THE THEOCRATIC KINGDOM*
By
GEORGE N. H. PETERS,
D.D.
[* VOLUME 3 (pp. 582-605.)]
These books are the result
of 30 years labour, and they culminate in a three-volume set entitled “The Theocratic Kingdom of our
Lord Jesus” - which is a staunch defence of dispensational theology
organised into 206
propositions which build upon each other. Each proposition is stated and
then defined with a series of annotated observations.
Peters quotes
from over 4,000 sources, ranging from the second century to the nineteenth, to
build the case for Premillennialism. Each volume contains three in-depth indexes: [1] Authors
and their works, [2] Periodicals, [3] Scripture quoted in the book. This three
volume magnum is over 2000 pages in length.”
-------
[Page 582]
PROPOSITION
206. This
earth will yet witness the re-establishment of
a glorious Theocracy - a Theocracy in
its perfect form.
Our entire line of argument directly founded
on the covenants and prophecies of the Old Testament, and on the teachings and
predictions of the New Testament, enforces this Proposition,
the hope of ancient believers, of the primitive Church, and of a long and noble
line of witnesses for the truth. We will now briefly bring together the
converging lines of testimony which present this
blessed prospect, so much needed by humanity.
The reader is
expected to keep in view the reasoning under the Propositions referred to, seeing
that to avoid recapitulation a mere reference is deemed amply sufficient.
OBSERVATION 1. Attention is again called to the
fact that this government, predicted to be established and to extend itself
over the earth, is a Theocracy, i.e. God Himself, in the Person of Jesus, the
Son of David, rules in it as an earthly Ruler. This form of government is already seen in the Theocracy, initiatory, once
established (Propositions
25, 26)
and which incorporated the Davidic line (Propositions 27-33). God was the Supreme Ruler -
the earthly King. This fundamental idea must necessarily be
retained, if justice is done to the
direct representations of Scripture, seeing that the entire tenor and analogy
of the Record incontestably proves that the same
Theocracy overthrown, owing to the sinfulness of the nation,
shall be again restored under the
Messiah with increased splendour and power (compare Propositions 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36). As the Theocracy
must, in the very nature of the case, include a manifested reign of God as earthly Ruler and the exhibition of an intimate and
abiding union of the civil and religious, this, of course, does not allow us to
make the Church, as now constituted, the covenanted Kingdom of the Messiah
(compare Propositions
88-104).
The Theocracy restored as covenanted
and predicted through Jesus at His Second Advent, brings forth
the Son of David as the actual representative of God manifesting God to us in a
pure Theocratic relationship in the Person of One related to humanity - thus adapting
it to the necessities of humanity, and insuring its divine and permanent nature
(see e.g. Proposition
200). The Theocracy being a form of
government in which the State and Church are united, and in which the ruler is
accessible as the Head, etc., it follows, as a requisite result, that the
Church in this dispensation cannot, be the promised Messianic Kingdom, and,
therefore, as the Bible declares, this Theocracy when re-established shall be
visibly manifested, and the Messiah’s reign shall be one visibly exhibited over
the earth (compare e.g. Propositions 131 and 168). A
Theocracy, such as God. Himself has practically explained and enforced,
cannot be displaced by a substitution of something else, and it cannot be
spiritualised away without doing violence
to a thousand promises and calling into question the faithfulness of God.
Under Propositions 25-37,
etc., attention has been directed to the perversion of
the theocratic idea, and its wholesale appropriation to things that lack its
most essential features. [Page 583] A few additional illustrations are appended to evince the careless handling of the subject.
The title of the following work is sufficiently suggestive: Theocracy, or
the Principles of Religion and Polity, adapted to all Nations and Times, by the Rev. Rob. Craig. Objection is justly urged against De Maistre, “On the Pope,” claiming for the Pope
the office of Sovereign and Infallible Arbiter on the ground of a divinely
appointed Theocratic ordering
exhibited in the Roman Church, but
some Protestants just as painfully mistake the Theocratic idea and misapply it,
as exemplified even in the title of the following book: The New England
Theocracy; a History of the Congregationalists of New England to the Revivals
of 1740, by H. F. Uhden,
etc., 1859. Unfortunately writers of ability
and acknowledged merit, as a multitude of quotations would show, thus pervert
the Scriptural meaning, and make the labour of restoring its original import,
and intent correspondingly harder. The authority of others, and a resulting
prejudice, are in the way of appreciating the Scriptural signification and
intention of a Theocracy. We need not be surprised that the
Papacy (Alzog’s
Univ. His.
vol. 2, p. 490, etc.) should designate itself “a
universal Theocracy” or “a system of Theocracy,”
but it is surprising that Protestantism so largely adopts the same spirit when
it (Meyer, etc.) designates the
Church as “the Messianic Theocracy,” when the
fact is, that if we retain the simple meaning and application particularly of
the Word, nowhere is a Theocracy at present existing on earth, because God
refuses to act now, for any nation or people, in the capacity of an
earthly Ruler. His Divine Sovereignty is one thing; a special covenanted
Theocracy pertaining to this earth is quite another. Hence those writers, who reason that the past establishment of the
Theocracy ought to be imitated by a union of Church and State. are most certainly mistaken. Thus Craig, “Theocracy;
or the Principles of the Jewish Religion and Polity adapted to all Nations,”
while presenting many admirable things, concludes that the Theocracy, as once
instituted, is a model designed for future rulers and nations. This is nowhere
asserted in the Bible, and cannot be true, since an infallible head and will, which alone can control such a union
and make it a source of mutual strength, is lacking. The mistakes of the past
in this direction, the bitterness, hatred, injury, and bloodshed, sufficiently
attest the correctness of our position. It is true that there are certain great
principles of law - as many writers have forcibly shown - the rights of man,
the social relations, etc., presented, which are worthy of study and reception
in practice. But to make a model in its fundamental
Theocratic principles, is certainly erroneous, and productive of great evil.
Craig and others mistake when they make the Jewish Theocracy, as such, one of
universal application (this is reserved
for the future under Christ), and when they assert that Christian nations
are equally under a Theocracy like the Jews (Christianity only being
preparative to the promised Theocracy). Why is it, that men will so
persistently ignore the special features which
constitute a Theocracy, and mistake the Universal Sovereignty of God for the
special covenanted Kingdom, in which Church and State are united under God as
the earthly, accessible, supreme, infallible Head? A writer North Brit Review,
May, 1850,
p. 143) justly observes that without this “no
government should receive the name.”
