Table of Contents

Biography - W J Lowe

The Morning Star

The Church of the Living God

Nest in the Altar

Heard,.. seen,.. handled

Apocalypse

W. J. L. 1918

1918, W.J.L.

A Word on Galatians

Meeting Place

* * *

* * *

Choice of Faith

You must prove the Bible true before I accept it

Little children

Address at Quemerford

Emmaus

Are we a remnant?

Sought and Found

Letter to his father

Ancient Dissidence

Les Versions Nouvelles Du Nouveau Testament

La véritable traduction:

APPENDICE

W. J. Lowe - Some Works

William J. Lowe

This document may be found online at www.stempublishing.com

You are welcome to freely access and use this material for personal study or sending to other Bible students, compiling extracts for notes etc, but please do not republish without permission.

With the prayerful desire that the Lord Jesus Christ will use this God-given ministry in this form for His glory and the blessing of many in these last days before His coming. © Les Hodgett (contact@stempublishing.com) (2011)

Biography - W J Lowe

A Brief Account of the Life and Labours of the late W. J. Lowe.

London, C. A. Hammond, n.d. c 1927.

It is due to the beloved readers of the Letters of Interest that some notice should be made of the life and labours of our brother Mr. W. J. Lowe, who edited the Letters for so many years, and who passed away very quietly in his eighty-eighth year, in the early hours of September 29th, 1927, at his home 34 Woodside, Wimbledon, London, S.W.

He was born near Regent's Park, London, his parents being godly Church of England people. Even as a boy William Joseph Lowe gave abundant promise of the distinguished place he was destined to win in the estimation and affection of his fellows in after life. As a child he was for some time at school under the late Mr. J. G. Deck, the well-known hymn writer, who afterwards emigrated to New Zealand, and where his labours in the gospel were much used of God. W.J.L. was also at school at Tusculum, near Bideford, under Mr. William Hake, who afterwards became well known as the friend and companion of Mr. Robert Chapman of Barnstaple. The tutor to the boys in the upper classes was Mr. Henry Soltau, from whom W.J.L. received much scriptural instruction. During the years 1856-1857 he attended the Elm Grove Collegiate Institution, near Ealing, where he gained the highest distinctions; winning in the latter year the Silver Medal Prizes for Greek, Latin, French, German, Geometry and Algebra, with the highest marks for diligence and perseverance; all proving him to be possessed of natural abilities much beyond the average.

Besides his scholastic attainments, W.J.L. showed decided artistic talent as is seen by beautiful water-colour paintings he executed while at Elm Grove Institution. Sketches of engineering works in India, and of the country scenes there, also display the same skill.

His desire to keep free from worldly society while in India gave him time to indulge his taste in this direction, and also to study botany and make exquisite drawings of flowers in all their stages from bud to seed. His correspondence at that time also showed the same benevolence to those in need and to God's servants labouring in His vineyard, that characterised his later years.

It was very seldom that he would speak of anything in which he personally had any prominent share, but we remember with what happiness he would recall his conversion as a boy in his 'teens at the old Kennington Room in South London, through the late Mr. Leans, whose gifts and devotedness he much admired. There also he was received into christian fellowship, when Dr. Cronin and Colonel Langford were prominent men. He would speak also of the abiding influence of a visit of two or three weeks in those early days to the late Mr. W. Kelly in Guernsey, which was a turning point in some ways in his life, as also of a later visit on his return from India.

After leaving school, he studied civil engineering in London, and secured, soon after his mother's death, a most important post in India, for which he left via Southampton, in 1859, going round the Cape to Madras, by sailing ship. So deeply did his abilities impress those in authority, that we find him in full charge of very large contracts for the Madras Irrigation and Canal Company in India, engaged in extensive and costly works, building embankments across valleys to impound rivers, forming aqueducts and canals to distribute waters over sterile lands. On these works W.J.L. had many thousands of men under his control when he was but twenty-three years of age. It was in India that he first used his pen to give expression to his deep-seated love for the Lord's people. Three interesting volumes of the magazine he edited there for their edification are still preserved. His health, however, proved unequal to the climate of India, and the doctors ordered him to give up his post and return home.

