perga, they went down into Attalia: 26And thence sailed to Antioch, from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled. 27 And when they were come, and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles. 28 And there they abode long time with the disciples.

The Evils Of

Religious Liberalism.

[1]

BY JUDSON TAYLOR

This article, by Judson Taylor, great pioneer missionary, first appeared in the collection of essays edited by Elder J. M. Pendleton entitled: An Old Landmark Re-Set. The Second Edition of these essays is dated 1856. The message set forth here by Elder Taylor is perhaps even more applicable to our day than his own. The advances of Religious [2] Liberalism have been truly amazing and thoroughly destructive of Scriptural Christianity.

Liberalism has taken the place of Persecution. Persecution killed men, but prospered the cause; whilst Liberalism kills the cause by flattering men into compromises.

Persecuted Truth has survived in all ages, but Compromised Truth never survives the fatal tragedy in which the voice of God is only made equal to the voice of human tradition. Persecution is the act of an enemy against the truth, but Compromise is the act of a professed friend. God engages to counteract and overrule opposition, but heaven has no promise for that ill that deliberately sacrifices the truth of God, either from fear or for the applause of men. So of the two, Persecution is far preferable to the Liberalism that claims the various denominations of the times as all "churches" or "branches" of the church of Christ.

Whilst the Baptists stood the raging blast of the Pope for more than a thousand years, yet it is a fact that many of our churches are now shorn of all their strength whilst sleeping upon the lap of this bewitching Delilah of the nineteenth century. But the song is so sweet and the lap is so fragrant that thousands of silly Baptists throw aside the habiliments of their strength and lull down into the sweet but deathly sleep of the popular "Liberalism" of the day.

"Not to speak against the religious opinions of others," has become the IDEAL of this age--claiming to display the highest finish in Christian etiquette.

Had they equipped the Apostle Paul with this sort of cheap heraldry, he would have escaped all those "bonds and imprisonments" he so constantly "suffered for Christ's sake." But were Paul here today, he would prefer persecution rather than sit gracefully primped in the most magnificent gate of smiling applause sweetly fellowshipping seven faiths DIFFERING from each other, and yet all claiming to be the church of Christ. This is the error of the age. In the very nature of the case such a thing as fellowship between warlike faiths can not exist, only in a diseased fancy; for if you believe a thing you don't believe its Opposite; or if you love a teaching, you necessarily disprove of all that is contrary to it.

The Baptists and Roman Catholics for more than ten centuries, prior to even the days of Martin Luther, were the immediate opposites of each other in all their faith and practice; and there was, consequently, no such things known in all that long period as "Liberalism." True Baptists have ever maintained charity for men, but none whatever for ERROR. There ought to be no affiliation between error and truth. There was not one particle of compromise between Christ and the miserable traditions of the Jews of his day. Paul fought the Apostle Peter "face to face, giving place by subjection, no, not for an hour," just because Peter's Liberalism would have been a death-knell to the prosperity of the gospel. Hence, at its very first appearance in the church at Antioch, Paul and others ministered a death blow to the trouble.

Whilst Christ and the apostles loved souls, they in no case showed courtesy to the errors taught by those souls. Let us, therefore, set forward in this matter by discriminating between true and false charity, or false love. "Charity that suffereth long and is kind" is certainly the most noble thing that goes abroad upon the face of the earth. It came right out of the best courts of Heaven to people this globe with sons of glory, who are to rank above the angels, and gather around them the richest estates of Him who

is sole heir of boundless treasures. But how unlike, both in character and destiny, is the false charity of this time-serving and "sect"-adoring age. Religious Liberalism is not this "charity that thinketh no evil;" but when unmasked is seen to be love for self that thinketh to sell the truth of God, and buy therewith the applause of men.

True "charity REJOICETH in the truth," but much that is called charity these times is ashamed of the truth, and rebukes it for being harsh in tone and outlandish in conduct.

True charity looks upon the word of God as its eternal-support; but Religious Liberalism has more trouble with the Bible than it has with all the errors of the age in which it lives. Why? Because it sets out to befriend all the denominations of the times; whereas, the Bible only endorses the "One Body," the church of Christ; rebuking all things unlike it.

If Jesus and the "twelve" were here today, their plainness of speech would run the religious Denominations of the times raving mad; and it would not be twelve months till North America would be afire with religious controversy.

This is not an age of plain and faithful dealing, but it is an age preeminently of false Liberalism, growing rank as weeds ten feet high! The devil, who is the religious (?)

LIAR of the universe, has changed his tactics, and now makes it his business to persuade the "holy saints" to quit their quarreling with each other. It is the high prerogative of this modern Religiousness to rebuke any man who now-a-days dares to say there is ONLY ONE Lord, ONE faith, and ONE baptism; at the same time to award highest premiums to that man or that sect who can fellowship the greatest number of faiths and the greatest number of churches. Never, till now, did Satan claim seven times seventy churches (?) for the "Bride of Christ." Since the days of Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Henry the Eighth, Campbell, &c., instead of being CATHOLICS many are "Protestants," occupying half way ground between Roman Catholics and Baptists, who, with uncompromising zeal for the pure doctrines of the gospel, endured the bloody wars of Popedom for more than a thousand years. Protestants are in miserable business when they take a Catholic by one arm and a Baptist by the other and try to make their doctrines kiss each other. Now all these intermediate tribes constitute what may be called a COMPROMISE between Roman Catholics and Baptists, for they teach much Catholic doctrine and some Baptist doctrines; and so, being on medium ground between the two original disputants, they try to endorse that which the "Virgin of Christ" and the old "Harlot," never could. Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Campbellites, &c., often view with the others extolling to the heavens the noble excellencies of the newly formed "Church alliance." But true Baptists are afflicted with such an amount of truth they can't get along with error. Their hearts are as loving as the Lord Jesus Christ can make them, but their doctrines are as stubborn as that old unmanageable book called the Bible.

When Catholics and Baptists occupied the world all alone for many hundreds of years prior to the Protestants, there was no such thing as Religious Liberalism; but soon after Luther, Calvin, Wesley and the religious company of the nineteenth century appeared, "Patent-Right" churches sprang up all over the land like mushrooms, the indigenous growth of a night.

Why all this? Answer: Because there was not enough difference between them to quarrel over; and so they quit it and began to talk of a newly-made something Catholics and Baptists never heard of, calling it by the world-taking name of "Religious Liberalism." I say let Luther, Calvin, Wesley and Campbell try their courtesies on the Pope of Rome by giving him direct credit for more than half of the doctrines they teach; for "partial depravity," "infant membership," "sprinkling and pouring," "falling from grace," "baptismal remission," "an unconverted membership" and "an undemocratic church government" were all taught by Catholics and bitterly opposed by Baptists many hundreds of years before Luther, Calvin, Wesley or Campbell brought forth their respective churches to help the Pope teach the self-same doctrines.

Or, if they continue to press upon us Baptists their wonderful PEACE gospel, we suggest that they acknowledge our supreme devotion to the word of God in the ages past, when to speak the truth

was but to die, and not to speak was to leave the world in total darkness. This late invention speaks on this wise: "We Liberalists are not so anxious to endorse you Baptists as we are for you Baptists to endorse us." Liberalism never was at all liberal toward Baptists, but never ceases its cries for us to endorse many things at war with our quickened consciences. It is the TRICK of the age, and was gotten up for one of two purposes, viz.: Either to seduce the Baptists from the faith from which Roman Catholics tried in vain to drive us by murdering our millions; or it was intended to slur us because we will not and can not endorse other denominations as churches of Christ. It is masked ERROR, and its business is to destroy what dungeons, stakes, fires, imprisonment and deaths in every horrid form failed to do, and that after a vigorous war of unrelenting cruelty for more than a thousand years.

Satan manages all these things, transforming himself into an angel of light, and has never yet failed to unite the world against the doctrines of Paul. Baptists teach, and always have taught, beginning with John the Baptist, that there is but ONE line of faith and practice, and all else are of men. It is utter ignorance, nonsense and depraved foolishness to talk about Catholics, Methodists and Baptists all being churches of Christ--to talk of Mormon, Campbellites and Universalists being New Testament churches, sisters to the church which was at Jerusalem. Two denominations differing in CARDINAL doctrines CAN NOT be one and the same; and if one is a church of Christ the other is not. If a Methodist society is a Church of Christ, the Baptist church is not, for we reject their baby membership, their sprinkling and their "Episcopal form of government," to say nothing of forty other differences between us. It is simply folly in the Methodists to pretend to claim us as a church of Christ, seeing we utterly reject most all they teach; and, in fact, such a proposition is not only ridiculous, but savors of great inconsistency.

The doctrine of pardon, the doctrine of baptism and the doctrine of church government being FUNDAMENTAL doctrines, and these doctrines, as taught by the denominations of the day being unlike the teaching of Paul on the same subject, causes that sect to fall short of being a church of Christ. So if sprinkling is not the baptism practiced by John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and the apostles; and if baby membership is contrary to the teachings of the gospel, and if men must be truly saved before they are ready for baptism or church membership, then those denominations who practice these things are not churches of Christ.

But it is the pompous boast of Liberalism that all these societies are churches of Christ, differ as much as they may from each other or from the word of God. Liberalists say "sprinkling," "pouring," or immersion is baptism. The gospel knows but one baptism, and if immersion is gospel baptism then nothing else is. Liberalism says A BABE may be baptized, A SEEKER may be baptized, and a truly converted man may be baptized; but the gospel knows of but ONE subject for baptism, and if that subject is a converted soul then no one else is. So this false friendship, in attempting to show charity to men, has endorsed the errors of men. Christ had charity for men, but not for their errors. So, of Stephen and of Paul. Their hearts yearned with unquenchable love for the souls of men, but they preferred to die rather than show one particle of charity to their errors. The gospel is full of love to the souls of men, but never yet showed the least resemblance of allowance for the errors of its subjects.

It is the greatest blunder of this or any age to endorse a Liberalism that espouses errors just for the sake of a union; for such a union will yet end in riot. It is the gravest move that Satan was ever allowed to make against the Gospel of all grace. No man can serve Christ by fellowshipping a doctrine not of Christ. Charity is for men, but not for their unscriptural doctrines; and the Liberalism that feigns fellowship for the diverse teachings of the many sects is the most marvelous monstrosity ever allowed to deal with the sons of men. It is meaner than downright Paganism, for it attempts to cover up and to shield ACKNOWLEDGED errors. Now, in view of all this, who can not admire the conduct of Baptists in past ages, enjoying the most sublime charity for men, but dying by the millions rather than endorse known and acknowledged errors. To this day they should know no compromise, but denounce the errors

of Christendom as readily as they would the superstitions and idolatries of heathendom.

If this vaunting benevolence wishes to show us any favor, it has it in its power to honor us as it never honored any people. Let it concede that Baptists have in past ages, and do to this day, teach the following great doctrines, which make up the weight and substance of the whole Bible. They are as follows: 1. The total ruin of men in the fall. 2. The sovereignty of the Holy Spirit in conversion. 3.

Salvation ALONE

by Faith in Christ. 4. Baptism ALONE for the regenerate. 5. Baptism ALONE by immersion. 6. Church membership ALONE for the immersed believer. 7. Church government ALONE by the whole membership. If these Liberalists are fond of showing us courtesies, let them do what is easy to do and hard not to do, and that is, let them be so magnanimous as to confess Baptists taught these doctrines 1500 years before the "branches" of the church of Christ had formed a bud. Get a Liberalist to confess these things, will you? Many of them grow angry at the thought of giving us such hoary honors, and at once strike out our history and take up the Catholic church with which to run back to the Apostle's day. No well informed Baptist expects anything at the hands of this modern church-making and church-trying monopoly. Who hates immersion worse than the man who demands of us to acknowledge his sprinkling? If Liberalism is truly charitable why will it not allow Baptists to enjoy their conscientious views on the subject of the Lord's Supper instead of persecuting us to the death because of the unanswerable defense of our faith and practices? Liberalism is in many respects the most uncharitable thing of this age, and it is high time these facts were clearly understood.

Our enemies filled all Europe with blood because they hated our doctrines; and martyrs by the million have died because they loved our doctrines more than the applause of men. O read our wonderful history to attest the statement just made. Hence, for the various so-called churches of the times to take the one half of the Pope's doctrines, without giving him credit, and then run to us Baptists to press upon us to endorse them after having shed rivers of blood in opposing them, is the wiliest scheme ever devised by the bickering hates and proselyting jealousy of the 19th century.

Just let the gospel refuse to fall in line and shout praises to the seven different faiths on which seven different churches are based, and the Liberalists of the day are the first to stone him who dares to defend such a gospel.

Again: What honors this blubbering benevolence could do the Pope of Rome if it were their business to GIVE, rather than to receive honors from others. How consistently they could credit "His Holiness" for having furnished them more than half of all they teach. For be it told over and over and announced from time to time that "baby membership," "sprinkling and pouring," "baptismal salvation," "partial depravity," "falling from grace" and "an undemocratic church government," are all Roman Catholic doctrines.

Let such as teach these doctrines, if they wish to make a flourish of their much paraded Liberalism, call upon His Holiness and say, ''Father Pope, we thank thee for all those convenient doctrines invented by thy wisdom and kept alive for our coming in spite of the heretics who denounced them and died of holy stubbornness rather than submit. Even so, Holy Mother church, for so it seemed good in thy sight to put away a foe common to us both and thus preserve the doctrines by which we are so closely allied to each other and to you."

No doubt in my mind Methodists, Presbyterians, Campbellites and various other denominations very much like them, have in their midst many truly regenerate men and women, whom God has saved IN SPITE of their printed doctrines; but they are as destitute of a gospel communion and a divinely appointed church polity, as is the Order of Odd Fellows; for if you miss these things you miss them clear, since the gospel accepts no such thing as a substitute for truth, or a substitute for obedience. Millions of men are therefore wasting their lives upon the dogmas of the Pope, and which being renewed in heart as we confess many of them are, their souls will be "saved so as by fire," but all such "works" as defending the Pope's inventions will be burned up in that day when Popery shall pass into the abyss, extracting in

its fall every "lie" it has furnished the various Protestant denominations of this or any other country. It will yet become patent that the errors of Christendom came from the "Man of Sin," and all truth through the millions of martyrs who died that IT might live.

In fact, it is difficult to tell how much all other denominations are indebted to us for the pure and saving doctrines of the gospel. CONVERTED MEMBERSHIP, BELIEVER'S IMMERSION and a DEMOCRATIC CHURCH GOVERNMENT, would have been lost from the world, but for Baptists who held these views through past ages, back to the apostles. The war was between Catholics and Baptists, and when you find grounds of difference between Baptists and other denominations of this land, they are the very doctrines that divided Baptists and Roman Catholics long, long, before other denominations had their existence! And anything a Methodist, Presbyterian or Campbellite can do to harmonize Baptists and Catholics, only makes them ridiculous in the eyes of a discriminating world. For instance, a Methodist will "sprinkle a babe" out of respect to a Catholic doctrine, but will immerse, out of respect to a Baptist doctrine; a Presbyterian will take a "babe into his church" according to the practice of the Roman Catholics centuries before his church was set up, but will also receive a converted adult into his church according to the practice of Baptists; a Campbellite will baptize a subject in order to save him, according to the usage of Catholics many centuries past, and he will also receive into his church one whom Baptists immersed because he was saved. So if you wish to find Catholic and Baptist doctrines mixed ill every way conceivable, just acquaint yourselves with the multitude of churches that have, since Martin Luther's day, taken their stand somewhere along the line between Roman Catholics and Baptists, and you will find anything that prolific invention and crazed fancy can foist upon the world.

Of course the CHURCH MAKERS that can take Catholic doctrines and Baptist doctrines and mix them so as to stick, are the very doctors to insist on Baptists taking a dose of compromise. But strange as it may seem to their generous souls, neither Catholics nor true Baptists have ever accepted any such treatment.

Hence in attempting to harmonize the "Church of Christ" with the "great Apostacy" these persons have but unharmonized themselves and caused devils to rejoice over the folly of the professed friends of the Lord Jesus.

And yet this is the work of Religious Liberalism, to unite the Catholic world to the Baptist world, but putting the Protestant world right between the two, and cause truth and error to be married to each other, by the love-making festivities of a set of meddling compromisers!

If the prophets and apostles of old had had some such a compromise they need not have died.

"O that the Baptists could be induced," says this Committee on Conciliation, "to nullify their extreme contrariness by adopting this potent peace measure"--which loves all and hates none which believes everything in general and nothing in particular.

As for me, I would rather see my Baptist brethren weltering in martyr's blood than have them embrace the many conflicting faiths of the day and call them by the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Learn wisdom, will you, from the depths of ages as she cries: "Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel than that ye have received, let him be ACCURSED! Having treated this grave and important subject in this fundamental way thus far, we now turn to some pointed specifications.

The evils of this monstrous Cleverness are many, some of which we will group as follows: 1. It slightly esteems many of the most important doctrines of the Bible.

2. It gives prominence to many of the most fearful errors of the day.

3. It causes the Lord to withdraw his gracious presence.

4. It provokes to wrath as a penalty for compromising away his truth.

5. It retards the growth of the soul that sells the truth to buy the applause of men.

6. It greatly hinders the work of converting the nations to God.

7. It has, no doubt, drowned thousands of souls in perdition, that rebukes and faithful teachings would have saved.

8. It removes the grandest opportunities afforded in life to cultivate the noblest heroism.

First, then, "Religious Liberalism" ignores much of the word of God. It opposes those who hold to the word of God; for all the "isms" of the day are already at war with the pure doctrines of the gospel of all grace.

Methodism, Presbyterianism and Campbellism can walk together pretty well, for they much agree in rejecting many Bible doctrines. When a Baptist becomes love-sick for these "branches" of Christ that slight the doctrines of Christ, that Baptist learns to attach very little importance to these all-important principles. Religious Liberalism, in fact, hurts other denominations but little, but it kills a Baptist outright, and wherever practiced a few years, removes Baptist churches and surrenders the field occupied by them into the hands of this precious Liberalism that so effectually destroys them. All this fearful mischief began when the Baptist sought to please his Pedobaptist neighbors by refusing to contend for what he honestly believed to be true.

So Liberalism does not mean that truth must be so liberal as to accept error, and Satan well knew this when he held thousands from the Roman Catholic church and set them half way between Catholics and Baptists, through them intending to stop the former fightings and get up a grand feast of HUSHMEATS, thereby giving the victory to the "gates of hell" after they had stormed the city of truth from the year after Christ up to the rise and racket of Martin Luther.

Secondly. When one becomes a Liberalist he is forced from that day forward to endorse many of the errors of the accommodating times, in which the polish and finish of all etiquette consists in grace fully yielding every man's conscience to the exercise of that sublime liberty that chooses the church of one's fancy. Yea, Liberalism endorses seven errors in one truth. It has almost ceased to be a question of charity for men, and is mainly a matter of charity for the doctrines of men.

This makes it the incurable leprosy of North American Religiousness. It takes a grand summing up of many fine doctrines to entitle a body to that, highest of all appellations, "A Church of Christ." But Liberalism stands by and sees two denominations destroy wellnigh all there is of each other's doctrines, and yet compliments them both as being New Testament churches. O how Christ is lied on in this world where truth has to be learned from Liberalism.

That species of Religious Liberalism that induces a Baptist to join a Methodist or Campbellite church because there was no Baptist church in that community, makes that man ENDORSE it as a true church of the Lord Jesus. Verily, it doth not yet appear how much ignorance it takes to kill a man. A church of Christ is a body of immersed believers, preaching the same to others, each congregation finding in itself the highest judicial and executive authority on earth, administering from time to time the Lord's Supper to its own members, exhorting them to the spread of the gospel to the end of the earth.

So all those Baptists who are led astray by a silly affection for that sort of Liberalism called Open Communion, in that very act ENDORSES the denomination they thus commune with, and could just as well join it as to commune with it; for where one can "commune" they can always join and be perfectly at home with that body as a church of Christ, as none but the church of Christ can set the Supper.

So all of those good, easy, ignorant Baptists in our midst, who talk so lovingly about the "Sister Denominations" can just as well JOIN them as to make this splendid speech for them; for one sister always was just as much a child of the parent as another. We often find converted men where we do not find a "Church of God," and we have Christian fellowship for all who show they love Jesus, be they among Catholics, Mormons or Methodists; and yet we have for them no church fellowship whatever, because they are so wholly unlike ourselves in doctrines and ordinances. Out of hundreds of denominations on earth, the gospel only finds ONE it calls the "body of Christ."

But Liberalism finds divers different organizations and calls them all the faith of Paul and the

truth of God. It calls them by the flaming name of "Evangelical Alliance" and woe to the Baptist who is silly enough to be tied hand and foot by the Evangelical Alliance. Liberalism speaks of all the "preachers" of the time, as "ministers of the gospel," when many of them preach two gospels for the Pope to where they do one for Christ.

It speaks of the "branches" of the church of God, a thing wholly unknown to the Bible. It claims it is infinitely better to belong to any of these thousand and one churches than to be out in the world, just as though a man was not still out in the world when he is simply in a man-made society. To illustrate, we cheerfully grant, if the Episcopalian church is a church of the New Testament, then the Baptist church is not, and to join a Baptist church would leave the one that joined out in the world. All this sort of clever looseness is used by the Devil to impress the young as they come on, that it does not require any specific teachings to be gospel, nor anything in particular to be a gospel church; and that the gospel in one country is not the gospel in another; or the church of God in One age is not the same as the church of God in another age. So by this sanctified (?) looseness Liberalism teachers a vast amount of religious (?) foolishness, until with all our seeming religious prosperity, there is in fact but little gospel preached today that the Apostle Paul would receive as the doctrine of Christ.

Thirdly. But a third evil of "Religious Liberalism" is in this, that it causes the Lord to withdraw his gracious presence from those that practice such wanton deception. God keeps company with his truth, and just to the extent one forsakes that truth, to that extent he is without the Lord's company. "Lo, I am with you"-WHEN? Answer, when we "teach them to observe all things Christ commanded." The use of God's word secures God's presence, but the use of human traditions drives him away.

God is never present when the teachings of the occasion are at war with his revealed word. Furthermore, God is also present when his ordinances are properly administered. Thousands have even felt his presence when a true believer has been immersed, being "buried with Christ in baptism;" but he was never yet present when a babe was to be "sprinkled," or a "sinner baptized to save him." So it is a Bible doctrine--just to the extent one forsakes the truth of God, just to that extent he withdraws his gracious presence from him. To the Bible reader the history of the Jews for 1,500 years is full of overwhelming proof to this effect.

Fourthly. Nothing is so sure to provoke the wrath of God as the introduction of an evil doctrine. God regards his word as he regards himself, and he regards the "doctrines of devils" as he regards the devils themselves. It was the false doctrines of the Jews that slew them, for God never yet destroyed a people without first looking very closely after their doctrines. Lying, stealing or murder are no more offensive to the Lord than an evil doctrine; for the "traditions of men make void the law of God," whilst murder or adultery cannot do more. To hold to an error since we have the Bible, is a high crime against God, and divided Christendom, as it is today, holds to enough error to sink a world to hell.

The great Head of the church sorely threatened "the church in Pergamos" because they "held to the doctrines of Balaam," also the "doctrines of the Nicolaitans." "Doctrines of devils" are as the devils themselves. When a Baptist becomes so kind to all the religious sects of the age as to let their doctrines sit on one knee of his great benevolent lap, let him look out for a thunderbolt from God; for an evil doctrine is an idol; and he who wreaths his brow with lightnings, and throws his thunders from world to world, will yet shake all "isms" loose and cause them to go howling down to the abyss from whence they came.

The most extravagant sin of the age is to give up the doctrines of the gospel. It took Christ day and night three years and six months to deliver his truth, whilst it required only six hours upon the cross to suffer for sin. "Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ"--"hear ye him," had in it a world of meaning, till for not hearing him, God destroyed a whole nation of Jews. Christ talked himself to death.

It was not what he did, but what he said that killed him. And yet the loose charity of this age, in thousands of cases, will sell Christ's sayings to buy the applause of men. The lowest and least saint in

glory, will be that man who pushed aside the doctrine of Christ and took in its stead a command of man.

There is not a Bible truth to be found but what is bitterly denied by one or more of the so-called churches of this church-making age, and yet Liberalism has a hand of strong fellowship for it all. Christ "came to send a sword" and to "kindle a fire;" but the ideal of this age seems to be to break the sword and put out the fire.

I feel sorry for that community where four different denominations are all in perfect peace and loving quietude, for it is besotted with errors, and if one of the denominations is the "church of God" it shows clearly they are not preaching the gospel they hold, for the truth never will fail to arouse opposition. In that town the church of God is sure to be the FIRST one of the four that will die! for compromised truth of all things brings death most speedily.

If error holds her peace, nothing is lost; but if truth holds her peace, all is lost; and what truth lost, error gained without one struggle. I was once "interviewed" as to becoming pastor of a certain church, and this question was propounded to me by several of the leading ones in the church: "HOW DO YOU GET ALONG WITH OTHER DENOMINATIONS?" I did then and shall ever look upon it as the strangest question ever propounded by mortal man; for to endorse their errors, would be to commit treason against God; and to preach my Sentiments would be direct antagonism to theirs.

"Except two be agreed they CANNOT walk together"--and everybody knows it. If I hold an error and a Methodist brother holds the truth on that subject, his truth is destined to destroy my error, and the sooner the better. If sprinkling his child SAVES it, then my babe that died, went to hell. The Methodists feeling so on this subject are guilty before God, if they hold their peace, for holding their peace will let souls be lost that might be saved. If immersing a man in order to his salvation is the gospel, then I say the Campbellites can not hold their peace a day nor an hour, for if immersion be essential to salvation, as they verily teach, then thousands of Pedobaptists will certainly be lost. So to withhold truth is not only a high crime against God, but the highest crime that can be committed against our fellowman. And for this reason, we believe the wrath of God will certainly be visited against the schemes of this age to make unhallowed peace with divers conflicting faiths. O, my God, make me a "good and faithful minister of Jesus Christ;" help me "earnestly to contend for the faith," so in a dying day I may utter that finest of all human sayings, "I have fought a good fight, I have kept the faith," for only such look forward to a "crown of eternal rejoicing." Let the people ever "try those who say they are Jews and are not, but do lie," by blowing hard the gospel fan against the huge chaff piles of sects and ISMS, till the "floor is thoroughly cleansed."

Fifthly. Religious Liberalism stunts the growth of the child of God, and hushes up the truth to secure the praise of men. The more the Apostles preached the doctrine of the resurrection, so offensive to the Jews, the more the churches of Christ everywhere grew and prospered. But when Judaizing Teachers, the Compromisers of that age, followed the Apostles with their Liberalism, the self same churches dwindled. It is so everywhere, and always, for doctrines make the food of God's people and always of very necessity, go before practice. This is the milk for the babe and the meat for the strong man, whereby they both grow. The church in Jerusalem "continued in the Apostles' doctrine," and as a result the Lord added to it daily the saved. The soul is always lean just in proportion as it has rejected the DOCTRINES of the gospel.

I never yet knew a man that was afraid to speak the whole gospel to become a pillar in the church of God. And when and wherever you find a half-starved soul in Baptist ranks, call for the facts in the case and it will be revealed that that man is in sympathy with all other denominations around him; for a Baptist always hushes down on doctrines just to the extent he falls love sick with other denominations.