OBSERVATION 2. We press upon the notice of the reader the consistency and reasonableness
of such a future Theocracy. The relation that man and this earth sustains to the
most High God requires that the honour and majesty of God should demand the
establishment of a Theocracy here on the earth, by which the
race is brought under a government. Honourable alike to God
and man. Our line of argument strongly develops this feature, and the
student will appreciate its force,
if attention is called to a few points. (1) At the creation God
had determined upon this form of government (Propositions 1 and 2);
(2) man by disobedience forfeited a
dominion which God through him was to exercise over the earth (Propositions 8
and 82:
(3) God has resolved to restore that
dominion in the Person of Jesus, the Second Adam (Proposition 82); (4) God - to indicate in what form of
government this dominion should be incorporated when restored, to test man’s
present capacity for it, and to make certain indispensable provisions for the
future - erected a Theocracy (Propositions 25, 26, etc.); (5) man, owing to sinfulness, was unfitted for a Theocratic
ordering, and, therefore, it was withdrawn (Propositions 32, 33,
etc.); (6) God promised at some
future time to [Page 584] restore it (Propositions 33-36);
(7) this Theocracy is God’s own
preference for a form of government and if not restored makes His proposed
government a failure (Proposition 201); (8) God has sent His Son to make provision for Salvation, i.e. to
lift man and the race out of the state of rebellion and to restore all the
blessings forfeited by the fall (compare e.g. Propositions 196, 182,
144,
etc.); (9) this [future] Salvation in its ultimate realisation is
invariably linked with this still future Coming [Messianic] Kingdom (so e. g. Propositions 120, 121,
etc.); (10) God, to insure the
future permanent establishment of the Theocracy, is preparing a body of rulers
for the same to be associated with “the
Christ” (Propositions
61, 86,
65,
and 153);
(11) that until this Theocracy is
set up the race is not brought into subjection to God (compare e.g. Propositions
176, 152,
204,
etc.); (12) however glorious in
design this dispensation may be, there is still an incompleteness in Redemption
and which will continue until “the
Messiah” comes to restore the Theocracy (Propositions 87, 88, 120,
etc.); (13) when this Theocracy is
re-established, then under the rulership of Christ and His saints the race
itself is brought into subjection to God - a revolted province is brought back
to its pristine allegiance and blessedness (Propositions 124, 200,
151,
etc.); (14) the Theocracy is the
form of government most admirably adapted to secure this result (Propositions
128, 116,
117,
119,
etc.); (15) a theocracy being in its
nature a visible government, such a sovereignty and redemption completed must
be visibly shown in the sight of the world, so that - as rightly belongs to God
and is done in heaven itself - it be publicly, recognised (Propositions 121, 122,
131,
154,
etc.); (16) the personal
relationship of God to Adam in Paradise, to the Theocracy once established in
the past, to man in and through Jesus at the First Advent, insures a future
special and continued personal relationship in a restored throne and Kingdom
(by way of pre-eminence called His own) its exhibiting His Supremacy in the
most tangible and satisfactory manner, and that the recovery of a rebellious
people and race, as well as the manifestation of God’s will being done on earth
as in heaven, includes such a personal relationship in the Person of Him who is
“Son of man”
(Proposition
81, 86,
and 199,
204,
etc.).
The office of Jesus as Prophet,
Priest, and King, are united in this Theocracy; the
Kingship of the Jews, the Headship of the Church, and the Second Adamship, are
so combined in this form of government that they are inseparable, forming One.
The swaying of the sceptre in behalf of deliverance over the world includes
these relations in a realised Theocratic sense, a unity. Hence
we do not, in this future state, regard them as separate and distinct one from
the other, but united in the same person. For, as shown in detail, this
Theocratic reign will result in manifesting, as something actually realised,
Jesus as “the Saviour of the World.” To day a
favourite phrase with many theologians to express the highest phase relating to
Jesus, is that of a “Christocracy,” but
whatever may be asserted respecting the same, it is
still true that a “Theocracy” is the more
comprehensive term, embracing more, and impressing more specifically the divine
and the result of the Christship.
OBSERVATION 3. Nothing but a real Theocracy can possibly, satisfy the representations given in the
Scriptures. Let the reader consider the numerous reasons presented in its
behalf, some of which are the following: (1)
the actual establishment of a Theocracy which God claims as His special
Kingdom, and which He withdraws
under promises of future restoration (Propositions 25, 33, etc.). (2) The covenant, confirmed by oath, positively demands its future
restoration under David’s Son (Proposition 49). The Kingdom that is
covenanted to that future David’s Son is not some other [Page 585] form of government, but the identical Theocracy identified with David’s
throne and Kingdom (Propositions 31-33). (3) The postponement of the Kingdom (Propositions 66, 67, 87)
makes it, indisputably certain that this Theocracy will be restored at the
return of Jesus. His own words are amply sufficient to sustain our faith in
such a blessed expectation. (4) The
prophecies, in their plain sense, imperatively demand the Theocracy to be
restored (Propositions
21, 32,
33,
etc.), seeing that the same Theocracy overthrown is the one that they declare
shall be gloriously re-established. (5)
The faith and hope of the pious Jews implies such a regained Theocracy (Propositions 20,
40,
and 85),
because that we cannot believe that God would thus incite and foster a false
faith and hope by an admitted sense of His Word to be sadly disappointed. No!