Rest and attention in England and Switzerland mercifully had the desired effect, and at twenty-six years of age we find him perfecting his knowledge of French under an elderly sister in Switzerland of whose godliness and efficiency as a teacher he often spoke with gratitude to God; his object then being to go out to labour for the Lord in Quebec among the French-Canadians. It was at this time that he was thrown in the path of the late Mr. J. N. Darby, who, as a christian teacher, influenced so many young men in England, France, Germany and Switzerland by his gifts and quite exceptional insight into the truths of the Bible; whose oral sermons and lectures, as well as his writings, were affecting not only the professors and students of many schools and universities, like Geneva and Oxford, but the rank and file of God's people in many countries.

J.N.D. and others whom he had gathered around him at Pau were closely engaged at this time in the work of translating the scriptures into French, a work which afterwards extended to German, Dutch, Italian and English. The proof-sheets of the French New Testament where, at the first, casually passed to Mr. Lowe, to look over, and the number of discrepancies he found, and the value of the improvements he suggested, so surprised and impressed Mr. Darby that he said: "You are just the man we want here, you must now stop and help us."

Thus commenced a friendship and co-operation in service with J.N.D. of a world-wide influence, and which lasted till the latter's death in Bournemouth in 1882. Mr. Darby, in his later years often said that he knew of no one with the knowledge and general grasp of the truth in its detail, which W.J.L. possessed. Verily a great tribute coming from such a man!

Many of the older brethren will remember the part which W.J. Lowe took in conferences and meetings of brothers in early days, and although not so well known in England as in some places abroad, what he said never failed to arrest attention and to command the respect and approval of those who took the lead among the saints. He travelled and laboured for the Lord incessantly, and was well known in the gatherings in Belgium, France, Germany, Holland, Spain and Switzerland, not a few of which were the fruit of his own ministry. He also visited the United States and Canada several times.

He was married to Miss Ellen McAdam, the daughter of the late Mr. Christopher McAdam, of Notting Hill, on September 15th, 1885, after having known the family and co-operated in much service for the Lord for many years; the honeymoon being spent at Dillenburg, in Germany. Even at such a time our brother's preoccupation with the Lord's work was so absorbing that they did not reach Dillenburg till 10.30 p.m. on the 19th owing to visits to several gatherings in Holland on the way; the time at Dillenburg also being filled up with lectures, visits and meetings, as was his custom, including a four-days' conference at Elberfeld. It will interest our readers to see a copy of the entry regarding the meeting to commend them to the Lord on the day of their marriage. "It was quite full. J. S.Oliphant 56th hymn. Then W.T. Turpin and H. M. Hooke prayed. The latter very long and with great detail and power. Hymn 209th. R. spoke shortly on 1 Cor. 7: 22. The Lord's free man and Christ's servant. Hymn 173rd. Hooton prayed. Hymn 174th, verses 2 and 3. Then tea. Evening meeting. Mr. McAdam. Hymn 100th. Mr. Howe read Luke 9: 9, and John 4: 34-38. W. T. Turpin spoke on latter part connecting it with the Lord's ways with the woman."

After the death of Mr. C. McAdam (at St. Leonards-on-Sea) who was very well known, and who had laboured much for the Lord, especially in distributing help to the foreign labourers, Mr. Lowe took over this work, including the editing of the Letters of Interest. This he continued for nearly forty years till he had become a kind of institution among the saints. This varied service brought him into touch with God's people all over the world and entailed a mass of correspondence of which no one had any idea except those more immediately linked with him. The exigencies of this ceaseless toil at his desk, on behalf of the saints and labourers, far more than his travels or public work, were undoubtedly responsible for the breakdown of his memory in the early years of the late war.

