THE THEOCRATIC KINGDOM
By
GEORGE N. H. PETERS
PROPOSITIONS 166 & 167 [VOLUME THREE (pp. 17-31.)]
-------
PROPOSITION 166. The rudimentary reorganization of this
Kingdom
will be made at Mt. Sinai.
The organization of the Theocracy was
affected before the Jewish
nation entered Palestine.
The appointment of officials, the giving of laws, the
commandments to destroy the enemies of God, etc., were issued at Mt. Sinai.
It is eminently suitable that the reorganisation of the same should
be effected in the same p1ace. The reasons will be
adduced in the following observations.
This is one of the Propositions, which, if torn from its
connection, can be injuriously employed against us. The writer felt the force of Prov. 12:
23 a prudent man
concealeth knowledge, but in view of the importance of the subject, its
instructiveness especially pertaining to the interval, and the encouragements
to instruct, etc., he felt persuaded that in this case, Prov. 13:
16, every prudent
man dealeth with knowledge, and Prov. 15:
2, the tongue of
the wise useth knowledge aright, insured its presentation to be
acceptable to the class whose good-will we ought to esteem. We only now
say that this Proposition
serves to clear up some - otherwise - difficult passages. Thus e.g. it throws light on the question where Jesus and the
saints are during the interval; on the fact that during the interval Jesus is
spoken of as being present on the earth; on the setting up and existence of
thrones (Rev. 20:
4) indicative of a formative Kingdom; on the
stages of the same Advent; on the object of the first resurrection and
translation: on the Kingdom not coming with observation, being concealed and
sudden; on the hatred and intentions of the Antichrist; on the march of the
Christ and His saints; on the subsequent war and its results; and on various
Millennial predictions.
OBSERVATION 1. Taking it for granted that the Theocracy will be reorganised in its
Theocratic-Davidic form, so that God in the person of Davids descendant
(inseparably connected) again condescends to dwell with the Jewish nation, and act in the capacity of an earthly ruler,
we may suggest, that if such is the divine order, no place on earth could
be selected more suitable or better
adapted for such an arrangement than Mt. Sinai, and its adjoining territory. It is a place so isolated, separated
from other countries, that such a work undertaken would, for a time, at least,
attract but little attention among other nations. It lies at the same time
contiguous to the inheritance of Davids Son, which at the time will be sorely,
pressed by the Antichrist with its confederated power. The
Holy Land occupied, as it then will be, by the forces of enemies, and all other
lands having their Kingdoms or civil power in full sway, forbids in them a peaceful, previous,
arrangement as indicated; and hence this
locality, surrounded by its sandy deserts, under no special civil jurisdiction,
occupied only by wandering tribes, is well adapted to secure, as it once did
before, uninterrupted facilities
for a preliminary national organization. Besides this,
it, is a place already highly distinguished, having enjoyed the presence of God, and
having witnessed the entrance of God and people into the desirable
Theocratic relationship, being
honoured by the camp of the elect nation, and the manifestations of the King,
made memorable by the giving of the law, and expressly pronounced, in view of
its associations, to be holy.
In all [Page 18] respects, therefore, considering that
the nations will then be hostile to the Saviour (in fact arrayed against Him),
it is of all places the one most suitable to be used for such a purpose. The question is,
do the Scriptures give us sufficient intimations to believe the proposition? We shall present
the reasons for holding to such a belief,
premising (1) that they are not nearly so indistinctive as
predictions relating to the First Advent; and (2) that, if mistaken in this particular, it
cannot affect our main
leading argument, which is independent of the discussion of minor points
relating to the order or introduction of the Kingdom, upon which differences of
opinion are reasonably to be anticipated.
The critical student will observe (what Mede on the one hand, and Brown
on the other, insist on) that Dan. 2: 44
particularly declares that in
the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom. That
is, previous to the final ending
of the Roman Empire, of Gentile domination, of
the horns that arise, this kingdom will be already commenced, organized. These
writers, Bengel, and many others,
declare that the position assigned to the time of setting up
the Messianic Kingdom must he maintained in order to meet the conditions
annexed. This Sinaitic view meets them fully, and in the only place, and under
the only circumstances possible, in view of the conflicts in Idumea and Palestine. It harmonizes
all the predictions, and presents us with an easy Scriptural solution of what otherwise would be full of
difficulties.
OBSERVATION 2. In considering this subject some preliminary matters must be
duly regarded, viz. (1) That the
most prominent students of prophecy are now agreed that the Second Advent, to
be appreciated, must be comprehended in its several phases, being at first secret, hidden to carry
out certain purposes, and finally open, revealed. The reasons for this belief are given under Proposition 130. (2) That the First Advent, embracing
within itself about thirty-three years, teaches us not to limit the acts of
Jesus at the Second within a brief period of time; and that His preparatory
private life of about thirty years before His open manifestation to the nation,
should lead us not to circumscribe His Second Advent to an immediate open
Revelation, unless a comparison of Scripture makes it absolutely necessary.
(3) That if it be admitted that the
establishment of the Theocracy at Mt.
Sinai was a pattern of something that should follow in the future (which
nearly all writers confess however much they may differ in the ultimate
fulfilment), then an open door is
at once presented for the introduction of our Proposition. (4) That the passages bearing on this
subject are to be considered in their general scope,
in their connection with context and
analogy, and shall involve no contradiction of Scripture.
The student will also observe the
following: (1) that dispensations
may, as the Jewish and Gospel overlap each other for some years;
(2) that this Theocratic Kingdom is
reorganized before the times of
the Gentiles are ended; (3) the
breaking and consuming process upon which the Kingdom immediately enters, is
expressive of a previous organisation
- for it is evidently an intelligent organised force that is set in motion
against the kings of the earth and their armies; (4) Rev. 10:
7 implies, in view of finishing the mystery
of God (which appertains to the [promised] Kingdom), that to the believing there will be such a
manifestation, that before the epoch is
concluded this will be done; (5) the
Coming of the Son of Man in His Kingdom (implying a
previous organisation) is to be
distinguished from His thief-like Coming.
OBSERVATION 3. The Bible seems to declare that Jesus, the Messiah, at His Second Advent,
will especially exhibit two acts or
phases in this Coming, and between these two, He
and His saints will pass the intervening period at Mt.
Sinai. That He comes as a thief for the removal of the saints [Page 19] is clearly taught, and that He also openly comes with these saints on the Mount of Olives (Zech.