Be it known and be it stated in this connection, the world is today indebted to our faithfulness for a "CONVERTED CHURCH;" for Catholicism brings all into the church, whilst babes, and they, of course, grow up in sin, till the world in this way is all crowded right into the church without being regenerated.

Being in the church and believing it is the CHURCH THAT SAVES them, of course a change of heart is never once thought of or mentioned by the Catholics after the babe is, by baptism, brought into the "Catholic" church--which in the Bible is called the "Mother of Harlots," and many other hard and dreadful names.

So infant baptism is the PILLAR of Popery. It is also the master LIE of earth. Now if Methodists and Presbyterians, with others who hold to "baby membership" and "infant sprinkling," will just HOLD to it, it will soon put them right where it put and kept the Catholics for more than a thousand years past. If they believed sprinkling the babe into the church SAVED it, then it will never need to be saved by repentance and faith in Christ. So if all the Pedobaptists of this country will just stick to "BABY MEMBERSHIP" they will soon have no other sort, and their children will grow up with no other religion but what they received by being "sprinkled" or "poured" into the church. So that leaves the Baptists through all the ages past, and in the age present, to stand all ALONE in contending for a CONVERTED church--a church whose members were regenerated in answer to prayer and faith. Doubtless, many Pedobaptists are truly converted men and women, but they had to "go back on their infant baptism" before they got it. When they grow up and learn that "being sprinkled when babes and brought into the church thereby" still leaves them to repent and be saved AFTER they come to years of accountability, they then ENDORSE BAPTIST TEACHINGS. So they were saved when babes according to Catholic doctrines of "infant membership" and saved, again when adults, according to the faith and practice of Baptists in all ages. The truth is, Baptists are right, all others being judges; for sooner or later, one way or another, Baptist doctrines are received as gospel doctrines by the various Protestant denominations of the land. All others endorse us, but we cannot endorse any--THEREFORE WE ARE SELFISH (?). Now right here is the trouble; they endorse us not as a matter of politeness or charity but because we have the TRUTH and for that reason they ought to endorse us.

But we cannot espouse them because differing from us we can not regard them as holding the truth on any point in which we teach different sentiments. It was not CHARITY for us but TRUTH we hold, that made them endorse us, whilst it is not a lack of charity on our part, but the preaching of error on their part that prevents us from espousing them.

And yet many Baptists, timid because they are ignorant, finding good Pedobaptists fellowshipping Baptist views, at once try to fellowship them on the grounds of cleverness and general neighborship among denominations. And in so doing arrest the progress of truth in their neighborhood and the growth of their own souls, in "grace and in knowledge." It was this that arrested the growth of Paul's Hebrew brethren, for they got to mixing the gospel and Judaism. It was showing fellowship to the surrounding nations that caused the Jews to decline, till they became so weak they readily fell a prey to those whose favor they courted.

The gospel compromises with nothing, but demands everything to surrender to it. It fellowships no one of the million religions on the globe today, but demands of them all an unconditional surrender in honor to the claims of the one model church Christ established on the earth more than 1800 years ago.

O, my Baptist brethren, betake you to the doctrine, to the DOCTRINE, yea to the DOCTRINES, for that soul will perish away who will not feed on the doctrines of the New Testament.

Sixth. But now let us consider another evil of Liberalism. It fearfully retards the work of converting the nations to God. For instance, take a "heathen," ship him over here where the big quarrel is. Let him hear patiently all there is of seven DIFFERENT teachings.

1. Let him hear all there is of the Pope's plan of saving men.

2. Let him hear all there is of the doctrines of the Universalists.

3. Then let him hear the views of the Episcopalians.

4. After that let him hear the gospel of Mormonism.

5. Then listen to Methodism.

6. Then to the Campbellites.

7. Then let him hear from the "Sect" everywhere spoken against.

Now here is a clear presentation of the whole matter as to the way modern Liberalism HINDERS the salvation of the nations. So what would this poor heathen say after hearing it all. He doubtless would say this is a HELL of confusion and the professed friends of the gospel have put me in it! But what would Liberalism say? It would say, "Most any one of these plans for saving men is good!"

Liberalism would say, "Though these doctrines differ very widely from each other, yet if you are sincere in the belief and practice of any one of them it would lead you into glory."

Then what would the poor heathen say of American Liberalism? Convulsed with disgust at the thought, he would declare Liberalism is the mammoth deception of earth and with vengeance in his heart curse it back to lying Beelzebub, whence it came.

Now there are many doctrines that damn men, but there is but one doctrine that saves men.

When Paul went to a heathen nation to preach the gospel of Christ he did not find one thing in that heathen religion that he ENGRAFTED into his preaching and made it a PART of his story to them; for the Bible utterly destroys every religion on the whole earth and then builds on its own foundation. And that man who does up a town professing to preach what Paul preached and then weaves in a little of every denomination's faith catering to the "popular demands" of this unfaithful age, had better fall into a sinkhole on his way there and die unheard of, rather than bring in "damnable heresies" that "drown men's souls in perdition."

It is a fact that a man cannot so instruct a soul so as to reach its salvation till he throws away all plans SAVE ONE. Hence Paul taught, If any man preached another gospel than the ONE he preached, let that man be accursed. He positively forbids any saint giving such a one Godspeed or even to receive him into his house.

But again. Let seven men leave our shores for a foreign land, and with a Bible in his hand let each take a stand some where among the four hundred million of Chinamen, to teach the poor heathen the way to glory. Let the Catholic teach one community that they will get there by observing the "seven sacraments of the church of Rome"--which are "baptism," "confirmation," the "eucharist," "penance," "extreme unction," "orders" and "matrimony." Let the Universalist teach another community all will be saved whether or no. Let the Jew teach another all will be saved who are circumcised and offer up the blood of beasts. Let the moralist teach another community they will be saved by obeying the ten commandments. Let the Methodist sprinkle all the babes of another community, explaining to them how "it brings them into the church" and so saves them. Let the Campbellite teach another community, "no baptism no salvation." Then let the Baptist take his stand and teach all in his precinct they are lost and ruined in sin; tell them of infinite grace; exhort them as accountable beings to repent with a Godly sorrow for their sins, to believe in Jesus Christ with all their hearts unto the saving of their souls through the "renewing of the Holy Ghost;" tell the saved to be immersed, expressive of the "burial and resurrection of Christ" their only Savior, as well as expressive of "their death to sin" and "their life to holiness" of heart; form these immersed believers into a church, leaving them to rule by the voice of the people, observing the Lord's Supper among themselves, using all diligence to live Godly and sober in this life, making the salvation of other souls the business of all life to come. Let these men stay there for a life time and each widen his circle and add circle to circle and--at the end of a hundred years what will be the result! I will tell you, just the thing we have today in America, over which sanctimonious Liberalism sheds its clever smiles and calls it all of God! We bless God that the teachings of the Baptists are adopted by many whose "creeds" are to the contrary, until but few people in this country can be found who boldly and squarely deny, "BAPTISTS

TEACH A SAVING GOSPEL." Baptists are right, others being our judges.

The chief complaint is not so much against WHAT WE TEACH as it is what we do NOT teach. We teach a converted man is a fit subject for baptism and no man on earth denies it; but we do NOT teach "infants" or "seekers" are fit subjects for baptism and the Liberalists lose all patience with us BECAUSE WE DON'T. We do teach immersion is gospel baptism and there is not a man who is sincere and well informed that will deny it; but we do NOT teach "sprinkling" Or "poring" for gospel baptism and it is this "not" that provokes the cruel hostilities of these sweet spirited Liberalists. We do teach that immersed believers formed into a church under democratic government, are allowed the privileges of the Lord's Supper and no man in the College of modern Charity will dare deny it; but we do NOT teach an unconverted or an unbaptized person can eat thereof, and it is this unpardonable NOT that makes the Liberalists persecute us with every unpleasant name and epithet that the English language, thus far, has been able to supply.

Now the heathen nations stand by and listen to all these furious contradictions of christendom, and witness the SPIRIT of religious wranglings that rises to a furious pitch at certain times, till many of them turn away and stagger into hell at the sight of scenes now going on in far famed christendom. No marvel that 1800 years has barely torched the midnight darkness of heathendom with a light here and there; for where ONE rises up to preach the gospel, MANY rise up to unpreach it, and thus leave the world of idolators that surrounds christendom to judge our gospel to be, of all things most selfcontradictory and self-destroying.

Seventh. But we come now to announce as another evil of Liberalism; it creates the most wanton unfaithfulness. It sees men believing what it, in many cases, knows will let go to ruin and yet having avowed liberal sentiments and adopted a "set of let-alone habits" it proposed to befriend the man by letting him be lost forever, rather than be so unkind as to correct his error.

For instance a Liberalist has a splendid set of opportunities to show his "Universalist" brother that it is one of Satan's greediest LIES to believe that all will be saved; but restrained by this fine charity that rebukes no doctrine and is too polite to wake a man up and tell him his house is on fire, he just lets a soul sink right down to eternal ruin because he is married to the charity of unfaithfulness. O thou MEANEST of friendship, go thy way and leave me to the faithful mercies of a man who will wake me up at midnight to rebuke my sin and keep me from rest till he has redeemed my soul from the pit.

That Pedobaptist that will stand by and see a SINNER go down into the water to find salvation in the act of baptism, fully believing in his heart that soul is deceived and will certainly be lost, is a murderer whose guilt cannot be measured; for hand in hand he enters the ring of Christian Liberalism and engages a solemn hush as to each other's prospects for glory, whilst they combine to slay the man who dares say sprinkling a babe to save it or immersing an adult to save him will certainly let them both go to hell if not delivered from the awful lies.

As a Baptist, I have had more opposition from Religious Liberalism than from any other one source, or all others combined.

We believe a man is saved solely by GRACE THROUGH FAITH and that independent of any act, deed, or works. Hence we can but tell the sprinkled sinner, the immersed sinner, the sinner in the church, the sinner at the Lord's Table, the sinner keeping the ten commandments, the sinner keeping the law of Moses, or the sinner keeping the seven commandments of the Pope, that they are all sure to be lost if they do not quit insulting God by their good WORKS and trust alone in Jesus for salvation.

Baptists can do nothing else, for they are the only people on this globe who have a sinner REFRAIN FROM ALL HIS WORKS till regenerated by the Holy Spirit through faith in Christ; his baptism, church joining, taking of the eucharist, and every good work, the Bible enjoins upon men, being made to FOLLOW his change of heart and in no case allowed to go before it in order "TO HELP God to save."

In fact there are two doctrines on the earth as to saving men--one is by WORKS and the other by GRACE. The Catholics taught the first and the Baptists the last named doctrine for more than a thousand years before Liberalism had learned to mix the two and by mixing them forty ways make forty new sorts of churches all DIFFERING and yet all right.

Eighth. But now to the last thought. The disposition of the times to seek popularity and to cheerfully allow all sorts of faiths and practices, is fast destroying the noble courage of a by-gone and better day.

Opposition makes men, whereas a cowering surrender to that we believe to be wrong, sinks our manhood and makes us mere things in society. The grandeur of the Prophets and Apostles as, at times, they stood ALL ALONE battling for truth, is just simply beyond description.

Thousands today love this abominable Liberalism, just because they cherish the thought in their hearts that it RELIEVES them from fearful contentions for the truth. To love a lie may be easier than dying for a truth, but it is not half so grand.

The grandest man on earth today is that man who cultivates every religious conviction; goes through life fearlessly speaking the truth of God, because he loves it more dear than life itself. Amen and Amen.

The Conclusion.

The prophesies of the Old Bible, and the New Testament doctrines and prophecies, know TWO, and ONLY two opposing religious organizations. They cover the whole ground on the one hand with the "church of God," and the "Mother of Harlots" on the other. The "church Christ built on the rock" that is yet to break "the gates of hell" and "fill the whole earth" as the resistless "stone of prophecy" is composed of the (one) "church which was at Jerusalem," the (one) "church which was at Rome," the "seven churches in Asia," with all others mentioned in the New Testament, and constituted as LOCAL bodies, here and there by the Apostles; and ALL LIKE THEM that have been on the earth from that to the present day, to the utter exclusion of societies UNLIKE them.

At least three things are ESSENTIAL to constitute a New Testament church: 1.

Its members must be "children of God" by the "renewing of the Holy Spirit" THROUGH PRAYER AND FAITH. 2.

Its members must have been immersed AFTER they were "sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise," EXPRESSIVE of "the burial and resurrection of Christ," as well as of their "death to sin" and "renewal to holiness of heart," and the immersion performed by one AUTHORIZED by the church in Jerusalem, or—ONE LIKE IT. 3.

It must be Scriptural in its Government, being complete as an organization within itself, neither appealing to, nor ruled by any other corporate body on the earth, making no laws whatever, but enforcing those of Christ, and that by the voice of its members in common council.

To say the least, a body cannot be a New Testament church and lack EITHER of the three points above, and if it lacks ALL, as many of them do when they stick strictly to their written creeds and confessions, then they are hopelessly ignorant as to even the first principles of a gospel church.

In the ages past there have been a people holding to and practicing the doctrines of the three points above specified and today that people are known by the name of BAPTISTS. They have had DIFFERENT NAMES in different ages and countries, but ONE FAITH in all ages and throughout the habitable globe.

The CATHOLICS have ever been their opposite in faith and practice, GOING OUT FROM US and setting up to themselves in the third century after Christ, growing more and more hopeless and more and more desperate in their opposition to us, clear on to the fifteenth century after Christ. They are foretold in the Bible, the "Epistles of the New Testament," and the "Revelation by John" and fearfully

characterized as "Babylon," "The great Whose," "drunken with the blood of Saints;" and the "Man of Sin," the "Son of Perdition," "The False Prophet" and the "Beast" I aver and affirm nothing is plainer in the Word of God than that the "church of God" and the "great Apostasy" should go on down through the ages in raging conflicts, the holy saints" using no weapons of war but TRUTH, whilst the sons of the "Man of sin" and the daughters of the "great Whore" were to use the combined forces of CIVIL LAW and every Religious despotism formed by cruel hates, wielding sword, fire and dungeons to extinguish the people of God's own choice; but that the church of God should survive them all, whilst the great enemy with paralyzed and abated force should continue his opposition, changing tactics to suit the emergency.

Those two marvelous forces are ON THE EARTH TODAY, and whilst they occupy utter extremes, the poles apart in the religious world, all this vast distance between them has been filled in since the days of Luther, and is today occupied by every conceivable phase and change of denominations whose names have become LEGION. But extremes, one way, are found in the Baptists, and extremes, the other way, are found in the Catholics, whilst Episcopalians, Congregationalists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists and Campbellites have spread themselves over the MEDIUM ground BETWEEN teaching Catholic doctrines and Baptist doctrines mixed in different proportions and ways without number.

So the whole matter resolves itself into the following shape: Baptist Doctrines at war with Catholic Doctrines, or the Truth of Jesus in conflict with the "traditions" of the Pope. And there is not a debate in Christendom today but what resolves itself into that shape, Baptist doctrines at war with Catholic doctrines.

Brethren, the time has come to put the controversy of the religious world right on this ground, and in every debate between us and the denominations around us, just ask our Campbellite and Pedobaptist friends what part of Popery are they willing to defend, and what part of the truth of God as we have held it in the past ages they are willing to receive as the gospel of Christ? If any one reading this Tract of mine thinks that I am wofully mistaken in all this, or that he and his people are fearfully misrepresented by such a classification as the above, let me say, in all candor, I will allow him the chances of either a written or oral discussion of all the matter as set forth in this Essay on any point and to any extent to which he may feel himself called upon in high and honorable discussion to review the issues between us.

"The Conclusion" was copied from the book; LANDMARKISM by J. M. Pendleton 1899; reprinted 1996 by Landmark Media Productions, Inc.; 4311 Peeler Bend Rd, Suite B Benton, AR 72019. http://www.gospelweb.net/OldTimersWorks/judsontaylor.htm http://baptisthistoryhomepage.com/hall.memoirs.chapter5.html From Great Old Timers Index Back to Shayne's Home Page

[1]

Also this interesting note from the "Baptist History Homepage Former Spiritual Giants in Western Kentucky News & Truths, 1931 By H. Boyce Taylor."

"Forty-five or more years ago Judson Taylor (a brother of the Editor's father) read an essay before the Baptist preachers of West Kentucky and West Tennessee on 'Religious Liberalism.' At that time Judson Taylor was pastor in Clinton or Fulton (he pastored both churches) and my father, W. C. Taylor, was pastor in Mayfield.

'There were giants in the earth in those days.' Those were the days of the stalwarts among West Kentucky Baptists.

Baptists carried a chip on their shoulders then: now they carry a sugar-teat in their vanity case or compact.

Among the giants of those days were J. B. Moody, J. N. Hall, J. H. Milburn, G. L. Ellis, R. W. Mahan, W. F. Lowe, T. H. Pettit, Judson Taylor, W. C. Taylor, and others."

[2] Accessed 2014 at - http://www.gospelweb.net/OldTimersWorks/judsontaylor.htm

Standing Fast In The Truth "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again in the yoke of bondage." Gal. 5:1.

"Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?" Gal. 4:21 The heart of the Apostle Paul was broken because the Galatians, among whom he had spent much hard and patient labor, had been beguiled by certain legalistic teachers, and had been led away from the simplicity of the truth as it is in Christ Jesus. In his epistles to the Galatians, which he wrote to correct such a grievous error, he spoke in no uncertain terms.

He called the Galatians FOOLISH in being misled from the truth.

"O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth., before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you," Gal. 3:1.

And he also said to them: Â "I marvel that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel," Gal. 1:6.

And in his denunciation of the legalistic teachers who had confused them he did not use sugar-coated words.

He said of them, "I would that they were even cut off which trouble you," Gal. 5:12.

He also pronounced an anathema upon them. He said, "If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that which ye have received, let him BE ACCURSED," Gal. 1:9.

Many of the brethren think that I have gone off the deep end in my opposition to the preaching of the law among us today.

Some are greatly offended because I have come out so plainly against the legalistic doctrine which is advocated by so many of our preachers today. It is not I, but those preachers, who have departed from the truth. I am standing just where I stood 40 years ago. I am standing where practically all of the Association brethren stood when I lined up with them 36 years ago. I left the ranks of the Convention people because they were seeking to follow the Seventh Day Adventists. I read the writings of the leading Association brethren and talked with some of them and I found out that they did not preach tithing, so I decided I was with the wrong bunch, and left the Convention people and joined with the Association group, and they paid me more than the tithing group.

As an example as to who has changed I could name a certain Association preacher who 10 years ago denounced the Convention church in the same town where he lives for advocating tithing. Now he is on the bandwagon with the tithing preachers, and that same Convention Church now has a pastor who is opposed to the preaching of tithing to the churches. So who has departed from the truth? It is not I, but those who think I have gone off the deep end.

Now just what did Paul have in mind when he told the Galatians to not be entangled again with the YOKE OF BONDAGE? He was speaking of the law.

This is seen by reading Gal. 4:21-31: Â "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

Which things are an allegory; for these are the two covenants; the one from mount Sinai, WHICH GENDERETH TO BONDAGE, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children . . . Now we brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise.

But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

Nevertheless what sayeth the scriptures?

Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the free. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. STAND FAST therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage," Gal. 4:21-5:1.

From the above passage we see that Agar, the bondwoman, represented the covenant which was given at Mount Sinai, which Paul said genders to bondage. So when he admonished them to not be entangled again with the yoke of BONDAGE, he was admonishing them to not become entangled again with the things which belong to the old covenant which was given at Mount Sinai. He asked them "Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, DO YOU NOT HEAR THE LAW?" v. 21. Then he went on to show that the law covenant which was given at Mount Sinai brings BONDAGE.

Now let us see something about the law concerning tithing. We shall find that it was given at Mount Sinai, and was only given to the children of Israel.

"And all the tithe of the land, whether the seed of the land, or the fruit of the tree, it is the Lord's: it is holy unto the Lord . . . And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord . . . These are the commandments, which the Lord commanded Moses for THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL IN MOUNT SINAI," Lev. 27:34.

From this we see that the command to give tithes was a part of the covenant given to Israel in Mount Sinai. In Gal. 4:24 Paul makes it plain that Abraham's bondwoman represented the covenant which was given at Mount Sinai, and he said it gendereth to BONDAGE. Lev. 27:30-34 makes it plain that the command concerning tithing was given in Mount Sinai.

That which was given at Mount Sinai belongs to the old covenant, and genders to bondage, Gal. 4:24.

The command given to Israel to tithe was given in Mount Sinai, Lev. 27:30-34.

Therefore the command to tithe belongs to the old covenant, and it genders to bondage.

But someone says that tithing was practiced before the law was given to Israel. So was fleshly circumcision practiced before the giving of the law on Mount Sinai. See Gen. 17:9-25.

In Gal. 5:3 Paul makes it plain that fleshly circumcision was part of the law.

"I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a DEBTOR TO DO THE WHOLE LAW." Not only does this show that circumcision was part of the law, but it shows that when a person obligates himself to keep one part of the law he thereby obligates himself to keep all the law.

Circumcision was practiced before the law. See Gen. 17:9-25.

But Gal. 5:3 shows that circumcision was a part of the law.

Therefore, the practicing of circumcision before the law was given at Sinai does not prove that circumcision was not a part of the law.

Moreover: Abraham paid tithes before the law given at Mount Sinai. Gen. 14:20.

But the command to Israel to pay tithes was given at Mount Sinai, and the old covenant is connected with Mount Sinai. Lev. 27:30-34 and Gal. 4:24.

Therefore, the obligation to tithe was part of the covenant given to Israel at Mount Sinai, which Paul says genders to bondage. ***** The obligation to tithe was placed upon Israel at Mount Sinai.

Paul said that the covenant given at Mount Sinai genders to bondage. Gal. 4:24.

Therefore to place the obligation to practice tithing upon the New Testament believer is to place him under a yoke of bondage.

When some were trying to place the Gentile believers under the law Peter said, "Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear," Acts 15:10.

So to put the Gentiles under any part of the law is to TEMPT GOD. Is it pleasing to tempt God? Well this is exactly what the preachers are doing who place the obligation to tithe upon the believers today.

They are tempting God. They shall see when they stand before the judgment seat of Christ that they have been building wood, hay and stubble, to be heaped up in the day of the Lord Jesus.

The word "Tithe" is found only three times in the four gospels. It is found in Matt. 23:23. It is found in Luke 11:42 and Luke 18:9-12. I ask the reader to read these passages and see if Jesus was not speaking directly to the unbelieving, hypocritical Pharisees who were under the LAW. In Matt. 23:23 Jesus said: "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For ye pay tithes of mint, anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the LAW (See this word), judgment, mercy, faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone."

Here Jesus was not speaking to His disciples, but to the unbelieving Pharisees, who were under the LAW. But the believer is not under the LAW: "For ye are not under the LAW, but under GRACE:" Rom. 6:14.

It is a gross misapplication of the word of God to take what was spoken to people under the law and make the application to people who are not under the law, but under GRACE. "We know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the LAW:” Rom.3:19.

It does not say that to those under GRACE. It looks like the tithing preachers do not know that yet. In Matt. 23:23 Jesus had tithing as a matter of the LAW. Let the tithing teacher find where Jesus ever said to His disciples "These ought ye to have done" speaking of tithes.

He just cannot find it for Jesus never spoke such words to His disciples. One man said he would not condemn what Jesus commended. Neither will I. But where is the place Jesus ever commended the giving of tithes in His disciples? Where can it be found that Jesus ever used the word "Tithe" when He was talking to His disciples? The tithers have been asked to find the place and they have to admit that there is no such place to be found in the ministry of Jesus. Since they cannot find where Jesus ever commanded His disciples that they should observe tithing, then the proof cannot be found that the teaching of tithing is in the great commission.

The great commission reads: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to OBSERVE ALL THINGS WHATSOEVER I HAVE COMMANDED YOU." To obligate the churches to practice tithing the preachers will have to find where JESUS TAUGHT HIS DISCIPLES TO OBSERVE TITHING. This they cannot find. Therefore Jesus did not commission His church to teach those they baptize to observe tithing.

We do not have to assume that Jesus taught them to observe the Lord's supper, (Luke 22:19-20). We do not have to assume that he taught them to BAPTIZE, Matthew 28:18-20. But when it comes to the observance of tithing preachers can only get it into the great commission by ASSUMPTION. I ask is it safe and sound policy to go on assumption, when there is no command to do that thing? Does this not lead us away from the word of God to human reasoning, which is fertile soil for modernism? In 1 Peter 4:11 we read: "If any man speak, let him speak as the the oracles of God." In I Tim. 6:3-5 Paul said: "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; he is proud, KNOWING NOTHING, but doting about questions, and strife of words, whereby cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself."

I asked a certain tithing preacher if he could answer what I had in my book on "Freedom from the Law and Spiritual Growth," He said maybe not, but he had found out that he could get more money by preaching tithing, and he was going to continue preaching it.

This looks like he thinks that gain is godliness. I would like to ask the question, is God more concerned about how much money we raise, than He is in the way we raise the money?

But some say I think it is a good system to follow. If that is so, then why did not Jesus teach His disciples that it would be a good system to follow? It is not a good system to follow, because it is legalism, and we are not under the law.

It is not a good system to follow because Israel failed under the system, and brought a curse upon that whole nation.

In Mal. 3:7-11 we read, "Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and HAVE NOT KEPT THEM. Return unto me and I will return unto you saith the Lord of Hosts.

(This title is only used in connection with Israel) But ye said, Wherein shall we return? Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and in offerings. Ye are cursed with a CURSE; for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.

(ISRAEL)

Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now wherewith, saith the LORD OF HOSTS, (THE EXPRESSION LORD OF HOSTS IS NEVER CONNECTED WITH THE CHURCHES) if I will not open the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your (Israel's) ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, said the Lord of host. And all nations shall call you (Israel) blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land."

Anyone should be able to see that these words were addressed to the nation of Israel, and not to the churches. They should also see that the command to Israel to tithe brought a curse upon the whole nation. This is enough proof that tithing is a command which belongs to the law, and that it brought a curse. Let us read Gal. 3:10, "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, CURSED is every one that continueth not in ALL THINGS which are written in the book OF THE LAW TO DO THEM." The nation of Israel did not continue to keep that part of the law which commanded tithing. They had robbed God in TITHES and offering (animal sacrifices, see Mal. 1:78), and God had cursed that whole nation. Why? Because the law of tithing brings a curse on all who do not keep all the law. No wonder Peter said, "Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither OUR FATHERS nor we are able to bear?" Acts 15:12.

Failure to keep the commandment concerning tithing had brought a CURSE on the whole nation of Israel, Mal. 3:8-9.

That which brings a CURSE belongs to the works of the LAW. "For as many as are of the works of the LAW ARE UNDER THE CURSE: for it is written CURSED is everyone that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them," Gal. 3:10.

Therefore tithing, which brought a CURSE ON ISRAEL, IS ONE OF THE WORKS OF THE LAW. It is legalism.

Moses taught his disciples to TITHE. "These are the commandments which the Lord commanded MOSES FOR THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL IN MOUNT SINAI." Read Lev. 27:30-34 where the command concerning tithing was given.