The writer well remembers the first meeting with him. It was at the house of the late W.H. Broom, in Barnsbury, London, N., in 1889. Mr. Broom was a man to whose love and fatherly care large numbers of young men owed more than they ever realised. That day many of them had been invited to meet W.J.L. for whom W.H.B. had a deep regard. Mr. Lowe turned out to be a tall man lean of figure, with a dark long beard, thin hands, an unusually shaped head, diminutive pointed ears, somewhat careless of dress, and altogether a man of grave yet striking appearance. No one found him light or flippant in speech, but he was the most accessible of men. The young were always drawn to him in spite of the habit he had of asking them very personal and sometimes —what they would term— "uncomfortable questions": all in order to stir up their interest in the whole Bible. The secret of this, in some degree, was the touch of humour he could at times introduce, and which helped to disarm prejudice and put people at their ease. Some of his most interesting and effective dissertations on scripture were made at informal gatherings of young people. He would make all the allowance he could for people's ignorance or limitations; therefore, the poorest and simplest always welcomed him; but where, as sometimes happened, a brother would be disposed to air his knowledge, some dry or, perhaps, cutting remark would effectually close his mouth. Although he had a practical working knowledge of ten, if not eleven, languages, no one could suspect this in the least from his public ministry. The only time the writer remembers his using any Greek or Hebrew publicly, out of some hundreds of meetings with him, was at a large gathering in South Wales, composed of colliers and steel workers —converts of the Welsh revival, in 1906 and at which some ministers were present. His doing so seemed so novel and surprising. When asked for the reason afterwards, he simply answered, with twinkling eyes: "I thought I would give the ministers something to think about." He learnt Spanish during four brief visits to Spain.

Simplicity, directness and brevity in prayer always marked him. He could never suffer what he would term "long-winded prayers," or which were mere repetitions to God of well-known truths. But in private, or in the domestic circle, he would pray most affectionately for everybody and everything that came before him during the day, forgetting no one. His faith in God's word, in the power of prayer, and in the government of God was such as to put most of us to shame; but his dependence on the Lord and his settled practice of watching for the working of God, often caused him to be misunderstood or seem lukewarm or even slack; but behind which was deep concern and much looking to God. Times of sorrow in the church of God he would feel keenly, yet while many would be spending sleepless nights brooding over the havoc wrought by the enemy, the close of the day would find him, in the simplicity of a little child, able to cast it all on the Lord, and then go fast asleep.

The large place he held in the affections of a very wide circle of the Lord's people and on which he set much value was unique. In a great measure he entered into the spirit of the words "The saints in the earth and the excellent, in whom is all my delight." Certainly his labours on their behalf were abundant indeed, few, save those in closest touch with him were aware how abundant, for he ever sought to hide himself, while seeking diligently to honour his Lord and Master.

The reading of his carefully-kept diaries would amaze anyone unacquainted with his life. They disclose activities so varied and unceasing, in long journeys on diligence or donkey, in train or on foot; by day and by night; preaching, visiting, correspondence, and writing for the press, that they remind one of John Wesley's journals more than anything else. Often does he speak of being tired but never of taking any rest or holiday. The habit of early rising which marked J.N.D. had evidently laid hold of those who worked with him. It is no wonder, therefore, that our esteemed brother is found habitually rising between 4.30 and 5.30 a.m. and very frequently attending daily meetings for prayer or reading the word between 6 o'clock and 7.45 taking long walks to hold bible readings before lunch, preaching or having bible readings in the afternoon with visits worked in between, gospel preaching at nights in all sorts of places to large and small companies, followed by talks with those interested; then long walks or rides (sometimes till midnight) to reach his destination for the night, only to start again early the next morning. We see him sleeping in tents, barns, station premises and houses of all sorts and conditions. By such means did he endear himself to the hearts of God's people and stir them into active interest in "the things concerning Himself."

While it could be truly said that he was a man of knowledge —intimate alike with his Bible and general subjects —it was as a man of prayer that he shone most. He would, up to the last, pray publicly two or three times at the prayer meeting, even though the consciousness of his failing faculties deterred him from doing much more. He would pray earnestly, especially for the young, that they might "grow in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ" and for the saints in Egypt for whom he had a special love.

His pastoral work combined with the distribution of monies entrusted to him for the labourers, and the Letters of Interest, so occupied him, that comparatively little of his written ministry is found in English, although there is more in French. The booklets in existence are nevertheless all of great value on the subjects dealt with, e.g., The House of God, Life and Propitiation, The Choice of Faith, his papers in Words of Help, and some of the older Magazines, and in Le Salut de Dieu, the French periodical which he edited for many years, but now is conducted by Dr. Périer in Paris. Some of his most valuable writings also remain in his introductions to the various issues of Letters of Interest. Controversy of any kind was repugnant to his temperament, and he would never enter into it unless compelled. When he did so his papers— following on J.N.D.'s habit —took the form of helpful expositions of scripture bearing on the subject in hand, rather than of dialectics aimed at scoring over opponents. He was always careful to substantiate any statement of doctrine he made by quoting the scriptural sources from which it was derived, a practice we would do well to follow in our day.