He will be faithful to the sense given under His own auspices, and these
ancient believers shall yet exult in the full realisation of anticipated
deliverance and glory in the restored Theocracy. (6) John the Baptist’s faith and hope imply the same (Propositions 38-41),
for it is impossible, without degrading a person “filled with the Holy Ghost,” and specially commissioned to
preach the Kingdom, to believe that John should utterly misapprehend the nature
of the Kingdom he was to proclaim. (7)
The doctrinal views of the disciples, apostles, and primitive Church (Propositions 43,
44,
70,
71-78)
in reference to the Kingdom, were such that they cannot be consistently
explained (without lowering their commission, inspiration and faith), unless we
receive their expectations of a future re-established Theocracy to be the
truth. (8) The confining by Jesus of
the preaching of the Kingdom - its tender - to the Jewish nation (Propositions 54,
55,
etc.), indicates that the Theocracy, which pertained to them, was the Kingdom
offered. Hence, as the very Kingdom tendered to them is the one postponed to
the Second Advent (Propositions 66-68), the same Kingdom must be the one ultimately restored. (9) The Kingdom not being established
under John’s ministry (Proposition 41), not under Christ’s (Proposition 56),
and not in this dispensation (Propositions 70, 71, and 90 to 110) corresponds with the nature
of the Theocracy, seeing that no such form of government has yet been
witnessed. (10) The design of this
dispensation (Proposition
86), the preparatory of the Church (Propositions 88-105),
the gathering out of a people to inherit the Kingdom (Propositions 61-65)
- these are all points in agreement with our position respecting the future
Theocracy, and thus aid in establishing it. (11) A correct understanding of the Divine Sovereignty as something
ever existing, and the covenanted Kingdom which that Sovereignty bestows
(compare Propositions
9 and 80), enforces the precise idea of a real Theocracy, pertaining
to a special rule confined to this earth. (12)
A consideration of this Kingdom as belonging, by way of covenant, specifically
to “the Son of
Man,” and what this
implies (Proposition
81), brings forward the Theocratic ordering alone as intended. (13) The restoration of the dominion
forfeited by the first Adam through the Second Adam (Proposition 82) involves a rule
such as we know can only be realised after the Second Advent of Jesus, and
which the Scriptures unite with this re-established Theocracy. (14) This
The reader is requested to notice the wonderful harmony of our doctrine. Although many things are requisite
to give it completeness, every link in the chain of connection is
forthcoming and expressed in a plain, easily understood, grammatical sense - the
strongest proof that can be given to
substantiate a doctrine. Aside from the details (in which we may, more
or less, mingle error - being human) the grand outlines of the system evidence
this harmony of teaching. It is a great gratification, a high comfort, to find
such unity between the curse and redemption, the covenants and their realistic
fulfilment.
OBSERVATION 4. Briefly, reference may again be made to the
exceeding desirableness of this future Theocracy. A real Theocracy is on that
humanity requires, [Page 589] and down to its establishment, if we
but credit God’s foreknowledge as in His Word, the nations of the earth will
lack a government that can insure continued peace, prosperity, happiness, etc.
The sad condition of the world plunged in unbelief and direct, hostility to the
truth and the Christ (Propositions 123, 160, 161, 162, 163, 174, etc.), clearly evinces what
the efforts of man at government will yet develop. Let the reader turn to Proposition 202,
and notice how the Bible represents to us a Divine
government, perfect in every respect, and admirably adapted in every particular
to secure stability, blessedness, etc. This is alone met with
in a real Theocracy, which contains the elements of a
complete Kingdom that can lift man and the race from the present low ground
into a higher plane, reconciling clashing interests and removing evils, under a
visible head and rulership wholly actuated by justice, love, and mercy. The cravings of humanity for a stable government that shall
dispense impartial justice and extend its care over all its subjects; that
shall bless the highest and the lowest; that shall remove the distress and
evils incident to present forms: that shall assure constant and abiding release
from oppression, war, and suffering; that shall make it sympathising and
all-powerful ruling Headship constantly accessible to every subject, that shall
manifest in a manner to command unfaltering assent, a perfectly reliable and
infallible rule; these can only be realised in a restored Theocracy
- a Kingdom in which God - infinite in wisdom and power - Himself again
condescends to act in the capacity of earthly ruler. Who, when viewing
the sad history of the nations of the earth (a long, dreary catalogue of
jealousies, wars, bloodshed, revolutions, etc.), and regarding the fearful
condition and troubles still future (as delineated by the Spirit of God, Propositions
161, 162,
163,
etc.), does not earnestly desire the speedy Coming of this Theocracy. Again,
notice Proposition
204, and see how this restored Theocracy
gives definiteness and a continued exaltation to David’s Son, and vividly
brings before us - as no other system of faith can possibly do - the majestic
relationship that He sustains throughout the ages to the race of man. The
dignity, honour, and glory of Jesus is promoted by this arrangement; and
associated rulers, Jewish and Gentile nations, experiencing the elevation and
blessings flowing from this divinely instituted government, shall ever tender
to the Father and Son and [Holy] Spirit
ceaseless heart-felt ascriptions of praise.
The reply to those who allege that this
Coming to this earth and condescending to act as earthly ruler in the
Theocratic order is degrading to David’s Son and David’s Lord, will be found in
Propositions
203, 81-85, 200,
197,
etc., to which the reader is referred. The objection arises from not
discriminating between the Divine Sovereignty (Propositions 79 and 80)
and, this specially covenanted Kingdom to “the Son of
Man.” It does not see that it is sitting in judgment
upon God’s own former condescension thus to act, upon God’s own preference of
government, upon God’s oath-bound covenants and predictions relating thereto,
and upon the most desirable and glorious method to bring God and man into an
intimate and enduring relationship, promotive of the highest glory of the One
and the highest blessedness of the other. A believer
should hesitate to question such a divine mode of procedure, which must - if
duly considered - elevate David’s Son to a divine most honourable position, and
which brings glorious deliverance to the world; uniting this fallen and
rebellions earth into intimate and enduring relationship - as a recovered
province in which God’s will is done - with heaven itself, and that by
sanctifying and elevating the noblest of earthly relations, the civil and
religions in combination. God again “tabernacling
with men” as their King, manifesting Himself in the Person of Jesus as
Theocratic King; this is a glory inconceivably great, and a
boon so
full of unutterable blessing that
the heart of man desires it with intense desire. The old view (Farrar’s Life of Christ, vol. 1, p. 28) of Tacitus, Suetonius, and Josephus,
of a powerful King arising in
OBSERVATION 5. The Scriptures are full of this Theocratic idea (as
the preceding Propositions
allow), and many of its declarations receive new force and beauty when viewed
in its light. All illustration will indicate this: the
expressions relative to God’s dwelling with man, and of being their God
and they shall be His people, convey the notion of a Theocratic affinity entered into by God and experienced by man. This is seen if several particulars are noticed. (1) When the Theocracy was established this feature was thus distinctly announced.