Christ nowhere taught His disciples to observe tithing. If so, in what chapter and verse can we find it?

Give proof is you can.

Therefore tithing was for the disciples of Moses, and not for the disciples of Christ.

"The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ," John 1:17.

Christ did not teach His disciples to tithe. He taught them GRACE AND TRUTH, John 1:17.

Moses taught the law, and he taught his disciples to tithe, Lev. 27:30-34 and John 1:17.

Therefore those who preach tithing, have left the ground of GRACE AND TRUTH, and are following Moses, and not Christ.

Please find in the Bible where God ever pronounced a CURSE on those under GRACE, or where they were ever called thieves and robbers. I read and hear of preachers trying to browbeat God's redeemed children by calling them thieves and robbers. Christ never called them that. The apostles never called them that. So why should you? You make a gross misapplication of scripture by taking what was spoken to Israel under the law, and applying the same to those under GRACE. Why do you not learn to rightly divide the word of truth? Don't you know you are sowing error and confusion by applying what belonged under the law to those under grace?

You are trying to place God's children under BONDAGE AGAIN. Paul said, "Ye have not received the spirit of BONDAGE AGAIN to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we

cry, Abba, Father," Rom.8:15.

Please notice the words BONDAGE AGAIN. Paul said they had NOT RECEIVED THE SPIRIT OF BONDAGE AGAIN. "If the Son therefore shall make you FREE, YE SHALL BE FREE INDEED," John 8:36.

How dare you to try to place one in BONDAGE AGAIN whom the Son of God has made free? Listen to me young preachers, (and some older ones too). DON'T you know that you are doing insult to the spirit of GRACE when you preach tithing to God's freeborn children? You are doing insult to those the Son has made free.

A few days ago, a deacon of a church in our county, and a very devoted and faithful member for over 30 years, said he was getting tired of hearing these young preachers who are not yet dry behind the ears telling him that he is a thief if he does not practice tithing.

(He is a liberal giver, but he does not like to be put under the law.)

Listen young preachers. Who are you to seek to drive God's freeborn children as slaves by the whip lash of the law?

The motive of service under GRACE is LOVE, not the fear of the law.

Paul said, "The LOVE OF CHRIST constraineth us."

Again he said "In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but faith which worketh BY LOVE." Gal. 5:6.

A few years ago I was talking to three tithing preachers, and I said "Under grace the impelling motive must be LOVE." They replied, "Love won't get the job done." Bro. Tom Walker was listening to the conversation, and can verify what I say. Paul evidently thought that LOVE would get the job done for he said, "Charity (Love R.V.) NEVER FAILETH." He also said "The love of Christ constraineth us."

The preacher who would have his people to do anything for Christ through any other motive than LOVE, not only cheats that person out of a reward for what he does, but he himself will get no reward for what he preaches. These were tithing preachers who made that remark. They seem to have no spiritual discernment. No wonder Paul said, "But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ," II Cor. 3:14. "But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart," II Cor. 3:15.

We who are under grace are not driven to service by what the law says, but our service is Spirit led, and Spirit directed.

"If ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under law," Gal. 5:18.

If we are under law then it follows that we are not being led of the Spirit.

Now let us go back to Mal. 3:7-11 which the tithers seem to love so well. That passage was written to Israel which was under the law. When we accuse tithing preachers of preaching law, they will deny it, and then they will go right back to Mal. 3:7-11, and other like proof texts under the law to prove their tithing doctrine for today. They do not know how to distinguish between what belongs to Israel, and what applies to the churches. They do not know how to distinguish between law and grace.

In the same connection where God told Israel that the whole nation was cursed with a curse, He also said "From the days of your fathers ye are gone away from MINE ORDINANCES, and have not kept them."

Hear Col. 2:13-14 in the connection.

"You, being dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all your trespasses; blotting out the handwriting of ORDINANCES THAT WAS AGAINST US, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, NAILING IT TO HIS CROSS."

So Jesus nailed to the cross the ORDINANCES from which Israel had gone astray, from the days of their fathers (Mal. 3:7); Sabbath keeping, animal sacrifices and other things which were against them.

This shows that the ORDINANCE concerning tithing was taken out of the way when Jesus died on the cross. It was against Israel for it had brought them under a curse.

The offerings mentioned in Mal. 3:8, where God said Israel had robbed Him in tithes and offerings, has no reference to a money offering they were due to give above their tithes. By reading Mal. 1:7-8 we find that is has reference to animal sacrifices, which were to be offered on the altar of sacrifice. " If ye offer the blind FOR SACRIFICE, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and the sick, is it not evil?"

How often we hear preachers when taking up the regular collection say, "Let us honor God with our tithes and OFFERINGS." Instead of just making a blind stab at this passage, the preachers, if they would, could study the book of Malachi, and find out how Israel had robbed God in their offerings as well as tithes. But ignoring the fact that God was speaking to Israel under the law, and not to us, they just make a blind stab, and come up with the idea that we today owe God a tenth, and money offerings above that. I heard such as this a thousand times while I was with the Convention people, and now Association Baptists are following in their steps.

Few preachers really study the connection in a passage. They just take what some leader among us has said and follow him blindly without studying for themselves. God's word tells us to "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good," I Thess.

5:21.

If we have been robbing God in tithes and offerings, as did Israel in Mal. 3:8, then have we been taking lame, blind, and sick animals to an altar of sacrifice? Are these tithing preachers going to get us back to offering burnt offerings on an altar? Their blindness on the tithing question has led them into this error. Truly Paul said that those who would be teachers of the law "understand neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm," I Tim. 1:5-7.

Every preacher should study the notes on the book of Exodus

by C. H. Mackintosh, a great English preacher of the last century. (The books may be bought from our book store in Little Rock). I studied his notes years ago. On pages 26263 in his notes on Exodus he has this to say: "How could we admit the thought that those whom God had received in grace he would rule by law?

Impossible . . . Both the Jews who had received the law, and the Gentiles who never had, were now to be saved through grace. And not only were they saved by grace, but they were to stand in grace (Rom. 5:2) and to grow in grace, (II Pet. 3:18). To teach anything else was to tempt God. Those Pharisees were subverting the very foundations of the Christian faith; and so are all those who seek to put believers under law.

There is no error or evil more abominable in the sight of the Lord than legalism."

End of quotation. I quote again from Bro. Charles Halff: "According to the New Testament, born again believers are led by the Holy Spirit. We are not led by the preachers in the pulpit or by a denominational machine. We now have the Spirit of God dwelling in us to convict us of things that are wrong and to comfort us when we are walking in the steps of our Lord and Master. When we believe on Christ we receive a new teacher - one who not only can teach us what to do, but one who can give us strength to do it as well. Listen to this scripture.

'For the grace of God which bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, TEACHING US that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world," Titus 2:11-12.

Bro Halff goes on to say, "The law IS NOT THE RULE OF LIFE (my caps) for He redeemed us from the law; so today we have a new teacher, GRACE."

End of quotation.

This has been exactly my position for over 40 years.

I studied these things out before nine tenths of our tithing preachers were ever born. We neither got life through the law, nor is it to be the rule by which we live after being saved.

The old Jew had to turn away from the law to be saved. Then why should he have to turn back to the law after being

saved to promote his spiritual growth, or to regulate his service?

"As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so WALK YE IN HIM: rooted and built up in him, stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving."

Paul asked the Galations "This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" Gal. 3:2-3.

We certainly do not receive the Spirit through observing the sabbath day nor by tithing. We are to continue in Christ in the same way we received Him, which is by faith and the leadership of the Spirit, and not by trying to observe any of the precepts of the law.

We received Him by FAITH through the enabling power of the Spirit. Even so must we walk in Him, grow in Him, and serve Him by FAITH, through the enabling of the Spirit.

This is why Paul could say in II Cor. 5:17, "If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things have PASSED AWAY; behold ALL THINGS ARE BECOME NEW." If old things have passed away, then animal sacrifices, Sabbath keeping, and tithing which were observed under the old system have passed away. ALL (not a part) THINGS ARE BECOME NEW. We have a new life. We have new standards of service. We have a new standard of giving. Every man, yielding himself to the Spirit is to give "According as he purposeth in his heart." See II Cor. 9:7.

That was not the way the old Jew, under the law should give. Each Jew, both saved and unsaved, was under a direct command to bring in his tithe.

But those were the old requirements. That has passed away for the man who is in Christ. For him ALL THINGS ARE BECOME NEW.

We also have a new principle.

How often we hear preachers say this principle and that principle of the law has been carried over into this DISPENSATION. Tell me then what Paul meant when he said, "ALL THINGS ARE BECOME NEW"? How could the old unsaved Jew, who was required to give tithes, and a Spirit filled, born again person, serve under the same principle?

Impossible.

Their motive of service was fear. Our is LOVE. This new principle of LOVE is planted in our hearts by the Holy Spirit, Rom. 5:5. The old Jew under the law did not have this indwelling Spirit. The Spirit led person does not need the commands "Thou shalt not kill," "Thou shalt not steal," "Thou shalt not commit adultery."

The indwelling Spirit drives out of his heart such desires.

"Now the end of the COMMANDMENT is charity (love) out of a pure heart, and of good conscience, and of faith unfeigned," I Tim. 1:5, "The law is not for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, for whoremongers, for them which defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers," I Tim. 1:9-10.

The kind of people mentioned above are the ones for whom the law was made. In fact it was given to pronounce such guilty before God. "What things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth might be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God," Rom. 3:19.

The law only speaks to those who were under the law, not those under grace. The one under grace has already had all his guilt removed. He no longer needs the law to pronounce him guilty before God. Grace has already come in and has pronounced him justified before God for his faith in Jesus Christ. If we yield ourselves to the Spirit, and live in the center of God's will, we need no law to tell us to give, or how much to give. The Spirit of God will lead us to give freely of our means.

Here I wish to quote from Dr. W. L. Pettingill in his notes on the Second Book of Corinthians.

"The contrast is apparent between this New Testament giving and the almost universal practice among us in financing of God's work.

The emphasis upon tithing, and pledging, and budgeting, and pleading, and urging, and begging, tends to rob giving of its pleasure. Christian giving should be spontaneous. Christian giving should be free. It should be joyous.

Christian giving should be "Out of the abundance of the heart." . . .

"If all Christians could be induced to tithe their incomes through pressure for co-operative programs, denominational enlargement, etc., it would still be hateful to God unless those tithers were motivated by LOVE . . . Get the people in love with God, there will be no lack of money, there will be no need of human schemes to raise money." See Dr. Pettingill's notes on Second Corinthians, pages 76-77.

Recently an old acquaintance of ours, who is now an independent missionary in Brazil, and his family came by and spent most of a day with us. My heart was moved as I heard him relate how he and two others went out by faith, with no board, or associational committee behind them. They went to Brazil about eight years ago. I saw the pictures of the great baptizings they have been having, out in open streams, and in lakes.

They are doing a great work. He only had the endorsement of the church where he holds membership. When he resigned that church in Owensburg, Ky., and had paid all his bills he owed, he only had a $10 bill and some change in his pocket. He and his wife and two children started on their way to the airport in Florida, not knowing where the passage money was coming from. But he said by the time he arrived at the airport he had sufficient money to buy their tickets and have a few dollars left over after arriving in Brazil.

From day to day, from week to week, the money has come in to supply their needs, and now they have more children to support.

He said he had rather have it that way than to have a promised salary. He said it is a great joy, and it brings great spiritual blessings, just to see how the Lord provides from unexpected sources. For years I have found this so in my experience. My wife and I have often started on a 5,000 mile trip (round trip) with not a penny promised to us. By the time we get back home our expenses have been more than paid. I accept invitations from small churches, and from larger churches. Usually the small churches give the most, and the largest offerings come from people who are not tithers.

Too many preachers want to walk by sight, and not by faith. Paul said "We walk by faith and not by sight.�

If we will trust God, and not the people, nor the churches, nor leaders, in some way God will provide. And our joy will be all the more abundant when we see how He is able to provide. Several years ago I got an invitation to hold a meeting with our church in Oklahoma City. I had already held one for this church and received $100. I got a letter from them asking me to return on a certain time for another Bible school. But I already had promised to teach one in a small church, worshipping in an old school building with a young pastor. He had already told me the church was weak, and would probably not be able to pay much. But I had given them my promise so I declined the invitation from Oklahoma City. I went to the small church, feeling sure I would not get over $50 at the most. When the school was over they paid me $120. Of course I was more than satisfied with the offering, but the joy that little church got in making that offering was the best part of the whole thing. And they did not have a pastor who preached tithing.

The Moral and Ceremonial Parts of the Law While I see no scriptural ground for dividing the law into the moral part and ceremonial part, yet how often we hear preachers say the ceremonial part has passed, but the moral part remains. The scripture teaches that the law stands or passes as a whole, not in parts. Jesus said, "One jot or tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled," Matt. 5:18.

If any of it has passed then all has been fulfilled and has passed. Jesus said He did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill, Matt. 5:17. I ask did He do what He came to do? When he died on the cross He said "It is finished."

On the eve of His crucifixion He said to the Father, "I have FINISHED the work which thou gavest me to do," John 17:4.

So then He completely fulfilled ALL the law, and He set it aside. In Heb. 10:9-10 it is said, "He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will (or covenant) we are sanctified through

the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

So all the law covenant with its sacrifices, its holy days, its feast days, its Sabbath day observances, and its tithing obligations has forever passed for every believer.

"Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth," Rom. 10:4. "For ye are not under the law, but UNDER GRACE," Rom. 6:4.

We cannot mix law and GRACE. It must be one or the other. It cannot be both. Under the law the Israelites were considered servants.

"For unto me the children of Israel are servants; they are my servants whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt," Lev. 25:55.

This position they occupied until Christ redeemed them from under the law.

"When the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the LAW, to REDEEM them that are under the Law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying Abba, Father.

Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son," Gal. 4:4-7.

When Christ redeemed believing Jews from the LAW, they no longer occupied the place of servants (Lev. 25:55), but of SONS. Let the reader study this closely. It will help him to understand the case of the UNPROFITABLE servant in Matt. 25:30, who shall be cast into outer darkness. He will see that he will be a Jew, who refused the redemption which is in Christ. He will still be occupying the place of a servant (Lev. 25:55), and has never become a SON, as in Gal. 4:4-7. The unprofitable servant said to his lord, that he was a hard man. Indeed the LAW is a hard taskmaster. It is a YOKE OF BONDAGE. But to all such Jesus offers a yoke that is easy, and burden that is light.

"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my YOKE upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your soul. For my YOKE IS EASY and my burden is light," Matt. 11:28.

Why will men insist on wearing that old yoke on their necks which Peter said, "Neither our fathers nor we were able to bear," Acts 15:10?

Why will they listen to the legalists who wish to keep them under a heavy burden, and under the yoke of the law which they are unable to bear, when Jesus offers to remove that heavy burden, take away that galling yoke, and give rest.

He says His yoke is easy, and his burden is light.

On the other hand the yoke of the law is a heavy one. It is a yoke of bondage.

Just why will men insist on being under that yoke again? Why will they exchange their freedom in Christ for the old law yoke of bondage?

Contrast Between The Ministration of the Spirit And The One Written In Tables of Stone In Deut. 10:1-5 we find Moses telling about receiving the ten commandments, written in stones. In II Cr. 3:6-11 Paul contrasts the ministration of the Spirit with the ministration written and engraven in stones. In v. 5 he said, "The Spirit giveth LIFE".

But in the 7th verse he calls the ministration engraven in stones (10 commandments) the ministration of DEATH. In the 9th verse he calls the one written in stones the ministration of CONDEMNATION. WHILE HE CALLS THE MINISTRATION OF THE SPIRIT (GRACE) THE MINISTRATION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. THEN IN THE 11th VERSE HE SAID, "FOR IF THAT WHICH IS done away BE GLORIOUS, much more that which REMAINETH is glorious."

Here we find contrasted the ministration of the Spirit (grace) with that of the law (10 commandments). One gives life.

The other brings death. Does the Spirit bring life or death? Does the law bring death or life? Does the ministration of the Spirit bring righteousness or condemnation? One has been DONE AWAY, and one REMAINS. Has the ministration of the Spirit been DONE AWAY or does it remain? Does the ministration written in stones (the 10 commandments) remain, or has it been DONE AWAY? To say that the 10 commandments written in stones remain is to say that the ministration of the Spirit has been done away, because, according to the 11th verse, one has been done away, and one remains. To say that the ministration of the Spirit remains is to take the position that the ministration

written in stones (10 commandments) written in stones has been done away. This writer takes the position that the ministration of the Spirit remains, while the ministration of the law (10 commandments) written in stones has passed away.

Now of you who say that the ceremonial part of the law has been done away, while the moral part remains, I ask were the 10 commandments the moral or ceremonial part? So something else about the law besides the sacrificial part has been done away. The part containing the 10 commandments, according to II Cor. 3:6-11, has been done away. In fact it has all been done away for the believer, the 10 commandments, Sabbath keeping, the observance of holy days, feast days, animal sacrifices and TITHING. But you say tithing was not part of the law. Heb. 7:5 says that it was.

"The sons of Levi who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people ACCORDING TO THE LAW." Now just where did they receive that commandment to receive tithes of the people? They received it in Mount Sinai, where the law was given. Proof: "and all the tithe of the land, whether it be the seed of the land, or the fruit of the tree, it is the Lord's: it is holy unto the Lord. And if a man will at all redeem ought of his tithes, he shall add thereto the fifth part thereof. And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the Lord. He shall not search whether it be good or bad, neither shall he change it: and if he change it at all, then both it and the change thereof shall be holy; it shall not be redeemed. These are the commandments which the Lord commanded Moses FOR THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL IN MOUNT SINAI," Lev. 27:30-34.

That which is connected with MOUNT SINAI belongs to the old COVENANT and genders bondage.

"But he who was born of the bondwoman was born after the FLESH, but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the TWO COVENANTS; the one from the MOUNT SINAI, which gendereth to BONDAGE, which is Agar," Gal. 4:23-24.

This leaves no room for argument.

Gal. 4:23-24 definitely connects the LAW with MOUNT SINAI. And Lev. 27:3034 positively shows that at MOUNT SINAI Israel received a command to TITHE. Men may say that tithing does not belong to the law. But the Bible proof shows that it does. It belonged to the law in Heb. 7:5 and Lev. 27:3-34. When the law was abolished then tithing was abolished. It belonged to the OLD SYSTEM of the LAW. If old things passed away for those in Christ, and ALL THINGS ARE BECOME NEW (II Cor. 5:17), then for the one in Christ tithing has passed away.

"Now we are delivered FROM THE LAW, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in NEWNESS OF SPIRIT, and not in the oldness of the letter." Why? Because for the one in Christ "ALL THINGS ARE BECOME NEW."

The Old Commandment Disannulled Because of Its Weakness and UNPROFITABLENESS "There is verily a DISANNULLING of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof," Heb. 7:18.

Just why was the commandment concerning tithing unprofitable? Because it brought a CURSE ON ISRAEL. "But ye say, wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and in offerings. Ye are CURSED with a CURSE; for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation," Mal. 3:8-9.

Why would God take out of the old covenant a commandment which was unprofitable, and which brought a curse, and bring the same unprofitable command over into the new order of things? In Gal. 3:13 we read, "Christ hath redeemed us FROM THE CURSE OF THE LAW." This being so, He redeemed His people from that which brought a CURSE. Tithing brought a CURSE, Mal. 3:8-9.

Therefore the believing Jew is redeemed from the old law of tithing. Just why would He place one back under something from which He redeemed him by His death on the cross?

This is as weak and inconsistent as the false doctrine that after a child of God has been saved he can be lost again.

Abraham and Melchisedec - Heb. 7:1-10 In the case of Abraham giving a tenth to Melchisedec the tithers think they can prove their point. The argument is all against them.

First, the book of Hebrews was not written to the churches, but to the Hebrew people who wanted to go back under the old law system. In this very chapter in which the writer speaks of Abraham giving a tenth to Melchisedec the writer says, "The law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did."

I have shown that tithing belonged to the law. Well, when this better hope was brought in, then the law, which was not so good as this better hope, passed away. Tithing was part of it. Proof: "The sons of Levi, who received the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of the people ACCORDING TO THE LAW, that is, of their brethren, though they came out of the loins of Abraham," Heb. 7:5.

So when the law passed away, and the better hope came in, then tithing which was part of the law passed away.

Second, notice the words "Out of the loins of Abraham" (v. 5), and "Out of his loins" in v. 10. It was the Hebrew people, not the Gentiles who came out of the loins of Abraham. Tithing only concerned Abraham, and those who came out of his loins. The children of Israel to whom was given the command at Mount Sinai to give tithes (Lev. 27:30-34) came out of the loins of Abraham.

Why is it that the word "TITHE" is not found one time in letters to the churches? Why is it that nowhere in all the Bible the word tithe can be found in connection with any people but Abraham, and those who came out of his loins?

Third, they claim that Melchisedec is a type of Christ, and that proves we are to tithe today. I ask the question was Melchisedec a type of Christ in His relationship to the churches, or in His relationship to Israel, and His reign as priest and king on David's throne in Israel? Why is it that the name Melchisedec is not found a single time in the letters to the churches?

His name is only found in Gen. 14:18; Ps. 110:4 and in Hebrews. It is found in the 110th Psalm in connection with a prophecy of Christ's return in battle to overcome Israel's ENEMIES, and rule on His throne over that nation. The words "King of Salem means "King of Peace." See Heb. 7:2. Christ is not now KING OF PEACE. In fact He said in Matt. 10:34, "Think not that I am come to bring peace on earth."

Not until He sits on David's throne in Jerusalem will He be King of Peace, and bring peace to this earth. See Isa. 9:57; Jer. 3:17-18 and Micah 4:1-8. Not till then will he reign as "KING OF PEACE". Then He will be a KING and PRIEST on his throne, as was Melchisedec. See Zech. 6:12-15. So Melchisedec is not a type of Christ in His relationship to the churches, but in His relationship to Israel, those who came out of the loins of Abraham. I Cor. 16:1-2 This passage has reference to an emergency, or relief offering for the impoverished saints in Judaea, and nothing else. Some try to make a play on the Greek word "Titheto" found in the second verse. But this word is never used in connection with tithing. The word for "Pay tithes" in Matt. 23:23 and Luke 11:42 is "Apokekatoute." The word for "I tithe" in Luke 18:12 is "Apodekato." The word for TENTH in Heb. 7:4 is "Dekatan."

The word "TITHETO", translated "Lay by" in I Cor. 16:2 is the word Jesus used in inquiring about Lazarus. He asked "Where have ye laid him." The same Greek verb is found in John 13:4 where it says, "He riseth from supper and LAID ASIDE his garments." Neither the word "Apodekatoute" (Pay tithes), nor the word "Dekatos" meaning a TENTH is found in I Cor. 16:1-2. There was no certain specified per cent they were commanded to lay by in I Cor. 16;1-2.

I Cor. 9:13-14 "Do ye not know that they which minister about the holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar. Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel."

In this place Paul is not speaking of tithes which were given to the Levite, but about the PRIESTS, who ministered at the altar where the sacrifices burned, eating certain parts of those animal offering.

"The priests shall burn the fat upon the ALTAR: but the breast shall be Aaron's and his sons'. And the right shoulder shall ye give to the priest for a heave offering of your peace offerings. See also Lev. 7:1-6. "Every male among the priests shall eat thereof: it shall be eaten in the holy place."

Tithing is not under consideration in I Cor. 9:13-14.

THREE CHURCHES WHICH PAUL DID NOT TEACH TO TITHE The Church at Ephesus In Acts 20:27 Paul said to the elders of the church at Ephesus "I have not shunned to declare unto you ALL THE COUNSEL OF GOD." It evidently is not part of the counsel of God to teach tithing to the churches for Paul did not teach this church to support preachers with tithes.

He said to them, "I have coveted no man's silver or gold, or apparel. Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered to my necessities, and to them that were with me. I have showed you all things, how that so laboring (as he had done) ye ought to support the weak, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive," Acts 20:33-35.

Since Paul worked to support himself and his preaching companions then the Ephesus church did not support them with tithes.

They did not build church houses until the 3rd century. See Dr. Newman's Church History, page 295, vol. I. If they paid a tenth it could only have gone to support the weak. Tithing churches today do very little in supporting the weak.

They let the welfare do that. So this is one church Paul did not teach to support the preaching of the gospel by giving tithes.

The Church at Thessalonica The church at Thessalonica is a second example of a church Paul did not teach to support the gospel with tithes.

"For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you; neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you," II Thess. 3:7-8.

This proves that this church did not support him with tithes.

The Church at Corinth This is the third church Paul did not teach to pay tithes. He said to them, "Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and we have no certain dwellingplace: and labour, working with our hands," I Cor. 4:11-12.

Why did he not preach tithing to them? Because he said in II Cor. 3:6 that God had made him an able minister of the NEW TESTAMENT, not of the letter, but of the Spirit, for the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. Tithing belonged to that of the letter, the old covenant, which did not bring life, but bondage.

Now let the tithers bring just one example where Paul taught tithing to a church. I have brought three examples of churches to which he did not teach tithing. There is evidence that he did not teach others to tithe. In Phil. 4:15 he said, "Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, NO CHURCH COMMUNICATED WITH ME as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only."

Sometimes Paul was supported, and sometimes he was not. In Phil. 4:12 Paul wrote, "I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound: every where and in all things I am instructed both to be full and to be hungry, both to abound and to suffer need."

But Paul did teach giving to support preaching. Yet there is no evidence that he taught tithing. In Gal. 6;16 he said, "Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things. In II Cor. 9:7 we read, "Every man according as he purposeth IN HIS HEART, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver."

Do you not think when a man is yielded to the Spirit, and fully surrendered to God, that the Spirit will put in his heart to give, how much he should give, and to what he should give? One thing today we are called upon to give to things which are not pleasing to God. The Spirit condemns the pleasure loving spirit in His people, and we are called upon to give to build gymnasiums. This is conforming to this world which God's word forbids.

No man need tell me that our leaders were led by the Spirit to build gymnasiums. Such as that grieves the Spirit and cultivates in the minds of the people a love of worldly pleasures which God's word condemns.

"Be not conformed to this world," Rom. 12:2.

In building gymnasiums we are falling into a pit the modernists dug for us, in order to capture all religious schools for modernism, and we are already going that way at a rapid pace. We are trying to be like other schools. The Devil has us sleeping in the lap of Delilah while he shears us of our spiritual strength.

We need to stand up and be counted. We need more men like Shadrach, Meshack, and Abednego who will dare to stand for the truth even if it endangers their lives. We need to let the world know that we need none of their standardization plans, and we will get ours out of the Bible. We need more Spirit led giving, and less law led and preacher led giving.

Spirit led giving always honors God, and promotes scriptural things. Law giving and preacher led giving too often caters to the desire of the flesh. Spirit led giving never surrenders to the spirit of this world. Many, many times law led and preacher led giving is for the purpose of keeping step with what world schools are doing. I hear someone say we have to do these things to gain credit before those who set the standards of accreditation. If we have to surrender to this world's standards to have Christian schools, we will have Christian schools in name only. Instead of being a blessing to God's cause they will be a drawback to God's cause.