The following is a copy of the entry in Mr. Lowe's diary under April 2nd, 1881, concerning Mr. Darby on whom he waited much during his last illness at the house of the late H.A. Hammond, in Bournemouth. It is not only an entry of great interest, but all those who were privileged to know Mr. Lowe will recognise how closely he followed J.N.D.'s wise advice: —Afternoon. J.N.D. took my hand and drew me to him to kiss him, thanking me most heartily for all cooperation in his work, and said: 'We have worked together and rejoiced together. God bless you.' Then a minute after: 'Work with the younger brethren, occupying their hearts with Christ.' Then shortly after 'Walk with Christ and with the brethren.' I said: 'The only way to walk with the brethren is to walk with Christ, is it not? ' 'Yes.' he said, 'and vice versa… I can only commend you to God and the word of His grace.' "

Having thus laboured so much with J.N.D., especially on Bible translation, he largely shared the zest and delight which the latter found therein, in view of the help and protection it would yield to the poor of the flock as the days grew more difficult. J.N.D. repeatedly stated that it was for their benefit more than anything else that the arduous task was undertaken. It is not recognised sufficiently that the "New Translation" embodies important features which make it unique as a version; being the work of men who had great love for the Lord and for the whole church of God, irrespective of name or system; men to whom the Holy Spirit had given exceptional insight into the truths of scripture and a zealous desire to themselves walk in the light thereof; who united sound scholarship and sober judgment with painstaking toil and prayer. Therefore it is not surprising that the beloved subject of this notice should defer, as he always did, to the authority of this version above any other. Yet he often said that J.N.D.'s respect for the Authorised Version was so pronounced that if the latter had lived to produce another edition of the "New Translation" it would in diction and phraseology have followed much more closely the A.V. than it does now. Such facts should weigh with those who lean towards some of the modern, novel, and often questionable translations now advertised so much. It was, however, Mr. Lowe's special grief that a quantity of valuable Notes which the translators had compiled for the French Version of the New Testament (new translation), from the more recently discovered MSS., could not be embodied in the English Version also.

Having known the late F.E. Raven intimately for many years, Mr. Lowe was more fully aware than most of the exceptional sense of the value of words which F.E.R. possessed. It was all the more painful, therefore, to him in 1890 and onwards, to find disciples of F.E.R. suppressing the godly exercises and fears of their brethren regarding the latter's errors, by stating that he had a metaphysical mind, and therefore his words should not be taken too seriously. Mr. Lowe viewed such assertions as so many efforts of Satan to hide heinous error as to Christ and it was in much grief that he felt constrained to combat these heresies by his pen and many personal talks with their author. The world-wide effects of this grievous development of leaven, in the very midst of those who ought to have been the best instructed saints, alas still continue: and Mr. Lowe's repugnance of this teaching remained undiminished to the end. We therefore would venture to here appeal to those who are still identified with these errors, both in the so-called "London" and "Glanton" associations, to heed Galatians 5:9, and, with godly zeal, clear themselves publicly from the leaven for their Lord's sake.

W.J.L.'s simplicity, and dependence on the guidance of the Lord, which has already been mentioned, came out nowhere more conspicuously than when discussing what may be termed "church questions." He stressed the importance of the consciences of all those affected being reached and touched by God Himself, of their feeling their individual responsibility in any assembly action, rather than acting mechanically in a mass. The two words "administration" and "organisation" were abominations to him, whenever introduced to regulate, either from without or from within, the conduct of God's assembly. No one appreciated these qualities in their proper sphere more than he did, but he dreaded their operation in the meeting because, in his judgment, they tended to destroy individual conscience, and to bring in human expedients, which invariably militate against, if they do not smother the operations of the Spirit in the gathering, especially in settling assembly difficulties, which difficulties, he held, the Lord often allows to arise in order to perfect our spiritual education, and for the establishing in the truth of all those concerned, in a way they could not otherwise learn.