Even in Gen. 17:
8, it is promised that “I will be their God” when the
This indicates the high calling of the
Kingdom in its King, associated Rulers, and as well as the foundation of the
dispensed blessings. This dwelling of God in their midst as Supreme Ruler upon
the earth gives the Theocracy its efficacy, and adaptedness, and perfection. It
throws light upon Millennial prophecies, illustrative
of the Kingdom. Thus: being Theocratic, the civil as
well as the religions is divinely administered, and hence everything, even of a
political nature, is a divine standard. Therefore, as under the withdrawn
Theocracy (that illustrates the spirit of the restored one),
every violation is not merely a crime but a sin,
because opposed to the Will of this Head dwelling among them. Faithfulness to
the laws of the Kingdom - in every respect - is faithfulness to God, evincing
that supreme love whose extension is ultimately to overthrow all disobedience. The rewards and the punishments, as becomes a Theocracy, will then also
be immediate, because temporal bestowment of the same evidences the worthiness and power and majesty of the same. The
saints, as we have shown, will play an important part in exhibiting this
feature.
OBSERVATION 6. This Theocracy is a predetermined form of
government, which, when the time arrives, will be
enforced upon “a willing people.”
It is not dependant upon the choice of any nation or nations, for, as prophecy
predicts, it will be so unwelcome to the nations of the earth that, to
establish it, the kingdoms of the world will be broken to pieces by it, (thus e.g. Propositions 123, 160-163).
The ambition, pride, self-exaltation, and wickedness of earthly kingdoms cannot
be induced to submit to such a Theocratic rule, and, therefore, the Scriptures
plainly predict, as a result, that a fearful conflict will arise (e.g. Propositions
162 and 163), which will prove
disastrous to the kings and rulers engaged in it. Indeed, a little
reflection will evidence that the representations of the Bible in this respect
are most reasonable - the only ones that can possibly be anticipated. Just as the
establishment of the Theocracy in
Some excellent writers have a
misleading idea of a Theocracy and of the manner of its establishment. Thus
e.g. Wines (Com.
on the Laws of the Ancient Hebrews), in his efforts to show that the
OBSERVATION 7. The Theocratic idea is so grand in its conception and so
sublime in its adaptation to man and its results, that
it could not have been of human devising. Unbelievers like Rousseau (Social Contract, b. 2, ch.
7) make Moses the founder of the Theocracy, and land “the
superior genius of the great man,” and his “sagacious
and comprehensive power of mind.” Believers in the Word employ language
in this direction not far removed from the notion that Moses by his own wisdom
conceived, and by his own positive spirit practically enforced, the Theocratic
idea. Quotations that are painful and degrading to the Record might be produced, illustrative of this loose method of
interpreting the Scripture account. If we turn to the Record,
while fully admitting the wisdom and ability of Moses, yet it distinctly states
that Moses was simply an agent in the hands of God; that God Himself was the direct Founder of the
Theocracy, and Moses acted by His command, and under His direction (compare
e.g. Ex. 19: 3-10; Deut. 6: 20-25, and, in brief, the entire history of its
founding). The “divine legation” of
Moses is an accepted fact, indisputably supported. This was requisite, for
Moses, with all his wisdom and genius, could never have devised the Theocratic idea; as an honourable man it could
not have been his work. Consider the God that Moses worshipped, His exalted
attributes and His transcendent glory, and how could he, without the grossest
presumption, have conceived the idea of His becoming the personal, accessible
earthly ruler of the Jewish nation? And to have done
so without a direct sanction would compromise his integrity insult His own God,
and found the government on a fearful falsehood. No man of wisdom, genius, and
honour could have been guilty of so barefaced a fraud as to palm off his own
conception for a God-given one. Indeed, so pure and exalted is the idea in the
form presented under the Theocracy, that if it had been imitated, it would have, under the moulding influence of
that age of the world, been modified, as seen in other ancient governments that
sought a divine sanction of the gods to sustain their polity in the estimation
of the governed. The fact is, that the conception is above the individual and
the age (forming part [Page 593] of a Divine purpose); and the public
manner in which the idea was practically inaugurated, and the continued
accessibility of the Head, etc., forbid the notion of its human origin. The
entire Scriptures constantly refer to it as once established and as again
restored by God - He being its Founder and Ruler. As
we trace this Theocratic idea, we find other distinctive features beyond the
conception of finite mind. Thus e.g. it being the Divine Plan
to perfect this Theocratic idea in the Person of the King, we discover to our
amazement and admiration that to make this Headship accessible and in intimate
relationship with humanity - to fit it for such an earthly rulership - the
Divine is united with a David’s Son, so that in and through Him God exercises
just the rule required in a Theocracy adapted to man. Could man develop
this conjunction, when e.g. it required a virgin to give birth to a Son, and
when it demanded the most, intimate acquaintance with the Divine Purpose? Could
the prophets or the Apostles bring forth such a magnificent conception of a Theocratic
ordering and Theocratic King? No! before it we bow in
reverence, acknowledging a divine wisdom and power.
A Theocracy, as the Bible describes,
is the grand conception of inspiration. It belongs wholly and essentially to
the divine, being a revelation of the Divine Purpose, and strikingly exhibiting
the divine in all the preparatory stages and measures until the culmination,
when the divine, connected with humanity, appears in overwhelming grandeur and
glory. We way well, therefore, dismiss the vain efforts to trace the biblical
ideas to Oriental religions, to
OBSERVATION 8. This Theocracy, when once again established, is permanent. This has been proven in detail (Proposition 159),
but we may briefly present one feature which alone assures us of its stability.
One source of the weakness of human governments is the perpetual change of
rulers and dynasties, owing to mortality, revolutions, etc. Now the King is
immortal and divine, and no change can be predicated of Him;
the associated rulers being made like unto Him [after “the first resurrection”
are], immortal and glorified, their positions are perpetual. A
distinguishing peculiarity of this restored Theocracy is that the rulers are all chosen by God Himself, no one can ever be a king or
priest in it without God’s direct appointment. The people have, no voice in the
selection of the rulers,* and hence
there, is no possibility of introducing those who are unworthy. God selects His rulers from faithful and tried ones - they are the true
brethren of the King (Propositions 90, 154, 124, 153).