I am 75 years old, and have gone to two colleges, and hold a degree from one of them, and one by one I have watched Christian schools slip into the folds of modernism, and turning out hundreds of preachers who are worldly minded, and not sound in the faith. Their chief aim is to get a church which will pay them a fat salary. Where is the old time spirit of self denial?

We do not have to have these houses of pleasure. We have them because we want them. As we read in Jer. 5:31, "My people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof." "Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."

No, I am not too narrow but many are too compromising, and too loose. When I was a young preacher no Baptist preacher would have thought of rushing through with a religious service so that the church members could go to a ball game. But that very thing is being done now, and I have proof. Then the churches would not have had a youth revivalist who would gather up the young people after the service at the church, and ride all over town, and go to the picture show, and call it YOUTH FELLOWSHIP. We are fastly becoming a pleasure loving, world conforming group of people. We are sleeping in the lap of Delilah.

Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play."

Our schools are trying to mix worship and PLAY. "What will ye do in the end thereof," Jer. 5:31.

A Better Plan? *Taken from Identified With Christ A Book of Sermons by G. E. Jones PRINT See also Jones’ Is There A Difference In the Churches?and The Sabbath Day & Questions for Tithers and "FREEDOM FROM THE LAW of Moses and Spiritual Growth in CHRIST." The Shayne Moses Project

Graves’ Signs of “the End” by J. R. Graves, 1883 A.D., in The Work Marshaling

of

Christ

in the

of the Nations.

Covenant

of

Redemption; Developed

in

Seven Dispensations.

An excerption out of part III, Eschatology: ch. IX, The

The Nations of Europe and Asia Marshaled for the Last Great Battle of Gog and Magog—This Accomplished

by Three

Unclean Spirits like Frogs—They Symbolize What?—The Time When, and the Place Where this Battle will be Fought. Friday Evening

of the

Worlds

Great Week.; ch. X, The Church of Laodicea Symbolizes the Character of the Churches of Christ in the Last Days of this Dispensation. And ch. XI, The Coming of Christ

for

His Saints. The Second Coming of Christ under two Aspects—He Comes “into the Air” for His Saints—The “Resurrection of the

Just”—The Translation or Rapture of Living Saints—They meet their Lord in the Air and receive their Glorified Bodies.

The nations of Europe are armed to the teeth, and the vast standing armies of all these kings cause the very earth to groan beneath their weight, and the populations are being exhausted in feeding them. A general war is expected and inevitable by every Cabinet of Europe, and then – the End. ...

The reader need not doubt these combinations, nor the ultimate result—the frogs are at work. This war, the last, may burst forth any day, and, once commenced, will not close until the armies engaged are destroyed by the manifest judgment of Christ at his coming.

The Unmistakable Signs of Christ's Coming.

The disciples, after hearing his predictions of his coming and of the ending of the Gospel or Gentile Dispensation, eagerly asked what would be the sign of the coming and of the end of the age that would close at his coming. I will suppose my readers as eagerly ask me to answer these two questions, but essentially one. I will endeavor to find the answers to both of these questions, under the same division, and present not only the Saviour's teachings, but also of his apostles, whom he instructed.

From these sources we learn that his coming, and the close of this Dispensation will be immediately preceded by the following portentous signs:

1. Gross ignorance of divine things will be prevalent among all classes, with respect to his coming.

In his address of comfort to Zion and Jerusalem, in view of his immediate appearing, Christ Jehovah puts these words into the mouth of his prophet : “Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen above thee. For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people; but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and his glory shall be seen above thee. And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.”—Isa. 60:1-3.

“But the wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand.”—Dan. 12:10.

“And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie; that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”-2 Thess.

2:10-12.

2. A great apostasy from the faith once delivered to the saints on the part of its professors.

“Nevertheless when the Lord cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?”—Luke 18:8.

If this is not equivalent to an assertion that there will not be a saint on the earth at his second coming (see future chapter), it certainly indicates that there will be very few indeed at that time.

“Let no man deceive you by any means, for that day [i. e., the coming of Christ] shall not come, except there come a falling away first.”- 2 Thess. 2:3.

“Now, the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons; speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their consciences seared with a hot iron.”— 1 Tim. 4:1-2.

“There shall be false teachers among you who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by

reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you; whose judgment lingereth not and their damnation slumbereth not.”-2 Pet. 2:1-3. (Read onward to the end.)

3. A general unbelief in Christ's coming, abounding iniquity, hypocrisy, untruthfulness, disobedience to parents, and scoffing Infidelity.

We learn from God's Word to what depths of abominable iniquity and infidelity the world had reached, “while the long suffering of God waited, in the days of Noah”—and how few believed God's Word, spoken by him concerning the coming flood; and also the wickedness and infidelity of Sodom and Gomorrah, in the days of Lot. And Jesus said this would be the case with the whole world just before his coming, and he gave it as one of the signs of his coming: “And as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat and they drank [i. e., to drunkenness], they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot, they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. Even so shall it be when the Son of man is revealed.”—Luke 17:26-31.

What more irrefragable proof than this could be framed in human language, that the world is not to be converted before the revelation of the Son of God from heaven, and consequently that his coming is pre-millennial ?

And is not this a graphic picture of the present state of the world—an inveterate unbelief in his second coming, and a presumptuous recklessness under its proclamation, and an inordinate greed for lust and gain? I quote other passages only to emphasize this clear statement of Christ : “This know, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthoughtful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those who are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.

Now, as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth; men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further, for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.”-2 Tim. 3:1-10.

“Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last clays scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming ? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.”-2 Pet. 3:3-4.

Perhaps there never has been a time since Christ's ascension when the very idea of Christ's personal coming, and the near approach of it, would be more generally met with this identical scoff than now, or by a larger number of the professed friends, and even ministers of Christ!

Could a darker picture possibly be drawn of the moral condition of the world, out of Christ, than this?

Christ will make their destruction manifest unto all men at his coming. With this dark and fearful picture of universal and most abominable wickedness before their eyes, how can any candid mind believe that the world is to be converted before Christ comes?

Thus we have delineated before us the state of the churches, and of the world, just prior to the coming of the Lord for his saints, to take them away from the most terrible evils to come upon all them left upon the face of the whole earth. There is but one commendable feature connected with all this, and it is given as a sign of the end.

4. There will be an extensive spirit of inquiry, among the faithful few followers of Christ, concerning his coming.

The Saviour has left on record most emphatic commands to his faithful disciples to watch for and recognize the signs of his near approach, and pronounced especial blessings upon all who do study his word and compare the events that are transpiring among the nations, with the moral condition of the world and the spiritual state of the churches; with the signs he has given we must believe that “the wise”—the truly justified in Christ—will, in a good measure, understand the things, and be found ready and waiting for his appearing.

“And none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise [the justified] shall understand.”--Dan. 12:10.

A distaste for prophetic study, to search and to understand what is written concerning Christ's second coming, should be to each professor of Christianity a satisfactory evidence of unregeneracy. But many will search most diligently into these prophecies as the time of the end approaches, and great attainments in a knowledge of them will be made.

“But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book [not always, but only] to the time of the end. Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.”—Dan. 12:4.

“Many shall endeavor to search out the sense, and knowledge shall be increased by their means.”(A. Clark.)

“And there will be many teachers who will understand, for they will give the timely warning of the Bridegroom's approach, and all the wise virgins will hear and be prepared to go into the marriage.”(On Matt. xxv.)

This sign is being fulfilled in this, our day, as is evidenced by the numerous new books and tracts almost weekly offered to the public in this country and England, and the Prophetical Conferences that have been held in New York and London; and the papers, weekly and quarterly, devoted to the discussion of prophecy and the signs of the second coming. These must find patrons, and by the thousands, or they would not be published. It is said that not less than three hundred ministers of eminence and scholarship in England, and nearly one thousand in America, have embraced pre-millennial views, and are engaged in studying the prophecies, and many of these preach and write upon the subjects. Many are indeed diligently searching the teachings of God's Word with respect to Christ's coming, and knowledge upon this subject is being largely increased and widely diffused.

CHAPTER X.

H

The Church of Laodicea Symbolizes the Character of the Churches of Christ in the Last Days of this Dispensation.

AVING considered the predicted state of the nations, their political agitations and marshalings for a general conflict, let us now notice the religious aspects of society and state of the churches, given by Christ as signs of his near coming—his being at the door and knocking.

What is the predicted state of the Church of Christ at the close of this dispensation?

The sure word of prophecy on which I rely, for it most certainly is a prophecy, is Christ's message to the last of “the seven churches in Asia.”

It is true that various views are entertained by expositors, with respect to these letters, as there is touching the Revelation itself; and, since these letters partake of the character of the book in which they stand, I will briefly state...that of the historical interpreters, or those who hold that the prophecy embraces the whole history of the church and its foes, from the time of its composition to the end of the world. The expositors of this school, while they differ among themselves in detail, agree in regarding the Book of Revelation as a continuous prophetic history of the church, describing in symbolical language the various phases through which it was ordained to pass; and they look for the proper interpretation of the book largely to the events which have occurred in the history of the church thus far.

The view held, though in different forms, by the greater number of evangelical scholars, and the one I fully adopt, the reasons for which I will briefly lay before the reader.

1. These letters containing messages, like all the other parts of the book, were by an angel dictated to John in ecstatic vision when an exile in the Isle of Patmos. In this respect they are like the revelations made to Daniel by the angel, and must be explained by the same laws of interpretation—i. e., those governing symbols.

2. The messages to these churches are all prophetic.

This revelation was given by Christ to show unto his servants what things must shortly come to pass (Rev 1:1)). These messages, as well as the book, must be interpreted by the same rules—symbolically.

The simple explanation upon this view is: The seven cities bearing these names were all the churches then existing on the peninsula, which the Isle of Patmos overlooked, called Proconsular Asia. Since these seven churches were then the sole representatives of Christianity in all Proconsular Asia when he wrote this, and because the inditing spirit knew there never would be any others, the Saviour selected them to symbolize all his churches that would exist until the close of the Dispensation.

Each church, with the characteristics and trials given it, was designed to symbolize the characteristic and trials of all his churches during the period it represented. In this respect they partake of the character of the seven seals, trumpets and vials, for these divided all prophetic time into periods—i. e.,

each one characterized by its own peculiar characteristics and trials. Thus, in the history of the seven symbolic churches, we have presented a complete panoramic history of Christianity from the first century until, in answer to the prayers of a long-waiting Bride, the Lord shall come....

We trust God will raise up some one in our day to write a history of the churches of Christ, by developing the historical application and fulfillment of what is predicted of these seven symbolic churches i. e., the churches of Christ in the seven periods of the Gentile Dispensation. If our view is correct, that they have a symbolical import, then does the Word of God establish the fact disputed by some of our own writers (to their shame be it said), that Christ has preserved a succession of witnessing churches until now, and will until his return.

1. These seven churches are in prophetic accordance with the other parts of the Apocalypse, and John gives us no room for other conclusions.

2. No proof exists that the actual state of those seven churches was described at the time of writing these addresses, and a forced construction is given by literal expounders.

3. No one can support, from historic details, a reasonable and literal accomplishment of the things contained in the addresses to those churches; the candlestick is removed, not from one, but from all.†

4. The addresses close with an application to all the churches i. e., of the age to which the prophecy alludes, and not to the one church only bearing the inscription of the address.

5. The state of the things at Pergamos does not accord with that church being “the seat of Satan,” which must be at Rome, agreeably to other plain passages, and which is allowed by McCrie and others.

6. The other symbols of the Apocalypse are divided into prophetic periods; and there is not the least indication from the writer of a change in the mode of address.

†Those who hold the literal view must believe that the Catholic Hierarchy is the true and apostolic church of Christ, since a few dilapidated churches and ignorant Catholic priests remain in Philadelphia, and their services are in a language they do not understand.

7. It is “a revelation of things to come,” but if the things in those churches actually existed, John could have forwarded an epistle to each church, as the other apostles did, and so have rectified the abuses without calling it “a revelation of things which must shortly come to pass,” the character the whole book sustains. And finally and conclusively8. The seven churches were in one small proconsulate, and within a circle whose diameter would be only sixty miles, and they would all, therefore, possess a like characteristic, and they must have all suffered from the same false teachers and impostors; and it is certain, they would all have suffered from the same persecuting edicts—a few of the members of one church could not suffer and the others not, or, one church suffer and the others not.

Admitting that the symbolic view is the correct one, and that these churches represent church periods, as the trumpets do State periods, and admitting that the universal belief of the Jews is correct, viz., that six thousand years closes the world's week, and the seventh introduces the world's grand Sabbatism, there remained about two thousand years from the First to the Second Advent of Christ, and this divided by seven, the number of church periods, the average length of these periods would be about three hundred years.

But the blasts of the trumpets were some longer and some shorter, so the periods symbolized by the churches, or “lamp-stands,” varied in duration. One period may' have been only one hundred, another one hundred and fifty, and yet another three hundred or more years.

Ephesus was the first city and capital of proconsular Asia, and it is made the symbol of the first and most distinguished period of Christianity. The very word, if derived from ephesis, signifies ardent zeal, intense desire, and may be designed to express the fervent love and labors of the churches in the first period, and their eager desire after the knowledge of and communion with Christ.

It is a striking fact that the character as well as the trials here ascribed to the church at Ephesus, characterized the churches for two hundred years after John wrote this, and it is also true that at the close of the third and at the beginning of the fourth there was an abatement of primitive zeal and works.

It is also evident that the churches of this age alone could be troubled with a class of religious teachers who claimed to be “apostles,” but were apostates. And it must be evident to all that these pseudo-apostles would not have infested one church only, and allowed all the rest to go free, but would have troubled the seven equally, if this language is to be interpreted literally. This covered the whole period from Patmos until the rise of Constantine, A. D. 303. The

prophecy concerning Smyrna, the next symbolic church, is so strikingly fulfilled in the history of the next period, embracing the three following centuries, that I can not forbear noticing it here : “I know thy works and tribulation and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them who say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison that you may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days ; be thou faithful unto death, and I will give you a crown of life.”—Rev. 2:9-10.

There is as conclusive evidence of the symbolic as of the prophetic character of this message.

The very name of the church signifies myrrh—bitterness—indicating the bitterness of poverty, persecutions and imprisonments that was in store for them; also the term “Jew,” and “synagogue of Satan,” and “ten days,” are all symbolical terms.

There were no Gentiles who endeavored to pass themselves upon this church as Jews; there was no organization known as “the synagogue of Satan,” nor was there ever a persecution that lasted only ten literal days.

Then if these were indeed literal churches, not some of the members only of one church, but all zealous, active members of all these churches would have suffered persecution. But it is a fact that the edict of persecution by Diocletian, commencing A. D. 303 and closed in 313 lasting just ten years, aimed at the extermination of all Christians in the empire. The reader of history also is aware that the first apostasy took place in the reign of Constantine, A. D. 313-30, under whose auspices the first man-invented religious organization was formed, and this claimed to be the church of Christ, and its members alone Catholic Christians, true “spiritual Jews, and they denounced all true Christians as heretics. This manmade church is here pronounced by Christ the “synagogue— church—of Satan,” and can any one doubt that every man-invented church organization is likewise a “synagogue of Satan”? What is said of one other church, the Philadelphia, is worthy of special note. This church, according to our theory, symbolized the church period from the fifteenth to the eighteenth centuries. “These things saith he that is holy, he that is true, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and no man shutteth, and shutteth and no man openeth, . . behold I have set before thee an open door, and no man can shut it.” Through the instrumentality of the religio-political revolution of the sixteenth century, the churches of Christ enjoyed the first taste of religious liberty they had known in ten centuries, and that door has never been closed to them, but opened wider and wider. It was opened only to this church, and if it is not here used as a symbol, how can this Scripture be reconciled to unrelenting facts?

But Christ further says: “Behold I will make them of the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet and to know that I have loved thee.”

The human persecuting religious organizations, that sprang up in the sixteenth century, claiming to be the only true churches of Christ, are here symbolized by these false Jews, and Christ himself says they are of the synagogue of Satan—that organization which he at first pronounced the synagogue of Satan. But I may be delaying the attention of the reader too long from the symbolic church under discussion.

The Laodicean Age. As the Ephesian church symbolized the apostolic age, the first period, so the Laodicean., the last period; and the terms used to describe its character are symbolic of the general condition of the churches of the period covered by the symbol. The very name selected to symbolize the period, like the names of the other churches, is significant.

It is compounded of two Greek words, laos, the people, and, dike, judgment, and indicates, that, in this age, the people or nations will be judged; and it may very properly be called the Judgment Age. This is the view that Dr. Gill takes of this name: “It signifies the judgment of the people, for in this church state, at the end of it, will bring on the general judgment [he should have said the judgment of the wicked nations—Matt. xxv.] the Judge will now be at the door indeed, standing and knocking, and they that are ready to meet the Bridegroom when he comes, will be admitted into the nuptial chamber, and sit down with him on his throne, in the thousand years kingdom, at the close of which will be the second resurrection,” etc. (Com. in loco.)

Mark the peculiar address to this church, and what may be implied in it. He refers to his own title, “the faithful and true Witness,” thus reminding them of the mission to which he had appointed them, “ye shall be witnesses unto me,” which, at the close, would be fulfilled in them. Not only the opening address, but the closing

promise, indicates the severe trial through which, at last, they had to pass to their thrones and crowns.

He does not charge this church, as he did others, with unsoundness touching vital doctrine, but with a sinful laxity and indifferentism both as to their faith and practice; a tepidness and milk-warm sentimentality, that was nauseating; an easy accommodating themselves to influences around them, that was more sinful than even positive coldness with respect to the truth committed to them. They had become rich in their own estimation, having “need of nothing,” boastful, self-sufficient and arrogant, when he who sees the heart saw they were miserably “poor, blind and naked.” Yet, notwithstanding all this, he gives them the assurance that he loves them, and the proof of it in that he rebuked and chastened them; for whom God loves, he does not let alone.

Now let us look for the application of this Symbol. The Laodicean Church state embraces a period extending from the Philadelphian state until the Second Advent. There are good and sufficient reasons to place its commencement about A. D. 1776, when the church in Europe and America ceased to suffer from the civil rulers the vigorous persecutions that had followed it onward from the days of John the Baptist. From this period the churches multiplied, and, their substance no longer distrained for “fines and penalties,” they commenced to rapidly increase in “this world's goods”—on account of their great numbers and wealth they began to be esteemed respectable, and treated with consideration, by those who had persecuted and shed their blood. In turn, the witnesses of Christ began to weaken in the boldness and faithfulness of their testimony against the heresies and Antichristian position the sects occupied towards the kingdom of Christ, and in this way, with thief-like stealthiness, a false liberalism stole in upon the churches which had fruited into full affiliation with manifest heresies in their organized forms, and fellowship with the teachers of those heresies by public association with them.

Notice again the charges brought against the churches of this period, not because they had departed from or renounced any vital, fundamental doctrine of Christ, but their sinful indifferentism, nauseating tepidness and lukewarmness with respect to all that pertain to the honor and cause of their Divine Master. They had not only become indifferent in the defense of the faith delivered to them, but lukewarm in their opposition to the destructive errors that threatened the corruption and very existence of His Truth. But more than this, the churches of this period had become, in their own estimation, “rich and increased in goods”-had become more than self-complacent, even boastful, saying, we “have need of nothing.” The goods and riches in this passage are symbolic, and represent a species different from themselves, i. e.. its numbers, its social influence, the number and the talents of its ministry, its activities and ability to accomplish desired results, and its respectability.

Now all this is true of the churches of Christ in this age as it never has been since Christ established his church on earth; and, when I allude to his church, I mean those organizations that, in their form of government, the order of their ministry, the form of their ordinances, the character of their membership, and their form of doctrine, conform to the teachings of the New Testament, and that have been known since the fourth century as Waldenses and Anabaptists.

We, as a people, have vastly increased in numbers—over two millions of adult members in America alone; and we are continually boasting of this sort of wealth. But how poor in a really regenerated and truly spiritual membership we may be, the one who walks amid the golden candlesticks alone knows, and he pronounces us miserably “poor.”

Doubtless there never was so large a proportion of our membership unregenerated as it is to-day, and becoming yearly more so through the specious revivals and periodical excitements that sweep over the land under the control of professional revival makers and their singers, by which thousands are pressed into our churches unrenewed in heart and with sadly perverted views of Christianity. We were never before possessed of so much material wealth.

Cathedral-like temples for worship, costing from $50,000 to hundreds of thousands, are seen in our larger cities and more populous towns. These are the monuments of our pride rather than of our piety; for in them are buried, as in the earth, the talents the Lord committed to his disciples to put into active employment for the conversion of the heathen, and the extension of his kingdom until he comes. It was not until the churches became corrupted, not until piety lapsed into pride, that costly houses were built. While the apostles lived, only the plainest edifices were provided for public worship, and indeed few churches owned the houses they worshiped in—Paul had no meeting house in Rome, and he nowhere exhorted the brethren to build one.

We have, as a people, won a high social position on account of our wealth, intelligence and refinement, and of this we are proud and boastful, and it has become a cross we feel quite unable to bear, to sacrifice all this by a faithful advocacy and defense of the doctrine of Christ, so unpopular and hateful to the world and false religionists.

We have already become proud of our ministers, and boast of their number, their talents and power, but the

thoughtful observe with saddened hearts that as they become eminent and popular, the temptation to “save their lives,” i.e., enhance their personal influence and popularity, to win the favor of men and to gain or retain rank with educated teachers of the popular religious errors of the day, is far too strong with most, and they are influenced to affiliate with them, and thus acknowledge them before the world as their equals in all things that constitute true ministers of Christ. It would be quite unsupportable for one of our ministers in any of our cities or towns not to be allowed a seat in the evangelical pastors' conference. This is a trap that seldom fails to commit our preachers to a recognition of the preachers of all the sects as truly evangelical ! Thus they surrender every inch of ground upon which to stand to protest against their errors, and, as witnesses, their voices are effectually hushed, and they lose their moral courage and sink down into indifferency with respect to the maintenance of all the principles that distinguish us from the adherents of false doctrine.

We may not shut our eyes to the painful truth; Spiritual declension and religious indifferentism, widespread, inveterate and increasing, characterize the churches of this period, and furnish indubitable proof to us that we have progressed very far into the Laodicean church period. Where only a score of years .ago there was, in comparison to the present, an ardor of life, a zeal for, and devotion to the distinguishing principles and doctrines of Christ, and a cheerful liberality in giving to extend the cause, there is to-day almost the absence of life manifested; and, as to warmth, only a little less than the coldness of death. It is even urged that the preaching and defense of the doctrines and ordinances of Christ is at the sacrifice of all that is spiritual in religion, and it does not fail to bring down upon the head of the offender the bitter opposition and persecution of his own brethren. It seems now to be considered as the highest type of spirituality to indorse, by affiliating with, one form of religion as fully equal to another, and to regard that man as only a “sectarian bigot” who will hold and “teach the ordinances as they were delivered,” and have no religious association with false teachers. It is boldly maintained from the pulpit and the religious press that a zeal for the doctrines and ordinances of the church is an evident sign of lack of spirituality; and it has passed into an adage with some, that such “are more partisans than Christians.” And those ministers and public teachers are held up as models of piety who ignore ecclesiasticism altogether, and consider one religious organization equal to another, however unscriptural in its form, or heretical in its doctrine, and freely co-operates in religious meetings. This is called Christian liberality, and a “catholic spirit; “but it is a sickly and sinful sentimentalism.

Our ministry is feeling this declension most severely, for so little interest is taken in the stated preaching of the Word that they are driven to the fields and the school-rooms to feed their families. Our religious press is feeling it, for only here and there a Christian family patronizes a religious periodical. Our missionaries, in home and foreign fields, are withheld or recalled from the white harvest field because the churches refuse them bread.

If this state of things is allowed to continue, what must the end be ? Evidently this spacious liberalism and indifferency, if left to grow, will work the extinction of true Christianity. But the Master will not let those he loves alone, he will rebuke and chastise them into dutiful obedience. He has been for years past raising up within his churches a body of witnesses to plead for the maintenance of our principles, and to rebuke those who would approve, fellowship, and affiliate with the teachers of acknowledged heresies, and while, as yet, these are lukewarm when compared with the faithful witnesses and martyrs of old, yet there is pleasing evidence that the tone of their protest has yearly acquired depth and strength and boldness.

The statement of the 19th verse—”As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten : be zealous therefore and repent “—seems to us pregnant with meaning. He can not recover his church from its sinful lukewarmness by letting it alone—he must rebuke and chasten it. In this message, by the angel of the church, he administers a severe rebuke, and he may rebuke them instrumentally by the agency of the faithful witnesses he is raising up in their midst, to protest against their indifferency and sinful inconsistencies, while he foreshadows the fact that he has chastisements in store for them. The fires of persecution by which his martyr church was kept purified must be rekindled, the persecuting power he has restrained for a sea, son, while his church has grown rich and degenerate, must he let loose to chastise them until they will be awakened out of their state of apathy and indifference. It may be necessary, in order to recall them to their senses, for those self-same organizations with which they “have lived deliciously “to shed their blood and waste them, as they did in former ages. They will then be made to see and feel the true character of these organizations, 1. e., that they are opposed to the true churches, as they are to the truth of Christ.

Persecutions yets await the churches of Christ, which, in comparison to those of the past, are denominated by the Holy Spirit, “The Great Tribulation,” and only those who are able to pass through it, and triumphantly overcome, will be allowed to sit down with Christ on his throne. The Laodicean church state, then, closes with Christ being at the door and knocking, which event will be considered in the next chapter.

CHAPTER XI.

The Coming Of Christ For His Saints.

The Second Coming of Christ under two Aspects—He Comes “into the Air” for his Saints—The “Resurrection of the Just”—The Translation or Rapture of Living Saints—They meet their Lord in the Air and Receive their Glorified Bodies.

THE Second Advent of Christ manifestly has two aspects or comprises two events: 1. His coming into the air for all his saints, and 2. His visible appearing in glory to the whole world with all his saints.

The first is that aspect of his coming which relates to the resurrection of all the righteous dead and the translation of all the then living saints, and the second is that aspect which relates to the unbelieving Jews and Gentiles—the world. He comes not in the same manner to his friends and his foes.

I propose in this chapter to examine what the Scriptures teach concerning the first of these two wonderful and most desirable events.

Christ directly foretold that the last event, just preceding his appearance to the world, would be “a time of trouble such as never had been experienced since there was a nation on this earth, and such as never will be again,” which has been denominated “The Tribulation Period,” occasioned by the pouring out of the vials of the last plagues upon a guilty world of implacable enemies of God. Just preceding this event, Christ will come into the air-Paradise—and with the voice of a trumpet, awaken “those that are asleep in Jesus,” from Abel to the one who died but an hour before, restore to them their bodies glorified, and immediately after catch up, change and glorify all the saints then living on the earth. Thus all the saints who have ever lived on earth will be taken up and receive their glorified bodies, and will evermore be with the Lord.

These raised and changed saints are, doubtless, those referred to by Paul as “those who are Christ's at his coming,” and by John (Rev. vii.) the 144,000, a definite for an indefinite number.