14: 4 is unmistakably
announced. But He and His saints are also represented
as being at Mt. Sinai. A comparison of Scripture shows,
that when the saints are removed by the
power of resurrection and translation, they do not remain in the air, but are conveyed to Mt. Sinai, where, as at the establishment of the
Theocracy positions are assigned, the kingship and priesthood inaugurated, the
instructions given preparatory to the ushering in of the
dispensation of the fulness of times. After all the preparations are completed,
and the time has come for the manifestation of the sons of God, the deliverance of the Jewish nation,
destruction of Antichrist, this associated body of Rulers with the King of kings at their head (Rev. 19) present themselves to the confusion of
all enemies, and to the joy of the ancient elect nation. Let the reader ponder the 68th
Psalm, and its references to Mt. Sinai. This Psalm, allowing
its character, was never
fulfilled, as is generally supposed, at the appearing of God
in the wilderness at the institution of the Theocracy. The reasons are the
following: (1) the description is too exalted to meet facts as they transpired in the
wilderness, in the march to Canaan, and in
obtaining possession of the land. The comparative feebleness and repeated
transgressions of the nation; their inability, owing to sin, to extend their
power as here predicted; the continued existence of their enemies; their final
subjection to other nations, etc. - all this is opposed to the spirit of the
Psalm. (2) The Psalm is Messianic, and relates not to the
past but to the future. This is proven
by the direct reference and application of a portion of the Psalm to Christ. This is done by Paul in Eph. 4: 9, where he applies it as significant
of results produced by the resurrection and ascension of Jesus. The [Holy] Spirit thus gives us a key to its interpretation. (3) Its reference to the future is evinced by
its allusion to the resurrection
(verse 20); the great slaughter and
complete overthrow of all enemies (verses 1-3, 14, 21-23, 30); the restoration of the Jewish nation
(see verse 22 and notice
force of again)
although oppressed by a multitude (sea);
the restoration of Theocratic rule (verses
24-35);
the kings of the earth bringing presents, and the extended, world-wide dominion
exerted (verses 29-35).
On the other hand, what is here delineated to occur corresponds fully and accurately in every respect
with the predictions pertaining to the ushering in of the Millennial
age or Christs Kingdom. Then, we know, the enemies will indeed be removed as here described, then the exaltation, the purity, beauty,
rejoicing, safety, and power of the righteous will be witnessed as here
portrayed; then the dwelling of God with man, the
exertion of supernatural power, the power of delivering from death, the
restoration of the people, the universal dominion, the re-organisation of the
nation under rulers, kings coming to present their allegiance and worship at
Jerusalem, nations submitting themselves, the praise and glory manifested - all this,
as here predicted, will
come to pass. Hence seeing that the general tenor of
the Psalm does not suit the history of the
past, in the non-fulfilment of large portions of it, but faithfully describes
the future, it is not an arbitrary act to interpret verses 8 and 17 as also realised in the future, and this the more
readily because this Advent accords with what is ascribed to Christ at His Second Coming. Let the mighty King come as predicted
in other places, and there is nothing in those verses, unless it be the locality designated, which differs from the
others. But why object to the specified locality? Can
a reason be [Page 20] assigned for the rejection of it in
such a connection? No, we are content to receive it as it
reads, believing that as Sinai at the inauguration of the Theocracy witnessed the presence of the Theocratic King, so when Gods Son comes to restore the
Theocratic rule even
Sinai itself is moved at the presence of God, the God of Israel (verse
8.), and in view of His
surroundings it can be said (verse
17) the chariots of God
are twenty thousand (myriads)
even thousands
of angles (even many thousands
of thousands of heavenly powers); the
Lord is among them as in (or simply, in or so Sinai among the holy mountains, as rendered by Lederer) Sinai in the Holy
place.* Accepting of the Psalm as a prophetic announcement of the future, it is impossible, without violence,
to rid ourselves of the persuasion that at the future Advent the Messiah will appear not only on the
Mount of Olives, but antecedently on Mount
Sinai, where evidently the gathering together occurs, with which
gathered body Christ is afterward accompanied. In all this, there is eminent propriety, if we but
consider that this Theocratic
Kingdom is to be restored and manifested through the Seed of David, and hence
in its relations to humanity and to the Jewish race, necessarily requires an outward exhibition
of its earthly re-inauguration. There is also a peculiar fitness in the choice of place [and
persons] where this is done, inasmuch as Sinai itself is identified
with the organization pertaining to Theocratic rulership.**
* Reitieke, Proph. Times, Nov., 1864, p. 163, renders The horsemen of God are two companies of myrinds, thousands of changed ones; the Lord in them Sinai in
holiness, or The horsemen of God are two
companies of thousands of myriads; the Lord in
them Sinai in holiness. Rabbi Greenabaum renders the verses: The earth quaked, also the heaven dropped
at the presence of God; yea this Sinai, at the
presence of God, the God of Israel, The
chariots of God are two myriads; thousands of angels follow him; the Lord is
among them, so is Sinai holy among mountains. Langes Com.., Exeg. has Yon Sinai before the face of Elohim, the
God of Israel, and The Chariots of God are myriads, thousands and again thousands, the Lord among them, a Sinai in sanctity.
** Sinai was even esteemed
holy before the giving of the law (Stanleys
Sinai and
Palestine, p. 48, Josephus, Ant., 3, v. 1), and the only
reason that can be satisfactorily
assigned is that pertaining to its foreknown Theocratic usage, making it a
special favourite of Gods. What a distinguished place Mt.
Sinai will be in the future ages! The place of Gods marriage (so according to Oriental usage, the inauguration of a Ruler), with the
Jewish nation: the place where Jesus
marriage takes place before the bridal procession proceeds to Jerusalem. God in view of this, may, as
we anticipate, adorn the wilderness and make it a place of resort [or to go,
to have recourse, etc.]. We cannot
help but feel that Elijah will again, under far different circumstances, visit this
place. This prophet visited Horeb (Smiths Bib. Dic. makes Sinai
and Horeb - the latter standing in the shadow of the former - to be used
interchangeably as (e.g. Deut. 1: 2, 6, 19, and 4: 10, 15, and 9: 8, and 29: 1; 1 Kings 8: 9, and 19; 8, and 2 Chron.
5: 10; Mal. 4: 4) when persecuted (1
Kings 19), and in the mount of God
found special nearness to God, and realised that, amid the general defection,
God had reserved for Himself a people. How changed the relations, and
what a glorious reservation he will there meet! If [obedient and] faithful our
glad eyes will behold the same, and our glad hearts will associate with those myriads.
