KINGDOM AND AGE TO COME.
“Earnestly contend for the Faith, which was once delivered to the Saints.”—Jude
Volume 1—Number 2 (February 1851)
From The Voice of Israel
“So many of the prophecies of the Old Testament do evidently refer to the reduction of the Jews into their own land, as the people of the Messiah, that I can by no means doubt of the certainty of that event.”—Doddridge’s Comment on Romans 11: 12. —Note a.
* * *
We have already directed the attention of our readers to the return of the Jews from Babylon; and endeavoured to exhibit that event in its exact scriptural bearing and magnitude. We have seen that the promise of a restoration at the expiration of seventy years, was not a promise which had respect to the whole nation, but was expressly limited to that portion of the people who were carried captive to Babylon in the reign of Jehoiakim and that of his son Jehoiachin. That such was the case, must appear obvious to every one who gives attention to those passages of scripture adduced in our article on this subject. Moreover, we find that the accomplishment was in accordance with the prediction; for the Jews who returned were not one-hundredth part of the whole Jewish race. * These things considered, it is truly surprising that the return from Babylon should ever have been looked upon as the principal object of the numerous prophecies which relate to the restoration of Judah and Israel, and an event in which they have received their full accomplishment.
We now proceed to take a cursory view of a few of those prophecies to which we here allude. Before, however, entering on the subject, we shall make one observation, which it is of importance to bear in mind in reading the Hebrew prophets. When prophetic promises, &c. are addressed to Judah and Israel, we must understand them as addressed to Judah and Israel, properly so called, and not to the Gentiles. When promises are made to the latter, they are always called by their own name—Gentiles, nations, peoples, or terms of a similar import; and are never, in the language of the prophets (whether in a converted or unconverted state,) confounded with Judah and Israel, or the Jewish people.
* (Judea contained as may be fairly calculated, from 2 Samuel 24: 9, nine millions of souls.)
The first prophetic promise relating to the general restoration of the Jewish people to which we would invite attention, is that which is contained in Deuteronomy 30: 1-5, where Moses, after having in the two preceding chapters described, with wonderful minuteness and precision, the calamities which should befall them in the event of their disobeying the voice of the Lord their God, thus addresses them:
“And it shall come to pass, when all these things are come upon thee, the blessing and the curse, which I have set before thee, and thou shalt call them to mind among all the nations whither the Lord thy God hath driven thee, and shalt return to the Lord thy God, and shalt obey his voice according to all that I command thee this day, thou and thy children, with all thy heart and with all thy soul: that then the Lord thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations whither the Lord thy God hath scattered thee. If any of thine be driven out unto the outmost parts of heaven, from thence will the Lord thy God gather thee, and from thence will he fetch thee. And the Lord thy God will bring thee unto the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it; and he will do thee good, and multiply thee above thy fathers.”
This prophecy of Moses contains all the buds of prophetic truth, regarding the restoration of the Jewish people, which we find fully developed in the writings of the Prophets, and exhibited in detail. We shall, at present, only remark, that the restoration here spoken of, is not partial, but comprehends the whole Jewish race, as is obvious from the 3rd and 4th verses.
The Prophet Isaiah contains many remarkable predictions relating to the national restoration of these people. We read, 11: 11-12,
“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, from Egypt, from Pathros, from Cush, from Elam, from Shinar, from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea (or islands of the west). 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 corners of the earth.”
Both Judah and Israel, the two tribes and the ten, are here mentioned; and they are gathered from the four corners of the earth, that is, from all parts of the earth. None, surely, will say, that any event like this has ever yet occurred in the history of this people. The same great deliverance is spoken of, 27: 12-13: —
“And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall beat off from the channel of the river unto the stream of Egypt, and ye shall be gathered one by one, O ye children of Israel. And it shall come to pass in that day, that the great trumpet shall be blown, and they shall come which are ready to perish in the land of Assyria, and the outcasts in the land of Egypt, and shall worship the Lord in the holy mount at Jerusalem.”
This was not done at the return from Babylon; nor is there any event in the subsequent history of the Jewish people to which this prophecy can be referred, as having received its accomplishment. Again, in chapter 49 —
“Thus saith the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth. . . Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant to the people (i.e. the Jewish people,) to establish the land, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages; that thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Show yourselves. . . And I will make all my mountains a way, and my highways shall be exalted. Behold, these shall come from far; and lo, these from the north, and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim” (supposed to be China,)
Verses 7-9, 11-12.
And when Isaiah prophesies of the Messiah as the deliverer of captive Israel, he says,
“And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of many generations,” chapter 61: 4.
And in verse 18 of the preceding chapter, it is said,
“Violence shall no more be heard in thy land, wasting and destruction within thy borders.”
The reverse of this is exactly the state of things in their land, at this present time. It is not safe for any one to go any distance from Jerusalem without arms. Even those who are employed in cultivating the soil are all armed.
Moreover, in chapter 54: 7-10, it is written,
“For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer. For this is as the waters of Noah unto me; for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah shall no more go over the earth, so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee.”
Verily, there remains a time for the display of this uninterrupted kindness! The Lord has been angry with his people, and his anger is not yet turned away from them. From the days of the Prophet to the present moment, they have experienced little else besides oppression and calamities, which have befallen them as a punishment for their transgressions. But read the language of mercy, verses 11-14:
“O thou afflicted, tossed with tempest, and not comforted, behold,” &c.
In that day they shall say,
“I will give thanks unto thee, O Lord; for though thou hast been angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and thou hast comforted me.”
Yes, the Holy One of Israel hath said,
“As one whom his mother comforteth, so will I comfort you; and ye shall be comforted in JERUSALEM.”—Isaiah 66: 13.
Were we to produce all the passages in Isaiah which relate to the restoration of this people to their own land, we must transcribe the greater part of his prophecies. All the latter chapters especially direct our attention to it. See, particularly, the whole of the 60th chapter, viewed in connection with the two last verses of the preceding one, which is a prophetic picture of this great and glorious event, and of the state of blessedness consequent thereupon.
In Jeremiah, 3: 12-18, we find a prophecy relating chiefly to the restoration of Israel, or the ten tribes. It is there said,
“At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the Lord; and all nations shall be gathered unto it, to the name of the Lord, to Jerusalem: neither shall they walk any more after the imagination of their evil heart.”—Verse 17.
Nothing like this has ever yet taken place.
“In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel, and they shall come together out of the land of the north to the land that I have given for an inheritance unto your fathers.”—Verse 18.
Again, in chapter 16: 14-15, it is written,
“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that it shall no more be said, The Lord liveth, that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; but the Lord liveth that brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither he had driven them: and I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers.”
In the public prayers, &c. of the Jews, there is a continual reference to the deliverance out of Egypt, as the greatest event in their national history; but it is here intimated, that that deliverance shall be obscured by one still greater—their restoration, in the latter days, to the land of their fathers. There are persons who possess a remarkable talent for spiritualising, or rather allegorising, the language of the Prophets, who say, that bringing up and leading the seed of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither they have been driven, means converting persons out of all nations to the faith of the gospel; but, as if to refute all such interpretations, it is added,
“And I will bring them again into their land that I gave unto their fathers;”—“and they shall dwell in their own land.”
In the 30th chapter of the same Prophet we read,
“Thus speaketh the Lord God of Israel, saying, Write thee all the words that I have spoken unto thee in a book. For lo, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will bring again the captivity of my people Israel and Judah, saith the Lord; and I will cause them to return to the land that I gave to their fathers, and they shall possess it. For it shall come to pass in that day, saith the Lord of Hosts, that I will break his (the oppressor’s) yoke from off thy neck, and will burst thy bonds, and strangers shall no more serve themselves of him: but they shall serve the Lord their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up unto them. Therefore fear thou not, O my servant Jacob, saith the Lord; neither be dismayed, O Israel: for, lo, I will save thee from afar, and thy seed from the land of their captivity; and Jacob shall return, and shall be in rest, and be quiet, and none shall make him afraid. For I am with thee, saith the Lord, to save thee: though I make a full end of all the nations whither I have scattered thee, yet will I not make a full end of thee; but I will correct thee in measure, and not leave thee altogether unpunished.” Verses 2-3, 8-11.