While all Christian expositors hold and teach that there will be a resurrection of all the dead, they are divided upon the question whether it be a simultaneous or a mixed resurrection, i. e., do the Scriptures teach that there will be a distinction as to time between the resurrection of the righteous and of the wicked? The settlement of this question is of the first importance to a Scriptural Eschatology—to the right understanding of the doctrine of the things that must shortly come to pass. The proper interpretation of the Scriptures—not human opinions—must and will settle this question.

The Faith Of The Old Testament Saints.

It was the general belief of all orthodox Jews that the resurrection of the just would precede, and be separate from that of the unjust.

Martha's answer to Jesus is sufficient proof of this.

“Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day.”—John 11:24.

She refers to the resurrection of the just only, and not to a mixed resurrection of saints and sinners; the ground for this faith they must have derived from their Sacred Scriptures.

Daniel, alluding to a resurrection at the time of Jacob's trouble, says : “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.

“And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars forever and ever.”—Dan. 12:2-3.

Tragelles translates this, “Many from among the sleepers shall arise, . . these shall be unto everlasting life; but those (the rest of the sleepers who do not awake at this time) shall be unto shame.”

This resurrection to everlasting life entitled the saints to see face to face and to be associated with their Redeemer.

Job's faith also took hold on this hope which he expressed, notwithstanding all the attempts of critics to rob his language of the idea. To our mind he said nothing sensible unless he expressed this hope of the ancient saints: “For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and in after time will stand upon the earth; and after this my skin is destroyed, yet in my

flesh† shall I see God : whom I shall see for my self and my eyes behold, and not another.”(Job 19:26-27.)

Before considering the passages in the Old and New Covenants referring to the resurrection, I wish to call attention to this fact in their construction, viz.: That in all passages which refer to the indiscriminate resurrection of the dead it is h anastasiv twn necrwn, the resurrection of the dead; but when the resurrection of the righteous is alluded to, it is ec twn necron, the resurrection from or out of the dead. That the preposition from is never used when the resurrection of the wicked is spoken of. I refer the reader to Acts 17:23; 23:6; 24:21; 1Cor.15:12-42.

Lightfoot recognizes this as an invariable rule. “‘The general resurrection from the dead,’ says Prof. Lightfoot, ‘whether good or bad, is h anastasiv twn necrwn (e.g., 1 Cor.15:42); on the other hand, the resurrection of Christ, and of those who rise with Christ, is generally [h] anastasiv [h] ec necrwn, (Luke 20:35; Acts 4:2; 1 Peter 1:3); the former includes both the anastasiv zwhv and the anastasiv. crisewv ( John 5:29 ); the latter is confined to the anastasiv zwhv.’” † This is rendered by some (Conant, Ewald, et al.) sine carne mea —without my flesh—and these interpret it to teach an existence beyond the grave; while C. V. and Rosenmuller, tamene carmine mea videbo Deum, i. e., corpore mea redintegrato, in my body restored I will see God my Redeemer. And this has been the hope of Christians in all ages.

CHAPTER XII.

THE TRANSLATION OF ALL LIVING SAINTS.

T

Christ comes into the Air for his Saints—They are suddenly Caught up, Glorified and Receive their Rewards— They remain in Paradise until the Tribulation Period has Passed.

HIS is what is called by writers on Eschatology, “The Rapture of the Saints,” the taking of them away from the evil to come, from the tribulation and distress of nations (Matt. 24:21) which will take place during the period intervening between the coming of Christ for his saints and his appearing to all the world with his saints.

I have shown that the righteous dead will first rise, after which all the saints, then living on the earth at that time, will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air. Paul tells us that— “The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel 1 with the trump of God, and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we that are alive that are left, shall together with them be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, [not heaven, not in sight of men, but into Paradise, whence the dead saints came for their bodies] and so shall we ever be with the Lord.”—1 Thess. 4:16-17.

It will not be announced by trumpet sounds audible to the world, or characterized by the visible pomp and pageantry that will make notable his coming with his saints to judge the nations, but his sleeping saints will hear his voice, and come forth, and their open graves may be the only evidence to the living wicked that they have been raised, while the living saints will be silently as suddenly caught away, “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, to meet their Lord in the air”—Paradise— and the sudden absence from their midst of all the recognized righteous will be the only warning of their coming doom the wicked will ever receive. For, instead of the world growing better until entirely or mostly converted before the coming of Christ, and, in fact, to constitute his coming, as the opponents of a pre-millennial and personal coming teach, “evil men and seducers will wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived,” and scoffing infidelity will be the characteristic feature and sign of the last day.

“Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for, since the fathers fell asleep all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.”—2 Pet. 3:3-4.

The translation of God's children above the clouds of heaven, there to remain during the period that God visits an unbelieving, wicked world with desolating punishments, is most clearly revealed both by the prophets and Christ himself through his evangelists and apostles. Isaiah foretells it in these words :

“Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee; hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the Lord cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity; the earth also shall disclose her blood and shall no more cover her slain.”—Isa. 26:20-21.

Christ refers us to the days that were before the flood and in connection with it, as foreshadowing the state of the world and the scenes in connection with his second coming: “And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. . . . I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall be taken and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other left. And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord ? And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body is, thither will the eagles be gathered together.”—Luke 17:26-37.

The disciples very naturally asked where they should be taken. Christ only answered them, “Where the body is, there also the eagles will assemble.”

That is, where he was in his glorified body, thither the whole body of his people, raised and glorified, would be gathered together unto him, to be evermore with him.

It seems worthy of remark that in the above passage Christ evidently anticipates the discoveries of scientists by some thousand of years, indicating as he does the spherical form of the earth and its revolution on its axis, making day and night in different localities at the same time. At one place it will be evening, at another midnight, at another cock-crowing, at another morning, or, as in the passage just quoted, in one part of the world two men will be asleep together at the time for slumber, in another two women will be preparing the morning meal, and in another part, still further east, two men will be plowing the field, when one will be taken, mounting up as on the wings of an eagle, to meet the Lord in the air, and the other shall be left to the deluge of wrath that shall break in successive waves of desolation over an utterly godless world.

Paul alluded to this event as a gathering together unto Christ: “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him.”(2 Thess. 2:1.

See 1 John 4.)

This promise of being caught away from earth and “gathered together unto Christ,” and with all his brethren, was to Paul, as it should be to us, a most precious promise, and how comforting it was to the souls of those persecuted and suffering saints.

But let us for a moment look to the days before and in connection with the flood.

Was not the translation of Enoch, the eighth from Adam, prior to God's visiting the wickedness of the age with his desolating fury, a prophecy of the translation of the saints before the distress of nations and the inauguration of a new dispensation ? But when God's judgments were ripe and ready to fall upon the ungodly antediluvians, did he not remove Noah and his family from among them by inclosing them in the chambers of the ark? Was there a saint without the ark after Noah and his family entered? How long was it after God closed the door before the deluge came? Were these not days of fearful suspense and torturing anguish and despair ?

So it will be at the unseen coming of Christ for his saints; they, and they alone, will hear his voice, and in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, will be silently caught up to meet the Lord in the air—Paradise—whither the risen saints have just preceded them to receive their glorified bodies.

Christ, in his last address to his disciples, assures them of his return for them, at which time he would receive them unto himself, nevermore to be separated from him.

“And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.”(John 14:3.

See Rev. 14. also.)

The last sound that lingers upon our ear as the formula of the communion is repeated, is a refrain of this blessed hope: “For as often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup ye show the Lord's death till he come—till he come.”

Paul minutely describes this momentous and, to the child of God, most glorious event: “Behold, I show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall be changed. In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead [i. e., righteous dead] shall be raised incorruptible, and we [all who may

then be living] shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, death is swallowed up in victory. O Death, where is thy sting? O grave [Hades], where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast. unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.”— 1 Cor. 15:51-58.

To the church at Thessalonica thus : “But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord, shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air : and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words.”—1 Thess. 4:13-18.

“Prevent them which sleep.” He did not use this word, but a Greek word which means “to precede “or “go before,” and this was the meaning of our English word “prevent” three hundred years ago, and we still find the term “prevenient “sometimes used, e.g., “prevenient grace,” grace going before an act. The saints who are upon the earth when Christ comes for his saints, will not, in the Rapture, precede or go before those whose bodies are in their graves, for the dead in Christ will first rise, and then the living ones will be caught up to meet them in Paradise.

“Oh, what rapture shall thrill the hearts of the redeemed, what ecstasy of bliss shall ravish the sorrowing, tempted, troubled disciples of Jesus, when responding to his shout that will sound to the world only as a strange clap of thunder, they shall in the twinkling of an eye be changed into the likeness of his glorious body, and together with the risen saints, hand in hand with some whose graves have cast a shadow all along their pathway of life, they shall ascend to be with him forever, and to be done with sin and suffering forever! But what amazement and horror must seize upon the careless, the unbelieving, the worldly, when the husband shall miss from his side the wife who had wept bitter tears over his rejection of her Saviour, and the child shall look around in vain for the mother whose entreaties had been disregarded, and the friends who mingled their sympathies shall silently and suddenly part to meet no more! ‘“What horrors shall roll o'er the Godless soul, Waked from its death-like sleep; Of all hope bereft, and to judgment left Forever to wail and weep! ‘“O worldling, give ear, while the saints are near!

Soon must the tie be riven, And men, side by side, God's hand shall divide, As far as hell's depths from heaven. ‘“Some husband whose head was laid on his bed, Throbbing with mad excess, Awakes from that dream, by the lightning's gleam, Alone in his last distress: ‘“For the patient wife, who through each day's life Watched and wept for his soul, Is taken away, and no more shall pray— For the judgment thunders roll ! ‘“The children of day are summoned away; Left are the children of night— Sealed is their doom, for there’s no more room; Filled are the mansions of light!’”

This day of the resurrection of the dead and the rapture of the living saints is called in the Scriptures

The Day Of Our Redemption.

It is properly so called because our perfect redemption, purchased by the precious blood of Christ, will not be consummated and made manifest until that day, for not until then will we exchange these bodies of our humiliation for bodies fashioned like unto the glorious body of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul, writing to the church at Philippi, says: “For our [politumenos, not conversation, but registration as citizens]-citizenship is in heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ; who shall change our vile body—[the body of our humiliation] that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all this unto himself.”—Phil. 3:20-21.

Paul points to this day as the time when the saints will have, through Christ, the victory over death and Hades; for the living righteous will not be touched by the sting of death, and the righteous dead will be delivered as .”prisoners of hope” from the custody of Hades into the glorious liberty of the children of God. It is called the “Day of our Redemption,” since it is the carrying of our adoption into effect, manifesting us to the world as the sons of God. “And when these things begin to come to pass then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.”—Luke 21:28.

“And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our bodies.”—Rom. 8:23.

“And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.”—Eph. 4:30.

This work Christ secured by his resurrection from the dead.

“Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.”—Heb. 9:12.

It is by pre-eminence called the day of our salvation that is drawing daily nearer.

“And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to wake out of sleep, for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.”—Rom. 13:11.

No one who had been .in heaven could say this, but as nothing imperfect has, or can ever enter heaven and stand in the presence of God, therefore no saint will ever appear there until redeemed and perfectly saved, body as well as soul. All saints will be glorified.

The Manifestation Of The Sons Of God. It is the day when the saints will be for the first time made manifest to the angels and the world as the sons of God, by the act of glorification, being made like Christ—the body like its glorious head: “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not 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 3:2.

The sense of this will be made clear by a more literal rendering : “It hath not yet been made manifest, or seen, what or how glorious we shall be.” No saint has ever yet been glorified, and, therefore, made fit for heaven, or to be presented before the Father and the holy angels, and when one is glorified and presented, at that same time all will be glorified together.

This event is called the “manifestation of the sons of God.” “For the earnest expectation of the creation waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.”—Rom. 8:19.

The Judgment of Rewards, or the Justification by Works.

It is when Christ comes for his saints that they will appear before him to be justified by their works and receive the judgment of awards for all they have labored and endured, sacrificed and suffered for him in this world.

“We [Paul is addressing Christians] must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things he hath done, whether good or bad.”(2 Cor. 5:10; Rom. 14:12.) Then will the parable of the talents be fulfilled and the servant who made ten talents, by the faithful use of the talents intrusted, be made ruler over ten cities, and the one who made five, over five cities, while the evil, who was only a professed servant, will be left with

those whose resurrection will be to shame and everlasting contempt. That there will be different awards, positions of honor and glory, according as our works are found to be by the impartial Judge, is recognized by the inspired writers under both dispensations. Daniel says: “They that be wise—[i. e., justified, barely saved, and nothing more] shall shine as the brightness of the firmament [with an undistinguished light] and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars forever and ever.”—Dan. 12:3.

Paul says: “There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars : for one star differeth from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead.”—1 Cor. 15:41-42.

Salvation is solely by grace, and is not in the least conditioned upon our works; but God graciously rewards his children for each good work they have done from the right motive, love to him, even the giving to his disciples a cup of cold water; but there will be some, and very many ministers, who will receive no reward in that world, no position of honor, but barely salvation.

Paul, in his first letter to the church at Corinth (ch. iii.), seems to address a warning to ministers and masterchurchbuilders under Christ, the Great Architect, and he warns his fellow-laborers to take heed with what material they build upon the foundation Christ has laid.

“And if on this foundation any one build up gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay, straw, the work of each will become manifest, for the day will show it, because it is revealed by fire, and so every one's work, whatever it is, the same fire will prove. If the work of any one remain which he built up, he will receive a recompense; if the work of any one shall be consumed, he will suffer loss; he himself, however, will be saved, but as through a fire”(Emp. Diaglott)—

Escape with nothing but his bare life.

If this is of universal application, to sinners as well as to saints, then the doctrine of universal salvation is taught by this passage - i. e., all men saved, but their evil deeds - sins —burned up,—as though the sin could be punished and the sinner receive no detriment!

The Prize Day. This will be the day that the prizes will be awarded to Christians—not salvation, which is a free gift and not contingent upon works, but something more than salvation, and which does depend upon the Christian's works and his faithfulness in this life.

“Behold, I come quickly,” says the Rewarder to his churches, “and my reward is with me to give every man as his works shall be [deserve]. No Christian has yet received his reward; the apostles have not theirs; therefore, no one has yet enjoyed the reward of heaven. This Christ and the Holy Spirit positively assert.—John 3:13; Acts 2:34.

“Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize ? So run, that ye may obtain. . . . And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.”—1 Cor. 9:24-25.

“I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.”—Phil. 3:14.

The fruition of heaven in the very presence of God must be the highest prize, and those who have attained to that fruition have gained the highest prize. But no prize will be given until Christ appears.

It Is The Crowning Day. Those who are rewarded with the highest vocation, i. e., to reign with Christ, will receive their crowns at Christ's coming, but not before. There can be no doubt of this.

Peter says : “And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.”—1 Pet. 5: 4.

Paul says : “Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give me at that day; and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.”-2 Tim. 4:8.

How is it that, notwithstanding these clear and explicit teachings of the apostles, we constantly hear it from

the lips of our most learned ministers, editors and authors, as well as generally from those called unlearned, when speaking of a departed saint, “He has gone to his reward,” or, “He has received his reward,” “He has received his crown of glory,” “He is reigning with Christ in heaven,” etc. ? Do they not know that Christ has not yet been crowned, and that he is not reigning in heaven, and, as Messiah, will never reign there, but when he is crowned and reigns, it will be on the throne of his father David, which was an earthly throne ? If any Christians are now crowned and reigning in heaven, over whom, pray, are they reigning—who are their subjects ? Not God, nor the angels, and certainly not over one another! No...

Back to: Shayne’s Home Page

“A PEOPLE MUST BE PREPARED.” The special mission of Christ’s kingdom in this Dispensation.

It certainly was for a specific purpose.

If I rightly apprehend it, it is: 1. To make a revelation to the world of its ruin by sin, and the great work of redemption undertaken by Christ for its recovery—that the provisions of this remedy were all-embracing—to be offered to every man of Adam's fallen race. The organization of all the beneficiaries of this grace into distinct bodies was, that, as organized and co-operative forces, they might act the more efficiently and potentially in preaching the gospel to all nations, and by the proper administration of the ordinances, preserve pure the vital doctrines of Christianity. It should be borne in mind that, since the ordinances set forth in most forceful symbolism, all the saving truths of the gospel, so long as they are duly administered, the faith of the church will be preserved in its purity, but that a corruption of the saving doctrines follow immediately upon a perversion of the ordinances. Let these be perverted in their design, and the more extensive the missionary operations of the churches, the greater the injury resulting to both Christianity and the world. The first and most important work of the churches is to guard the purity of the ordinances, that a pure faith and a pure practice may be conserved.

This fact should rebuke those Baptists who now are carrying fagots to the feet of the faithful few who are witnessing for a pure faith and a pure practice, while they at the same time encourage missions!

2. It is not the mission of the churches of Christ, the only constituents of his kingdom, to convert all nations, as many teach, and especially upon the platforms of missionary conventions, to the manifest disparagement of Christianity and discouragement of all thinking Christians. There is nothing in the teachings or the effects of the preaching of Christ and his apostles to warrant the idea. How very little did Christ himself and his eighty-two official ministers, with the aid of manifold miracles, accomplish during his entire ministry! In his commission to his apostles he does not command them to preach to the nations until all were converted, and then the end should come, but to preach the gospel “for a witness to all nations, and then shall the end come,” i. e., the end of this dispensation. If this be the mission of the “gospel of the kingdom,” then has it been a tremendous success; but if to convert the world, it has been a most signal and disheartening failure, and it is the part of honesty to confess it. It is questionable if there are as many real Christians in proportion to the population of the earth to-day as there were twelve hundred years ago, and the number is doubtless growing less, while mere nominal Christianity may be increasing. Christ never designed that all the world should be converted by the preaching of the gospel in this or the age to come. He knew it would not be, and therefore he never made it the mission of his churches to accomplish it. But what he commanded the apostles was accomplished by them; for, before the death of the last one of them—even before the close of the Jewish Dispensation—the hope of the gospel had been preached in every nation of the known earth. (Col. 1:23.) It must be confessed that we are very nigh the end of this Age, since the Bible and the living minister have been sent to nearly every nation of the habitable earth, and island of the sea, and thousands and tens of thousands in all lands are renouncing idolatry for the Cross. Yes, the gospel is accomplishing its glorious work, the mission of the kingdom in this Age is well-nigh completed, and his people may lift up their joyful eyes, since “the day of their redemption draweth nigh.”

"If the world is to be converted by the learning of theological schools, the eloquence of modern pulpits, and the efforts of our boards of home and foreign missions, aided by Bible and tract societies, why should Christ 'come in flames of fire, taking vengeance on a guilty world,' striking through kings in the way of His wrath, 'executing his vengeance in fury, and his judgments in flaming fire,' visiting a scoffing world with judgments and distress such as they never heard of?

This idea originated in the self-sufliciency and importance of the human heart; it is the popular doctrine of the schools and doctors of our modern divinity, and tickles and lulls to repose a guilty world. It will prove a failure, and the world will be made skeptical thereby, and reject it as false. Theirs is the dangerous theory; for they teach the world that the Gospel was designed to do this, and should it fail to accomplish it, as it will, universal unbelief will sweep over the land, or to the extent of the influence of their teaching. But the Gospel was not sent to convert the whole world, but only to be preached as a witness to all the nations until God should call out from among the Gentiles a people for His name. And this it will do, and not fail, while the subjection of a rebellious world and wicked nations to Christian rule and government will be effected by Christ Himself at His second advent." -[Graves in "Satan Dethroned"-Ed.]

A People Must Be Prepared.

Christ has a definite object to accomplish in the dispensation of his grace in this Age beyond the mere salvation of sinners. Before his first Advent he sent John, not to convert a whole nation or city, but to preach to all, and make ready a people prepared to receive him, and with whom he might form the nucleus of his church and kingdom. He is doing the self-same thing now, although on a far grander scale. The gospel is not confined to one nation and race of people as then, but is being published to every race, among all nations, and for the self-same purpose, not to convert all of any nation or city or village--and in the course of eighteen hundred and eighty years it has not converted a race or nation, a city or town, however small-but “to take out of them a people for his name.”(Acts 15:14-18) This people will be prepared to receive him, prepared and qualified by the instruction and discipline as subjects of his government in this, to be associated with him as joint rulers over the nations in the Dispensation to come. In this, his children, though heirs of the kingdom in its universal and glorious phase, are servants and subjects, under tutelage and government until the time appointed: “Now I say that the heir, as long as he is a child, does not differ at all from a slave, though he is master of all, but is under guardians and stewards until the time appointed by the father.”

(Gal. 4:1-2) But this feature will be more fully treated in future chapters. If these positions are well grounded, we are warranted in drawing the following

Practical Conclusions.

1.

That John the Baptist was a duly called and qualified Christian minister, belonging to the Gospel, and not the Legal Dispensation.

2.

That he was both a member of Christ's church and officer of his kingdom.

3.

That he preached the Gospel, and his baptism was therefore as valid as those administered by the apostles.

4. We have proof conclusive that the church and the kingdom of Christ were institutions of the Gospel Dispensation, and not reformed phases of the old Jewish Theocracy.

5. We conclude that the locality of the churches, which alone constitute the kingdom of Christ, is this earth, and that where he has no church he has no kingdom.

6. We conclude that Christ has no kingdom in heaven, and that it is teaching falsely when we pray him, as so many do, that when we die he may “ save us in his upper and better kingdom.” We teach those who hear us that we are not saved before death, and do not want to be, and that Christ has two kingdoms—one on earth and one in heaven—which is not true.

7. We conclude that a great deal of the teaching in our missionary meetings is contrary to the Word and intent of God, i. e., when it is urged as the bounden duty of the churches to convert the whole world by missions, and that it is fast being done by money, and even the time computed when the last heathen shall be converted, etc., etc.

8. We conclude, if Christ’s second and glorious Advent is waiting upon the Gospel being published among all nations as a witness by the instrumentality of the churches, that by greater zeal, activity and sacrifice the coming of Christ can be hastened, and this makes clear an inexplicable passage as it stands in our Common Version : “Looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God.” (2Pet. 3:12.) What a powerful incentive to push forward the missionary enterprise on the part of those who love and earnestly desire the Presence of the blessed Lord once more upon this earth!

The times of the Gentiles must be fulfilled, and their fullness be brought in.

It is clearly predicted that the present desolated condition of the Jews, and of their city and country, must continue until this second prophecy is fulfilled. The prophecies referring to both events are : 1.

“And for the overspreading of abominations he [the king of the North,] shall make it desolate even until the consummation and that determined, shall be poured upon the desolate.”—Dan. 9:27.

2.

“And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”—Luke 21:24.

3.

“That blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles be come in.”—Rom. 11:5, 25.

4.

“But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles, and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.” —Rev. 11:2.

There are a variety of opinions as to the meaning of these passages. Commentators are divided between these two : (1.)

Until the time appointed for the domination of the Gentiles and their oppression of the Jews is accomplished,

after which the Jews will return to their land, and rebuild their city.

(2.)

Until the full number determined by God to be saved out of the Gentile nation shall come in—i. e., into the kingdom—and be saved.

It is quite clear to my mind that both these views are established by these predictions. Daniel, Luke and Revelations certainly refer to the time, and Paul manifestly to the complement of a definite number to come in; i. e., to be converted out of the Gentiles.

Let the thoughtful reader examine these suggestions: 1.

That Christ and his saints are to reign over all the earth, in the Dispensation to come, is taught in both Covenants.

No unregenerate person is to have any share in the government or instruction of the nations in that age.

2. The number of saints required for this " high vocation " will be many millions, since it will require not less than five per cent. of the population of a country to govern and instruct it properly.

3.

Christ can not come and establish his reign on this earth, until there have been a sufficient number of Jews and Gentiles converted to be associated with him as rulers and instructors—i. e., to subserve the ends of good government and the most perfect instruction of the entire race.

4. If a sufficient number has not yet been saved to accomplish this, Christ can not come to establish his jurisdiction over the nations.

5.

When this number is converted and prepared for his service, “he will come and will not tarry.”

6. The mission of his churches, by the preaching of the gospel and the energizing influences of the Holy Spirit, is to gather in this full and required number.

The greater, therefore, their zeal, activity and sacrifice, the sooner this end will be accomplished. This appears to me a satisfactory explanation of this perplexing passage, viz.: “Expecting and hastening the presence of the day of God” (literally translated). The passage, as it stands in our Common Version, is inexplicable.

2Pe 3:12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? {hasting…: or, hasting the coming} Php 1:6 Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ: {perform: or, finish} While all the true lovers of Christ must certainly expect and earnestly long for his coming, they are exhorted to hasten his coming by their efforts, as instruments in God's hands, to complete the number that must be saved before Christ can come and reign. May we not, therefore, conclude, with reason, that as Jewish saints will in that day reign over the seed of Abraham, when the fullness of Israel has been gathered, that the Dispensation of the Gospel closed to that race, and was given to the Gentiles; so that this Gentile Dispensation of gospel privileges, will be continued until the fullness—the requisite number, known only to the Omniscient— shall have been saved out of all the nations to be associated with Christ “as kings and priests” for the Gentile nations, and will then be suddenly closed by the coming of Christ “to take to himself his great power and reign?”[see also Gal. 4:9; Acts 15:14-17, 18 -ed.]

This is my view of the subject, and, therefore, as I long for the speedy coming of my Saviour, and, that it may even be in my day, I am anxious for the gospel to be preached and the Bible sent to every nation and people of earth, that the fullness of the Gentiles may be speedily gathered in.

by J. R. Graves in the “Work of Christ in the Covenant of Redemption; Developed in Seven Dispensations.” part III, “Eschatology” ch. III, the “Gospel Dispensation” and ch. VII, the “Prophecies Fulfilling and To Be Fulfilled Before the Coming of Christ.” 1883 A.D.

The Shayne Moses Project

Take the GOSPEL to the JEWS “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!

Isaiah 52:7

This Scripture verse has often been quoted when messengers of the gospel were sent into foreign countries. But who ever considered that it speaks before everything else of the glorious ministry of those who bring peace and salvation to the Jewish people? The apostle Paul used this verse in its correct application. Referring to the Jews he asks: “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!”

(Romans 10:14-15).

Unfortunately, for centuries the Jewish people have been neglected by most ministers of the gospel. Scattered among the nations they experienced indescribable trouble and suffering. This was the result of unbelief and disobedience to God, as it is written: “And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword, among all nations whither the LORD shall lead thee....And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, [even] wood and stone....And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the LORD shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind:”- Deu 28:37,64-65.

Many Jews had early in life bitter experiences of persecution. Rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein† wrote in “Der Judenspiegel” (The Jewish Mirror): “Many a time have they afflicted me from my youth, may Israel now say: Psa 129:1. Mockery, scorn, blows, and all manner of humiliation, have been our portion even at the hands of Christian children. I still remember the stones which were thrown at us as we left the synagogue, and how, when bathing in the river, and powerless to prevent it, we saw them cast our clothes, with laughter and insult, into the water ... It is no wonder that I came to think that Christ Himself was the plague and curse of the Jews - the origin and promoter of our sorrows and persecutions. In this conviction I grew to years of manhood, and still thinking so I became old. I knew no difference between true and merely nominal Christianity”. † [LICHTENSTEIN, Isaac, Rabbi (?-1909).