OBSERVATION 4. If this deduction were founded simply on one
passage it might suggest doubt, but we find it sustained in other places. Thus take Deut. 33: 1-2 which embraces the blessings pronounced on the several tribes, and which
from other predictions we know shall be fully realised at the restoration of the nation at the Second Coming of its King. Now
these, blessings are introduced by a description which,
however applicable in some particulars to the giving of the law, was never verified in the past. For
we read: The Lord came from Sinai and rose up from Sier
unto them, He shineth forth
from Mount Paran, and He came with
ten thousands of [Page 21] saints;
from His right
hand went a fiery law to them, etc.* Such a coming with myriads of
saints is only predicted of the still future Advent. We have no account of any other, and this
correspondence with what will occur at the predicted Second Advent of [our Lord] Jesus (when myriads of saints are
with Him) is indicative of its intended application. In Heb. 3:
3 we have another allusion. Intending
to refer to the chapter at length in another place, it is sufficient to say
that the opinion so generally held that it refers to the past manifestation of God at Mount Sinai
and in the wilderness is utterly untenable. Aside from
various considerations, the simple fact that the prophet himself locates it in
the future and prays (verse 16) that he may find deliverance when it takes place,
is ample to remove the prevailing interpretation. It most certainly - if we
preserve its unity and compare with other Scripture - pertains to the future
Advent. The prophet tells us God came from Teman (or the South) and the Holy One from,
Mount Paran, at a time when
an overthrow of enemies and deliverance is experienced on a scale so great that the past
sinks into insignificance before it. Even Judges 5: 4, 5, may in the mind of the [Holy] Spirit be far-reaching; And many predictions respecting
the
wilderness may
have a deeper, more significant meaning than is usually attached to them. Let, there be a restoration of Theocratic rule inaugurated at Mount
Sinai, and it imparts new force to Isaiah
35: 1
the wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad for them and the desert shall
rejoice, etc., or to Isaiah 32: 15, 16 the wilderness (shall)
be a
fruitful field, then judgment shall dwell in the
wilderness, or to Isaiah
35: 6 for in the
wilderness shall waters (i.e., [for the] people) break out and
streams in the desert. In view of the apportionment of the stations,
etc., in the Kingdom at such a time and place, it may even be questioned
whether the planting in the wilderness of those several trees mentioned by Isaiah 41: 19, 20
is not to be interpreted of the
assignments of rank, etc., in this Theocracy, seeing that the [Holy] Spirit
likens in other places the saints to Trees of righteousness, the
planting of the Lord (Isaiah 61:
3),
and men and rulers are thus
designated. The specific mention of rejoicing,
shouting. singing, etc., in the wilderness at
some period still future is seen, if this idea is accepted, to be highly
appropriate, and what under the circumstances is to be anticipated. Surely the grace
in the wilderness, Jeremiah 31:
2,
which is yet. as the prophecy indicates, to be realised by the Jewish nation in an
unexampled restoration; the pleading in the wilderness, (Ezekiel 20 : 35-36)
still future with that people; the speaking comfortably to His people in the wilderness, Hosea
2: 14
- this, with similar intimations, should teach us that the wilderness, just as
in the beginning, is an important feature strikingly associated
with, the re-establishment of the [Messiahs] Theocracy.**
* Lederer, The Israelite
Indeed, Dec., 1863, p.
141, renders it: Jehovah is coming from Sinai, and
rises unto them from Seir; He beams from Mt. Paran, and comes (out) from the
myriads of saints, from His right hand (the) fire statue unto them,
etc. This fiery law or fire statue is also, as every one can see, a
distinguishing characteristic of the Advent with the saints, being expressive
of judgments.
** Hosea 2: 14 deserves
special attention, and the connection evidently shows the time of fulfilment to
be in the future. If the student observes two things
he cannot fail to catch its spirit. (1)
The elect now gathered being engrafted, and thus become identified the true Israel,
are inseparable with this period of blessing; (2) the time of this marriage, Pre-Millennial, as noticed Propositions 118, 169,
etc. Psalm 74: 14
will be impressively realised: Thou breakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, and gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting (sojourning in) the wilderness.
[Page 22]
OBSERVATION 5. Isa.
63: 1-6 cannot, possibly, without the
grossest inconsistency, be applied to the First Advent of Jesus. For,
aside from other reasons, it is not true that He then came in anger, fury and
vengeance, and shed the blood of His enemies, until His own garments were stained,
seeing that His mission was one of love, mercy and submission to death. But at His Second Advent numerous passages expressly mention wrath, vengeance
on enemies, and a fearful slaughter and supper. It is therefore a description only applicable to the Second
Advent, as the early Church taught (see Proposition 121)*. But the prophet in
vision sees Him coming from the direction of Mount Sinai,
asking: Who is this that Cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah? Indeed, when we come to compare Scripture
with Scripture, we have the route taken by the mighty King from Mount Sinai until He arrives at Jerusalem clearly pointed out. Prophecy
distinctly mentions Mount Sinai, Paran, the Wilderness, Mount
Seir, Edom,
Teman or the South, Bozrah, giving us
a direct route from Sinai northward to Palestine. This does not occur by chance,
but is descriptive of
what shall truly take place. Having the Mighty One with His Saints
manifested at Sinai, and also by way of the wilderness
of Paran on through Idumea, it seems to us faithless not to accept
of these things. Especially when we find an under-current of [a yet
future] prophecy,
which serves to bring them out in more distinctive proportions.** Thus, e.g. in the new thing
(Isa. 43: 18-21), which God is to perform, He will even make a way
in the wilderness, rivers (notice its figurative meaning) in the desert.*** I
give waters in the wilderness and rivers in the deserts, to give drink to my
people, my chosen. This people
have I formed for myself; they shall show forth my praise. Here we have
intimated under impressive figures the blessings that will result from a
reformation of Theocratic rule out of a
people expressly raised up - [i.e. resurrected out from the dead (Lk. 20: 35; Phil. 3: 11; cf. Rev.
20: 4-6, etc.)] - (and
gathered) for this purpose, and this is done in the wilderness, the very place where the Theocracy was
originally instituted. If such a restoration as the Proposition
states is really contemplated and intended, could the
language of the prophet be more expressive of the fact? The saints, that body of peculiar people and engrafted, thus constituting the
holy nation (and this forming a river, etc., in the figurative language of
Scripture), gathered to Mt.
Sinai, and associated
with Christ in the formative recognition of the fallen Theocracy, would fulfil in the most impressive manner such predictions. Then again, if we
turn to Isa. 40: 3, it is extremely doubtful whether we
have more than a mere typical fulfilment in Johns mission. And,
when the prediction is carefully studied in the light of other predictions, the
doubt resolves itself into a certainty that this also (whatever inchoate
fulfilment there may be) refers to this period of time. Let
the reader notice (1) that this cry
in the wilderness, etc., is taken as commentators, Barnes, etc., inform us from the approach of a mighty Conqueror,
and is expressive of irresistible power and a triumphal
march; (2) that the preparations are suitably completed, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed,
so that all flesh shall see it;
(3) that before the march of
Jehovah, all flesh being as grass, opposition
shall be overcome; (4) and the
results of this triumphal appearance in
deliverance and rule. To say that all this was strictly fulfilled at the First
Advent, having before us the rejection of John, and Jesus, in the triumph of
enemies, and no such experience of deliverance of the nation, etc., as
delineated, is certainly a lowering and altering of the prophecy. On the other
hand, the offer of the [Messianic] Kingdom at the First Advent necessitated a typical representation [Page 23] of this act in the wilderness (and hence applied to John), but owing to
the foreknown unbelief and sinfulness of the nation both the Kingdom and the real preparatory acts here predicted were postponed.