How wonderfully, hitherto, has this part of the prophecy been fulfilled! We look for the ancient conquerors and oppressors of the Jews, but they are not to be found. The Egyptians afflicted them, and detained them in bondage; the Assyrians carried away captive the ten tribes of Israel; the Babylonians afterwards carried away the remaining tribes of Judah and Benjamin; the Syro-Macedonians, especially Antiochus Epiphanes, cruelly persecuted them; and the Romans utterly dissolved the Jewish state, and dispersed the people, so that they have never been able to recover again their city and country. But where are now those great and famous empires which, in their turns, subdued and oppressed the people of God? Are they not vanished as a dream, and not only their power, but their very names lost in the earth? The Egyptians, Assyrians, and Babylonians were overthrown, and entirely subjected by the Persians, who were the restorers of the Jews, as well as the destroyers of their enemies; the Syro-Macedonians were swallowed up by the Romans; and the Roman empire, great and powerful as it was, was broken in pieces by the incursions of the northern nations; while the Jews are existing as a distinct people at this day. Faithful is He who hath said,
“Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish. Thou shalt seek them, and shalt not find them, even them that contended with thee; they that war against thee shall be as nothing, and as a thing of nought. For I the Lord thy God, will hold thy right hand, saying unto thee, Fear not; I will help thee.” Isaiah 41: 11-13.
Seeing such hath been the end of the enemies of the Jewish people let it serve as a warning to all who, at any time, would oppress and persecute them. —See Numbers 14: 9.
We now return to the 30th chapter of Jeremiah, verse 18:
“Thus saith the Lord: Behold, I will bring again the captivity of Jacob’s tents, and have mercy on his dwelling places; and the city shall be builded upon her own heap, and the palace shall remain after the manner thereof. Their children also shall be as aforetime, and their congregation shall be established before me, and I will punish all that oppress them. And their nobles shall be of themselves, and their governor shall proceed from the midst of them. And ye shall be my people, and I will be your God.”
And that there may be no mistake as to the season of this mercy, it is added,
“In the latter days ye shall consider it.” Verse 24.
These great and precious promises of the Lord to his people require no comment: no language can be more plain and specific: it forcibly reminds us of the command which the Lord gave to the Prophet:
“Write the vision and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it.”—Habakkuk 2: 2.
It is language which sets at defiance all the efforts of spiritualising Christians and spiritualising Jew * to explain it away. The Prophet Jeremiah proceeds in the same strain throughout the 31st chapter, giving assurance of Israel and Judah’s restoration in the latter days. See verses 1, 4, 5, 8, & 10. And, in order to remove all doubts, as to the accomplishment of these promises, the Lord ratifies them in the most solemn manner, verses 35-37.
* * *
* (There are among the Jews of the present day many who spiritualise the prophecies which relate to their restoration to the land of their fathers; who maintain that these prophecies are to be understood as expressive of a spiritual regeneration of the children of Israel, and a reign of universal peace; when they shall live among the nations in peace and unity, have temples every where, and be treated as citizens in every country where they live; when they shall no more sigh for the desolation of Jerusalem, and of the beautiful house where their fathers worshipped, because the whole world shall be their Palestine, every city their Zion, and every synagogue their Temple!)
* * *
Again, in the 33rd chapter verse 7, it is written,
“I will cause the captivity of Judah and the captivity of Israel to return, and will build them, as at the first. . . . Thus saith the Lord of Hosts; Again in this place, which is desolate, without man and without beast, and in all the cities thereof, shall be an habitation of shepherds, causing their flocks to lie down. In the cities of the mountains, in the cities of the vale, in the cities of the south, and in the land of Benjamin, and in the places about Jerusalem, and in the cities of Judah shall the flocks pass again under the hands of him that telleth them, saith the Lord. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will perform that good thing which I have promised unto the house of Israel and to the house of Judah. In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land.”
This verse is the key passage of the prophecy. The title “Branch” is not given to the Messiah in any passage that is applicable to his first coming; but in all the passages in which it occurs there are some circumstances to show that it applies to his second coming; as in chapter 23: 5-6, and in this place. In both these passages, it is said, “In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely;” which is exactly the opposite of what took place at the first coming of the Messiah; for instead of dwelling safely, Judah and Israel have had no safe dwelling in any country on the globe.
The above is only a small portion of the testimony of these two prophets, Isaiah and Jeremiah, relating to the restoration of the Jewish people to the land of their fathers; but it is sufficient, if the passages which we have adduced be viewed as they stand related to their respective contexts, to convince impartial readers that, although the goodly plant which the Lord planted in Canaan is cast out and withered as a dead tree, it shall again be planted in the mountains of Israel, and take root, and bud, and blossom, and fill the face of the world with fruit!
(To be continued.)
* * *
SPIRITED PEOPLE
Every species of wealth is difficult of acquisition, and every species of wealth is valuable. It is as difficult for a poor-spirited man to become rich in spirit, as it is for a poor-pocketed man to become a millionaire. More difficult; the latter is possible, but the former seems almost impossible. A poor man may become rich in a day by a legacy or a “treasure trove,” but there are no legacies for the spirit that one man can leave to another. There are no such charms as the mantle of Elijah in these days of drudgery. The grey redingote, the hat, and the sword of Napoleon will not make an emperor; and the pen of a Wordsworth or a Byron will neither kindle the poetic fire, nor provide the fuel. Richness of soul is a gift of God, and like all his gifts, it is distributed without respect of persons amongst rich and poor.
“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven!”
A strange sentence, seeming to imply that poverty of spirit is better than riches. But all sorts of contradictions are true in the mystic world. This poverty of spirit is humility—a beautiful and most becoming virtue. Nothing more admirable in rich or poor. This poverty is riches; it is the reverse of arrogance, haughtiness, and superciliousness. But that poverty of spirit which constitutes meanness is so far from being the reverse of arrogance, that it is generally its concomitant. Extremes meet and embrace. The miser can send a beggar from his door with as much heartlessness as a peer; when he is not craving or beseeching he is cursing and reviling. The coward is always cruel; and when he is not the victim, he is glad to be the persecutor. All the vices seem to go together, and all the virtues together. The humble man has a noble pride, the mean man has a petty pride, and the poor-spirited man has a courage peculiar to himself.
One of the proudest and haughtiest women we ever met was also the meanest. She would ring for a servant from the bottom to the top of the house merely to stir the fire with the poker, when she herself was sitting beside it in perfect health. She had no mercy on an inferior; and she either admired with extravagance, or regarded with indifference and contempt. She could borrow a shawl or a bonnet from a friend and wear it out. If there were any curiosity in your possession that you particularly valued, she could beseech you to give it to her, and importune you till she succeeded. When she succeeded she cared nothing for it, but probably gave it to one of her children to play with. The daughters were like the mother. They could borrow even a pair of shoes from an acquaintance, and wear them, without returning an equivalent, or even condescending to make an apology. This woman was both proud and mean, high-spirited, fractious and extravagant, and indomitable; the ruin of an excellent husband, and the mother of a reckless family—daughters who wore stockings with holes in the heels, and silk dresses torn and stained, having eyes without hooks, and hooks without eyes to match them—and sons who kept the house in perpetual uproar, because they wanted heart for good behaviour, and the mother wanted authority or inclination to enforce it.
This lady was called, by some of her acquaintances, very aristocratical! Are there such beings amongst the aristocracy? Did you ever meet amongst your acquaintances a scion of some noble or gentle family reduced to poverty, who could be guilty of meanness, selfishness or importunacy that would make a labourer blush? Some dowager, who, on the strength of a descent from some captain or colonel who fought at Blenheim, or Waterloo, could solicit, with indomitable perseverance for years, a pension for herself and places for her sons? or some ancient maiden, proud of her lineage, who, on the assumed importance of her genealogical tree, could get twopenny cabbages for a penny, lobsters for half-price, and a herring into the bargain?
Did you ever hear of an Archbishop of Canterbury, who, in obedience to the pious injunction of an apostle, to “provide for his own and especially for those of his own house,” appointed three of his own sons to the three lucrative registrarships of Canterbury? and of another, who, when one of these three registrars died, appointed his own son, a boy, to hold the valuable appointment of 3000 pounds a year, with a deputy to do all the work for him? High-spirited men no doubt! High Churchmen, doubtless, with wives as high and devout as themselves, firmly believing in baptismal regeneration, and the power of the priest to give absolution of sins.
Did you ever hear of cathedral trusts committed to deans and chapters for the benefit of the public, for the endowments of schools and the support of poor scholars, so entirely diverted from their original purpose that, whilst the revenue has increased as much as ten or twenty-fold, the increase has been transferred to the pockets of the trustees, and the benefit to the poor has diminished to a hundredth part? In 1542, when the cathedral of Canterbury had an income of 2,542 pounds, it expended 230 pounds per annum on grammar schools. In 1843, when its income had increased to 21,551 pounds, it expended only 182 pounds on grammar schools, under the high-spirited high church and aqua-baptismal superintendence of those apostolic men, who provide for their own and especially for those of their own house!