A Hungarian Rabbi, he preached Messiah Yeshua to his Jewish Hungarian congregation in Tapio-Szele who refused to dismiss him in spite of persecution for years, saying “I shall most willingly retract if you can convince me that I am wrong.” Later witnessed in many parts of the European for twenty years about the truth of Yeshua til his death. He died on Oct. 16, 1909, leaving writings explaining how he read a copy of the New Testament after 40 years of work as a rabbi in Hungary and was impressed by "the greatness, power, and glory of this book, formerly a sealed book to me. All seemed so new to me and yet it did me good like the sight of an old friend.... I had thought the New Testament to be impure, a source of pride, of selfishness, of hatred, and of the worst kind of violence, but as I opened it I felt myself peculiarly and wonderfully taken possession of. A sudden glory, a light flashed through my soul. I looked for thorns and found roses; I discovered pearls instead of pebbles; instead of hatred, love; instead of vengeance, forgiveness; instead of bondage, freedom." A letter to his son, a doctor, reports that "From every line in the New Testament, from every word, the Jewish spirit streamed forth light, life, power, endurance, faith, hope, love, charity, limitless and indestructible faith in God." Others, hating the idea of a long-term rabbi turning "renegade," attack Lichtenstein. His reply: "I have been an honored rabbi for the space of 40 years, and now, in my old age, I am treated by my friends as one possessed by an evil spirit, and by my enemies as an outcast. I am become a butt of mockers, who point the finger at me.

But while I live I will stand on my watchtower, though I may stand there all alone.

I will listen to the words of God." Source More on him at Messianic Art Profiles in Faith. - esn]

How tragic that throughout these years Rabbi Lichtenstein had not heard the gospel of peace. Even believers showed little sympathy and understanding. Where was the Christian witness? where the messengers of salvation? Why did they not obey God’s injunction: “Comfort ye, comfort ye my people! Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem!” (Isaiah 40:1-2)?

Some Christians think: “God has cast away His people!”

But the apostle Paul objects: “God forbid.

For I also am an Israelite... God hath not cast away his people..”

(Romans 11:1-2). On the contrary: Not God but the Christians have cast them away! Some argue: “They have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them”- (Luke 16:29). But how can they know that Messianic prophecy has been fulfilled, if they never see it in the New Testament? - others say: “Leave them alone! They are God’s people and now back in the land!” Yet, according to the Bible it is not enough to be in the land. They must return to God. If they want to be called God’s people, they have to come into a personal relationship with Him! Peter, the apostle to the circumcision, writes to Jewish believers in the Lord Jesus: “In time past ye were not a people, but now ye are the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. For ye were as sheep going astray, but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls” (I Peter 2:10,25; cf. Hosea 1:6-10; 2:23; Isaiah 53:6). Jesus said to the unbelieving Jews: “Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me” (John 10:26-27).

Every Christian knows that the great commission of our Lord to make disciples of all nations begins with the Jewish people (Luke 24:47). He said: “Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8).

How can we fulfill our Lord’s command to bring salvation to the Jewish people? To answer this question let us consider four guiding principles from the letter to the Romans.

1. LOVE THE JEWISH PEOPLE If we want to help people we must first of all love them and be concerned about their salvation. Maybe you find it difficult to love a person because of one reason or another. Then remember: God hates and abhors sin, but He loves the sinner. You must also distinguish between the person and his attitude, not condoning the evil, though loving the person. God desires that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (I Timothy 2:4).

The apostle Paul had a great love for his own people. He writes:

“I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, that I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites...” Romans 9:1-4 Paul wished to be cut off and banished from Christ for the sake and instead of his fellow-countrymen. How did he come to such a love? He was set aflame by Calvary: God’s love was shed abroad in his heart because Messiah died for sinners (Romans 5:5-8). The love of Christ constrained him (2 Cor. 5:14).

We see this love for Israel also in the Old Testament: MOSES, the servant of God, was willing to sacrifice himself for his people so that they might be saved. He pleaded with God: “Oh, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made them Gods of gold. Yet now, if thou wilt forgive their sin-; and if not,

blot me, I pray thee, out of thy book which thou hast written” (Exodus 32:31-32). DAVID, the man after God’s own heart, said a similar prayer: “Let thine hand, I pray thee, O Lord my God, be on me, and on my father’s house; but not on thy people, that they should be plagued” (I Chronicles 21:17).

If Paul, Moses and David loved the Jews, how much more does JESUS love them. The prophet Isaiah speaks of this love, saying: “He was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people (the Jews) was he stricken” (Isaiah 53:8). When Jesus saw the multitudes, he was moved with compassion for them, because they were harassed, and scattered abroad, as sheep having no shepherd (Matthew 9:36). He said: “I lay down my life for the sheep (the Jews).

And other sheep I have (the gentiles), which are not of this fold: them also I must bring” (John 10:15-16).

Do you love the Jews? God loves them with an everlasting love!

(Deuteronomy 7:7-8; Jeremiah 31:3). Should we not also love them? It is amazing how many Christians will tolerate the Jews but do not really love them.

A certain Christian who did not love the Jews once dreamed that he had died and was carried into heaven. It was glorious beyond expression. Angels led him into a wonderful mansion prepared for him.

But after some days he felt uncomfortable for he asked himself: “Where is Joseph whose story in the Bible I liked so much? Where is David the sweet psalmist of Israel?

Where is my beloved apostle Paul? And above all, where is our blessed Lord and Saviour?”

He asked one of the angels for an explanation. And the angel said: “O my dear, we thought you did not like the Jews. Therefore we placed you in a part of heaven, where you would never see them.”-This gave him such a shock that he woke up. Suddenly he realized that these men and most writers of the Bible and the Lord Jesus Himself were Jews. He was pleased that he could still change his attitude toward the Jewish people.

Yes, when we think of the Jewish writers of the Bible and the blessings which they brought to us (2 Peter 1:21; Jeremiah 15:16; Psalm 119:72, 97, 127); when we consider that salvation was given to us through the blood of the King of the Jews (John 4:22; 19:19); when we realize that we gentiles became partakers of the wonderful blessings in the New Covenant which God had made with Israel (Jeremiah 31:31; Romans 9:4; 11:17-20; 15:27; Ephesians 2:11-13; 3:6), then we shall show true gratitude to the Jewish people: We will love them as Paul did.

2. PRAY FOR THEIR SALVATION Paul loved his kinsmen not only in words.

He was concerned about their eternal well-being. Therefore he gave himself to fervent intercession. He says: “Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they might be saved.” Romans 10:1.

He knew that the majority of his people were lost and in need of salvation (Isaiah 53:6; Matthew 7:13-14). “For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.” (Ecclesiastes 7:20).

“All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

Nobody can save himself by his own efforts and good works. How often have Jews (and also gentiles) tried to outweigh their sins with deeds of kindness, being zealous to establish their own righteousness before God and not willing to submit themselves to God’s righteousness?

(Romans 10:3). However, we receive forgiveness and justification as a gift from God, and that only through Messiah Jesus (Isaiah 45:25; 53:11). He is our salvation and righteousness (Jeremiah 23:6; Isaiah 49:6). “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10: 13; cf. Joel 2:32).

Christians are known as those who call on the name of the Lord (I Corinthians 1:2; Acts 9:14, 21).* Paul speaks from personal experience. But how did this violent opponent become ready to call upon the name of Jesus?

He had thought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus (Acts 26:9) This furious persecutor of the Church could never have changed except the believers had loved him and pleaded for his forgiveness. * ["It is as binding on the Church now to preach the Gospel to the Jew for the conversion of “the remnant according to the election of grace,” (Rom 11:5) as it is binding on the Church now to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles “to take out of them a people for His name.”-(Act 15:14) An election of individuals now—Jews and Gentiles—to form a new body—the Bride of Christ; then the blessing of the nations in millennial times, after the return of the Lord."-- from "ISRAEL MY GLORY” Israel’s Mission, and Missions to Israel by John Wilkinson The Founder and Director of the Mildmay Mission to the Jews.---esn]

Fervent prayer is needed! Many Jews are still opposed to the gospel as Paul was in his ignorance and unbelief (1 Timothy 1:13).The apostle says: “As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes.”

(Romans 11:28). What an astonishing statement: Enemies of God and at the same time beloved of God. Yes, God loves His enemies! He loved us while we were yet enemies (Romans 5:8,10). Do you love those who try your patience and oppose the gospel? Paul experienced most persecutions from his own people and yet he loved them (Acts 9:23-24, 29; 13:45, 50; 14:2, 19; 17:5, 13; 18:12; 20:3, 19; 21:11; 23:12-14). For Jesus says: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you” (Matthew 5:44). Jesus practiced what He taught. On the cross, mocked and insulted, He prayed: “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do!” (Luke 23:34). Paul had seen this Divine love which forgives and prays for the persecutors (Acts 22:20). When Stephen was stoned Paul watched over the clothes of the witnesses. And then he saw the love of this wonderful disciple of Jesus who knelt down, and cried with a loud voice: “Lord, lay not this sin to their charge!” (Acts 7:58-60).

Surely Paul could not have been saved if the disciples had not obeyed the Lord’s command: “Love your enemies, bless them, pray for them!”

Are you praying for the Jews? Even for those who are not interested in the gospel: your neighbour, the grocer, the chemist and doctor? Would you not share with them the blessings which are yours in the Messiah? God promised to bless them that bless the descendants of Abraham, the Jews! (Genesis 12:3).

Pray for their salvation! “Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee” (Psalm 122:6).

3. TELL THEM OF THE SAVIOUR Because we received salvation through the Jews and because the first pioneers, who brought the glad tidings to the gentiles, were Hebrew Christians, many of us realize that we are deeply indebted to the Jewish people. While some of us pray daily for them to call on the name of Jesus for their salvation, this is not enough! Paul says: “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?”

Romans 10:14 We must introduce our blessed Lord and Saviour to them. How? Through the Word of God! Jesus says “Search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me!” (John 5:39). No one can be born again and receive eternal life without the living and abiding Word of God (I Peter 1:23-25; John 1:12-14; 1 John 5:11-12).

You may know noble and charitable Jews of whom you think they have no need of being born again. But is it not significant that the Lord Jesus spoke of the necessity of the new birth to a high-ranking theologian, a pious rabbi and member of the ecclesiastical court: “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” (John 3:7). Did you ever consider that the well-known verse John 3:16, the gospel in a nutshell, was first spoken to this rabbi: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life”? The apostle Peter said to the Jewish leaders: “Be it known unto you all, and to all people of Israel ... Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:10-12). Yes, they must be born again! If any Jew believes in Jesus, he shall not perish but have everlasting life. But Jesus said: “If you believe not that I am He (the Messiah and Saviour), ye shall die in your sins” (John 8:24).

Therefore the gospel must be preached to them. Scripture says: It should be brought to the Jews first (Romans 1:16): “it is the power of God unto salvation, to every one that believeth, to the Jew first and also to the Greek” (i.e. the gentile).

Did we bring it first to the Jews? We cannot reverse God’s sequence: To the Jew first! This is taught in God’s Word: 1) God loved them first of all (Exodus 4:22; Deuteronomy 2) To them He entrusted His oracles (Romans 3:2).

3) His judgments come first upon them (Romans 2:9).

4) First to them His grace is revealed (Romans 2:10).

5) The Saviour was sent first to the Jews (Matthew 15:24).

7:7-8).

6) Jesus came to bless them first (Acts 3:26).

7) He sent His disciples first to them (Matthew 10:6).

8) The great commission begins with the Jews (Luke 24:47; Acts 9) The gospel is to the Jews first (Romans 1:16).

10) Paul went always first to the Jews (Acts 26:20; 13:46; 14:1).

1:8).

Take your Bible and read to them the gospel in the Old Testament: That Messiah is born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14); the Seed of the woman (Genesis 3:15); coming out of Bethlehem (Micah 5:2); the suffering Servant of God (Isaiah 52:13-15; 53:1-12); the crucified One (Psalm 22:14-18). Show them the types which speak of the Messiah: Isaac carrying the wood and being laid on the altar (Genesis 22:6-9); the Paschal lamb dying that the first-born might live (Exodus 12:21-30); the sign of the uplifted serpent which saved everyone that looked up in faith (Numbers 21:6-9). Point out to them how clearly it is fulfilled in the New Testament. Give them the testimony of a Jewish person and tell them how you found the Saviour. And while you give to them the Word pray for them that their blind eyes may be opened to see that God’s Word is fulfilled: Salvation has come!

“Arise from the dust! Put on your beautiful garments, my people. Through the Son of Jesse from Bethlehem comes salvation to your soul!”

(From the Jewish prayer book: Inauguration of the Shabbat).

4. SHOW THEM THE LIFE After having spoken about these three vital steps - to love, to pray and to witness, the apostle stresses the importance of Christian living. Many will agree wholeheartedly and say: “Yes, this is most important! Israel suffered much. We must show them sympathy, kindness and friendliness!” Some have gone so far as over-emphasizing the works of love but leaving out the Christian witness. They put all their efforts into material and physical help and neglect the spiritual blessings, not showing them the way to eternal salvation. This is not sufficient!

When Paul speaks about Christian living he means our life must confirm our words of testimony, the glad tidings of peace, the report about Jesus Who took our sins upon Himself that we might have peace (Romans 10:15-16; cf. Isaiah 40:9; 52:7; 53:1; 61:1). He who found righteousness, justification and new life through faith in the Messiah cannot keep quiet about it. “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Romans 10:10; Psalm 40:9-10; 2 Corinthians 4:13). Through this glorious message comes faith also to those who hear it (Romans 10:17).

But they shall not only hear! Lip-service is not enough! (Isaiah 29:13-14). They must see in us the new life showing that we are redeemed and obey the gospel (Romans 10:16). Otherwise they may say: “What you are, speaks so loud that I do not hear what you are saying!” O, that we would understand what a great responsibility we have toward the Jewish people!

Paul asks: “...Did not Israel know?...”

And he refers to the Word of God through Moses: “I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people: and by a foolish nation I will anger you.”

Romans 10:19; Deut. 32:21.

Unfortunately, more have been angered than provoked to jealousy. How angered? Through anti-Semitism, crusades and inquisitions, blood accusations and pogroms, and other persecutions.

There are many who lost all relatives through the holocaust in Europe.

Words are not sufficient to convince them.

They must see the changed life of those who profess to know the Saviour. “The fruit of God’s Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance” (Galatians 5:22). Jesus says: “By their fruits ye shall know them!”

(Matthew 7:16).

“By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another” (John 13:35). Yes, a life that shows the fruit of God’s Spirit, the character and attitude of Jesus, will make a deep impression on the Jewish people. I know a Jewish doctor who was provoked to jealousy by a nurse who reflected the life of Jesus. One day he asked her: “Tell me, why are you so different?” She gave no long explanation but said: “It is through Jesus, doctor!” This made him inquisitive. He wanted to know more about Jesus. So he got a New Testament and discovered how wonderfully prophecy has been fulfilled. He became a sincere believer in his Messiah and Saviour Jesus.

God says: “I WILL PROVOKE THEM TO JEALOUSY!” For that very purpose we received Jesus into our lives. The name Jesus means “Saviour” “Thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21). Paul says that salvation has come to the gentiles to provoke the Jews to jealousy! (Romans 11:11) They will say: “What happened to them? How could their life be so changed?

This could not happen by their own will-power. There is a new Spirit within them.

Indeed, they have found the answer in Jesus! I wish to find Him too!”

Yes, God has given a great responsibility and vocation to all gentiles who know the Saviour. He will work through them to provoke the Jews to jealousy. Like Paul let us say, “Lord, if you will provoke them to jealousy, then I will too. Please do it through me!”

“I magnify mine office: If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and might save some of them.”

Romans 11:13-14 Paul wished to save them by all means. Love is inventive. It will find a way, some new method to bring salvation to the Jews (I Corinthians 9:20-22).

Today we have more possibilities than Paul ever had: think of the many tracts, Christian books, tapes, radio programs, films.

The question is: Are we willing to use these means? Or rather, are we willing to be used by God to fit into His program to provoke the Jews to jealousy?

Dear friend in the Lord, God says: “I WILL PROVOKE THE JEWS TO JEALOUSY!” How can the Lord do this? The apostle Paul says: “Lord, use me! that by any means I may provoke them to jealousy!” May I ask you: “Are you also prepared to make God’s will your own?” Then pray: “Lord, take my life and make of me a Christian who will provoke the Jews to jealousy!”

God expects our help in His great plan to bring salvation (Jesus) to the Jewish people, and He beseeches us to be equipped for the task. Inspired by the Holy Spirit, Paul says: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God. Romans 12:1-2.

This is a slightly edited piece from one of the "Must Read - Articles” off a webpage of: ©1997-2011 Hope Of Israel Baptist Mission, Inc. | PO Box 1700 | Powder Springs, GA 30127 USA; accessed July 2011. http://www.hopeofisrael.net/2011/articles/must_read/take_gospel_to_jew.html A List of Most Famous Messianic Jews; accessed July 2011. http://israel-pro.org/wiki-de/pmwiki.php/Resources/Biographies Introduction to The Collected Writings of Rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein (1824-1909); accessed July 2011. http://www.messiahnj.org/bio-lichtenstein.htm

Why I Believe that Yeshua is the Jewish Messiah: The Story of Rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein; accessed July 2011. http://www.messiahnj.org/bio-lichtenstein.htm “ISRAEL MY GLORY” Israel’s Mission, and Missions to Israel by John Wilkinson The Founder and Director of the Mildmay Mission to the Jews; accessed July 2011. http://www.baptistbiblebelievers.com/BooksoftheBible/ISRAELMYGLORYbyJohnWilkinson1894/tabid/435/Default.aspx

Reasons Why We Should Take the Gospel to Jewish People

+ Because we have all received knowledge of God and salvation from the Jewish people.

“Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.” John 4:22

+ Because there is a blessing for those who bless the descendants of Abraham and a curse on those who curse them.

“Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will shew thee: And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.” Genesis 12:1-3 + Because the Lord is jealous for Zion and angry with those who have persecuted the Jewish people. “. . . Thus saith the LORD of hosts; I am jealous for Jerusalem and for Zion with a great jealousy. And I am very sore displeased with the heathen [that are] at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction.” Zechariah 1:14-15 + Because the priority of evangelism in the New Testament is to the Jewish people. ** Rom 1:16 KJV - For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. + Because God’s heart is for their salvation.

Rom 10:1 KJV - Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. + Because God’s chosen method of reaching them is the preaching of the gospel.

How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace, who bring glad tidings of good things!” Romans 10:14-15 + Because the Jewish people are being restored to the land of Israel in fulfillment of Bible prophecy in preparation for their spiritual rebirth.

Eze 36:24-25 “For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land. Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.” + Because a time of great troubles lies ahead from which only the Messiah Jesus can bring salvation.

Jer 30:7 “Alas! for that day [is] great, so that none [is] like it: it [is] even the time of Jacob's trouble; but he shall be saved out of it.”

Zec 12:10 KJV - And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for [his] only [son], and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for [his] firstborn. + Because these events are a sign that we are living in the last days of this age during which time God will move among Jewish people.

And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled. . . . Then He (Jesus) spoke to them a parable: “Look at the fig tree, and all the trees. When they are already budding, you see and know for yourselves that summer is now near.” Luke 21:24; 29-30 + Because God’s purpose is to bring the elect remnant of Israel to salvation.

And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: “The Deliverer will come out of Zion, And He will turn away ungodliness from Jacob; For this is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.” Romans 11:26-27 + Because they are Christ's brethren according to the flesh.

This is repeated for emphasis. We need to really let this truth sink in. Jesus was indeed a Jew. According to the record of God's infallible Word: "of whom (Israel) as concerning the flesh Christ came" (Romans 9:5). + Because they are lost.

Romans 3:9; 6:23. Christ told the Jews of His day that they would die in their sins unless they believed that He was the Messiah (John 8:24). The way of the Cross is the only way home for Jew as well as Gentile. What a fallacy it is to take the attitude that we have our "religion" and the Jews have theirs, and we should leave each other alone! The stark, sad truth is that the Jew without Christ is LOST! + Because Christ died for them (as well as for us).

Isaiah 53:6, and Romans 10:4, 11-13. Are we constrained by His dying love to witness only to the Gentile? Surely not, for that precious blood was shed as much for Jews as for us. + Because God wants them to be saved.

II Peter 3:9 If we really want to be "in the center of God's will" we will be soul winners, because He is not willing that any should perish. If we by-pass the Jew, we are that much off-center as far as His good and perfect will is concerned. + Because Christ commands us to witness to them.

Mark 16:15 Our marching orders are both explicit and all-inclusive. When our Captain commanded us to witness for Him to all the world, He meant just that.

This includes the Jew, as well as the Gentile. + Because they are especially precious to God. Genesis 12:3, and Zechariah 2:8. This great truth neither condones Israel's sins, nor minimizes God's boundless love for Gentiles as well. But the fact remains that in His sovereignty, He has chosen the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob for a special token of His affection. As children of our Heavenly Father in Christ, what is our attitude toward those who are the "apple of His eye?" + Because they gave us the Word of God. Romans 3:1-2 Fellow Gentile-Christian, have you ever stopped to think that, humanly speaking, we would have no Bible had the Jews not written it under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit? Are we not their debtors, indeed?

+ Because a Jewish missionary died to give us the gospel.

Galatians 2:8, and 2 Timothy 4:6-8 Paul, the greatest of missionaries, was a Jew. He had a love for lost Gentiles that caused him to burn out his life giving them the gospel - the "good news" that a Jewish Christ had died for our sins and risen for our justification! Are we grateful? Do we show it? + Because they will yet conduct the greatest worldwide crusade for Christ.

Matthew 24:14 with Revelation 7:1-14 The shadows are lengthening and deepening as this age rushes toward its predicted end, to wind up in unprecedented evil and feel the unprecedented wrath of God in the "great tribulation." We believe the true Church, the Body and Bride of Christ, will be raptured before the judgment-stroke falls. Then the task of preaching the gospel will revert to Israel. And, from Revelation 7, it is evident they will do a masterful job for Christ!

Perhaps you and I might have the inestimable privilege of winning some of these future evangelists to Christ if we would only witness to the Jews as we should! + Because they are central in the earthly kingdom to be set up by Christ when He returns as KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS. It would take pages just to cite the many prophecies relating to the time of Israel's glorification. Let it suffice for the present purpose simply to state that they will then be the leading nation, and Jerusalem the world-capital, when our Christ personally takes over the reins of the government of the world at His glorious return. Brethren, it is an honor to witness to anyone for the KING OF KINGS, but especially to give the "good news" to His chosen people! + Because they are increasingly eager for the gospel of Christ.

Romans 11:23-27 As the Church-age draws toward its close, and the time approaches for Israel's purging and restoration (the "day of Jacob's trouble" the "great tribulation"), their "blindness in part" is beginning to give way to light, and Jews are more and more willing to listen to the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Should we not be alert to take advantage of every opportunity to make Him known to them? Many Jews of our acquaintance may be far more anxious to hear the story than we dare hope! + Because Gentile Christendom has tragically neglected and ignored the plain injunction of Romans 1:16.

“The gospel of Christ is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek (Gentile).” The fact that Gentile Christians in general seem prone to reverse this Divine pronouncement (if indeed the Jew is sought at all), should only serve to spur on to greater endeavor those of us whose spiritual eyes the Holy Spirit has graciously opened. All about us the fields are white unto harvest, both at home and abroad. The laborers are indeed few, but we sometimes wonder if there is a needier or more neglected field than the children of Israel, God's own chosen people! May it please the Lord of the harvest to awaken more of His people to the greatness and importance of this task of getting the precious gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to lost Jews throughout the world. + Because that by greater zeal, activity and sacrifice the coming of Christ can be hastened.

Note: "I have already shown that there are three stages to the kingdom, the blade, the ear, and the full corn in the ear, Mark 4:26-28. We do recognize the present, or blade stage, but we do not ignore the millennial stage as some do. The kingdom exists today in the person of the King, Christ, and the ruling class He is now calling out. But that over which we are to reign is yet future, for flesh and blood doth not inherit the kingdom of God. We must first be resurrected. This is just more proof that the first resurrection in Rev. 20:5-6 is the resurrection of the bodies of the saints."

--Excerpt from "The Millennial Issue" by Elder G. E. Jones, c. 1950; See also "the Three Stages of His kingdom".

"We conclude, if Christ’s second and glorious Advent is waiting upon the Gospel being published among all nations as a witness by the instrumentality of the churches, then this makes clear an inexplicable passage as it stands in our Common Version : ‘Looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God.’ (2 Pet. 3:12.) What a powerful incentive to push forward the missionary enterprise on the part of those who love and earnestly desire the Presence of the blessed Lord once more upon this earth!" --- "A People Must Be Prepared."

by J. R. Graves. ] + Because the Lord and King will remove a New Testament churches candlestick.

As the office of His Holy Spirit in all kingdom activities (Jo14:23-26; Ac1:4-7,8;2:1-4,16-19; Rev2:5); this effectively leaves each member shut out (Matt. 25:1013), cast out (Matt. 22:11-14) and beaten with stripes accordingly: thus He will burn up (Matt. 13:30) or “will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers” those that do not love Him (Luke 12:46-49; 2 Tim. 4:4-7,8; John 14:15-18) and His people (Matt.