Jesus did not exhibit Himself as the King; His glory was
concealed under humiliation; the time had not yet arrived for such a triumphal passage; He
Himself locating it in the future at His
Second Coming. Admit such a re-establishment of the Theocracy at Mt. Sinai in
the wilderness - consider the route from there through the wilderness to Judea, and then the
prophecy shines forth with a clearness and vividness that is startling. 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 - the completeness of the preparation, the majestic march
revealing the glory of the Lord, the helplessness of His enemies contrasted with
His power, the reward bestowed, the blessed rule and safety experienced; all evidence such an exalted condition of
manifested Kingly authority, etc., and connected with, as a starting point, the wilderness, that it is only to be fulfilled in the future. At least such a
fulfilment accords with the glory of the Lord, and His work as connected with the Second Advent,
and we can see no valid reason to reject its identification, in some way, with the wilderness, as the place from whence this King of kings comes, and before
whom a highway,
like that of a mighty conqueror, shall be opened. Such passages include
the idea, that the authoritative manifestation of Theocratic rule is exhibited, before it issues forth from the desert. It is a form ready for action before it
emerges from the wilderness. Considering the formation of the
Theocracy with its added hosts of kings and priests in so isolated a place,
secluded from the observation of the nations, and its sudden
and overwhelming appearance,
it may be a question whether Christ had not this initiatory stage in view
when He told the Pharisees, the Kingdom of God cometh not with observation,
seeing that it is not only divinely instituted, but, is is
done in a secluded manner and place, so that when it, appears it is already so organised as to be irresistible, etc.*****
* The reader will find information in Langes Com. Isa. ch. 63,
showing that Calvin, Masculus, Scuhuletus and
others, rejected the idea of its application to the passion of Jesus, and Vitringa expressly
says: the hero is not set forth as suffering
but as acting, as sprinkled with His own blood but with the blood of enemies, not as satisfying the justice of
God for
sins but as executing the justice of God in punishing enemies. Ziethe
is quoted as saving: Our text (Isa. 63: 1-6) bids us (1) To
look on the Man of Sorrows, who redeemed us; (2) To contemplate in faith the great work which He has accomplished
for us; (3) For this to render to
Him the thank-offering which we owe Him upon which the American editor
(Rev. Moore) justly observes: it is strange that an eminent modem preacher should so
misrepresent the teaching of
this passage. If we wish to lead men to
contemplate Christ as the Man of Sorrows, by whose blood we are
redeemed, we should choose a passage of Scripture that exhibits Him in
this character. But it is either culpable ignorance, or something worse, to
affirm that the Scripture before us contains the lessons set forth in the above
mentioned heads of a sermon. Many, alas deserve this rebuke and even Bh. Hobart (Works, vol. 3. p. 298), has a
sermon arbitrarily applying it to the sacrifice on the cross. Steir is of the opinion that the one who is seen as coming is Christ, coming
from the fulfilment of what is related Rev. 14: 20, and 19: 18, 21. The destruction of Antichrist is regarded by Delitzsch
simply as the New Testament counterpart to this piece. And Weber is thus
quoted: The prophecy which is here directed against Edom
is to be regarded as a prophecy of the judgment which will befall the
antichristian, persecuting, world in the last days. On this account the Seer of
the New Testament, John, has described the Lord as coming to judge the world
after the model of Isa. 63 (Rev. 19). The
American editor says: Messiah
is the conqueror of Edom as Balaam of old predicted (Numb. 24: 17, 18) Not till He rises up
the fallen tabernacle of David, is possession in the highest sense
taken of Edom
[Page 24] and of all the heathen (Amos 9: 11, 12). As we understand the
Lords work of destruction depicted in Ps. 110: 5, 6, so must we understand the judgment on Edom here described. We only add,
that nearly all expositors not knowing what else to do with the names Edom
and Bozrah have regarded them as mystical or figurative
terms expressive of enemies, but this view gives a deeper significance to them
- just as the names relating to the First Advent. Hannahs prayer will be verified (1 Sam. 2), and the nations (Zeph. 3:
8, etc.), be crushed under the long
predicted (Deut. 32:
41-43)
vengeance. If the reader turn
to Propositions
115 and 163, he will find by connecting the same with
this one, additional reasons for our position.
** The student will observe that the
place where the First Advent occurred is but indirectly given, and that all
other accounts of the same imply the coming first to Bethlehem. So in the Second Advent, when the
locality is one stated that is amply sufficient, and all other predictions
imply it. This at once opens a wide field
for reference which can only be indicated. Thus e.g. take Isa. 63: 1-6, and notice in connection the vengeance, the
Redemption etc. This compared with numerous parallel passages presents us
additional points of identification. Such a comparison having
been instituted under various Propositions, it is not requisite to repeat. Several passages not before specified, may briefly be suggested: Isa. 42:
11, is remarkable, as the context indicates
that new things are to be performed,
introducing Millennial blessedness and glory, worthy of a new song. This
is done in the manner we have advocated: The Lord shall go forth as a mighty man, He shall stir up jealousy like a man of war, He shall cry, yea war; He shall prevail against His enemies etc. (see
context). But notice verse
11, and its manifest allusions (as Bh. Lowth, and others), to the desert of
Arabia Deserta, to the rocky country of Arabia Petraea, etc. and surely the careful student of the Word
must be impressed that the some deep reason underlies such
references. What other reason so applicable as the one
advocated by us? For aught we know, such references as Zech.
9: 14,
going with whirlwinds of the South; as Ps. 126: 4, as streams in the
South; and similar phraseology, may contain allusions which a [future and literal] fulfilment will render expressive in this direction. The student will not
overlook Isa. 9: 1 (Delitzschs rendering), Isa. 59: 16-20 (comp. Lowth and the Chaldee).
*** Delitzschs
rendering is impressive: Behold I work out a new thing:
will ye not live
to see it ([after
your] resurrection)? Yea,
I make a road
through the desert. etc.
**** Lowth and Noyes, separate the clause as
follows: A voice crieth, In the wilderness prepare ye the way of Jehovah, and Barns loci declares the parallelism seems
to require the translation proposed by Lowth. This, if correct, would add to its
significancy. So Delitsch: Hark a crier!
In the wilderness prepare ye a way for Jehovah, make
smooth in the desert a road for our God.