Custom will sanction anything. The king and queen of Tahiti used to ride upon men’s shoulders, and the chevalier who bore the interesting burthen took firm hold of the legs of majesty, as he darted along with the velocity of a quadruped. This was accounted very dignified. Now that the Tahitans are civilised, they no doubt consider it very indelicate. When England is christianised an equal change will take place in its spirit and its practices. What now passes for high spirit will then be regarded as meanness, and what now looks like poverty and meanness of spirit, to the falsely educated and fashion led, will rise by public acclamation and universal assent to the top of the scale of society. Bishops will not then spend the best of their time in political discussions in the metropolis, apart from their sees, or sitting on ecclesiastical commissions, voting large sums for palaces and gardens to one another, and small sums for augmenting the poor livings of their humble brethren—ceasing to study theology so soon as they receive the theological crown—fighting and contending for mere forms of words and modes of ceremony, like High Churchmen—and exhibiting to the world an example of worldliness, which may be high enough in a political sense, but is certainly very far from being an imitation of the highest of all churchmen.
It is difficult to say what is high and what is low. Fashion teaches one thing, philosophy another, sectarianism a third. One man thinks himself high and dignified if he keeps a good house, gives good dinners and wines, talks curtly and snappishly to servants, and is ever ready to fight to avenge an insult. Such men can get into debt with butchers, bakers, wine merchants, tailors and shoemakers, and play hide-and-seek with them for years, without losing caste. It is legal sport. Transportation is not the penalty, and prisons are not without the pale of polite society. Men of this description are spirited in one sense. But everything in Nature, like a medal, has its reverse. So they are mean in another sense; but not, we suspect, in that particular theological sense in which the kingdom of Heaven is promised to the poor in spirit.
There are simple quiet men in the world, who have so little spirit, that they can never buy a new hat till they have paid for the old one, nor run up a bill with their tailors, however importuned to do so. They tremble at the very idea of an importunate creditor. They pay their bills so soon as they are sent in, and proportion their length to the amount of their income. If they have a thousand a-year, they never spend a thousand and one; but, on the contrary, reserve a floating sum to give them power over all emergencies. Such men exhibit no spirit to the world. But they may feel it. It is a secret spirit—a retiring, self-possessed, independent spirit—not likely to make a figure in the world, but one that is likely to get well out of it, as a Manchester man once remarked, “The grand thing in this world is to get well dead.”
By this reversion of the poles of character, it really looks as if every man in himself was both high and low spirited at the same time; just like the High Churchman, who is high, in the external sense, in relation to rites and ceremonies, sacerdotal pomp, and apostolic sublimity, demonstrated by words and scholastic logic, but not by deeds; and low, in reference to the spirit of the Church, which he subjects to the form. There is a class of men who are spiritual and spirited in words, but are just like other people in deeds—most evangelical men, who have formalised themselves after a pattern of solemnity that is somewhat imposing. These are the men “that take captive silly women,” and become the living idols of small sects and localities. Their piety is rewarded with silver plate and tea-things, worsted slippers knit by ladies, * dwelling-houses, furniture, wines and other delicacies, and the more worthy they think themselves. Whether this qualifies them the better for rebuking the foolish and the immoral amongst the givers with great boldness we cannot tell, but we have no doubt that it strengthens their countenances amongst the poor; money is a powerful thing, it makes a weak man strong. Even the Church must have its money-prizes to induce the learned men of the Universities to enter it. What would the Archbishop of Canterbury be with 150 pounds a-year? The day was when mendicants could rebuke and scourge kings, but those were times of old spirit; such times are gone. Poverty once reigned in the world—it will reign again, for money cannot reign well, and pride cannot reign well. The kingdom of Heaven is promised to the poor in spirit.
Who are they? You may well ask who are they. Nobody will own himself one of the number; but everybody can point to some of the fraternity. Are those the creatures that Heaven is to be peopled with? It seems so. The poor in spirit, the poor-spirited! Those who have not the courage to cheat a creditor; who are not so bold-faced as to be able to deceive or tell a lie, but whose heart and soul are revealed in their very looks; those who are not so fierce, so active, and energetic as to attempt to drive the world before them, as if they thought they could put Providence in harness; those who delight more in the passive enjoyments of life than the active domination of society, and who for that very reason are deaf to all temptations that lead to disorder, injustice and corruption, as tending inevitably to break the peace and mar their felicity—gentle-men and gentle-women, the inheritors of the age to come, creatures so very timid as to be afraid to do wrong.
Now, as all great truths are mysteries, reason, in the form of a circle, or the serpent wisdom with its tail in its mouth, we might here begin and contradict much that we have said without ever changing the character of the discourse or impairing its moral efficiency. Suffice it to say, that he is possessed of the greatest riches of soul who respects the law of universal rectitude, and never deviates from its straight path. He is a bold and reckless fellow who deliberately breaks it. He alone is a hero who abides by its injunctions, and fears to disobey. —Family Herald.
* * *
* One evangelical clergyman has a little closet all hung round with such slippers, which he is in the habit of showing to his friends with glistening eyes.
* * *
MOUNT ZION
That which naturally comes to be described after the city Jerusalem, is Mount Zion; the whole of which was anciently inclosed within the wall of the city, and about one half of which is within the modern city wall.
“David took the strong hold of Zion, the same is the city of David; so David dwelt in the fort, and called it the city of David.” (1 Samuel 5: 7-9)
This continued the royal residence, and became also the burial place of the kings; but that which gave it a sacred character, and made it afterwards, like Jerusalem, used to signify the church and nation of Israel, was the ark of God being placed there by David. When we consider that the ark was made by the express command of God, and that He gave the most minute directions respecting it, we cannot but wonder at the entire oblivion into which it seems to have fallen for so long a period. For upwards of ninety years, [20 years and seven months. —Ed] that is from the death of Eli, until David was king over all Israel, the ark appears to have been in a state of disuse. We hear once, it is true, of Saul calling for it (1 Samuel 14: 18); but David says expressly, when about to take it to Mount Zion,
“Let us bring again the ark of our God to us; for we inquired not at it in the days of Saul.” (1 Chronicles 13: 3)
It was probably to teach Israel again to honor it, as the visible symbol of His presence, that God saw fit to cut off Uzzah for his rashness in touching it. This judgment seems to have reminded David that the ark was not to be put upon ‘a new cart,’ after the fashion of the Philistines, but borne upon the shoulders of the Levites.
“And David made him houses in the city of David, and prepared a place for the ark of God and pitched for it a tent. Then David said: ‘None ought to carry the ark of God but the Levites; for them hath God chosen to carry the ark of God.’” (1 Chronicles 15: 1-2)
David and all Israel brought up the ark with shouting and great joy, “and set it in his place, in the midst of the tabernacle that David had pitched for it.” (2 Samuel 6: 17) From this time until the building of the temple, to which the ark was removed, Zion was the holy place, or sanctuary of the Lord; and the name continued ever after to be used by prophets and holy men, to designate the whole of Jerusalem, including the temple.
“I am the Lord your God dwelling in Zion, My holy mountain.” (Joel 3: 17)
“Is not the Lord in Zion?” (Jeremiah 8: 19)
What now remains of the glory of Mount Zion? Nothing. Its regal splendour, its hallowed sacredness, are gone: “Therefore shall Zion be ploughed as a field;” was the word of the inspired prophet to “the heads of the house of Jacob, and princes of the house of Israel;” (Micah 3: 9, 12) and there is now a field of barley growing on Zion, as a testimony that the word of the Lord standeth sure. Where now are her bulwarks and her palaces, which the Psalmist pointed out to the consideration of the faithful? They are swept away with the besom of destruction.
Mount Zion is separated from mount Moriah, a locality full of interesting associations. Here the father of the faithful was put to the trying test of offering up his well-beloved son. On this mount in dutiful submission to his Heavenly and his earthly father, he lay bound, from whom afterwards proceeded the many thousands of Israel. When Jerusalem was visited with pestilence, as a punishment for the sin of David in numbering the people, it was on this mount the destroying angel showed himself. It was at that time the property of one of the original inhabitants of Jerusalem, Arauneh, or Ornan, the Jebusite.
“And the angel of the Lord stood by the threshing-floor of Ornan the Jebusite. And David lifted up his eyes, and saw the angel of the Lord stand between the earth and the heaven, having a drawn sword in his hand, stretched out over Jerusalem.” (1 Chronicles 21: 15-16)
David was commanded to erect here an altar unto the Lord, and this he fixed upon as the place whereon the temple should be built.