On the other hand, the importance of giving practical expression to the truth of the one body— of the assemblies acting consistently with that truth; of our considering what was due to the consciences of our brethren in all our actions, were to him fundamental matters. He attached much more importance to all meetings of an open character, such as 1 Corinthians 14 insists on, than to set and often prearranged lectures because such meetings produced exercise of heart before God, allowed room for the spontaneous guidance of the Lord in the midst of His own, and for the use and development of the varied gifts He has given for the assembly's proper direction and edification. But where a brother abused this God-given liberty in such meetings, by taking up time to no edification, it would trouble him much.

He placed great importance on personal godliness and devotedness to Christ. The points of his varied ministry were most often directed to produce these virtues, although some would erroneously credit him with undue fondness at times for doctrinal knowledge, and say he was rather deep. If his knowledge of, and delight in, the word of God seemed to us so remarkable and often shamed us, this is not very surprising, for had he not hammered out every line of it on the anvil of careful prayerful study? In order to stimulate the young to read and re-read their Bibles from cover to cover, he would occasionally give them leaves from his own experiences. It seems that very early in life the importance of studying, rather than skimming, the Bible had laid hold of him: "And," said be, "I would read chapter after chapter by the hour. Then, sometimes I would ask myself 'What have I really gathered out of all this?' Often one would have to wearily confess 'Nothing.' But still I persevered for months and even for years. Then a remarkable thing took place. My Bible suddenly became a living book, a complete whole, whose various parts seemed to spring together to explain and supplement one another, till the O.T. as well as the N.T. became invested with the most absorbing, and sometimes thrilling interest. Therefore, stick to the reading of the Word. If you do not seem to get much out of it, still read on and on. In time, all that will change and give place to immense profit and spiritual pleasure, both to yourselves and those around you."

The following are extracts from some of Mr. Lowe's most recent letters. What he says in them cannot be too deeply taken to heart. The punctuation is his:—

(1) "As to your questions: the souls are more to me than their associations… The sad thing is they have lost Christ, who is the only key to the Gospel or Epistle of John; and consequently they seek to realise an idea of life eternal from their own feeling or experience instead of enjoying it as set forth in Christ in present relationship with the Father." (November 16th, 1917.)

(2) "We must not forget Isaiah 8: 12-14. If the object in view is confederation in any sense as giving importance to those so joined together, and a place of consideration amongst christians in general, it will simply end in a final and definite collapse of any real testimony to the truth, God-given eighty or ninety years ago, not for our glory in any sense, but for Christ's sake. This is a solemn and heart-searching consideration." (1917.)

(3) "My heart trembles for … The want of consideration of the consciences of others and determination to seek for big meetings and an extended public testimony has not yet been modified… The principle of confederation is human, and is all against Christ and against the 'two or three' gathered to Him. The principle is, wanting to be 'somebody' when before God, we can only hang our heads with shame, slowly learning our unfaithfulness and that we are nothing and 'nobody' " (March, 1917.)

(4) "We must expect increasing looseness in the last days; but for everything there is a resource in the Lord, and those who look to Him, and keep His word, will never find Him to fail them in the time of need. Faith often needs trying, in order that it may be approved to His glory. But dependence is the great lesson of the wilderness." (December, 1919.)

(5) "In the ordinary matters of this life, as to circumstances, etc., faith's path is not to choose, but to give oneself quietly over to God's ordering for us… In spiritual things, the contrary holds good: God expects us to choose what is most excellent in the path which He graciously opens up to us (Eph. 5: 15-17)…"

(6) "I have ventured a few modifications, the chief one being to use the passive voice as much as possible —always a great help in this department of our business. Please not to let my name appear on ANY account. It is a rule I have followed for forty-eight years or so, and it is certainly not the moment to change now… A good rule is to keep the chief point of a sentence as near as possible to its verb." (July, 1921.)