***** An additional
reason is found in Proposition 163 on the meaning
of Armageddon (which see), and to this idea of
the
Assembling or the Gathering many
passages refer, as e.g. Ps. 110: 3 (Barkers Bible, London 1815, renders),
Thy people shall come willingly at the time of the assembling thine army in holy beauty,
etc. Ps. 46
according to the title refers to the hidden ones or
virgins, and is highly expressive of this period (comp. Isa. 26: 20, 21; Jer.
2: 3; Luke 21: 36, etc.). Even the fleeing
to the mountains of Ps. 11: 1, if we
are to receive some renderings, may refer to this withdrawal. The passages which speak of the
removal and hiding of Gods people just before
the last great tribulation breaks forth might be used as illustrative of
this period. Here, indeed, they would be in safety and honour. The world will
be more or less unconscious of this gathering, the
days of Noah repeating themselves, and persistent unbelief in such a
preparation existing until too late. The secrecy of all this, is plainly
implied, even in the, meeting of the Bridegroom and those that were ready,
which no one of the world will witness. Those taken to Mt, Sinai are
pre-eminently favoured, and as then the door will be
shut it will be too late for the others to be added to the special
blessed number. These are the first fruits -
follows later in the divine order
belonging to the Lord - the harvest itself the great
multitude - follows later in
the divine order. Various passages relating to this subject are worthy of
consideration, such as Isa. 16: 1-5; Isa. chs. 34, 35, 13, etc.
When these things are realised, men will be amazed to find how largely and minutely,
all this has been described in the
Word, and yet how little it has
been noticed and appreciated, just as the things relating to the First Advent
were overlooked.
There is only one difficulty, suggested by a friend (Dr. Morehead), viz., that in Rev. 19 at the
open Advent of Jesus and His saints it is represented that heaven opened and the armies
in heaven followed Him, so that He and the saints literally come from
the third heaven and not from Sinai, etc. But this is
simply to overlook the symbolical meaning of the word heaven
as used in Revelation. If we are to give it
this meaning, [Page 25] then e.g.
ch. 12: 7 there was literally war
in heaven, ch.
4: 1, 2, John was
literally in heaven, etc. Hence all
commentators e.g. Barnes, Lange, etc., refer the expression to
the introduction of a new vision and its relation to the heavenly powers. Faber, etc., give us
correct ideas of its reference, and, for aught we know, if reference is made to
the same heaven mentioned in ch.
6: 13, it
would be sustained if the symbolical import is accepted, and even if the
literal, without including the third heaven (for Jesus and His saints can and
will come transported in the aerial by supernatural power). A consistent
interpretation of the Word in accordance with its usage (see Proposition 107)
in the book will remove the objection; and we are not to force the language,
just as we do not that which relates or pertains to the sword out of His month,
etc. It is a symbolical representation of the authority, majesty, power, etc.,
of the Advent.
OBSERVATION 6. This view instead of
conflicting with the other predictions, serves to illustrate and enforce them. Take, e.g. Dan. 7,
and there is something remarkable in the structure of the prophecy, which on
any other hypothesis baffles interpretation. The investiture (Proposition 83)
of the of the Son of Man, Davids Son, with the Kingdom, and the bestowment of
judgment or rulership upon the saints associated with Him, is done by the Ancient of Days, for the Kingdom is given by Him, to
the Son of Man and His saints [i.e., to the overcomers (Rev.
3: 21).]. But this is done here on the earth - as the representation in
its entire scope demands - even while the Antichristian power, so arrogant and
hostile, is in existence and holds sway over the nations. A difficulty at once
presents itself, how could
such an investiture which presupposes an order of
arrangements, etc., take place without exciting immediate attention and attack
from the enemy if conducted within his territory and in
a public manner. The
prophecy implies on its face a perfectly free unembarrassed, and even unexpected
by the enemy, accomplishment of preliminary arrangements pertaining to the [coming] Kingdom. Admit that Sinai and the wilderness is the locality where the Ancient of Days
invests Davids Son and His own with Theocratic power, and bestows upon Him and
the saints the covenanted dominion, and the difficulty vanishes. The prophet
looks in vision at the horn, and then, looking away from him, turns to gaze
upon the prophetic picture presented at Mt. Sinai without specifying the
locality; thus passing from one to the other without a commingling of them.
Although the investiture (i.e. the public official recognition in the presence
of holy intelligences) is on the earth, yet it is effectually concealed from
the interference and annoyance of the powerful enemy which
it is to destroy. Such an explanation, to say the least, is more natural and
reasonable - if the Theocracy is indeed to be restored in Davids Son - than
that usually given, which, against the Coming of
the Ancient One and the evident description of scenes
witnessed on earth, makes this a transaction in the
third heaven. When the Theocracy was established, it was done
amid the most solemn and glorious manifestations, and Mt.
Sinai was purposely selected for the same; now when the same Theocracy is to be reorganized in the
most august manner
under the leadership of the King
specially provided, is it not reasonable that
(instead of the third heaven or the air, etc.) it should be effected in
precisely the same place and with exhibitions of splendour and
power far more impressive than any hitherto given.* Is it not also suitable that such
arrangement when taking place on earth, should receive the
most solemn outward official sanction of the Most High, God?**
* There is nothing whatever in the
Scriptures which teaches directly or indirectly that Jesus
during this interval is in the third heaven. Wilson (Proph. Times, N. S., Aug., 1877, p. 183), correctly
makes an extended period between the two stages, but misled by the [Page 26] withdrawal of the saints to the air (or aerial), concludes
that Christ and His saints are in the air during the forty years. But his view of an organised form of government being
established during this interval is eminently just: And
so, when they shall come with Christ, at the end of the forty years they will
be a completely organized body politic. To apply the title Ancient of Days to the Son is harsh and utterly
untenable, although many do this, not knowing how else to interpret it,
although the prophecy distinguishes between the two, the one being the
giver and the other the receiver. We cannot receive the view
that this investiture is a transaction in the third heaven, as held by Tregelles and others, because the Ancient of Days Coming (verse 22) and the Coming of the Son of Man in the
clouds of heaven (verse 13), cannot have a
reference to the third heaven, but, as the entire tenor of the prophecy
demands, is a Coming to this earth where
the judgment [against
Messiahs enemies] is to be executed and
the [Messianic] rule enforced. Hence we
cannot receive Faussets (Com. Dan. 7: 13) that
this Coming and investiture was at His ascension,
and this title is exercised invisibly, but at His
Second Coming it shall be in visible administration, for this violates
the unity of the prediction by the introduction of an interval utterly
unauthorised, and is based on a misapprehension of the Kingdom that belongs to the
Son of Man as Davids Son. This investiture is certainly not witnessed before the rise of the
ten horns, the little horn, etc., and before
the time has arrived for judgment (upon which the action of the Ancient of
Days is founded). The only, interpretation that we can safely follow is the one
that does not violate the natural order, relating to time and events [yet future], given
in the prophecy. The Ancient of Days did, at one time, visit Mt.