“Then David said, This is the house of the Lord God, and this is the altar of the burnt offering for Israel.” (1 Chronicles 21: 1)
And here, in due time, was the magnificent temple reared up by Solomon the peaceful prince, the successor of Melchizedek, “king of Salem, which is king of peace,” (Hebrews 7: 2), and the type of that “Prince of Peace,” who shall “reign over the house of Jacob for ever.” (Luke 1: 33)
The temple of Solomon, with its courts, occupied the whole summit of Mount Moriah. But though it was “exceeding magnifical, of fame and glory throughout all countries” (1 Chronicles 22: 5), it was not this outward splendour that constituted the glory of the temple; it was the shechinah, the abiding presence of the Lord, He condescended to take possession of the habitation prepared for him:
“Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the Lord filled the house” (2 Chronicles 7: 1); even as it had before filled the tabernacle in the wilderness. (Exodus 40: 34).
Here was the true church pointed out with sufficient clearness; to separate from this was indeed schism. This visible manifestation of God’s presence continued until the commencement of the captivity. In the visions of Ezekiel, we have a detailed account of the departure of the glory of the Lord from the temple. While a captive by the river Chebar, he was carried—
“In the visions of God to Jerusalem, to the door of the inner gate—and behold, the glory of the God of Israel was there: Then said he unto me, —son of man, seest thou what they do, even the great abominations that the house of Israel committeth here, that I should go far off from my sanctuary?” (Ezekiel 8: 3, 6)
In the following part of the vision we are told that—
“The glory of the Lord went up from the cherub and stood over the threshold of the house” (Ezekiel 10: 4);
The glory then removes to “the east gate of the Lord’s house” (Ezekiel 10: 19); and finally—
“The glory of the Lord went up from the midst of the city, and stood upon the mountain which is on the east side of the city” (Ezekiel 11: 23); that is, the Mount of Olives.
When speaking of these localities, in connexion with this vision of the departure of the shechinah, I cannot resist directing my reader’s attention to another remarkable vision of the same prophet yet to be fulfilled. The latter portion of Ezekiel’s prophecy is occupied with the subject of the future glory of Israel; in which, doubtless, “there are many things hard to be understood;” but this much is very plain, that the things therein predicted did not come to pass at the return from Babylon. Respecting the “house” which occupies such a prominent part in that vision, I offer no opinion; that to which I now wish to direct attention is, the return of the glory of God, whose departure we have just seen so minutely described.
“Afterwards he brought me to the gate, even the gate that looketh toward the east; and behold the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east; and his voice was like a noise of many waters, and the earth shined with his glory; —and the glory of the Lord came into the house by the way of the gate whose prospect is towards the east; —and behold, the glory of the Lord filled the house. And he said unto me: Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever.” (Ezekiel 43: 1-7)
Compare this with the following Scriptures:
“My tabernacle is also with them; yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And the heathen shall know that I the Lord do sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary shall be in the midst of them for ever more.” (Ezekiel 37: 27-28)
“And his feet shall stand in that day upon the Mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east. And the Lord shall be king over all the earth; in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.” (Zechariah 14: 4, 9)
“And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them.” (Revelation 21: 3)
These Scriptures I leave without note or comment, to the consideration of the Christian reader. —Herschell.
* * *
Selected.
STRIKING TRUTHS.
The Protestant reformation was indeed a glorious era—glorious for its reduction of Papal and clerical power and for the partial liberation of the mind, rather than its immediate improvement of men’s apprehensions of Christianity. Some of the Reformers invented or brought back as injurious errors as those they overthrew. Luther’s con-substantiation differed from the Pope’s only by a syllable and that was all the gain; and we may safely say that transubstantiation was a less monstrous doctrine than the five points of Calvinism. —Dr. Channing.
“One of the most striking features of the human mind is its thirst for constantly enlarging knowledge, and its proneness to lose its interest in subjects which it has exhausted.”—Ibid.
(Quaere—Have not ‘certain,’ yet ‘exhausted the subject’ of Baptism for the remission of sins—the Pentecostian ‘Kingdom’ and other kindred topics which they have so long taught by halves. Will they never leave the first principles of the doctrine of Christ and go on to perfection?)
This love of freedom is not borrowed from Greece or Rome. It is not the classical enthusiasm of youth which, by some singular good fortune, has escaped the blighting influence of intercourse with the world. Greece and Rome are names of little weight to a christian. They are warnings rather than inspires and guides. —Ibid.
Passion for power has made the names of King and Priest the most appalling in history. —Ibid.
Power should never be permitted to run into great masses. No more of it should be confided to the rulers than is absolutely necessary to repress crime and to preserve public order. But there is a power which cannot be accumulated to excess. I mean, moral power—that of truth and virtue, the royalty of wisdom and love, and magnanimity and true religion. This is the guardian of all right. It makes those whom it acts on free. It is mightiest when most gentle. —Ibid.
Study is a restraint, compelling us, if we would learn any thing, to concentrate the forces of thought and to bridle the caprices of fancy. —Ibid.
Duty restrains the passions only that the nobler faculties and affections may have freer play—may ascend to God and embrace all his works. —Ibid.
Virtue is the free choice of the right; Love, the free embrace of the heart; Grace, the free motion of the limbs; Genius, the free, bold flight of thought; and Eloquence, its free and fervent utterance. —Ibid.
It is the prerogative of true greatness to glorify itself in adversity and to meditate and execute vast enterprises in defeat. —Ibid.
Dr. Channing says of Milton—“His whole soul revolted against the maxims of legitimacy, hereditary faith, and servile reverence of established power.”
I earnestly beseech all lovers of truth, not to cry out that the church is thrown into confusion by that freedom of discussion and inquiry which is granted to the schools and ought certainly to be refused to no believer, since we are ordered to prove all things, and since the daily progress and light of truth is productive of less disturbance to the church than of illumination and edification. Without this liberty there is neither religion nor gospel—force alone prevails, by which it is disgraceful for the christian religion to be supported. —Milton’s Prose Works.
Words are wise men’s counters; they do but reckon by them. But they are the money of fools that value them by the authority of an Aristotle, a Cicero, a Thomas Aquinas, or any other Doctor whatsoever. —Hobbes.
A cripple in the right way will beat a racer in the wrong. —Bacon.
Better to be defeated fighting for your principles than to succeed by abandoning them. —
Anonymous.
Martyrdom is no criterion of truth; for truth and error have their martyrs who have died in the defence of each. —Anonymous.
Whatever men are taught highly to respect, gradually acquires the rank of virtue. Thus if men are taught to fear adverse public opinion in the struggle between truth and error, they will always side with the latter, which has ever carried it by the popular vote. —Anonymous.
Men must be taught as tho’
We taught them not,
And things unknown, proposed,
As things forgot.
He that saith to the wicked—thou art righteous, him shall the people curse. Nations shall abhor him. But to them that rebuke him, shall be delight, and a good blessing shall come upon them. —Proverbs.
He that hath no rule over his own spirit, is like a city that is broken down and without walls. —Proverbs.
Because sentence is not speedily executed against an evil work, therefore the heart of the sons of men (contra-distinguished from the sons of God) is fully set in them to do evil. —Ecclesiastes.
God giveth to a man that is good in his sight, wisdom, and knowledge and joy; but to the sinner, he giveth travail, to gather and heap up that he may give to him that is good before God—[in the Age to Come.]—Ecclesiastes.
Worth means wealth, and wisdom the art of acquiring it. This is the world’s creed. —Anonymous.
As respects natural religion—revelation being for the present altogether left out of the question—it is not easy to see that a philosopher of the present day is more favourably situated than Thales or Simonides. He has before him just the same evidence of design in the structure of the Universe which the early Greeks had * * * *. As to the other great question—the question what becomes of man after death—we do not see that a highly educated European, left to his unassisted reason, is more likely to be in the right than a Blackfoot Indian. Not a single one of the many sciences in which we surpass the Blackfoot Indians, throws the smallest light on the state of the soul after the animal life is extinct. In truth, all the philosophers, ancient and modern, who have attempted, without the help of revelation, to prove the immortality of man, from Plato down to Franklin, appear to us to have failed deplorably. —T. B. Macauley.
The Christian believes, as well as the Jew, that at some future period the present order of things will come to an end. Nay, many Christians believe that the Messiah will shortly establish a kingdom on the earth and reign visibly over all its inhabitants. Whether this doctrine be orthodox or not, we shall not here enquire. The number of people who hold it is very much greater than the number of Jews residing in England. Many of those who hold it are distinguished by rank, wealth and ability. It is preached from the pulpits, both of the Scottish and English church. Noblemen and members of Parliament have written in defence of it. —Ibid.
Every generation enjoys the use of a vast hoard bequeathed to it by antiquity and transmits it, augmented by fresh acquisitions, to future ages. In these pursuits, therefore, the first speculators lie under great disadvantages, and even when they fail are entitled to great praise. Their pupils with far inferior intellectual powers, speedily surpass them in actual attainments. Every girl, who has read Mrs. Marcet’s little dialogues on Political Economy, could teach Montague or Walpole many lessons in finance. Any intelligent man may now, by resolutely applying himself for a few years to mathematics, learn more than the great Newton knew, after half a century of study and meditation. This is true of the experimental sciences. It is not so, however, with the imitative arts, as music, painting, and sculpture, and still less with poetry. —Ibid.