This immeasurably enhances the efficiency and stability of the Theocracy. When
the Apostles reign over the twelve tribes of Israel, when the saints are
allotted their position of judges, when the rulers of the Kingdom disseminate
and enforce the ordering prescribed, there is no power capable of resisting
them, and there is no element that can disturb their sway - being founded in
Omnipotence itself.**
* Wines (Com. on the Laws of the Ancient Hebrews) makes it the highest crowning
excellence of a government that the people are permitted to choose the rulers (God, however, in view of the past history
of nations, judges otherwise), and makes a desperate effort (because God to
some extent allowed this in the former theocracy) to show that this pertains essentially
to a Theocracy. We are certain that it does not to a perfected
Theocracy; and we are confident that it did not belong to the past Theocracy to
the extent that he claims. A
few statements will evidence the latter fact. We have seen that the form of [Page 594] government and the laws came from God (the people appointed no
representatives to choose the form and frame the code under which they were to
live), and that the people - as would be proper under any form - gave in their
willingness to yield obedience to the same. The next step was the appointment
of rulers, and, instead of the people selecting the chief magistrate, God
both selects and commissions Moses
as the chief ruler under Himself. Moses, by
God’s express direction, selects and commissions Joshua. The
Theocracy did form classes that held superior positions and privileges (and
these hereditary), it
gave the judges position for life, it ultimately incorporated and
upheld even a hereditary line of kings. All these were to perform, not what the people might demand, but what God’s own laws required. We
cannot help therefore to express our surprise that Wines should (p. 138) call the Theocracy “a
Republic,” and in his ardour - [i.e., ‘eagerness,’] - declare that “on the banner of
** Owing to human depravity and the
Theocracy being subordinately ruled by fallible men, there was an element of
danger in the former one (pointed out by Michaelis, Com. on the Laws of Moses, art. 46,
and by Wines, (Com. on the Laws,
etc., p. 509, etc.) viz., of two tribes when becoming more powerful than
others, regarding each other with suspicion and hatred, or when one tribe
acquired ascendancy over the rest, the others would be excited by envy, etc. Illustrations are
given of this in the works named. But this
danger shall be averted in the future Theocracy, as e.g. plainly predicted by Isaiah 11: 13.
The reason for this change is found in the fact that the King and all the
rulers being immortal, pervaded by the [Holy] Spirit, perfect, and perpetual in office, no place is given
to that ambition and jealousy for position, honours, etc., that is so
unfortunately and fatally developed in earthly kingdoms. Jealousy, envy, and
rebellion cannot exist; all, too, are under the sway, counsel, and protection
of perfect, God-consecrated rulers, and hence no antagonism, injustice,
oppression, arbitrary measures can exist.
OBSERVATION 9. The manner in which God regards the
world’s history as presented in His Word, indicates the high estimate that He places on
this Theocratic idea. Infidels have rudely assaulted the Theocracy
in the past (overlooking that it only foreshadowed in a real initiatory from
the grand Theocratic ordering to be
realised), and Apologists have lamely apologized (as e.g. suited by way of
accommodation to a transition state) in its behalf; but the reverent student of
the Scriptures, tracing the Divine Purpose, sees [Page 595] in it the
foundation of Jewish
greatness, past and future, and ultimately the world’s redemption and glory.
Why does God
so carefully trace the rise and progress of the Jewish nation to the
establishment of the Theocracy, then enter into fulness of detail respecting
the Theocracy, its history and downfall; then avoiding any connected history of
the nation so long as separated from the form of government He Himself
instituted, He only presents a sufficiency to give coherency to predictions and
preparations relating to the future? Why does God
specially single out this Jewish nation as alone worthy of detailed mention,
and pass by those mighty nations (with brief mention) that existed
contemporaneously? Why does He
devote so many pages to a special form of government, and pass by those forms
which largely fill the pages of profane history and which played such a
prominent part in the world’s drama? Such
questions are only satisfactorily answered by a
reference to the Theocratic ordering. The Jewish nation being directly under
God’s own Kingdom, sustaining to Him a near national relationship as the Ruler,
He, for the sake of His own Theocratic position, once occupied and to be again re-occupied, evinces this
partiality to the nation in the recorded history. When history shall be read
and studied after the thousand years are ended, the significancy of all this
and the manifest omission respecting other governments and nations of vast
proportions will appear self-evident in the then existing grandeur of the
Theocracy, the restoration and supremacy of the Jewish nation, and in the
Gentile nations having participated in its blessings.
The reason why God did not reveal
Himself directly to other nations as He did to the Jews - a problem, the
subject of much thought to various writers - is found in this Theocratic idea.
They were utterly unfitted for it, even as the Jews,
although having a previous preparation of wonderful manner, evidenced
themselves to be unworthy of its permanent retention in the form first
presented. It was, therefore, as a preparatory measure
brought out in the Jewish line in order to provide for the Theocratic
King, David’s Son, etc. So much is this felt that
unbelief has sneeringly said, that the Old Testament contains a “Civil Theology.” A recent writer on
“Natural Religion” (Littell’s Liv. Age, Oct. 28th, 1876, p. 222), referring to it
as a distinguishing peculiarity of the Bible, that it occupies itself so much with
the future on earth, remarks: “The future is their
study, but not - this is almost as true of the New Testament as of the Old -
the future after death. It is a kind of political future that absorbs them, the fall of kingdoms and tyrants, of
OBSERVATION 10. This Theocracy has a politico-religious constitution, i.e. a constitution inseparably connected with
the worship of God, for God in the Person of “the Christ” is King. Hence idolatry is treason,
and will be swiftly punished, for it is aimed directly at the Divine King and the foundation of His government.
It possesses a constituted, manifested unity, the same centring in an
infallible, ever just, and beneficent Head, which seeks the welfare and
happiness of all classes from the lowest to the highest. This unity is preserved by the oneness of mind and heart, cemented by
redemptive love, existing between the King and His associated rulers. It
bestows liberty, but only in the sense that it allows whatever the [Page 596] public good requires and whatever pertains to the good of the individual
himself, i.e. whatever is consistent with the rights of the State, society, and
individual. Freedom consistent with the benefit and happiness of all is the
only liberty, as the greatest of statesmen have shown,
that ought to pertain to a State striving to become a blessing to its subjects.