25:44-46), at the Judgment seat of Christ (1 Peter 4:15-19) on His Return (Luke 12:31-53; I Cor. 3:13-16). ** NOTE: In our LORD'S final commands & warnings for those who are to "occupy" His kingdom,(Luke 19:13; Revelation 2; 3) in what we nowadays would call a "Risk Assessment / Management" statement(or maybe a "State of the Union" address); He said, and in order of priority, I believe, FIRST: "Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love."-- Rev. 2:4. Isn't it obvious that Israel is His "First Love"? Shouldn't we love what He loves and hate what He hates? Maybe it's high time to reevaluate our Jewish outreach programs--if we have any. YA THINK???---see also: http://www.wvi.com/~moses/GOD Bless True ISRAEL.htm

The Shayne Moses Project

CHURCH COVENANT

{ "The New Testament in My Blood...that...they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." } { Genesis 1:1-28; 2:8-25; 3:1-24; 4:1-26; 5:29; 6:1-22; 7:16; 8:20-22; 9:1-27; 12:1-9; 13:1-18; 14:18-20; 15:1-18; 17:5-24; 18:18-33; 19:15-38; 21:12-31; 22:1-24; 24:60; 25:31-32; 26:4-30; 28:4-22; 31:45-54; 32:28; 46:1; 48:16; 49:17-24; 50:19-20; Exodus 2:23-25; 14:19-24; 16:7-9; 19:1-7; 23:32; 24:4-11; 34:12; Leviticus 2:13; 26:14-39; Numbers 18:13-19; 30:2; Deuteronomy 6:4-9; 7:2; 11:18-20; 17:2-7; 18:1-8; 23:21; 25:4; 29:1-28; 31:12-18; 32:14-33; Joshua 7:10-15; 9:15; 23:16; 24:14-26; Judges 2:2-23; 1Samuel 18:3-4; 2Samuel 13:28; 1Kings 18:26-44; 2Kings 6:16-17; 11:17; 23:3; 2Chronicles 13:5; 15:8-15; Ezra 10:2-5; Nehemiah 9:38; 10:29-39; Esther 4:13-16; 5:1-3; Job 12:2; Psalm 1:1-3; 15:1-3; 25:14; 29:2; 34:7-22; 36:8-10; 48:13; 50:3-6; 55:16-19; 65:4; 78:5-7; 89:34-37; 105:7-10; 111:9-10; 116:14-18; 122:1-9; 126:5-6; 139:7-12; Proverbs 1:7-10; 10:9-10; 11:13-30; 15:1-28; 17:17; 18:8-19; 19:1-11; 20:1-19; 21:17; 22:1-15; 23:19-35; 25:11-23; 26:17-22; 27:17; 28:6; 31:4; Ecclesiastes 2:14; 5:1-7; 7:20; 9:18; 11:9; 12:1-14; Song 4:12-16; Isaiah 2:2-3; 4:5-6; 5:11-22; 9:6-7; 28:1-8; 42:6; Jeremiah 2:3; 23:23-24; 31:31-34; 50:2-5; Ezekiel 3:18; 5:13; 17:18; Daniel 2:34-45; 5:1-31; 6:10; 12:1-4; Hosea 4:11; Jonah 3:1-10; Habakkuk 2:15-16; 3:4; Zechariah 3:8-10; 4:6-14; 6:12-15; 7:8-14; Malachi 3:6-12; Matthew 3:1-17; 4:19; 5:13-46; 6:3-33; 7:23; 10:10-40; 11:4-30; 12:35-36; 13:25-39; 15:9; 16:13-19; 18:3-20; 19:22; 20:25-28; 21:22-43; 22:11-14; 23:8-23; 24:35-46; 25:21-40; 26:26-75; 27:52-54; 28:18-20; Mark 1:1-4; 3:13-14; 5:19; 10:13-16; 11:24; 14:22-25; 16:15; Luke 3:7-8; 5:32; 6:12-46; 9:23-62; 10:7; 11:5-48; 12:31-32; 16:2-16; 18:1-43; 19:1-10; 22:19-20; 24:30-48; John 1:11-51; 2:1617; 3:1-21; 4:21-42; 5:39; 6:37-69; 7:17-39; 8:12-32; 12:13-32; 13:15-35; 14:1-31; 15:4-26; 16:7-14; 17:6-16; 20:21-22; Acts 1:8-14; 2:1-47; 3:25-26; 4:1-35; 5:28-42; 6:1-7; 8:4-37; 9:18-31; 10:1-47; 11:18-29; 13:1-38; 14:25-28; 15:14-18; 16:6-34; 17:6-18; 18:24-28; 19:1-5; 20:28-35; 24:14-16; 28:27; Romans 1:1-32; 3:19-26; 4:25; 5:2-18; 6:1-23; 7:4; 8:1-33; 9:1-33; 10:1-21; 11:1-36; 12:1-21; 13:813; 14:4-23; 15:4-27; 16:1-25; 1Corinthians 1:10-21; 2:4-16; 3:1-6; 4:1-2; 5:1-13; 6:5-20; 8:1-13; 9:7-27; 10:6-12; 11:18-31; 12:12-21; 13:1-13; 14:40; 15:1-58; 16:1-2; 2Corinthians 1:3-22; 2:1-6; 3:1-6; 5:7-19; 6:14-18; 7:1-10; 8:1-24; 9:1-15; 10:3; 11:1-3; 12:19-21; Galatians 1:4; 3:10-27; 4:9-14; 5:16-25; 6:1-10; Ephesians 1:3-23; 2:1-21; 3:9-21; 4:1-32; 5:1-27; 6:1-19; Philippians 1:27; 2:5-30; 3:617; 4:8-20; Colossians 1:3-24; 2:12-23; 3:1-13; 1Thessalonians 1:1-10; 2:10-14; 4:1-18; 5:11-25; 2Thessalonians 1:3-12; 2:16-17; 3:315; 1Timothy 2:1-8; 3:15-16; 4:11-16; 5:13-21; 6:12; 2Timothy 1:6-18; 2:2-15; 3:1-17; 4:2-10; Titus 1:9; 2:1-15; 3:2-5; Philemon 1:2; Hebrews 1:13-14; 2:17; 4:12-14; 5:11; 7:25; 8:6-13; 9:15-26; 10:12-25; 12:22-29; 13:1-21; James 1:6-27; 2:14-18; 3:1-8; 4:3-11; 5:1016; 1Peter 1:3-23; 2:1-25; 3:1-22; 4:19; 2Peter 1:1-21; 3:9-18; 1John 1:6-9; 2:1-27; 3:14-18; 4:7-21; 5:4-9; 2John 1:9-11; Jude 1:1-19; Revelation 1:6-20; 2:1-16; 3:15-19; 4:5; 11:3-4; 19:7-8; 21:5-8; 22:6-17. }

Having been led, as we believe, by the Spirit of God, ( Mt5:16,44; Jn6:44,63,65; 12:32; 15:26; 16:7-8; Ro3:19-26; 5:5; 8:9,14-17,26-30; 10:14; 1Co2:14; 2Co7:10; Ep2:8-10,18; 5:9-10; 6:17; Ti2:11,14; He4:12; 1Pe1:22; 2:12 ) to receive the Lord Jesus Christ as our Savior, ( Ec7:20; Mt10:40; Jn12:13; 14:6; Ga4:14; 5:22-23; Php2:13; 1Th2:10-14 ) and on the profession of our faith, ( Ac2:41; 8:36-37; Ro4:25; 10:6-13; 14:23; 1Co5:9-10; Ga3:27; 1Ti6:12; 2Ti4:2,7;He4:14; 7:25 ) having been baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, ( Mt28:1820; Mk1:4; 3:13-14; Lk3:7-8; 5:32; 6:12-16; Jn14:15,21; 20:21-22; Ac2:37-42,46-47; 4:12; 9:18; 10:47; 11:18; 19:1-5; Ro6:3-6; Ep4:5;

we do now in the presence of God, ( Ps34:15; 139:7-12; Je23:23-24; 1Pe2:1-3,20-21; 3:21; 4:19 ) angels, ( 2Ki6:16-17; Ps34:7; Mt18:3-6,10; 1Ti5:21; He1:13-14 ) and this assembly, ( 1Co2:4-7; 5:12-13; Co1:24 ) most solemnly ( Ac9:31; Ro12:4-5; 1Co12:20-21; Ep5:26-27 ) and joyfully ( Ep2:8; 3:21; Re19:7-8 ) enter into covenant with one another, ( Ps50:5; Ro1:17-21; 1Co1:10; 15:58; He8:10-12; 2Pe1:19-21; 3:17-18 ) as one body ( Ro12:4-5; Ep1:22-23; 4:1-5,11-16 ) in Christ. ( 1Co12:12-14; Co1:18; 2Ti2:15; 3:14-17 )

Co2:12; 1Ti4:14; 1Jn5:6-9 )

We engage therefore, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, ( Mt3:16; Jn14:16-26; 15:4-5,26; 16:7-8,12-14; Ac1:8,13-14; 2:1-4,40-47; 4:31-33; 9:31; Ro8:1-2,9,13-16; Ep5:18; 6:17-19; 1Th1:3-8 ) to walk together in Christian love; ( Jn13:3435; Ro5:5,7-12; 13:10; 1Co13:1-13; Ga5:16,22-25; Ep4:1-5; 5:1-8; 1Th4:9; 1Jn4:7-21; 1Pe1:14-16 ) to strive for the

advancement of this church, ( Mt16:18; 28:19-20; He10:25; Ep2:21 ) in knowledge, ( Ro10:2; 1Ti2:4; 2Ti2:15; 2Pe1:1-9; 3:17-18 ) holiness, ( Je2:3; Ro6:19; 2Co7:1; 1Th4:7 ) and comfort; ( Ac9:31; Ro15:4; 2Co1:3-7; 1Th4:18; 5:11-14; 2Th2:16-17 ) to promote its prosperity ( Ac2:41-42,47; Ep1:18; 1Pe1:7; Re3:16-19; 19:8 ) and spirituality; ( 1Ki18:26-28; Mt26:75; Ro12:6-11; 1Co3:1; Ga5:22-23; Php1:27; 2Pe3:11 ) to sustain its worship, ( Ps29:2; Jn4:22-24; Ac24:14-16; Ep3:21; He10:25; Ju1:19 ) ordinances, ( Mt3:13-17; 26:26-29; Mk14:22-23; Ro6:4-6; 1Co11:18-27; 1Pe3:21 ) discipline, ( Mt16:18-19; 18:17; Ro6:17; 1Co5:1-13; 2Th3:6 ) and doctrines; ( Mt15:9; Lk16:16; Jn7:17; Ac2:42; 5:28; Ro6:17; Ep4:14; 1Ti4:12-16; 2Ti2:15; 3:16-17; 4:2; Ti1:9; 2:1,7; Ju1:1-3; 2Jn1:9-11 ) to give it a sacred preeminence over all institutions of human origin; (Mt6:33) to contribute ( 2Co8:5,9,13-15; 9:6-7 ) cheerfully and regularly ( 1Co16:1-2 ) to the support of the ministry, ( De18:1-8; 25:4; Mt10:10; Lk10:7; 1Co9:7-14; Ga6:6 ) the expenses of the church, ( Ac4:34-35 ) and the relief of the poor, ( Mt25:40; Ro12:13; 15:26-27 ) and the spread of the gospel ( Mk16:15; Ac1:8; 11:22; 13:1-4; 14:25-28; Ro1:16; 10:13-14; 1Co1:21; 15:1-4 ) through all nations. ( Mt11:4-5; 16:18; 23:23; 28:19; Lk10:7; 24:47; Ac8:4-8; 11:29; 13:14,38; 17:6,15-18; 2Co8:5-12; 1Th1:8; 5:25; 2Ti4:2; He12:28; 1Jn3:17 )

We also engage to maintain family ( Ge18:19; Nu18:13-14; De11:18-20; Ps126:5-6; Pr11:30; Lk22:19; 24:30; Ac10:2; 2Ti3:15 ) and secret ( Ps34:11; 55:17; Da6:10; Mt6:3-6; 2Ti2:15 ) devotions; ( Ac17:11; Ep6:18-19; 1Th5:17-18 ) to religiously educate our children; ( De6:4-7; Ps48:13; 78:5-7; Pr1:7-10; 22:6,15; Ec12:1-14; Mt28:20; Mk10:13-16; Ep4:11-14; 6:1-4; 2Ti3:15 ) to seek the salvation of our kindred and acquaintances; ( Ge13:17-18; De6:6-9; Ezek3:18; Mt4:19; Mk5:19; Lk24:47-48; Jn1:11-13,41; Ac1:8; Ro1:16; 9:1-3; 10:1; 1Co3:6 ) to walk circumspectly in the world; ( Ps1:1-3; Pr19:1; 28:6; Ec2:14; 11:9; Mt5:16; Jn17:11-16; Ro6:4; 8:1,4; 12:2; 13:13; 2Co10:3; Ga1:4; Ep2:10; 5:15-21; 1Th2:12; 2Th3:6-15; 2Ti4:10; 1Jn1:6-7; 2:6,15 ) to be just in our dealings, ( Pr17:17; 18:19; Ec9:18; Mt12:36; 13:25,38-39; Lk16:2; Ro12:17; 1Co6:5-8; Php4:8-9; 1Jn3:14 ) faithful in our engagements, ( Mt24:45-46; 25:21; Lk16:10; Ro12:9-18; 13:8; 1Co4:2; Ep4:25; Co1:7; 1Th5:24; 2Th3:3; 2Ti2:2; He2:17; Re21:5 ) and exemplary in our deportment; ( Mt5:16; Jn12:21; 13:15; 17:15; Ro6:4; 12:2; 1Co10:6; 2Co6:17; Ep2:10; 5:8; Php2:14-15; 1Ti4:12; Ja2:18; 5:10; 1Pe2:9-12,21; 1Jn2:15 ) to avoid all tattling, ( Pr11:13; 18:8; 20:19; 26:20-22; Ep4:31; 1Ti5:13 ) backbiting, ( Ps15:1-3; Pr25:23; Ro1:28-30,32; 2Co12:20 ) and excessive anger; ( Pr15:1,18; 19:11; 1Co9:27; Ep4:25-27; Co3:8; Ja3:1-6 ) to abstain from the sale and use of intoxicating drinks as a beverage, ( Ge9:20-25; 19:30-38; De32:14,33; 2Sa13:28; Pr20:1; 21:17; 23:1921,29-32,35; 31:4; Is5:11,22; 28:1,7-8; Da5:1-31; Ho4:11; Ha2:15-16; Ro14:16; 1Co6:10; 8:1-13; Ep5:16-21 ) and to be zealous in our efforts ( Is9:7; Ezek5:13; Mt26:51-52; Jn2:16-17; 6:66-69; 14:19; Ac5:28-32; Ro10:1-3; 1Co6:19-20; 2Co9:2; Php3:6-8; 2Ti2:15; Ti2:14; Re3:19 ) to advance the kingdom of our Savior. ( Mt28:19-20; Ro1:1,16; 2Pe3:12; Re2:4-5; 3:15-16 ) We further engage to watch ( 1Th5:14 ) over one another in brotherly love; ( Ge4:9; Mt5:23-24; 23:8; Jn4:21; Ro12:10; 1Th4:9; 2Th3:14-15; 2Ti1:16-18; He13:1; 1Pe1:22; 1Jn3:14-17; 4:20 ) to remember each other in prayer; ( 1Ki18:42-44; Mt21:22; Mk11:24; Lk11:5-10,48; 18:1-8; Jn14:14; 15:7; Ga6:2; Ep6:18; 1Th5:25; 1Ti2:1; Ja1:6-7; 4:3; 5:16; 1Jn3:18 ) to aid each other in sickness and distress; ( Ac2:44-45; 4:34-35; 6:2-3; Ga6:2,10; Ja1:27; 2:14-17; 1Jn3:17 ) to cultivate Christian sympathy in feeling ( Ro12:4-5,15; 2Co2:1-6 ) and courtesy in speech; ( Pr15:1,23; 25:11; Ep4:29; Ti3:2; Ja3:2; 1Pe3:8 ) to be slow to take offense, ( Ro12:19; 1Co13:4; Eph4:1-3; Co3:12-13 ) but always ready for reconciliation, ( Ro5:10; 12:21; 2Co5:18-19; Ep4:30-32; 1Jn2:9 ) and mindful of the rules of our Savior ( Mt28:20; 2Ti3:16-17 ) to secure it without delay. ( Mt5:23-25; 18:15-18; Ro12:18 ) We moreover engage that when we remove from this place, ( Ac18:27; Ro16:1-2; 2Co3:1; Php2:29 ) we will as soon as possible unite with some other church of like faith and order, ( Ep1:22-23; 3:21 ) where we can carry out the spirit of this covenant ( Ec5:4-5 ) and the principles of God's Word. ( Mt28:20; Ro1:31

)

Prayer Now the God of peace, who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that Great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make you perfect in every good work, to do his will; working in you that which is well-pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever. Amen. { Source: J. Newton Brown, The Baptist Church Manual (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society, 1853), 23-24. ("In COVENANT 41: 1853 COVENANT OF J. NEWTON BROWN'S THE BAPTIST CHURCH MANUAL, J. Newton Brown published his personal revision of the 1833 covenant of the New Hampshire Baptist Convention... And he took the last paragraph of the New Hampshire covenant and attached it to his revision as an appendage entitled 'Prayer.' [ Deweese, Charles W. — Baptist Church Covenants. Original Copyright Š 1990 Broadman Press, Nashville, TN ].") This is a similar version with some variations of the text as given {without the Scripture references and "Prayer" } to new members of the Hillcrest Missionary Baptist Church, Oregon City. Verse references excerpted from The Baptist Way-Book by Ben M. Bogard; The Baptist Church Covenant by M. L. Moser, Sr.; A HANDBOOK For Young Christians and New Church Members by L. H. Owen (1962); The Baptist Training Guide by Rev. R. Porter; Christian Engagements by Roy M. Reed; Adult BTC Quarterlies ( 3-1-85 & 01 ) by Terry Parrish & David Robinson; Church Covenant "We engage..." by I. K. Cross; The Church That Jesus Built by Dr. Roy Mason, Th.D. 7th ed. reprint by the Central Ave. Baptist Church, Tampa, FL; The Pilgrim's Progress by John Bunyan; and A Summary of New Testament Law lecture notes given by ABA Interstate Missionary-Pastor Fred C. Miller (1974); edited by: mosesdewitt@wvi.com }

Got PDF? The Shayne Moses Project

A

man of God drove aimlessly on a dusty back road, depressed over recent church events. What is it that makes one dissatisfied with anything but the Truth? There is something about the elect of God that only resonate to the truths of GOD. The influences of the lives that touched them and their combined experiences seems to awaken a hunger for something permanent and real that can only be found in GOD and His Word and Way. Even Death is merely an interloper. They learn to agree with Paul when he said, “Let GOD be true but every man a liar.”

As he came to a crossroad there had been a wreck. A new VW convertible overturned in the ditch and not 20 feet away a beautiful young girl lying face up staring into heaven with lifeless eyes. Obviously, she had been driving too fast on the old dirt road and lost control trying to make the turn. The car could be fixed but for her it was too late. He could not just leave her there so he decided to stay and wait and pray; help would come eventually. The irony was not lost on him.

And as he waited, he wrote this requiem... let's call it...

Dane’s Dirge I love the LORD and His church; I know for this truth many have been hurt.

God gave His Son for her, Christ our blessed LORD; He only asked we love her by keeping His Word.

After 20 years His minister, they excluded me.

The charge, God used modern man don’t you see; Heretics, Wesley, Moody, Finny, and Rice, For we have a split commission is why Christ died.

So we are gathered here today, we wouldn’t take wrong, Church don’t mean much, let’s all get along.

They say we are trouble makers, we cause hurt; Christ died for man and not His church.

But we’re old fashioned and believe her, His Bride, We love her; she was born from His side.

We believe in all the Bible, not modern man; For this great truth, a few have taken a stand.

Fifty million martyrs and all true Baptists have stood through the years, Untold blood and sweat and many many tears.

So we lost a piece of earthly property and land; Nothing, no Satan, not heretics, can take away our Stand.

They may make fun of us and even kill us too; They will never take away our Faith and Truth.

We haven’t long left for this wicked land; We stand a proud people because of our Stand.

For ten years I pastored what used to be a church; In six months they embraced heresy, regardless of the hurt.

I’m not talking of myself or you that’s gathered here, But my Jesus and His Bride, that’s who has been so dear.

We’ll go on believing what Jesus said In Ephesians 3:21 until the raising of the dead.

We can hold high this race to run, And hear Christ say, “Come my people, well done.”

Few of us won’t be here too many more days, So I encourage you younger, it takes grace.

Christ told us, we would be hated,

This is the truth today; in John 17 it was stated.

So the fight grows harder, as the goal looms ahead; You will be hated by all the world is what Christ said.

Men will love self and they will try to make a name; You can’t work for Jesus without taking the blame.

Some day we will come through the furnace of fire; It was rough for a while in this sin sick world of mire.

A shout goes up, these all belong to our LORD, From Heaven’s shore, “Welcome home, You Kept His Word!”

We made it, we cry, we never had a doubt; We see him, His scars; there rises a great shout.

It’s over; we thought it hard down below; Oh GOD, we’re glad, look the Bride dressed white as snow.

Here comes the Bridegroom, singing Amazing Grace, Crying to us, “Come you made reservation, here your place.

We watched you, shouted as you fought the fight of Faith; We knew you would make it, fighting Heaven’s race.

It’s all over now, rest, from race you run; They didn’t exclude you, that can’t be done.

GOD made you and gave you Love in your heart; You are here, you will be always, and never depart."

--by Haskell Dane, circa 1972

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."--Eph. 6:12.

Thou therefore endure hardness, as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier. And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned, except he strive lawfully.--2 Tim. 2:3-5.

Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. ... And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.--Mt. 10:34-36.

Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. ... And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: ... For many are called, but few are chosen.--Mt. 22:11-14 Be not afraid, only believe. ... And when he was come in, he saith unto them, Why make ye this ado, and weep? the damsel is not dead, but sleepeth.

And they laughed him to scorn. But when he had put them all out, he taketh the father and the mother of the damsel, and them that were with him, and entereth in where the damsel was lying. And he took the damsel by the hand, and said unto her, Talitha cumi; which is, being interpreted, Damsel, I say unto thee, arise.–Mk. 5:36-41.

He speaks, and the sound of His voice Is so sweet the birds hush their singing; And the melody that He gave to me Within my heart is ringing.

“Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?”—Luke 18:8. ~ ~“Arise, my love, my fair one, and come away.”--- Song 2:10-13.

And as for this Minority Report; those "which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him."

To the excluded, excommunicated, "cast out" like our Lord Jesus, censured or otherwise disavowed; those "hidden

ones", I offer these verses: Ge4:26; 49:10; Ex20:23-26; De7:7; Jg6:11-14; 1Sa2:9; Ps27:5; 56:8-12; 83:3; 84:3; 91:1; 102:7; Is4:3-6; 35:8; 51:1-2; La3:28; Eze7:22; Mt5:9-13; 10:31, 34-36; 13:33, 44; 18:20; 19:27-30; Mk6:10-11; Lk4:2831; 6:20-23; 9:4-5; 10:11; 20:12-15; Jn6:37; 8:59; 9:22, 34-35; 14:21-24; Ac7:19-21, 58; 13:49-52; 16:37; 18:6; Ro11:25, 29; 1Co6:19-20; 2Co6:14-18; Ga4:28-31; Co3:1-4; 2Ti1:6-9; He13:10-13; 1Pe2:4-5; 3:18-21; 4:10-13; 1Jn5:7-10; 3Jn1:9-11; Re2:17; 3:20; 22:17-20. "The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."

Back to Shayne's Home Page

The Shed Blood That Justifies A sermon outline by Richard A. McIntee

Rom 5:8-9 But GOD commendeth HIS love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, CHRIST died for us.

Much more then, being now justified

by HIS blood, we shall be saved from wrath thru HIM !

Mankind has many things in common. Our Genesis is traced to a single ancestor, Adam. Our rebellious nature, fallen estate, and need of Redemption also originate with Adam.

When Adam rebelled, and found that he could not cover his own nakedness, GOD provided a covering to hide Adams shame. The shed blood of that innocent animal has stained the ages of History, pointing the way to CHRIST, and HIS shed blood at CALVARY, by which Man can be made FREE from SIN! Let us look, today, at "The Shed Blood That Justifies", and see That, as it Applied to Adam, it does also apply to each ONE of US!

I. It's origin

A. From GOD

1.

Innocent lamb-Slain of GOD

Gen 2:25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

Gen 3:7 And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons. Gen 3:21 Unto Adam and to his wife did the LORD GOD make coats of skins, and clothed them!

2.

Covered Adam & Eve-pictured promised SEED Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thy seed and her seed: it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise HIS heel!

B. Mary-visited by Angel Lk 1:34 Then said Mary unto the Angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a Man? And the Angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, the power of the HIGHEST shall overshadow thee; therefore also that Holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the SON of GOD!!

II. It's purpose

A. Covers sin's

I Pet 1:18-19-20 For as much as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your father: but with the Precious Blood of CHRIST, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, who by HIM do believe in GOD, that raised HIM up from the dead, and gave HIM glory: that your faith and hope might be in GOD. I John 1:7 But if we walk in the LIGHT, as HE is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of JESUS CHRIST HIS SON cleanseth us from all Sin.

B. Redeem men Rom 10:9-11 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the LORD JESUS and shalt believe in thine heart that GOD hath raised HIM from the dead, thou shalt be saved! For with the heart man believeth unto salvation, for the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on HIM shall not be ashamed.

C. Purchase of Church Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Spirit hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of GOD, which HE hath purchased with HIS own blood.

III. It's Results

A. Make peace with GOD

Rom 5:19 For as by one mans disobedience many were make sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

B. Making us Sons of GOD I John 3:1 Behold what manner of love the FATHER hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the Sons of GOD:

C. Eternal fellowship I Thess 4:15-17 For this we say unto you by the WORD of the LORD, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the LORD shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the LORD HIM-self shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the Archangel and with the trump of GOD: and the dead in CHRIST shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the LORD in the air; so shall we ever be with the LORD. Though we have, among mankind, many things in common, we do not have all things in common. The Shed Blood of CHRIST has a distinct origin with GOD, a distinct purpose of redeeming mankind, and the distinct result of making each person, who will, a born again Child of GOD. There are many Who reject GOD's gift of salvation

by Grace through Faith. Each one of us should ask our-selves the question "Am I covered by the Shed Blood That Justifies"?

Back to Shayne's Home Page

Those who call themselves

“Jehovah’s

Witnesses”

By R. A. McIntee

Intro: The cult commonly called “Jehovah’s witnesses” was founded in 1879. It’s founder and first President was a man named Charles Taze Russell, hence the common nomer, for the cult, of “Russellites”!(ibid-- Rise of the Cults-Walter Martin). Charles Taze Russell was born in 1852 and died in 1916.

He was raised a Presbyterian, and at age 15, became a congregationalist. At the age of 18, Russell established a Bible study class, based on the Adventist doctrines of Jones Wendell, which continued for approximately 5 years.” Much of the eventual J.W. doctrines, such as extinction of the soul at death, annihilation of the wicked and denial of a literal hell, was taken directly from these Adventist Doctrines. Russell was an inveterate date setter, having set dates several times, concerning the second coming. As early as 1874, he advanced the first major error of Watchtower doctrine, relating to the advent; he taught then that Christ had returned invisibly at that time. He subsequently concocted numerous other dates and doctrines in attempts to cover his errors.

Russell was the originator of a major part of J.W. doctrine, but was by no means the only “leading new light”!

In 1916, Russell died, and a new figure waltzes on to the stage of J.W. leadership. Born in 1869, raised as a Baptist, well-educated and a Judge in the 14th Judicial District of Missouri, here comes the Judge! None other than the Honorable Joseph Franklin Rutherford.

“Judge” Rutherford was a very able administrator, as well as a prolific writer. At times, his writing was so prodigious, that the printing presses at J.W. headquarters were often unable to keep up with his output. Rutherford learned, early on, the value of “Progressive Revelation”, which frequently bailed him out of the “HOLES” that some of his, (and Russell’s) erroneous doctrines put him. Although Rutherford was very fond of setting dates, this propensity was often to get him into trouble. Rutherford used Russell’s writings to further his position in the J.W., but was quick to publicly disassociate himself from Russell’s influence.

He was also the motivating force behind the J.W.’s present disdain for all other organized religious groups in what he scathingly branded as “Christendom”! He was the one who was primarily responsible for developing the present doctrine of annihilation of all “Christian” religious organizations. Rutherford was also responsible for a split in the organization, resulting in a second group known as Dawn Bible Students. The Judge “ruled” the J.W.’s for 25 years, died in 1942, and was succeeded by the third and final President of the Society, Nathan H. Knorr. Knorr was born in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania in 1905. At age 18 he became a full time “preacher”, and by 1932 he became General Manager of the J.W. publishing house in Bethel N.Y. In January 1942, he was elected President of the Society. When he was elected , the Society numbered 115,000! Under his leadership, the number increased to nearly 2 million! He instituted a vigorous expansion program and was instrumental in many additional printing facilities. In 1961, the New World Translation (J.W.’s corrupted version of a bible) was printed. Strangely enough, they contend that there are many mistranslations from !the original languages, which they have “corrected”; the remarkable thing about this is that there is not one notable or recognized linguist in their entire panoply of “Translators”!