“Better have, in the church, a peaceful error than a troublesome truth,” said Erasmus. “Peace indeed, if possible, but truth at all hazards,” was the noble reply of Luther. —D’Aubigne.
* * *
REPRESENTATIVE THINGS.
By the Editor.
The acquisition of knowledge by mere verbal signs is tedious and generally difficult. All kinds of teachers, from the teachers of babes to the dignified professors of the highest branches of philosophy and science, are so convinced of this, that where the case admits of it they endeavour to exemplify by representations addressed to the senses of their disciples. Thus the teacher of a child is not content with telling his pupil that h o u s e stands for house, but he demonstrates it by presenting him with the representation or picture of a house. This impresses the idea on the child’s mind indelibly, so that whenever he sees the word house this representative word is immediately succeeded in his mind by the idea or image of the thing itself. The professor of mathematics points to his representative diagrams; the chemist to his experiments; and so forth, all of them for the common purpose of making more intelligible the precepts they inculcate.
Knowledge of all kinds gains access to the human mind by all the senses—by seeing, by hearing, by tasting, smelling, and feeling. If only one sense be engaged in the acquisition of it, it is not likely to be so quickly and comprehensively acquired as when two or more senses are employed. The prophets of Israel were sometimes made to see, hear, taste, smell, and feel in relation to one and the same subject before they were permitted to make known, or deliver their message to the rulers and people of the nation. This gave them a full assurance of knowledge which could not be made more certain, seeing that there remained no other avenue to their minds, no sixth sense to receive additional impressions.
It is manifest from the divine oracles that God teaches men as they teach one another, not by precept only, but by example, type, or representation also. This is apparent from the many visions seen by the prophets, who in describing what they saw delineate and paint it, as it were, on the minds of those that read their descriptions; so that in this way the visions are transferred from their minds to them. Vision, however, is not the only representative mode of instruction exhibited in the sacred scriptures. The events of Israel’s history, the leading men who figured in their several generations, the temple furniture, national festivals, and other institutions of their law are all representative things, that is, things illustrative or shadowing forth a something God has declared shall be. The proof of this is contained in the following passages: thus it is written in 1 Corinthians 10: 6,
“These things were our examples (typoi, types) to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.”
The things here referred to were the overthrowings of the Israelites in the wilderness because of the displeasure of God at the faithlessness and obduracy of their hearts, although he brought them safely through the tempestuous sea, fed them with “angels’ food,” and slaked their raging thirst with water from the flinty rock. The food, the drink, and the rock are styled “spiritual meat,” “spiritual drink,” and the “spiritual rock,” the spirituality of which they did not perceive. The word spiritual in this place is pneumatikon in the original text, and evidently means figuratively, typically, or representatively; for, says the apostle, “that Rock was,” or represented, “the Christ” from whom rivers of living water were to flow. The Rock in Horeb was indeed a beautiful and expressive emblem of the Lord Christ; for when Moses smote it Jehovah’s representative stood upon the top of it, thereby connecting the Lord and the Rock as the sign and the thing signified. From the seventh to the tenth verses of this chapter the apostle cites various instances of the perverseness of Israel in the wilderness notwithstanding the goodness of God to them, and finishes his citations by declaring that—
“All these things happened unto them for ensamples,” (or types); “and they are written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world,” (or ages of the Law, aionoon), “are come.”
The deduction from which is that the gospel was preached to the generation of Israel that came out of Egypt, as well as to the generation contemporary with the apostle; but that it did not profit them because, although baptised unto Moses, they did not continue in the faith but turned back in their hearts to Egypt; so also the belief of the same gospel would be unprofitable to those who are baptised unto Christ, if they continue not in the faith, but commit sin even as they.
But these representative things or “ensamples,” do not find their full and complete significancy in the spiritualities pertaining to the believers of “the truth as it is in Jesus.” They have a meaning which will appear only at the engrafting of Israel again into their own olive tree. The passage of the Red Sea and baptism of the Twelve Tribes into Moses is an historical event which has an individual and a national signification. Thus as the national baptism into Moses released Israel after the flesh from their bondage to the Egyptian adversary, so an individual baptism into Christ releases the believers of the same gospel, or Israel after the spirit, from their moral bondage to the adversary, or sin incarnate in the flesh. But the national baptism into Moses also represents the future national baptism of the Twelve Tribes into Jesus as the Christ, and prophet like unto Moses whom the Lord their God was to raise up unto them from among their tribes. They have sung the song of Moses, but they have yet to sing the song of Moses and the Lamb on the shores of the Egyptian Sea in celebration of their Second Exodus from the house of bondage. The man whose name is the Branch, even Jesus and not Moses, will be the king in Jeshurun who will divide its waters, and lead them in triumph to the eastern shore. Then will the nations rejoice with Israel; for the Lord will have avenged the blood of his servants, and have rendered vengeance to his adversaries, and have been merciful to his land, and to his people. —Deuteronomy 32: 43.
The testimony which writes these things upon our hearts is found in nearly all the prophets; a quotation or two must therefore suffice in this place: Let the reader consult the eleventh and twelfth chapters of Isaiah. There he will find that a Branch is to grow out of Jesse’s roots who is to judge the poor with righteousness, and to strike terror into the hearts of his adversaries, at a time when the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea. In that day of glory and intelligence, He is to stand as an ensign for Israel and the nations, around which they will all be gathered in one glorious dominion. The introduction of that day of rest is to be characterised by the assembling the outcasts of Israel, and the gathering together of the dispersed of Judah from the four wings of the earth a second time. A return from Egypt is especially referred to in the eleventh and fifteenth verses, in the latter of which it is declared that “the Lord (that is, the Branch) shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian Sea (that is of the Red Sea:) and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river (Nile) and shall smite it in the seven streams (or mouths) and make go over dry shod.” This can only refer to the future, for there has been no second gathering of the Ten Tribes called Israel, or of the Two Tribes styled Judah, since the first gathering of the latter from the Babylonish Captivity. The Branch, whose name is the Lord our Righteousness (Jeremiah 23: 5, 8), is the ensign and the gatherer; for Jehovah formed him from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob’s tribes again to him, and to restore the desolations of Israel. (Isaiah 49: 5-6, 8) He is Jehovah’s servant, then, to do all these things, which are the exact antitype of what Moses effected, and therefore illustrated or represented by the redemption from Egypt; as it is written,
“There shall be a highway for the remnant of his people, which shall be left from Assyria, like as it was to Israel in the day that they came up out of the land of Egypt.”
The result of this second national redemption from civil and ecclesiastical bondage among the gentiles, will be the restoration of political harmony and concord among the Twelve Tribes, their national supremacy over the rest of the world, and their drawing water out of their own country’s wells in safety, and therefore termed “the wells of salvation” in their song of joyful thanksgiving for the restoration of their land and kingdom by “the Repairer of the breach, the Restorer of the paths to dwell in.” (Isaiah 58: 12)
Once more. The national probation in the wilderness of Egypt for forty years under Moses is also representative of the individual probation of believers subsequently to their baptism into Christ and of the national probation of the Twelve Tribes in the wilderness of the people previous to their being brought into the bond of the covenant, and into the land of Israel. That the Mosaic probation is representative of spiritual or individual probation appears from the apostle’s reasoning in the third and fourth chapters of Hebrews. The exhortation in the ninety-fifth Psalm, which he quotes, he applies to the believers in Jesus, and to Israel at large, by connecting the two classes of the commonwealth together in his reasoning. The testimony in Ezekiel shows its applicability to the Twelve Tribes hereafter as well as to “the children of the promise” in the days of Paul. Let the reader consult that prophet in the twentieth chapter from the thirty-third to the thirty-eighth verse inclusive. He will there find that similar things are to be enacted over again as have already transpired in the days of Moses. Israel is to be brought out from the countries wherein they are scattered with a mighty display of divine power; they are to be brought into a wilderness, where, says the Lord,
“I will plead with you face to face LIKE AS I pleaded with your fathers in the wilderness of the land of Egypt, so will I plead with you.”
The carcasses of the rebels are to fall there, so that although brought into the wilderness from their present houses of bondage “they shall not enter, saith the Lord, into the land of Israel;” in other words, “they shall not enter into his rest” under Christ when he sits upon the throne of David in the land.