A perfect State should be, in its ruling Head, in close sympathy with its people,
and this is pre-eminently true of this Theocracy. With a King
who suffered in humanity and died for man, and with subordinate rulers who
passed through the trials incident to an earthly pilgrimage, we have a body of
rulers who can and will
sympathise with the people, and manifest it by the power exerted in
their behalf. The very form of government under the guidance of infallibility
will secure the rights, privileges, and blessings of all - of rulers to rank
and position, of subjects to property, soil, etc., so that all shall feel an
abiding interest in the perpetuity of the united State and Church. The
happiness of all being secured, all are influenced to love the polity introduced,
which cares for the welfare of all. Alienation of estate,
utter deprivation of property, galling indebtedness, servile vassalage (as
shown by the Jubilee year) cannot find their counterpart in this Divine Polity,
for then “they shall sit every
man under his vine and under his fig tree, and
none shall make them afraid”
(Mic. 4: 4) The Agrarian law of the Theocracy,
which divided the land equally among all, and prevented that enormous
accumulation of landed estate in the hands of the few to the detriment of the
many, may reasonably give us a hint how in the future the earth will be
occupied by the subjects. In the past Theocracy there
were no standing armies and no provision made for them, because the King
Himself was the defence; this is true of the Coming One, when the Omnipotent
King and His rulers inaugurate by their august presence and action an era when
the nations and people “shall
beat their swords into ploughshares, and their
spears into pruning-hooks: nation shall not
lift up sword against nation, neither
shall they learn war any more” (Isa. 2: 4; Mic.
4: 3).
Public worship and religious institutions are an integral part of a Theocratic
Polity, for in it State and Church are firmly united and blended; hence, in the
delineations of the restored Theocracy this feature assumes a very deservedly
prominent place. All nations falling under its sway and enjoying its blessings
must publicly worship the Ruler, thus acknowledging their dependence,
indebtedness, gratitude, love, and reverence as subjects (see e.g. Zech. 14: 16; Isa. 60: 6, 7; Rev. 21: 24; Isa. 66: 23, etc.).
Then is verified what even men not Millenarian, as Neander and many others, have insisted
on as imperative in order to fulfil the plain predictions of Scripture, viz.,
that the Church must come in possession of “a
world-wide dominion,” but fail to inform us how it is
possible to possess the dominion as delineated by the prophets without the
conjunction of the civil; and how, if the latter is once admitted, it is
possible to co-ordinate them - owing to human infirmity - without this
identical Theocratic ordering, seeing that, according to the Scriptures,
nations shall be averse to it down to the Second Advent. Rothe
(so others) correctly insists on it that the highest possible condition of government
is a perfect union of the Church and State. Here alone it can be realised; for vain is it to expect such it revolution without the direct intervention
of the appointed Theocratic King. The Scriptures
are too direct upon this point to cause us to mistake its meaning. Schaff (His. Apos.
ch., p.
15), speaking of the Church and its ultimate union with, and control over the
State, says: “History in this view is to end in a
Theocracy in which all dominion and power shall be given to the saints
of the Most High, all nations be united into one family, and joyfully yield
themselves to the divine Will as their only law.” We show from
covenant and promise how this will be realised. In the nature of the case [Page 598] the legislation of such a Theocracy
cannot be tampered with, for it embraces the Divine Will. Hence in it no crushing monopolies can exist; men, women, and children
will be converted into mere machines to add to others’ wealth; it does not, owing to its Supernatural basis of immortal and glorified
rulers, grind down its subjects with taxes to support its governmental
machinery; it will not, like present governments, force an opium trade upon
some nation at the cannon’s mouth, or obtain revenues by indorsing things which
tend to moral and social degradation. Religion, inestimable
as it is, is only the earnest of the purity of that Theocracy which
incorporating religion in its highest development with the magnificent civil
pertaining to the government of the world, manifests and disseminates civil and
religious, spiritual and temporal, individual, social, and national blessings.
The consideration of personal salvation, however precious, should not hinder a due view and appreciation of
the Divine Purpose in Redemption as exhibited in this Theocratic ordering. This
would be religions selfishness, leaving out the most glorious results. And we must not forget that in the restoration of the
Theocracy important changes, as predicted, will be made. The
Theocracy that once existed was rudimentary, the Theocracy that comes will be
perfected; the Theocracy that was withdrawn only gave certain outlines to be
filled out, being accommodated, preparatory to Redemption, to the circumstances
of the nation and the times; while the Theocracy to be erected retains the grand
outlines with the most splendid additions to adapt it to the King, rulers,
nations, and new dispensation. Hence in judging of the past, due
allowance must be made between the fundamentals of a Theocratic government and
the incidentals incorporated in view of the state of the Jewish nation and the
world. The fundamental must be discriminated from the preparatory, typical, and
initiatory. We can readily perceive certain principles that
underlie such a government, which, in the nature of the case, never can be
yielded without destroying the very idea of a Theocracy, such as God acting in
the capacity of an earthly, civil ruler; the Church and State united in one;
the subordinate rulers and the people subjected to a supreme perfect Will; such
a Will offering an infallible guidance; the rights and privileges of the
highest and lowest are respected and protected; that every one under its laws
has access, either personally or by chosen representatives, to the Head of the
government; that the Chief Ruler dwells with His people and is their God; that
the happiness and welfare of all are duly regarded and promoted. Infidels of all classes have made certain
features of the
OBSERVATION 11. A Theocracy, in the very nature of the case, cannot tolerate
any other form of government. If the
earthly King is the Mighty Creator, the Redeemer, the Renewer, etc., then a
Kingdom specially designed to promote His own glory and the good of His
creatures cannot endure the existence of kingdoms of human origin and pervaded
by human infirmity. Even this feature was to some extent manifested in the
initiatory Theocracy of the past. It is sometimes said that the laws of the same were cruel,
unjust, etc. Leaving Wines (Com. on Laws, B.
1, ch. 6), Spring
(Oblig. Of the World to the Bible, Lect.
3), and others to show, by contrast with the most polished nations, by the
merciful laws incorporated, etc., that the charge is pressed to an undue
extent, yet they fall to vindicate the same form the proper Theocratic standpoint. It cannot be denied that
the charge given by God was to utterly root out and exterminate the nations of
Canaan, and the reason actuating the King of the Theocracy is plainly given, in
that the retention of those nations and kingdoms with their wickedness was in
direct conflict with His own government, and would [Page 598]
necessarily result in leading His own subjects astray and in open rebellion.
The very prohibition and apparent cruelty toward the nations of
Hence, the plain predictions of
the punishment of nations if they resist acknowledging allegiance, and even of
their utterly perishing if they persist in it, as seen e.g. in Zech. 14: 12-19; Isa. 60: 12, etc.
Therefore it also will not tolerate the treason of the individual, but metes
out to him condign punishment, and, if persevering in rebellion, finally death.