Sinai when His Kingdom was instituted, and it is most
reasonable, aside from the Scripture intimations, to believe that when it will
be gloriously reorganized with the Son of Man at its head, that He will again
manifest Himself, as predicted, in the same place. We deem it not a little
significant that it number of highly interesting works (like Stanleys Sinai and Palestine) have recently been
published calling special attention to Sinai. Hence we
reject Thomass (Exp. of Dan.
p. 16) view that the Ancient of Days is equivalent to the Coming of Jesus (see Proposition 83)
and Smiths (Thoughts on Dan., p. 71), idea that
the scene of investiture is in the third heaven. Whatever the right,
exaltation, etc., of Jesus, we must keep in mind that this predicted, is a
special inauguration scene visibly exhibited to the saints at the restoration. (Wild,
Ten Lost Tribes,
p. 156, has the wildest conception, when he makes the two witnesses of Rev to be the Ancient of Days and the Son of Man -
the former being Moses and the latter Elijah!)
** This subject may also throw light on
such passage as 1 Thess. 5: 1-5, But ye brethren are
not in darkness that that day should overtake you as a thief, etc.
Consider that this was addressed to Thessalonian
brethren and includes them. Now if they are thus raised up [i.e. resurrected out from amongst
the dead], brought to Mt. Sinai, and
made part of that reorganisation, preliminary to the terrible scenes following,
and even with Christ participate in them - will it not be pre-eminently true
that being the acknowledged children of the day
they cannot possibly be in darkness, Again,
the Passover is only partly fulfilled, the Lamb has been slain, the eating of
its flesh in faith has been going on for centuries (showing forth His death until He come), but the Passover itself
we are told by Jesus (Luke 22: 15, 16), is to
be fulfilled in the Kingdom of God.
In this Sinaitic arrangement, preparatory to the day
of vengeance, Jesus the mighty King will indeed be a refuge, etc., and
no evil will befall them. The reader can find for himself other references to
this period of deliverance from incoming judgments, all indicative of a visible
manifestation and ordering in behalf of the covenanted Theocratic Kingdom.
OBSERVATION 7. Other intimations are to be found,
which, owing to their obscurity, have greatly perplexed critics. Let the student carefully examine the structure of Isa. 16: 1-5, and
it is self-evident, however we may give it an inchoate fulfilment, or make it
typical, that it has not yet been fulfilled, seeing that in the immediate
connection (verse 5) the
throne is to be established, the Ruler is to sit upon it in the Kingdom of
David, producing righteousness by His reign which has not yet been verified. Seiss Sce. (Apoc. Sec. 10, p. 282, footnote) corrects
our version (which reads: Send ye the Lamb to the Ruler of the land from Sela to the wilderness unto the mount of the daughter of Zion. by
giving, as the Vulgate, Luther, and other translations, the
following: Send ye
(or, I will send) the Lamb, the Ruler of the land, from Sela of the wildrness
unto the [Page 27] mount of the daughter of Zion. The Chaldees makes it allude to the Messiah,
the Anointed of Israel. This, with the hiding of certain ones, the
overthrow of the oppressor, the establishment of the Kingdom
of David with the Ruler (after He has
come from Sela of the wilderness to Jerusalem) reigning in it makes it to
coincide with the other Scripture adduced. The Lamb is put for Jesus Christ,
and the Word fully identifies, in the future
Coming of the Lamb, in His wrath,
His marriage, His war, His throne,
etc. (comp. Apoc.),
this Lambhood with the Rulership that He
shall exert over all the earth from the established throne and Kingdom of David.
Attention is invited
to a passage, upon which a variety of opinion has been expressed, and which,
perhaps, no one can confidently interpret, excepting as general analogy sustains,
viz., Isa., ch. 41, and the connected chapters. Who is this righteous man from the East? Let
any one look at the majesty, power, and glory declared of him, at the numerous promises
descriptive of the same applied directly to the Messiah at His future Coming, at
the [Holy] Spirits application of
portions of fhe prediction expressly to Christ, and we are forced to the conclusion that the
usual reference of this righteous man to Abraham
or to Cyrus is utterly untenable - although, some do, we make Abraham or Cyrus
merely typical of Christ, having a double fulfilment, etc. The trouble with
interpreters is that they cannot explain how this righteous
man, if Jesus, comes from the East. But we have to bear in mind that the
term East (see e.g. Hornes Introd., vol. 2, p. 2:30. Eroryc.. R, Knowl.,
art. East, etc.)
has a wide range, and is applicable to Arabia
Deserts, Idumea, etc., from whence Jesus comes,
as we have pointed out. Hence the
applicability of these predictions to Jesus, as the ancients held (e.g. Barnabas, Tertullian, Augustine,
etc.), can be received in every particular. As the approach of Jesus and His
saints will follow the route of the Israelites, and hence the coming to Jerusalem
will be literally from the East, it is well to notice that Stanley (Sinai
and Palestine, p. 167) pronounces the approach from Jericho
and Bethany to
be really grand. It is the very route taken
in the triumphal entry of the Gospels, and indicative of this future triumphal
entry. Stanley
(p. 315) quotes Palmer as saying, From the Castle of Rubad, north of
the Jabkok, are distinctly visible Lebanon, the Sea of Galilee, Esdraelon in its fullest extent, Carmel,
the Mediterranean, and the whole range of
Judah and Ephraim. It is the finest view that I ever saw in
any part of the world. We may add, that this
view may be used as confirmatory of Faussets (Chr. Herald.
Aug., 14th, respecting the Kings from the
East (Rev. 16)
viz., to be Christs transfigured saints returning
from the East to reign as king priests with Him (Isa. 40: 3; Ezek. 43: 2; Zech. 14: 4, 5; Rev. 1: 6, and 19: 8, 13, 14). Babylon
must fall, that Jerusalem,
literal and spiritual, may rise. The kings of
the earth (Rev. 16: 14) shall be superseded by the Lord from heaven and the kings of (from) the East with Him (Ezek. 21: 27).
OBSERVATION 8. This removal to Mt. Sinai,
and the union there consummated of Theocratic relationship (likened owing to
its intimate, enduring, and permanent
character, to a marriage),
satisfactorily explains some allusions to the future marriage, which many writers ignore or fail to conciliate. Notice: In Matt. 25: 1, the Bridegroom is Coming and the invited ones who - [i.e. those accounted worthy, A.V. or prevail, R.V., regarded
worthy Dia., etc., (Luke 21: 35; Cf.