The twofold representative character of the “ensamples” supplied by the history, the typical history, of Israel in the flesh, arises from the nature or constitution of things pertaining to the kingdom which is to be restored again to Israel, styled the kingdom of God and of Christ. There are two classes belonging to this kingdom the members of which must necessarily be proved before they can be admitted to its organization. Neither class can be dispensed with in this organization, yet both must previously “pass under the rod” that the approved may be manifested. These two classes are “the children of the kingdom” (Matthew 8: 12) after the flesh, or the natural descendants of Abraham in the line of Isaac, and Jacob; and “the children of the kingdom” (Matthew 13: 38) after the spirit, or those of Israel and the Gentiles who believe the promises, “the exceeding great and precious promises of God,” and are therefore styled also “the children of the promise who are counted for the seed.” (Romans 9: 8) Israelites according to the flesh are the natural born subjects of the kingdom, and therefore God’s people in a political sense. The generation that came out of Egypt was proved and found to be unfit to occupy the land as the subjects of the kingdom and commonwealth under the first or Mosaic constitution. It was therefore destroyed in the wilderness, and their children of the next generation previously trained by Moses were planted in the land promised to the fathers. The descendants of this generation of the tribes of Jacob, now scattered among the Gentiles, are as unfit to occupy the land of Israel as the subjects under its new, or second, divine constitution or covenant, as their fathers were whose carcasses fell in the wilderness. Nevertheless, unfit as they may be they will not be condemned unproved should the kingdom be established contemporarily with the present generation. They will be made of necessity to pass under the rod that the turbulent and rebellious spirits among them may be purged out; for if they were permitted to occupy the land under Jesus as the “King of the Jews,” they would prove as ungovernable and disloyal as their fathers who exposed him to ignominy upon the accursed tree.
But the generation of Israelites according to the flesh which shall be approved as fit to occupy the land when the kingdom and throne of David are re-established, will not furnish inheritors of the thrones of David’s house. These are taken out from Israel and the nations upon the principle of faith in the gospel of the kingdom perfected by good works. A son of David, such as Solomon or Hezekiah, cannot occupy the throne of David under the future constitution simply because he is David’s son according to the flesh. The flesh profiteth nothing in relation to the honor and glory, might and majesty, dignity and renown, of the kingdom. The throne must be occupied by that son of David who has been made perfect through sufferings, who though a son of God, yet learned obedience by the things which he suffered. Probation must precede the introduction of either class as elements of the kingdom, which though essentially dissimilar, yet pertain to one and the same institution, in the relation to one another of rulers and ruled.
The King having passed through a probation of great suffering to the joy that yet awaits him, it is not to be supposed that those who are to rule with him shall enter into that joy without probation also. The co-rulers with Christ must be proved as well as he; for none can reign with him who do not suffer with him in some way or other. A tried and approved nation, and tried and approved rulers, will constitute the Kingdom of the Age to Come. The probation of these, that is, of the nation and of the rulers at different periods is represented by the things that happened to the nation and rulers under the law; the one constitution of things being typical of the other. Hence the twofold signification of the types.
The law of Moses constituted things which are remarkably representative of the realities of the age to come. These realities are styled the substance or body, of which the institutions of Moses are “the shadow;” and because of this intimate relation between them he was strictly enjoined by Jehovah to see that he made all things precisely according to the pattern he had showed him in the mount. Hence they are styled “the pattern of things in the heavens,” which things in the heavens will be manifested when the kingdom and throne of David are established by Jesus under the new constitution. The patterns are the representative things of the law, which constitute “the form of the knowledge and of the truth.” (Romans 2: 20; Hebrews 9: 23)
Among the representative things pertaining to Israel under the law are certain men who are styled in the English version “men wondered at,” or as it reads in the margin, “men of sign,” that is, typical, or representative men—men representing some other person than themselves. Joshua the son of Josedech and his companions are expressly set forth as typical men. So are Isaiah and his children. He said to Ahaz—
“Behold I and the children whom the Lord hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the Lord of hosts, who dwelleth in mount Zion.”
Paul quotes this in Hebrews and applies it to Jesus and his brethren, the children of God. Hence the prophet and his children, Shear-jashub and Maher-shalal-hash-baz, were signs or types of Jesus and the saints who are appointed to perform wonders in Israel when the Lord returns to build up Zion.
Thus much, then, at present upon this subject. We shall return to it hereafter and make further use of what is herein adduced for the illustration of the things of the kingdom of God.
* * *
From the Gospel Banner Extra.
MR. CAMPBELL AND THE GOSPEL BANNER.
“ ‘THE GOSPEL BANNER AND BIBLICAL TREASURY: containing the writings of Alex. Campbell and his coadjutors, in America and Great Britain. London: Hall & Co., Paternoster Row; A. Muirhead, Edinburg; P. Woodnorth, Liverpool; H. Hudston, Nottingham.’
“Such is the title of a monthly periodical circulated through Great Britain. I am sorry to be constrained and have too long forborne, to notice this publication, as unworthy of the patronage of our brethren in England and Scotland. The editor and his paper are sailing under a false flag. It does not ‘contain the writings,’ nor a tithe of the writings, of ‘Alex. Campbell and his coadjutors, in America and great Britain;’ and of the morsels of them given in it, most are given to subserve an indirect purpose; to betray us, by a kiss, into the hands of the erratic materialist and rather plausible sophist, John Thomas, of no-soul memory. It is a striking demonstration of the oblique morality of an exceedingly oblique theory, of any one who could thus stealthily impose upon an honest and unsuspecting community.
“That Mr. Hudston and John Thomas, M.D., of the celebrated medical school at Petersburg, Va., (which has, I believe, neither faculty nor students,) have a political right to preach, write, and promulgate their opinions, I do not deny. But they have no moral, religious, or honorable right, to garble my writings, and to deceive their readers by seeming to fraternise, in order to delude.
“John Thomas, M.D., and his deserted, dispersed, and withered flock, in Eastern Virginia, have long since ceased to attract any attention in this country. He left Virginia without presuming to answer my essay against his theory, and is now seeking to make a politico-religious impression on the English community, by a book and a theory called somewhat whimsically, the ‘Elpis (or hope) of Israel.’
“He has proved all the Apostles to be wrong in making the resurrection to eternal life the hope of God’s people, and for it, has substituted another terrestrial paradise, of which I shall not now speak particularly. True I have never read the new book, or the newly discovered ‘Elpis Israel,’ but am informed that it is that maintained by some Jews of the present day, as a substitute for the hope of the resurrection of the just. We Christians have but one evangelical hope of our calling, just as much as we have but one Lord, one faith, and one baptism. Ours is the veritable hope of the resurrection of the just, and not the political Elpis of the worldly Jews of this day. It is not, in other words, the literal return of the true Messiah to reign in Palestine, or on earth, or in any portion of the present solar system, but the hope of new heavens and a new earth, in which the pure in heart, and righteous in life shall reign. But at present I have room only to complain of the very censurable use made of my writings by the publisher of the ‘Gospel Banner and Biblical Treasury.’ A. Campbell’”
MR. WALLIS’ PREFACE TO MR. CAMPBELL’S NOTICE.
Mr. Wallis says “the flag under which this Banner continues to be sent out, is certainly a false one.” A rigid critic would expose the rhetorical inaccuracy of this phrase—but we shall forbear, wishing to be actuated and to manifest a nobler spirit than its author. Its falsity however must be exhibited. Now this same accusation was brought against us by Mr. Henshall in the June Harbinger, and we then produced arguments and facts to prove it false. It ought not therefore to have been reiterated before those were over-turned. But our contemporary does this. Without even noticing our reply, he reaffirms the accusation, and introduces it as if this was the first time of its publication, and expresses it as if it was an established truth. Such treatment would not have been given to the vilest criminal in any court. When he has made his defence to the accusations brought against him, these are never charged upon him again, much less worded as if proved true, till that is examined. “The children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light.”
We will not further remark on this conduct, though we shall again answer the accusation in our reply to Mr. Campbell.
Mr.Wallis declares his assertion respecting the Banner, to be true, “as decidedly so as that some who write for its pages are the most bitter and subtle enemies with which the Reformation has to contend.” This next must have our attention. We will first show that it is not correct; and, second, that if it had been true, it would be an honour, and not a disgrace, to the Banner.
First. There are but two individuals whose articles have appeared in our pages to whom these epithets can with any degree of truth be applied. And Mr. Wallis has yet to prove that “they are the most bitter and subtle enemies of the reformation.” The first is a gentleman who signed himself “B.B.,” and the second is Dr. Thomas of course. But neither of these can truthfully be said to be in the number of those “who write for our pages,”—this phrase signifying one who is a frequent contributor. The first wrote four articles in last year’s volume, and two of these were controversial with ourselves. Our readers will remember the skirmish. Since that time we have never received a line from him for the Banner. He is not, then, one of the number. Nor can Dr. Thomas be said to be so intimately connected with our periodical. There are but four original articles in the last volume bearing his name, that name at which
Some madly rage, and turn of snowy hue.