We read that mercy and long-suffering will he extended to
him for the time allotted to man in this dispensation, for e.g. Isa. 65: 20 declares that in the New Heavens and New Earth “the sinner a hundred years old shall be accursed.”
We remind the critical student what light this throws on the subject of the
temporal punishments of the past Theocracy, and which are so
unfairly used against the inspiration of the Scriptures. A Theocracy, in
the very nature of the case, must thus mete out, in defence of its foundational
idea, these temporal punishments - [presumably in ‘Sheol’ = ‘Hades’ (see Num. 16: 30; Acts 2: 27.Cf. Heb. 9: 27; 2 Tim. 2: 18, R.V. etc.], and it will do it again until the
world is brought into complete subjection. The punishments regarded in their
connection to the actual [Millennial] Kingdom of God existing pertain to this earth, and it is a
most powerful proof of the inspiration of God’s Word that it thus remains so
faithful and consistent to the Theocratic ordering. Mistaking the nature of the
covenants and Kingdom leads men to utterly misapprehend
the proprieties of language and the undeviating exactness to fundamental ideas.
OBSERVATION 12. Another feature connected with the Theocracy may be
mentioned as indicative of the Divine Power abiding with it. Let the
reader turn to Proposition
71 and see how the baptism of the Holy Ghost
and of fire is a distinguishing honour and privilege accorded in this Kingdom. In the former Theocracy
prophets were raised up, and, as writers of eminence have justly observed, they
were so directly influenced by the Theocratic King, that as special divine
messengers their authority could not be resisted (compare Wines’s Com., p.
624, etc., who refers to Coleridge, Schlosser, [Page 599] Horne, Alexander, and Milton) “without abjuring the
fundamental principle of the Theocracy.” Wines (Com. B, 2, ch.
9) Michaelis
(Com.,
art. 36), Alexander (Intro. Isa., p. 12), and
others hold, from the institution of the Prophetical order (Deut. 18:
9-22), that God designed “a constant succession of inspired men” and “a permanent order of (such) men in the Israelitish
commonwealth.” This was perverted by the rebellion
and perversity of the nation although God vouchsafed in mercy not to overlook
them entirely - until after a sufficiency was given - when, as an indication of
disapprobation, He left them without a prophet. We believe
that this position is eminently correct, viz., that the Theocratic ordering -
to evidence the pervading Theocratic influence (which Balaam, when he came to view the nation, could not withstand), and
to extend its sufficiency (as e.g. in revealing the will and purpose of the King, etc.) - incorporates such a
succession as part of its working instrumentalities promotive of the honour of
the King and the wisdom and good of His subjects.
Thus it will be again (Proposition 171), and so general (Joel, etc.) and continued that it in itself evidences
a most powerful present Theocratic arrangement. This is one of the concomitants
of a Theocracy, and affords an insight into the splendid portraiture of the wonderful operations of the Holy Spirit during that period, and the astounding moral,
religions, and civil results flowing
from the imparting of divine wisdom for the guidance, instruction, and elevation
of the nations.
Hence we cannot agree with those who - without perhaps
intending it - virtually lower the prophetic office by making it merely the
concomitant of the childhood of the nation, an accommodation to counteract the
ancient desire and propensity to look into the future, etc. Even under the
light that we now possess, how welcome would be the authoritative utterance, or
a prophet to inform of the exact truth of things concerning which the pious and
the great so widely differ. The prophetic office has a deeper foundation than
this, viz., in the testimony that it affords of a pervading Theocratic
ordering. All divine prophecy is based on speaking in
the name of Jehovah; it is a revealing that which comes from God the ruler of
the Kingdom. It therefore evidences the nearness of God, and when He comes again to dwell
with men, this nighness is evidenced by the re-bestowal of the gift of prophecy.
The reader is reminded of the affiliation of this prophetic order with the
Theocracy by the single fact, that the assumption of the prophetical office
without being divinely called, was (Michaelis, Com., arts. 252 and 253) treason to the State,
and hence the severity of the penalty, death. The ordinary reader, confining
his attention too exclusively to certain inspired ones (as the seventy elders,
etc.) and not comparing the Scriptures on the subject, is led
to form an incorrect opinion of the extent of this order in the former
commonwealth. Writers who have examined this feature (as Michaelis and Wines in their Coms.,
Calmet in “Diss. on the Schools of
the Hebrews,” sec. 11, etc.), say that they formed “a numerous body in the State.” Owing to the
infirmity of subordinate rulers, etc., we have intimations of pretenders
arising, which the future Theocracy, in virtue of its perfected ordering, is freed from.
OBSERVATION 13. The student will not fail to observe that the doctrine of the Kingdom,
embracing this realised Theocratic idea, is not dependent on the statement of Rev. 20:
1-6. This latter Scripture, so precious
in stating one of the means of its inauguration, etc., might
be entirely omitted without in the slightest degree affecting the abundant proof that covenants, predictions,
and promises afford. Hence we cannot but regard those
who so confidently affirm that our doctrine is founded on Rev. 20: 1-6 as
but slightly acquainted with it. The numerous Propositions
of this work, the logical procedure, step by step with the proof
attached, the history of the doctrine, with the declarations of its ancient and
modern upholders, the Scriptures produced from the Old and New Testaments -
elevate the [Page 600] Theocratic
idea into a cardinal and central one - into such a majestic proportion, that it
contains the manifestation of the Divine Purpose, that it is futile to attempt
to dwarf it into the narrow boundary suggested. The Pre-Millennial
[‘first’] resurrection is only a means necessary to secure a part
of the rulers of this Kingdom; the idea of the Kingdom is not to be
sought for in the means used for its re-introduction, but lies firmly
imbedded in the oath-bound
covenant of God.
The Jews always allied salvation with
the restoration of the
OBSERVATION 14. We need not enumerate the distinguishing blessings that will be restored in and be added to the
Theocracy, for these have been given (Propositions 36, 49, 105, 114, 116, 117, 119, 120, 122, 142, 143, 144, 146, 151, 154, 156, 157, 159, 167, 168, 169, 171, 173, 176, 182, 184, 196, 200, 202, 204, and others). These
representations, founded in God’s faithfulness, inspire us with the confident
hope that when this Theocracy is realised we shall receive far higher blessings
than we even forfeited at the fall, and this, that the Mighty King over us may Himself be honoured and praised
in and through us. Passing over the Divine Plan as it
culminates in this Kingdom, we have found not merely perfected redemption, but
a redemption which superadds Sonship, Kingship, and Priesthood - the highest,
most intimate, and enduring union with the Theocratic ruler - the most exalted conceivable relationship
with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and all this becomes a
priceless, [millennial
and] eternal inheritance. Under
its light and glory the nations of the earth shall experience the deliverance
and blessedness that a Theocracy alone is capable of bringing too a burdened,
groaning humanity.