Rev. 3: 10)] - to escape are watching go with Him to the marriage, the
rest being left; in Luke
12: 36,
the exhortation is to wait for the Lord when He will return from the wedding; in Rev. 19 a marriage is announced preceding
this overthrow of Antichrist; in Rev. 21, a marriage follows the removal of Gods
enemies. And how reconcile the exhortation to watch for
the Bridegroom Coming to the
wedding and the warning to watch for Him
Coming from the wedding, and both these with Revelation? If we keep in view
how (as explained Propositions 118 and 169), the figure of the marriage
relation is employed to denote a variety of unions; and then notice this
Theocratic union formed at Mt. Sinai previous to the open Advent of Jesus and His
saints, and previous
(as was observed e.g. Proposition 130, and Observation 4) to the [Page
28] overthrow of the Antichristian powers, we have the key of an easy solution.
The one ([in] Matthew) refers to the thief-like
Coming followed by the union at Mt. Sionai; the other
([in] Luke)
to the Coming of the Lord after this
union at Mt. Sinai (likened to a
marriage) and specially addressed to Jews and others; the one (Rev.
19), refers to the union at Mt. Sinai, and is the same explained under the married wife
Proposition
118; the other (Rev. 21) follows the overthrow of Antichrist, and is
the union delineated under Proposition 169. Thus several
phases in the Second Advent, with respective unions entered into, are presented before us;
the reconciliation being found complete in the order as presented to us.
The fact is,
it helps us to see how a number of things, which must transpire, before the open
Advent, can take place. Thus e.g. how [when] and where the judgment of believers is consummated, so that their respective stations in the
Kingdom are assigned (Proposition 135). It teaches us that that special preparedness for the direct establishment of the
Kingdom is of a supernatural nature, and done under the divine auspices at Mt. Sinai, and hence we cannot possibly receive the
suppositions e.g. of the Catholic Apostolic Church that it, through the
Apostolate established, is doing this work, or of Mormonism that it by its
system, etc., is performing it.
It evinces that Jesus, in more aspects than is generally supposed, is a Prophet like unto Moses. It shows that in the great work specially delegated to Moses, for
which he was particularly commissioned by the Almighty, viz., to erect and organise
a Theocratic government, in this Jesus will follow his footsteps,
and evidence the same work, only on a grander scale. The non-repentance of the Jewish nation, its rejection of the
Messiah, caused the postponement of this, the mighty work, to the Second Advent;
then will it be performed,
and in the identical place, too, where Moses stood forth the head of
the nation. The supernatural, which necessarily
accompanied the setting up of a Theocracy (which unbelief rejects as unworthy
of credence, although the absence of it
would vitiate the Theocratic idea), will
again be manifested in the gathering of
the people; in the august inauguration; in the march to Palestine; in the
encounter with the enemies of the Theocracy; in the establishment at Jerusalem,
and in the advancement and progress of its power over the nations of the earth.
The investiture of the Sovereignty of the world is so magnificent
a feature that it justly, in view of its magnitude, design, the worthiness of
the person invested, etc., demands a manifestation of it here on earth, and this it receives at Mt. Sinai,
where again a scene will be enacted, which will present an overwhelming sense
of the majesty, power, and glory of the Ruler. Bnt in the reinauguration there
will be this great difference, that while the saints will undoubtedly be deeply
affected by the wonderful transactions going on - while profoundly moved at the
sublimity of the investiture, yet they will not be affected by fear, as the
Jewish nation, and pray that the glorious manifestations may cease, for
prepared by previous glorification for this service, and realising their
dearest Friend in the person of the Ruler, they have, as Paul says, boldness in the day of judgment; for the
scene before them, and in which they participate, is not one of death, as the Jews
apprehended, but one of [selective resurrection
(Lk. 20: 35; Phil. 3: 11; Heb. 11: 35b etc.)
and of a future (1 Pet. 1: 5, 9, R.V.)] salvation, joy, blessedness, and
glory. When the covenants
are so vividly remembered
and exalted by fulfilment, then such Psalms
as the 98th will be verified. Then will be fulfilled
the saying of Cummings: The worlds greatest tribulation is the hour of the
Christians most magnificent deliverance. When the year of the redeemed
and the day of vengeance both come, Jesus, the Theocratic King, will be glorified and admired by
His own (Isa. 63 comp. with 2 Thess. 1: 5-9). The
Theocracy is established over a willing
people, who will exult and rejoice with fulness of joy in their
King and Redeemer. Vengeance does not touch the saints; and
when Jesus appears a polished shaft hid in Gods
quiver (Isa.
49: 2), in whom God will be glorified when employed against His
enemies, these [few but divinely chosen] saints themselves, by association of rulership and Theocratic power conferred on this mount of God, shall participate in its execution, Ps. 149: 6-9; Rev. 2: 26, 27, etc.
* *
* * *
* *
[Page 29]
PROPOSITION 167. The re-establishment of this Kingdom embraces
also the reception of a New Revelation of
the Divine Will.
This necessarily results, for while the Theocratic-Davidic Kingdom
is restored, its restoration is accompanied by great and wonderful changes. The
inaugurated rule of the Theocratic King, as predicted, the participation of the
saints in such rule, the worldwide extent of the Kingdom, the supremacy of the
Jewish nation, the entering upon a new age or dispensation, the change that
will result in the condition of believers in this Kingdom, etc., calls
for a relation by which not only the official position of
the saints is to be governed, but that of the Jewish and Gentile nations is to
be controlled.
We have only to ponder the Theocratic
idea embraced in the reign of and His saints, and the reasonableness of our Proposition
at once appears. We cannot possibly conceive of a restored Theocracy with the
extraordinary changes predicted, without increased Revelation as a directory to
rulers and subjects.
OBSERVATION 1. The reader will observe that our entire argument insists upon the present
and continued sufficiency of Revelation down to the Second Advent, over against
St. Simonians, Friends of Light, Swedenborgians,
Mystics, Mormons, Spiritualists, etc.
The Scriptures, as we now have them, are not only the highest but the last Revelation down to that period; and, hence, we
reject all others, no matter by whom presented or by what argument enforced. Until the arrival of the Bridegroom, there
is a sufficiency given to gather out and guide the
elect. Nothing is lacking to meet the Divine Purpose respecting this
dispensation, either in the way of instruction, motive,
encouragement, etc.; and, therefore, it is unreasonable to anticipate another
Revelation until we enter another and more glorious dispensation.
Our position protects us against, all vagaries, all pretended Revelations, on
the one hand, and likewise against that assumed
by some few, viz., that they are called upon to organize a Theocratic Society
similar to the Mosaic and amalgamate
Mosaic and Christian ordinances, etc. We gratefully accept of the apostolic arrangements for our
present good, and await the
arrival of Him, the Christ, who alone has
the authority to institute the changes deemed necessary. Before we are enticed into
any of the schemes which so largely prevail under the
garb of piety, zeal, increased knowledge, bestowed gifts of the [Holy] Spirit we are content to occupy with the things that are given to us until He, the King, comes.