There are two other articles having his signature—but one was copied from a newspaper and the other a short extract from a letter. In the current volume he has written three articles. The first, that noted one on the throne of David; the second, occupying about half a page; and the third, a defence of himself against Mr. Henshall. Now these do not constitute him a frequent contributor, as will be shown. We inserted the first, because Mr. Wallis would not, though impartiality demanded it; the last, we published in fairness to him, it being a reply to the accusations brought against him by Mr. Henshall. Now when the character or sentiments of a man are attacked in a periodical, and he is not allowed to defend himself in it, should another open its pages for his defence, he cannot on this account be said to be to this a frequent contributor. And this position the Doctor has not occupied towards the Banner. It is true that in this month’s number, (the November one,) there are two articles from the Doctor, but this neither makes Mr. Wallis’ assertion true, nor our arguments false—for both parties speak of the past Banners; and one of those two it will be seen the Doctor writes in his defence. This accusation of Mr. Wallis’ is therefore a falsity.
Second. But supposing that it had been true, it would be an honour to our periodical. It will be granted that the same Christian virtues which are to shine forth in our words and actions, ought to be developed in the conducting and management of a magazine. Now it is the climax of perfection, to meekly permit a “bitter and subtle enemy” to freely express all his sentiments, and to commend every honorable feature in his character, and true principle in his doctrine. That periodical, then, which allows the “enemies” of its cause to speak through its pages, and approves every good quality they possess, is assuredly based on generous and magnanimous principles. And again, this conduct shows a confidence in the doctrines advocated—a conviction that these can pass through the hottest fires of hostility, and come out unscathed, aye, more brilliant. It proves, we believe, that when antagonistic tenets are placed side by side with them, the comparison will but the more forcibly demonstrate their truth and value, and the more convincingly recommend them to every intelligent mind. What an accusation, then, it is to be brought against us, that “some who write for our pages are the most bitter and subtle enemies the Reformation have to contend with!!” an accusation, which if true, would be a glory and not a shame.
Mr. Wallis then insinuates, that certain articles have appeared in the Banner, which are in opposition to its motto, “Speak the truth in love.” This is another sly innuendo—a reckless assertion. He has not correctly quoted our motto, having transcribed it thus, “Speaking the truth in love.” But we will forbear with this, and throw him upon the proof of his assertion. We defy him to produce a single expression contrary to our motto, save from letters written against us for resolutely defending our principles, or from replies to attacks made upon the character or doctrines of persons in his own periodical, and for such expressions as these every intelligent mind will say we are not answerable.
The reader will have observed how careful Mr. Wallis is to avoid specific charges. His accusations are all general assertions, not substantiated by one example, or instance. There they stand! Unsupported by any power, save the breath of their utterer! Can he imagine that such assertions will make any impression upon the minds of intelligent men? If this be his idea, it would become him, we think, to appropriate to himself the wish of the poet—
“O wad some pow’r the fiftie gie us
To see ourselves as other s see us!
It wad fra monie a blunder free us
And foolish notion.”
But here we leave him, and proceed to Mr. Campbell’s notice of the Banner.
MR. CAMPBELL’S NOTICE OF THE BANNER.
How long Mr. Campbell has forborne to “notice the Banner, as unworthy of the patronage of the brethren,” we cannot say, having no positive data from which to commence the calculation. But we think his forbearance did not commence for some months after its birth, for this reason: When Mr. Campbell was in England, Mr. Hudston paid him for all the volumes of his Harbinger, from the commencement to 1848, which were to be sent on his return. In the meantime the Banner was started, all its numbers containing articles from his pen, and were regularly sent him. Now when the volumes came, there was no complaint then made of our abuse of his writings. And had Mr. Campbell then been dissatisfied, he would assuredly have expressed his displeasure when placing in our hands so great an amount of his literary property. But we presume his uneasiness commenced at the time that Dr. Thomas’ name appeared in our pages.
We must say, with all respect to Mr. Campbell, that we cannot thank him for his long forbearance towards us, if we were guilty of wrong. We shall be grateful to the man who will tell us of a fault, providing that he prove that we have committed one. But in this very essential point, our brother most signally fails.”
Having refuted Mr. Campbell’s mis-statements, the editor of the Banner concludes his defence in these words:
“We have thus replied to Mr. C’s accusations one by one, and rest assured that we shall be acquitted at the tribunal of intelligence and candour. He assuredly surveyed us through a very opaque medium while writing the notice; and from this cause must have arisen the distorted portrait he has delineated. But, however, the errors of great men have in one respect a beneficial tendency. By them it is seen that they also are flesh and blood, and little men are prevented from regarding them as infallible oracles. In conclusion, we affirm that it has ever been our desire to give Mr. C. that honour and respect which assuredly are his due for his arduous services in the cause of God and humanity; and in fact we have regarded his ‘notice of the Banner,’ in the same light as the brother who wrote the following remarks, which are taken from a note he sent us accompanied with a copy of the ‘notice.’ We believe that Mr. C. has not a firmer and warmer friend in England than the writer—
‘The American Harbinger came to hand the other day. I have only time now to send you the enclosed article from brother Campbell’s pen, which I am sorry to see disgrace its pages. It is evidently written in ignorance, and by the instigation of other parties, and therefore I pity Mr. C. as he is made a tool of, doubtless, by some on both sides the Atlantic. Only preserve the Christian dignity which has hitherto characterised the Gospel Banner, and all will be well.’
* * *
DR. THOMAS’ CRITIQUE ON MR. CAMPBELL’S NOTICE OF THE BANNER.
Mr.Banner, —Dear Sir, —Accept my thanks for the manuscript copy of President Campbell’s recent notice of you and myself, which is now on the desk before me. It is valuable as an illustration of the blind and reckless manner in which he treats those against whom he ‘takes up a reproach.’ It will also illustrate to your readers and others the kind of opposition I have to contend against in America, in advocating what I believe to be the Gospel of the Kingdom of God. I am judged and condemned without a hearing in the pages of those journals, which, like Mr. Campbell, deliver their sentence upon a matter before they have acquainted themselves with it, and upon mere report. I would like the thousands I have addressed in Britain to know, that in ‘Free America’ my views and character have been the subject of the most malevolent detraction in Mr. Campbell’s Millennial Harbinger, and in other papers co-working with him, for fifteen years past, without my being permitted to speak for myself in my own ungarbled words, to show cause why I should not be condemned upon their ex parte mis-representations. All I have asked, and do ask at their hands, is page for page in the same papers with my accusers. But this they have not, and I believe dare not grant me. The truth of what I say may be seen by reference to their journals. Had they done so, things would have presented a very different aspect from what they now assume. But the battle has yet to be fought in America; and I return to open the campaign. I have no misgivings as to the result either there or in Britain. The enemy is too feeble here to do more than to show what he would do if he could. The hope of Israel has got possession of too many hearts in this island to be suppressed by Messrs. Campbell and Wallis. They may make a great noise, but it will all end in smoke. The truth, which is not with them, will assuredly prevail.
I would also remind your readers of the kind of attacks I have been subjected to from Mr. Wallis, Rev. James Henshall, and Mr. Campbell’s party to some extent, since my sojourn here for two years past; also, that all the notice I have taken of them has been provoked by their injustice, and purely defensive. In my public addresses—and I have spoken 250 times in this country—I have taken no notice of them, save on one occasion in Nottingham, and then only to correct a misstatement by Mr. Wallis in his paper, but even then I did not name him, nor did I invite him to the platform, as he reports. They cannot say this. Their assaults have been frequent and malevolent; and withal they have sought not my salvation, but to heap upon me obloquy and contempt. On the contrary, I have replied to their articles with equanimity, testimony, and reason. Let the public, then, judge whose cause produces the better fruits. For my own part I fear not their decision.
The article which may be termed precious, but in what sense I leave your readers to decide, is from “the Supervisor of this Reformation!” * I have been highly amused at it. Some one writing to me styles it “severe,” on the report of a person who had seen the original. But the severity of an article consists in the truth it contains; and as this contains no truth in relation to me it is without severity; though redolent of prejudice, absurdity, and ill will.
* (In 1838, Mr. A. Campbell declared before three persons, two of whom are still living, that “God had called him to take the supervision of this reformation. Not with an audible voice, but by his providence, as he had called Martin Luther and John Calvin, and that therefore he had a right to say who should be his co-labourers.” This was reported to me half an hour after they left him. I afterwards published it in my paper; but Mr. C. never ventured to call it in question.)