The Jehovah’s Witnesses are a highly organized, highly motivated, intensely indoctrinated cult! Their indoctrination is totally centered around their major texts and supported (when necessary to convince an unbeliever) they will resort to their New World Translation!

The J.W.’s are termed “Apostles of Denial” by most fundamental groups, and the major true doctrines that they deny emphatically are: 1) The Trinity 2) The deity of Christ 3) The personality of the Holy Spirit 4) The Inherent immortality of the Soul 5) The total depravity of Man 6) The Bodily resurrection of Christ 7) The Blood Atonement of and thru Christ 8) The finished work of Christ and Need of the New 9) The Second Coming of Christ-Visible and Bodily 10) Eternal Punishment

Birth

11) A Literal

Hell

1) The J.W.’s contend that the Trinity is “an unnatural, freaky, three headed God” and that it is impossible for the logical (natural) mind to comprehend!

PROOF--The Bible introduces God in the very first Chapter of Genesis as Elohim, which is a plural noun describing the Godhead! Some of the foremost translators have translated Elohim as “The three Powerful ones”. In Gen. 1:26 And God (Elohim) Said, Let US make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness: Matt 3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightaway out of the water: and, Io, the heavens were opened unto HIM, and HE saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon HIM: And Io a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 1 Jn. 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.(J.W. Bible omits) 2) The J.W.’s deny the deity of Christ and insist that “the Word is A God”! Their denial of this doctrine by calling Christ “a God” makes them double deniers of the truth, for God has said (Deut. 6:4) Hear 0 Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord.

And again in Is. 43:10... .before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me! (also Is. 44:8) 3) J.W.’s deny the Personality of the Holy Spirit, and ridicule the Holy Spirit of simply “Breath”!

4) J.W.’s deny immortality of the soul. The J.W doctrine states “A human is a soul: he does not possess a soul separate and distinct from the body”.(Make sure of All Things, pg. 349) PROOF--I Thess. 5:23 And I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be presented blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Matt 10:28 “Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul, but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in Hell.

5) J.W.’s deny total depravity of man, and, with exception of Adam and Eve, who are to be annihilated, all men who have not heard the Gospel according to J.W.’s will be given a second chance to become acceptable to God and resurrection.

PROOF-- God has said (Gen. 6:3) My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: (Gen. 6:5) And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Ps 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. Ps 56:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: They go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.

Ps 14:2-3 The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, not one.

6) J.W.’s deny the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ and insist that he was raised a “Spirit Creature”. PROOF-Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

7) J.W.’s deny the Atonement that was accomplished at Calvary, and they teach that men must work here on earth to become worthy of their doctrine of “redemption”.

PROOF--Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

8) J.W.’s deny the finished work of Christ and maintain there is no need for the “new birth”. The J.W.’s do not expect to go to heaven, so are not moved by necessity to be born again!

PROOF--John 3:3-5 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God----Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 9) J.W.’s deny the bodily return of Christ claiming that he has already returned invisible, in 1874, in 1914 and 1975. This is contrary to clear scripture teaching!

PROOF--I John 3:2 Beloved, now are we the Sons of God, 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.

10)The J.W.’s deny Eternal Punishment and...

11) the existence of a Literal HELL. Yet Christ preached more concerning Hell than He did concerning heaven. They dismiss the account of the Rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) as a parable, yet Christ explained the parables to his disciples because it was given to them to know, whereas it was not given to the people in General to know the explanation of these parables (Matthew 13:10-13). It is very curious that such an important “parable” was not explained to “those to whom it was given to know”. The only and obvious conclusion is that Jesus here related an actual account of the torment of an unregenerate soul in Hell, where the “fire is never quenched and their worm dieth not” (Mark 9:43-45).

These “Apostles of Denial” will be judged by the one standard, whether or not they have accepted Christ as their Personal Saviour; I John 2:22-23: Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

So then, in denying the Lord Jesus Christ, God has indicted them in His word and finds them guilty of denying the very God, Jehovah, that they claim to serve!

Back to Shayne's Home Page

“Thou hast given a banner to them that fear thee, that it may be displayed because of truth.” — (Psalm 60:4) “Lift ye up a banner upon the high mountain, exalt the voice unto them.” — (Isaiah 13:2) Devoted To The Defense Of The Church Against All Errors And Innovations

A Better Plan

[*]

The word "plan" seems to have a great fascination for the common run of people. This is especially true in religion. All sorts of schemes, some of them fantastic and impractical, some of them good as measured by human standards, are acceptable and given currency if they are christened "the better plan." Lack of a plan suggests chaos and even some of the Lord's requirements are subjected to human alterations to fit into some plan or scheme devised by man. Sometimes the "simplicity and the purity that is toward Christ" that Paul feared the minds of the brethren would be "corrupted from" is rejected because it does not fit into the ideas that some entertain of what a "plan" should be.

A case in point came to my attention as I listened to a religious broadcast. The speaker was earnestly insisting that all Christians should tithe and read extensively from the Old Testament in support of that view. Because the Jews robbed God in withholding their tithes, he concluded that Christians also rob God when they withhold the tithe. He declared that there is nor has there ever been any "better plan" than tithing. If God requires that his people give the tithe, then it becomes obvious that those who do not do so are in rebellion against him as the Jews were who robbed him in this particular. There are some sects that make tithing a test of fellowship, require it on penalty of excommunication in which case the tithe is paid as a form of taxation and cannot be classed as a voluntary gift or offering. Since there is evidence of confusion as to what tithing means, the man who pays the tithe, pays a tenth of his gross income. A church therefore in which all the members pay in that much, either has a very small membership, or else it has a considerable amount of money to carry on its "plan." A large religious denomination so organized that a central authority has control over its funds would be something to reckon with, at least financially, should its members all tithe.

This system was evidently good for the Jews or God would not have given it to them. It does not follow that Christians should borrow it from the Jews and call it "the better plan." I have noted some confusion even among gospel preachers when it comes to comparing Christian's liberality with Jewish taxation. We are gravely told that a Christian ought to be ashamed, in view of our greater blessings, to give less than the Jews were taxed. In most cases, if not every case, the preacher himself does so. It might be well to check up on this matter of Jewish "giving" before making rash comparisons. The tithe was only a small part of it and that for a special purpose. It has been estimated that the Jews parted with about a third, or more, of their gross income in support of their religion. It should be remembered that the Jewish nation was a theocracy, a nation whose law was the law of God. The law required a tax, called the tithe, for the support of the priesthood. The support of the government, also a part of the religious scheme, had to be supplied by additional taxation.

Surely, Christians should be liberal in the use of their money in carrying on the work which is peculiar to the church. Saints must be edified, the poor must be remembered and the gospel must be supported. Is tithing "the better

plan" to get the money for this necessary work? If the Bible teaches it, then of course it is.

If the Bible does not teach it or any other "plan," then expediency might suggest it as better. It happens that there is considerable teaching in the New Testament on the matter of liberality among Christians.

Covetousness is classified with idolatry and stinginess is downright sin. Opposition to tithing as a "plan" prompted by a covetous spirit must of course be ruled out as wicked. Plan or no plan, Christians should give as the Lord directs.

It is significant that there is no direct command, or necessary inference, in the New Testament binding the tithe on the disciples of Christ. This is in vivid contrast to the binding obligations of the law, often repeated, which bound the Jews in this respect. Paul made a widespread appeal to the churches to give sums of money for a much needed work. He went directly to the churches in these words: "Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I gave order to the churches of Galatia, so also do ye. Upon the first day of the week let each one of you lay by him in store, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come." (1 Cor. 16:1-2) "As he may prosper" does not sound like a command to pay the tithe. The curious might pry into the question of the amount, whether equal to, more or less than the tithe. Such curiosity is not satisfied. It might be more. It was to "be ready as a matter of bounty, and not of extortion." (2 Cor. 9:5) "But this I say, He that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully. Let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart: not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver."

(2 Cor. 9:6-7) Why did not Paul just come out and say plainly for these disciples to follow "the better plan" and pay tithes as God required then they would always have plenty of money on hand to take care of all the calls that came to the church. There is not as much "plan" about God's requirements as some brethren and others seem to think we need.

If "each man" does "according as he hath purposed in his heart" and "each man" loves the Lord as he ought to, then sufficient money will be forthcoming to take care of the work of the Lord. If the money is not forthcoming somebody is evidently falling down on a responsibility.

We may resort to corkscrew methods to twist it out of them, or try to scare them into submitting to the legalistic system of tithing, but it does not occur to me that either is "the better plan." "Because the love of God hath been shed abroad in our hearts through the Holy Spirit which was given unto us" should be a greater incentive to liberal giving and the discharge of duties related thereto than any of the constraints of legalism.

Properly led and properly taught, the Lord's people should and will respond voluntarily and generously. This is the better plan because it is found in the New Testament. — C. E. W. TITHING: THE ENEMY OF GENEROSITY* The idea of tithing (10% see note) as the standard for acceptable giving has so permeated the church that no one (including Pastors and Elders) even questions its validity or application to those of us who are living on this side of the cross. Many pastors and preachers, emphasize tithing in hopes that their congregations will increase their giving above the national average of 3% by evangelicals. They believe that if they could just get everyone in their congregation to start tithing the church would have more money than it needed to do all that it wanted to do.

Consequently, they fervently teach tithing as the floor that every Christian ought to start their giving at – the minimum entry point. I know of one church in my town that requires potential new members to commit to tithing in order to become a member. Pastors are not really aware that while their efforts to promote tithing will increase giving for a few, it actually ends up doing more harm than good to everyone in their congregation.

Let me illustrate. Take any congregation that is being consistently and regularly indoctrinated with tithing as the giving standard. Those who for whatever reason (good or bad) are not able or willing to tithe are made to feel guilty that they are giving less than they “owe” God. So their giving is accompanied with feelings of guilt because they are told they are “robbing God”. Then you have those who are tithing to the penny. If they get a paycheck for $3,125.60, they will write a check to the church for $312.56. They are content to give exactly what they have been taught God has prescribed for them to give. Their giving will only increase as their income increases (mathematically to the penny).

Then there are those rare few who have broken over the tithe standard taught by the church and are now giving over 10%. They often look upon themselves with some sense of pride because they are actually exceeding the required, minimum standard of giving. Now let me ask you, which of these attitudes of giving is healthy – giving with guilt, giving with contentment or giving with pride? You see, as soon as you employ some mathematical formula to determine how much someone ought to be giving – what God expects – you actually create a spiritual, psychological and emotional barrier to encouraging generous giving. We are all fallen, sinful creatures and consequently we want to know what the “rules” are because we want to “please” God. How much church attendance, prayer time, scripture reading, giving, etc. will be enough to keep God happy with us. So, if we are given

a formula for giving, we will use it as the predetermined acceptable standard and no longer feel any need to seek out God’s will for our personal giving because we already know how much we are to give. Should we really want to bless and impress God, we’ll delight Him with a bonus gift over and above the required 10% payment that is due.

The New Testament never mentions tithing as the rule and standard for New Testament Christian giving – not even one verse. There is a very good reason for this. The New Testament calls Christians to give by faith (life) and not give by law (death) [ For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. Romans 8:2]. How much I decide to give of what the Lord has entrusted to me is just as intimately personal and individual as every other aspect of my Christian life.

Let me ask. Has God prescribed how many minutes I must pray each day? Has He stipulated how many verses He expects me to read each week? Has He established how many people I am required to witness to each month? He has prescribed none of these as His acceptable standard for me being a “good” Christian. Rather it is left up to each of us individually to seek out the Lord by faith and allow Him to direct us in how much of these activities we should be participating in. Similarly, our giving is to be arrived at by careful, personal self-examination and seeking the Lord’s direction in how much we should give as we evaluate this crucial area of financial stewardship. May I suggest that II Corinthians 9:7 gives us the Christian methodology for deciding how much we personally should be giving back to the Lord. Paul instructs, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give…” In other words, the amount of our giving proceeds from our heart, not from our calculator. Our giving is to grow out of a personal relationship with Christ and not merely a prescriptive formula arrived at mathematically. I can tell you with certainty that a poor woman who chooses to sacrificially give $500 out of her meager $12,000 annual Social Security income is being substantially more generous than the businessman who is giving $50,000 of his $350,000 annual income, even though the woman is giving only 4% and the businessman is giving 14%. Occasionally, I have been asked by affluent folks we work with, how much should they be giving. They sense that 10% is no longer the right percentage for them and they are looking for someone to give them what that right percentage should be. My answer is always the same, “That is a very important question. Unfortunately, you are asking it of the wrong person. You need to ask that question of the One who owns all your stuff.” Many pastors I have talked with about generosity vs. tithing express the same gnawing concern.

They fear that if they tell their people they are not required to tithe, the church’s weekly offerings will collapse. I disagree. If believers were properly taught and really came to understand and live out the idea of generous giving by faith instead of legalistic giving by math, I believe that congregation’s giving would actually explode. It may not happen overnight because the church will have to overcome years of bad teaching. But once people really understand they need to go to their knees to decide how much to give instead of to their calculators, we will likely see another outbreak of generosity that might compare to what the Israelites experienced in the construction of the tabernacle. Their giving was so “over the top” Moses had to command them to stop giving. (Exodus 35:20-35; 36:1-7). I recently attended a meeting in which the speaker was enthusiastically telling about a financial advisor who had a wealthy client selling a $1.5 million asset and the advisor had actually asked him about tithing on the sale price to the Kingdom, which he ended up doing.

What struck me as unfortunate in this story is that the advisor did not ask his client if he personally needed any of the sale proceeds. Maybe he should give 100% of the sale proceeds to the Kingdom - and if not 100% how much might God want of these funds to use for His purposes. Possibly an even more challenging question for this client would be, “How much of this $1.5 million would I have to give away for the gift to be a real, sacrificial act of faith on my part?

The first option – the tithe – is clean, mathematically simple and requires little thought. The second – generosity – is neither clean nor simple and requires genuine soul searching, faith testing and “wrestling with God”. In our struggle to find an amount we might find ourselves feeling compelled to ask a similar question, “How much would I have to give to the Lord in order for my giving to be both generous and sacrificial?” I hope you can see why I say that tithing is the enemy of generosity. If believers are ever going to become generous givers, we must first kill the legalistic, Old Testament doctrine of tithing that wars against it and replace it with the New Testament directive of 2 Cor. 9:7 KJV - "Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.". I would be remiss to conclude this article and not mention the “rest of the story” of II Corinthians 9:7.

Paul concludes this verse by giving us the emotional outcome of giving generously by faith vs. giving legalistically by math. He says, “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.” Giving legalistically by math produces a reluctant giver who is giving out of a sense compulsion. Giving generously by faith produces a cheerful giver who is giving out of overflowing joy.

Paul says this giver is the one whom God loves. I personally opt for the latter. How about you?

*The author, E. G. “Jay” Link, is both an ordained minister and the President/CEO of Kardia, Inc., a firm

that specializes in assisting wealthy Christian families with the stewardship of all of their life resources. He is also the author of the book Family Wealth Counseling: Getting to the Heart of the Matter. Mr. Link may be reached via email at jlink@KardiaPlanning.com. On the web at: http://www.kardiaplanning.com.

Note:

to tithe or tithing:--noun; one tenth of annual produce or earnings, formerly taken as a tax for the support of the Church and clergy. (in certain religious denominations) a tenth of an individual's income pledged to the Church. [in sing.] archaic a tenth of a specified thing: he hadn't said a tithe of the prayers he knew. verb; [with obj.] pay or give as a tithe: he tithes 10 per cent of his income to the Church. historical subject to a tax of one tenth of income or produce. ? tithable adjective. etymology: Old English teotha (adjective in the ordinal sense ‘tenth’, used in a specialized sense as a noun), teothian (verb). --Oxford English Dictionary. Lev 27:32 KJV - "And concerning the tithe of the herd, or of the flock, even of whatsoever passeth under the rod, the tenth shall be holy unto the LORD." See also these pdfs: Standing Fast In The Truth and Is There A Difference In The Churches? and The Sabbath Day & Questions for Tithers and "FREEDOM FROM THE LAW of Moses and Spiritual Growth in CHRIST." The Shayne Moses Project

[*]

(Vol.IV No.IX Pg.2b-3a April 1942)The Bible Banner was a periodical run during the 1940's by Foy E. Wallace, Jr. and his brother, Cled. As stated on the cover of each issue, the magazine was "Devoted to the Defense of the Church Against All Errors and Innovations".

The 40's were a difficult time, and they were a different time. People were not only more open to debates and discussion of differences, but they also spoke with "great plainness of speech".

Except for Jesus, the life, speech, and writings of no man should be emulated completely.

All men make mistakes, even those who are trying to follow the perfect One. However, there are lessons to be learned from the wisdom, battles, and tragedies that befell those who preceded us.

Before Wallace started the Bible Banner, he published another paper beginning in the mid 1930's, called "The Gospel Guardian". After publishing the Bible Banner for a while, the old name was resurrected and the Bible Banner was renamed The Gospel Guardian.

A better introduction, "in their own words", is provided in this article, The Bible Banner - Past Present And Future, when the Bible Banner temporarily converted from a monthly paper to a quarterly.

The Sabbath Day From “Identified With Christ A Book of Sermons” by G. E. Jones The question of the sabbath day has been one over which most of the religious world has been badly confused.

One of the ten commandments was “Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shall not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maid servant, nor THY CATTLE, nor the stranger that is within thy gates,” Exodus 20:8-10.

This commandment was never given to anyone but the nation of Israel. The sabbath was a sign between God and the children of Israel. “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, speak thou unto the children of Israel, saying, verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations,” Ex. 31:12-13. Those who have never seen their freedom from the law want to lift this commandment concerning the sabbath out of the place where the Lord put it, and bring it over into this period of time and place it on the believers of today. Those who talk about keeping the sabbath, and preach about it do not do so. The Bible says the sabbath day was the seventh day of the week. Few Christians make any effort to keep the seventh day of the week, and call it holy. For years Saturday has been the main shopping day for believers.

If we are going to keep the sabbath day we will have to go back and cease from our work on Saturday, and try to keep that day holy. No other day of the week is ever called the sabbath but the seventh, which is Saturday. People often call Sunday the sabbath day, but nowhere in the word of God is the first day of the week ever called the Sabbath, or a SABBATH, or The Christian Sabbath. Neither is there a place in the Bible where the first day of the week is said to be a HOLY DAY.

The Penalty For Breaking the Sabbath Was Death “Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the Lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day,” Ex. 35:2-3.

From this passage we see that the penalty for doing any work on the sabbath day was DEATH. If we bring over the law concerning the sabbath day and try to apply it to us today then we will have to bring along with that law the penalty for breaking that law. The penalty cannot be revoked without the law being disannulled. Where in the Bible can we find any other penalty for breaking the sabbath than the penalty of death? In Numbers 15:32-36 we find that a man was stoned to death for picking up sticks on the sabbath day. And he was put to death by the direct commandment of the Lord on that occasion. If the Christian is under obligation to keep the 4th of the ten commandments, then what penalty is to be inflicted on him for breaking the sabbath day? Just where in the Bible will we read the penalty which is to be inflicted on the Christian if he shall work on the sabbath day? Just where in the Bible do we read that the Christian cannot pick up sticks on the sabbath day? Just where do we read that the Christian cannot make a fire on the sabbath day? Such scriptures cannot be found.

Some want to make a holy day out of Sunday and call it a Sabbath. Just where is the scripture that justifies one in doing so? For the believer, the one who has been freed from the law, one day is no more holy than another day. Paul denounced the observance of certain days, months, and times on the part of the believers. He said to the Galations, “Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.”

He wrote to the Colossians, that they were to let no man “judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an HOLYDAY, or of the new moon,” Col. 2:16. For the believer the obligation to observe all these things passed when Christ blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, taking it out of the way and nailing it to his cross. See Col. 2:13-17. It was just after Paul had told them that Christ had taken out of the way the handwriting of the ordinances and had nailed them to the cross that he said to the Colossians “Let no man THEREFORE judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ,” vs. 16-17.

The word “THEREFORE” points back to what Paul had just said about the handwriting of the ordinances being taken out of the way and nailed to the cross. Because Christ has done this then the child of God is not forbidden to eat certain meat. He is not obligated to observe an HOLY DAY. See that word “HOLY-DAY” in Col. 2:16. In Ex. 35:2 God said to Israel “The seventh day shall be unto you an holy day”. If therefore the believer is not obligated to observe a

holyday, then he is not under obligation to keep a sabbath day. All those things were types and shadows which passed away with the coming of Christ who is the body which the shadows pointed toward. In Gal. 3:19 Paul asked, “Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions TILL THE SEED SHOULD COME to whom the promise was made.” In Gal. 3:16 we read, “He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy seed, WHICH IS CHRIST.” So the seed to whom the promise was made is Christ. And Paul tells us that the law was added TILL the seed should come to whom the promise was made. If the law was added until Christ came then it cannot extend its dominion over the believer beyond the coming of Christ. Then, to take our stand under the law, and seek to serve it, is to argue that Christ has not yet come. So those who try to place upon the believer the obligation to keep the sabbath, or to observe tithing, may not know it, but they are by so doing virtually saying that the SEED, Christ, has not yet come. What Paul wrote in II Cor. 3:15 is true of them. “But even unto this day when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart.”

Sunday Is Not A Sabbath Those who try to bring all the principles of the law over into this dispensation of time and place them on the believer under a new terminology do grossly err.

Those who would make a holyday out of Sunday, and place around it the same restrictions that were placed on the seventh day of the week, and invest it with the same sanctity, do so without any scripture for doing it, and they do nothing but confuse themselves and others.

Some may say now I believe this and I believe that, and I see it this way. Let me ask you is it what you may think, or how you see a thing which counts, or is it what does the word of God say? If you say you believe a thing a certain way then you should be able to give the passage of scripture which causes you to believe that way. If you cannot find any scripture to prove what you say, or what you believe, then give up that idea. Do not set yourself in opposition to the word of God. In Rom. 8:2 Paul wrote “The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” “If ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law,” Gal. 5:15. These passages are plain enough for any child of God to see and believe, and it should cause all argument on the law question to cease. Those who argue against these passages are against the word of God. Now let us see if we can place the same restrictions around Sunday which were placed on the sabbath. Ex. 35:3 told the children of Israel that they were to kindle no fire on the sabbath day. Is it wrong to make a fire on Sunday? If so, all church members break the law on this point. Every time a preacher, or some other church member strikes a match, and lights a cigarette on Sunday he violates the principle that was connected with the sabbath day. Several years ago I pastored a fourth time church in Wooster, Arkansas. The third Sunday was my preaching day. The first year I preached there there was a blizzard on the 3rd Sunday in February, on the 3rd Sunday in March, on the 3rd Sunday in April, and a severe cold spell on the 3rd Sunday in May. Someone had to go to the church house and build a fire in an old wood burning stove on each of these Sundays.

The Sabbath Israel was forbidden to kindle any fire on the sabbath day in any of their habitations, See Ex. 35:3. If Sunday takes the place of the old sabbath, then are these same restrictions placed around Sunday? If so, did we not break the principle of the sabbath day when we made a fire in the church house at Wooster on the third Sunday in February, March, April and May? Should we just have stayed home from church on those days, and with no fires in our homes, or have gone to the church house and kindled a fire? If you attach the same principles to Sunday which were applied to the old Sabbath day then did we not violate those principles by making a fire on those Sundays?

Then in Ex. 20:10 the children were forbidden to work their cattle on the Sabbath day. Not many preachers of today know anything about ox-wagons. But this writer can remember seeing ox-wagons in his time. They still have such in some places in the world. There used to be an old preacher in a church I pastored by the name of Griswood. I have heard him tell about hitching up his oxen to a wagon and going eight miles to church on Sunday. Under the old sabbath Israel was not to work their oxen on the sabbath day. Does the same principle apply to Sunday?

If so, that preacher, and thousands of other Christians in that time violated the principle of the sabbath by working their oxen on Sunday, and going to church.

If those restrictions, the kindling of a fire on the sabbath, and the working of their oxen on the sabbath, do not apply to Sunday, then what other restrictions which applied to the sabbath do not apply to Sunday, then where shall we draw the line, and will some of these law preachers point out to us the passage of scripture which tells us where to draw the line? Sunday is nowhere called a sabbath in the Bible, and there is not a line of scripture which shows that Sunday is

clothed with the principles of the old sabbath day.

The old sabbath was a day of rest, not a day of worship under the law, as given by Moses. Sunday is a day God's people gather from far and near to worship the Lord. The end of Sunday usually finds the preacher more tired than any other day of the week. I have often preached three times on Sundays, and occasionally four times. The man who has done this knows that it makes him tired.

When preachers say, “No, I know we are not under the ten commandments,” but the same principles are brought over and placed on the child of God today, they are hunting for a place to work in their tithing doctrine for today. The law was called the ministration of death and condemnation in II Cor. 3:7-9. How can the principles of that which brings death and condemnation bring life and justification? We are not under both. We must be under one or the other. Rom. 8:2 teaches that the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, has made us free from the law of sin and death.

My wife and I raised a family of children. At that time there was a law on the statute books of Arkansas against parents killing their children. But those laws had nothing to do in regulating our conduct toward our children, or our treatment of them. There was another law, the law of LOVE, which regulated our conduct toward those children. Had all those laws been wiped off the statue books of Arkansas my conduct toward my children, my neighbors, and their children, would not have changed in the least. So the child of God has no need for the commandments “Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not steal.” His life is regulated and motivated by the law of LOVE, and the law of the Spirit of life.

Paul tells us that the law was not made for a righteous man. He tells us that “What things soever the law saith, it saith to them that are under the law, that every mouth might be stopped and all the world might become guilty before God,” Rom. 3:19.

There is no command for us to observe Sunday or any other day as a holy day. With the child of God every day should be equally holy. There are a few scriptures which show that the believers met together on the first day of the week, and I thank God for the privilege of meeting together on Sunday for worship. But today two thirds of church members work at some kind of job, working for their living, on Sunday. We can do nothing but bring confusion and bondage and dismay in trying to place the same restrictions on Sunday as were placed on the old sabbath.

Every child of God should know his position and his freedom in Christ Jesus. In his book on “How to Study the Bible” Dr. I. M. Haldeman says, “The attempt to put Christians and Gentiles under the law of Moses in this dispensation gave this country the witchcraft of Salem, and such modern misnomers as The Christian Sabbath, and the American Sabbath.” He also said, “The Christian who goes under the law, goes under the Levitical priesthood.” See Pages 33-34.

How few people know what belongs to the law and what belongs to grace. Their pastors have dismally failed to inform them on that line.

See also these pdfs: Standing Fast In The Truth and Is There A Difference In The Churches? and The Sabbath Day & Questions for Tithers and "FREEDOM FROM THE LAW of Moses and Spiritual Growth in CHRIST."

The Shayne Moses Project