Emerson once declared,
the need was never greater of a new revelation than now;
we, from our standpoint, would say the need was never greater of returning to
the Revelation already given than now. We have no sympathy whatever for pretended
[Page 30] revelations given by professed prophets and prophetesses, or drawn from a professed inner light, etc. Our position has been fully set
forth under Propositions
9 and 10.
OBSERVATION 2. The Theocracy under Davids Son and Lord, being Gods own ordering, will
embrace in some, formal manner Gods Will in regard to it. Thus, e.g. the assignment of the positions in the
coming Kingdom, as intimated by Jesus, Matt.
20: 23,
will call forth an expression of the Divine pleasure. The entire structure of the Millennial predictions or prophecies pertaining to this
Kingdom, assume or intimate such a Revelation.
In Isaiah 2
and Micah 4, (which refer,
as we have shown, to this period), it is said that in that day out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem;
in various predictions (as e.g. Zech. 14: 16, etc.) the nations shall send their representatives
to Jerusalem, to ascertain and perform the Will of the King; in that dispensation so
largely shall the [Holy] Spirit be poured out that many shall prophesy Joel 2: 28, 29 (comp. Proposition 171); at that time
the Lord shall instruct, so that all thy children shall be taught of the Lord,
Isa. 54: 13,
filling the earth with the knowledge of the Lord Isa. 11:
9 in Ps. 68: 11 (which, Proposition 166,
also is fulfilled at this time) it is said: The Lord gave the Word: great
was the company (or Heb. army) of those that
published it; in brief, so permeated are the promises
pertaining to this [Messianic and Millennial]
era with the idea that, (God shall then specially and more abundantly reveal His Will, that it is made the matter
of praise and rejoicing. The saints who inherit this Kingdom, i.e. are rulers
in it, are designated as Priests, whose office can only be explained by referring it
chiefly to an official position (Proposition 156) in which they make known the
Will of God. The removal of darkness, the closing of the mystery of God, the
impartation of perfect knowledge, the bestowal of a pure language, etc., is indicative of the same,
and is fully implied in the tabernacling of God again with man, etc., in Rev., chs.
21 and 22.
A little observation can extend such
references, as e.g. in Ps. 138: 4, All the kings of the earth shall praise Thee, O Lord, when they hear the
words of Thy mouth. Now
down to the Second Advent this is not fulfilled (for the kings of the earth
even at the Advent are arrayed against Christ), but when the kings associated with Christ (Proposition 154)
shall reign over the earth then when Christ gives His words - the Revelation of His will, etc., all, without exception shall praise Him. Numerous Propositions indicative of the reign and
priesthood of Jesus and His saints, the restoration of the Jews, the nature of
the Theocratic Kingdom, etc., all evidence that in the
ages to come, Gods will, as circumstances require, shall be expressed
and gloriously advanced.
OBSERVATION 3. The Revelation respecting the Theocratic ordering, (viz., the manner of organization, etc.) originally was given outside of Palestine
at Mt. Sinai. So also
the special Revelation concerning the restored Theocratic arrangement will
again be given at Mt. Sinai (See Proposition 166).
Christlieb (Mod. Doubt, p. 133), in his chapter on the
relation between Reason and Revelation, after illustrating the aid Revelation
gives to reason by, the telescope assisting the naked eye in the study of
astronomy, and that still lacunce exist
which involve no contradiction, then adds: Revelation
and nature are developing toward one great goal at which they will coalesce.
The perfecting of the one is that of the other. The fixed tendency of Revelation to become nature, to
make itself more and more a citizen of earth in order to make the earth the
chosen place of divine Revelation, this tendency is one day to be completely
realised; the consummated Kingdom of God will combine both elements; the
highest degree of Revelation and the highest development of nature. This
necessarily follows from this instituted Theocracy, for the King revealing
Himself [Page 31] openly, Revelation in its
highest form is manifested. The restitution brings with it that nearness and
access to God, which was forfeited by the fall. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit (See Proposition 171)
imparts to each king and priest the power of giving knowledge by special
influences. Bickersteth
(Divine Warning,
p. 316), thinks, that the kings
and priests shall, like the old prophets, present at times
oral revelation. Although this
idea is ridiculed by Dr. Brown and
others, yet, in view of their station, gifts, etc., there is nothing
incredible in the statement. But Dr.
Brown (Christs
Second Coming, p. 112), while endeavouring to rebut the idea of a
new Revelation of the Divine Will, suitable for the age to come, concedes this:
Who can fail to see that a new dispensation necessarily
implies a new Revelation to usher it in; in other words to authorise
and organise it. Precisely so; and hence the question to be
decided is whether a dispensation is to follow this one. Our entire line of
argument conclusively proves that this will be the result. Brown in the same work largely employs
as an argument against us, our inability to explain satisfactorily or
decisively certain details respecting the Millennial Age (as e.g. if the
righteous Jews, etc., are translated, or whether they die, and if so, when resurrected,
etc.), We inform such that we await the future Revelation to embody the details
and believe that if such were now given in connection with the outlines, they
would meet the same fate precisely
at the hands of unbelief and captious critics as the more essential.
OBSERVATION 4. This feature enables us to meet an objection urged by some against our
view, viz., that Revelation as now existing, would not be adapted (as e.g. in
its requirements) to such an age and kingdom as we advocate. This is freely
admitted; for Revelation as now given only brings us down to the restitution of things under Christ, and when the forfeited blessing are restored, then,
of course, another Revelation of the will of God pertaining to the order of that age is to be anticipated. Now
the condition thus future is only expressed in the most general terms; now the
Bible appropriately begins with the fall and ends with the rescue, without
giving a detailed account of the world to come, in its governmental, civil, and religious aspect; then the fulfilment of those general
statements will require specific orderings, and then the developments of that age will
demand, to carry it out, a more extended Revelation of the Divine Purpose, both
in its administrations and dispositions, and in the end which it is to
subserve. The reason why such details are not now given is not merely
because it would be premature and unnecessary, but evidently,
judging from the sad perversion of that already given, to avoid its being grossly misapplied, and even caricatured by the most
shabby imitations.
We sometimes read authors who assume, so far as the early
Church is concerned, as if the Montanists alone believed in a future new Revelation.
The Millenarianism so prevalent in the Primitive Church led the Fathers, as Papias, Barnabas, Justin, etc.,
to hold to additional Revelation only at the Second Advent, while Montanists
and some others allowed antecedent Revelation; and, if we are to credit history
as given, some enthusiasts even then claimed to be inspired to impart Revelation.
-------
To
be continued, D.V.