On analysis, it resolves itself into the following elements: -
1. Into charges against the Banner;
2. Into allegations against John Thomas;
3. Into a declaration of Mr. Campbell’s status, together with that of those who believe with him;
4. Into a summary of their hope; and—
5. Into a declaration of what they do not hope for.
1. The charges against the Banner are,
a. Sailing under a false flag;
b. Publishing so much of Mr. Campbell’s writings in the Banner as are sufficient to betray him and his co-religionists, with a kiss, into the hands of John Thomas; and,
c. Of having formed a coalition with said Thomas.
2. His allegations against me thus orderly arranged, are, that—
a. John Thomas is “erratic;”
b. He is a materialist;
c. He is “a rather plausible sophist;”
d. He is a man “of no-soul memory;”
e. He garbles his writings to deceive his readers, and to delude;
f. He has a flock in Virginia which is dispersed and withered;
g. He has deserted his flock;
h. He has never answered Mr. Campbell’s extra on Life and Death;
i. He has published a book called “Elpis Israel,” or Israel’s Hope, which is “a whimsical” title as applied to a book and theory;
j. He has proved all the Apostles wrong; and,
k. He has substituted the hope of a terrestrial paradise for the resurrection of the just to eternal life, as maintained by some worldly Jews of the present day.
3. Mr. Campbell declares his own state and that of his co-religionists by averring, in relation to himself especially, that,
a. He has never read Elpis Israel, but undertakes to define its contents upon the report of others: and of himself and co-believers says:
b. We are Christians and have the true hope.
4. He sums up their hope by saying that they look for,
a. The resurrection of the just; and
b. A new heavens and a new earth. And,
5. Declares negatively what sort of a new heavens, &c., they expect, by stating that they do not believe in—
a. A political “Elpis;” nor in—
b. The literal return of the true Messiah to reign in Palestine, or on earth, or in any portion of the solar system.
Such is the analysis of the article before me, which article and analysis I hope you will present entire to your readers. I shall now proceed to make a few comments under the five heads as they may seem to require. It is my hope that you will insert the whole of this communication, or none at all. I, and not you, am alone responsible for its contents. There is no “common cause” between us at present, to be injured or benefited by anything I may say or do. Your position is not mine, nor mine your’s. You occupy one of your own, and are as independent of me as I am of you. If I understand it rightly, you hold your faith and hope in common with Messrs. Campbell and Wallis, but unlike them you are neither a bigot nor an oppressor, but disposed to PRACTICE the precepts they profess, namely, “to call no man master,” and to “prove all things, and hold fast what is good,” judging of that good for yourself, and not taking it second hand as they may determine it, and dole it out for your reception.
(To be concluded in our next.)
* * *
HERALD
OF THE
KINGDOM AND AGE TO COME.
RICHMOND, FEBRUARY, 1851
The article in our last number on the “Restoration from Babylon,” and those in the present one entitled the “Restoration of the Jews,” and “Mount Zion,” were written by a Jew who confesses that Jesus is both Lord and Christ. They are well and scripturally indited, and worthy of the attention of all who desire to know what the will of Jehovah is with respect to the future destiny of that ancient and interesting people and their city of glory and renown.
* * *
A man knows not what he can accomplish till necessity is laid upon him. When we last addressed the reader we were confined to our room and to a bed of sickness. About four days after we left it; in two more we ventured “to sun” our outward man in the garden for a few minutes; and the day but one afterwards we were wending our way on a journey of twenty-five miles, to attend an appointment of about a month’s standing. Our friends here doubted much the safety of the undertaking; but the weather being warm and pleasant as a British summer’s day, and the friends in King William having sent a close carriage to convey us thither, we apprehended no other inconvenience than fatigue from long sitting and jolting over the Randolphian gullies of the way. We allayed their apprehensions of our suffering a relapse from fatigue in attending meetings by the assurance of (as it then appeared to us) the utter impossibility of our doing more than by our personal presence proving to the Cretans and Samaritans that their prophecies were false, and that report spoke truly in saying that we had safely arrived once more in the United States.
We expected to meet two or three brethren at the meetings who would take upon themselves the labor of formally addressing the people, while we should have nothing else to do but to prove by our presence our willingness to speak to them, but our inability from extreme weakness to do it. Our dismay was considerable, however, when we found that they had not arrived, and that the work of faith and labor of love must be performed by us alone. Our principle is that difficulties which cannot be avoided must be met and overcome. It is bad policy to make appointments and not fulfil them. We therefore determined to do what we could, and to try to discourse even if we had to come to an abrupt and speedy conclusion. The first appointment was a three days meeting at Acquinton. A brother who accompanied us from Richmond attended to the preliminaries, after which, we, following the example of Jesus (not being able to stand) “sat down and taught the people.” At first our friends did not think we should be able to hold out fifteen minutes; but though weak in body the subject was itself an inspiration, and to our own surprise we spoke with comparative ease on the Representative Men of the prophetic word for upwards of two hours.
Encouraged by our success in this effort we did not doubt but we should be able to get along from day to day as the appointed times came round. We were strengthened by the consideration that sufficient to the day is the evil thereof; so that it was quite unnecessary to assume the evil of many days and lay it all upon one. We experienced, however, some relief from the fact, that one of the brethren announced to take part in the meetings, arrived at Acquinton on Lord’s day; so that had we proved unable to occupy the time there was help at hand to supply our place and to make up our deficiencies. He remained with us all the week, and was no little assistance to us in conducting the worship, and leaving us only the pleasant labor of “persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God,” and of “declaring all his counsel” to the people. (Acts 19: 8, 10; 20: 20-21, 24-25, 27.) We spoke at Acquinton on three successive days; two days after at a school house; and on Saturday and Sunday at the old state-church house called West Point. At all these meetings put together we spoke about twelve hours and a half on things pertaining to the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ; and instead of increasing our debility, we recruited our physical energy every day. In our own person then we have proved, that the truth is an inspiration which gives health to the soul, through which it operates nothing but good to the outward man.
We have styled West Point an old state-church house. We need give no reason for this to the citizens of this dominion. But, as we write for readers in Britain as well as America, a word of explanation will doubtless be acceptable to them who are far off, though unnecessary to them who are nigh. In the earlier days of George the Third’s reign the power to which these countries were subject was a military and religious one. The religious element of the power preached the divine right of the British kings to govern the colonists as they pleased, especially if their acts tended to the good of “the church”—taxation without representation, and a heavy tithe of tobacco for priestly need, were the political gospel of the clergy, whose favourite apothegm in “the plantations,” as it is in Britain to this day, was “no church no king.” And so indeed it proved, for “church” and “king” both went to perdition together. The military element of the power with which we associate also the civil, for the civil and military in all despotisms are inseparable—this element, we say, was fully aware of this, therefore the weapons of death and destruction were furbished and sharpened against the people in support of the twin idols of State-church, and King. In those cloudy and dark days of political religionism, Mangohick, Cat-tail, Acquinton, and West Point, four parish church-houses, were the “holy places” in which the admirers of state-churchism in King William county, assembled to hear the reverend tithe exactor read his prayers and the drowsy parish clerk drawl out “Amen.” The military and religious power of Britain, in concert with the people it had trained up in the way it wished them to go, had been performing this farce in the abused name of Christianity for many years, until the indignation of God waxed hot against them. In the course of his providence he raised up an opposition to the power, which like itself was both secular and religious. The combat was long and bloody, and resulted in the overthrow of the colonial establishment in “Church and State,” and the foundation of the existing order of things. The expulsion of the myrmidons of tyranny proved the downfall of “the church,” not however of the church of Christ, but of George the Third’s, for he though an insane man was the acknowledged head thereof. When his church militant was trampled under foot by the weapons of God’s fury, the victors seized upon the spoils. The church property was confiscated, and the ‘parish churches’ made common for the use of all sects. This was a great and beneficial revolution for this country, though utterly ruinous to Church-of-Englandism. There are now these four old “churches,” but no episcopal congregation, and we believe scarcely an Episcopalian in the county—at all events an exceeding few. The fact is that Episcopalianism is a religion of pride and cold formality, and adapted only to the sons of pride; and being essentially aristocratical in the worst sense it can only maintain its ground when aided by Mammon and the civil power. The poverty to which it reduced the people by a seven years war in support of tithes and taxation, put it out of their power to sustain it even upon the voluntary principle; and although in England it belauds itself as “the poor man’s church,” the clergy of this pillar of the State and of all its abominations, are not the men to preach for nothing and support themselves. Their system was therefore wounded unto death by their own suicidal policy; so that notwithstanding the abortive endeavours of some from a distance to resuscitate it, it is dead, plucked up by the roots, and buried, never to rise again in the county of which we speak.
In these old church-and-state bazaars of spiritual merchandise our British friends will be surprised to learn, that even we, a heretic of heretics, as we are said to be, do from ti