Aside from the
gradual removal of the curse and the ultimate destruction of the last enemy after
the thousand years, etc., which has been sufficiently represented, we may confidently expect that in the
revelation of the majestic King, in whom [Page 601] the divine and human are united, and of the glorified rulers
made “equal unto angels,” [see Lk. 20: 36, R.V.] then the great underlying mysteries which for ages have eluded the grasp of the
theologian, philosopher, and scientist will be revealed. The relation e.g. that mind sustains
to matter - a mystery in man, and preserved such in order to keep man humble before
the higher mystery of God’s Omnipresent Will in and over natural law -will then
in the Person of “the Christ” and in the persons
of His associated rulers, receive its long wished for solution. The Scriptures
indicate this in the predictions representing the manifested power of the King
and His subordinates. Then, too, will be realised what Reuss (His. Ch. Theol. Apos. Age, p. 29) says of the Theocracy: “The fundamental and formative idea of the prophetic teaching
was that of the Theocracy.” (Why then change it by a
substitution?) “The prophets set forth as the
end or law of that national life, a state of society in which all the citizens
should be brought into a direct relation with Jehovah, accepting His Will as
the sole rule of their actions, whether collective or individual, and receiving
in return for this unbounded obedience, the promise of peculiar divine
protection.
OBSERVATION 15. Finally: “The Christ” is the crowning excellence of the
Theocracy; He is “the chief corner-stone.” “the Head of the corner,”
the Stone that crowns the apex of the building. The builders (Matt. 21: 42, 43, i.e.
the Jewish nation to whom the Kingdom was tendered by Jesus, and upon whose repentance, depended the securing of this building
- see (Propositions
54-59)
rejected this stone, and therefore others are called, and when the number
pre-determined by God are gathered (Propositions 65, 66, 124, etc.), then He becomes the
glorious Head-stone. Again we say, He is
“all and in all;” without Him the Theocracy and its blessings, as covenanted, could not possibly
exist. In “the Christship” (Propositions
205, 204,
199)
we have the fundamental idea of the Theocratic ordering, viz., God
again ruling as a King over the nations - an actual, real, accessible King.
Look at the representations of the prophets in this direction, and obtain in
overwhelming proof of the Divinity of Jesus and a correct view of the
requirements essential to a Theocratic King. He must indeed be,
as has been abundantly proven, David’s Son, and thus Human; but He must also be God, and thus able to rule Theocratically. The prophets insist upon this human nature,
and they press it as so essential that all men, Jews and Gentiles, have fully
admitted that “the Messiah” must be
a descendant of David’s. This Messiah is to be the Head of the restored
Theocracy. But see how the same prophets describe this
Ruler as “God,” as “the Lord God,” etc., and bestow upon Him - the Coming One - the
title, dignity, honour, and glory of God Himself. A multitude of passages which, similar to Zeph. 3: 15, 17, declare that when this Kingdom is
set up “the King of
Jesus Himself will greatly rejoice in
this Theocracy. As David’s Son and Lord, it is His inheritance and work. In it He sees the grand results of the travail of His soul, and
He is satisfied. In it He realises “the joy set before Him,” and He is exalted in honour
and glory. In it He is the centre of admiration and
praise, the love and devotion of the glorified, of the Jewish nation, and of
the Gentiles being drawn to Him. The restitution, blessings, and perpetuity of
His dominion, the constant realisation that He Himself is a flowing fountain of
happiness and delight to ransomed ones and to the nations of the earth, this
enables Him to rejoice evermore, through “the ages of
ages.” Evermore King, He is ennobled by His civil relationship; evermore
Priest, He is glorified by His religious Headship; evermore King-Priest, He is
exalted by the perfect Theocratic unity centered in His own Person and Reign.
-------
CONCLUSION
[Page 603]
THUS, by God’s grace,
we have passed over the great, leading Biblical doctrine of the
[Page 605]
It is proper to
acknowledge at the close of our labour
gratitude to God that He has brought believers to the knowledge of such truth,
and that once “aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the
covenants of promise” we “are made nigh by the blood of Christ;” and being “Christ’s,
then are Abraham’s seed and heirs according to promise.” We thank God that He has enabled us to lay hold upon His
oath-attested covenants, and by faith in a covenanted Christ to have confidence
and assurance in the fulfilment of His most gracious Word, so that when
brethren forsook and reproached us (a sad trial, to which the Saviour was no
exception) we still had great comfort. We thank Him that,
unlike some (Erasmus-like) who keep
silence, He put it into our heart to present His own rich treasures [and rewards] to others, its a token of gratitude, as
a kind of testimony to the Church and the world, as a source of encouragement
in the coming trial, although advised to sacrifice the best years of our life
by committing this work to the flames, on the ground of the Church’s hostility
to its expressed faith. We thank Him that often sorely
tempted, tried, discouraged - when through poverty much of this work was
written on leaves of books, old letters, and waste paper (so that Jonathan Edwards’s straits could be appreciated, when reduced to write his Freedom
of the Will on backs of letters and blank pages of pamphlets) - when depressed
at the prevailing unbelief and the few
in number with whom we could “take sweet counsel”
- when falsely accused of heresy, fanaticism, and held up to odium, and
influence sought to be lessened on account of Chiliasm, He was ever the
prayer-hearing and answering God, supplying our wants, giving strengthening views of the unity of Divine Purpose, and the
fulness of Jesus in redemption; imparting hope that as the work was designed to
promote the Father’s honour, the [beloved] Son’s glory, and the [Holy] Spirit’s praise, He would provide for its
publication; and allowing the sweet privilege of being among that number who
entertain, confess and proclaim
“The Blessed Hope,”
even
“His Appearing and Kingdom.”
FINIS*
* NOTE: All
three volumes of this arothor’s ‘30 years labour’
can be puschased at:-
www.icmbooks.co.uk