(7) "I have not shifted my ground that I know of, but I do desire to show sympathy and fellowship, as far as one can, with those who are simply and sincerely walking with God. But Jeremiah's caution in Jer. 9: 4, is as true and needful now, as ever it was, and if I have one thing more than another in abomination, it is party-making… But scarcely anybody is careful enough to pass on a report exactly as he heard it, without any qualification. I abominate all 'parties' and only know 'the truth and nothing but the truth' to be the sole bond of fellowship… (November, 1920.)

(8) "As to work in the country gatherings, we can only wait on the Lord (Ps. 27: 14). It is good in every way. There is a tendency to run when not sent, and also loss to the soul through being preoccupied with work, instead of quietly waiting to see what He is doing, and fall in with that. Do you not think so? How little we know of the discipline, which the Lord, in His tender mercy, provides for us in the way, in order that our souls may be kept in a healthful condition, fit for passing on His messages whatever they may be." (November, 1920.)

(9) "My time is over. It has been a pleasure to serve the saints so far, and the Lord has been very merciful… I sometimes think it is possible to overstep the mark in the matters of fellowship and non-fellowship (see 1 Cor. 5:10). We need wisdom in order to draw the line aright, and God's mercy is very great, while we have much to learn concerning the path of wisdom in this world… How about 'offscouring' in Lament 3:45, and 1 Cor. 4: 13?" (December, 1919.)

(10) "But we have to wait on the Lord to open the way, when we have some special service laid upon our hearts. Things gradually settle down. Paul took with him Barnabas. Half of our work, to speak very moderately, consists, or should consist, in fellowship. The Lord shows that sower and reaper are not the same persons (John iv. 38). It is no use for us to make rules of our own as to 'our work,' but to encourage fellowship in a practical way is very important. One man makes bricks, another builds with them; self-sacrifice looks very attractive; but it is better to put our hand to the cart and shove it along for half-an-hour than it is to be able to say: I made the cart and I shoved it and I brought it home. What do you think? " (June, 1919.)

(11) "What a wonderful hope is before us —nothing short of our blessed Lord Himself. May we be found watching according to the close of Mark 13. Eph. 4 'one hope.' Col. 1: 27. In Hebrews 10: 37, the qualifying word for 'little' is repeated giving the force of "ever so little." And it is reinforced by what follows: 'will come, and will not tarry.' Very remarkable words, are they not?" (April, 1922.)

(12) "During all my life I have never felt as I have done lately, what the deep sufferings of the blessed Lord were on thLes Hodgett —their enormity, their terribleness— at the hand of God, of Satan, and man, as well as in making expiation for all the sins of His people." (December, 1922.)

The funeral, which took place at Gap Road Cemetery, Wimbledon, on October 3rd, was attended by a large and representative company of the Lord's people, and the fellowship was truly fraternal. In the chapel hymn 30 (App.) was sung. Our brother Th.R. prayed, thanking God for our brother's long service, his faithfulness to the Lord, and the example of his life. H.L. then read Matt. 25: 14-21, Luke 17: 7-10, and 1 Thess. 2: 19-20, and pointed out how thoroughly our dear departed brother's unselfish life exemplified these scriptures. Hymn 287 having been sung, our brother W.Ry. read 2 Sam. 3: 38-39, and carried our hearts (1) in comparing our departed brother to a prince and a great man fallen in Israel that day; (2) in stressing that we who were left were "weak" in ourselves, though anointed by grace and set in the place of kings and priests of God; and (3) though the wickedness and hardness of the enemies of Christ — the evildoers against the truth, are active on every hand, yet we have, in our weakness, a precious resource in Christ, who still abides with His own — the blessed One of whom it is written "Thou remainest," "Thou art the same." Th.R. then read Acts 20: 28-38, and in mentioning how truly apostolic in spirit was dear W.J.L.'s service, he read a communication which he had received from a brother confirming this: —"The intensity of the blank is softened by the prolonged period of the break-up of the earthly house of this tabernacle, but the effects of his long and abundant labours in the cause of the truth will yet abide, more so in other lands perhaps than here."

"I have a note of his, written in 1920, in which he alludes to his travels through France with Jacques B. after the Franco-German war of 1870 — fifty years previously, when they visited the assemblies to learn how they had fared under the pressure of the invader's heel, and he remarks: 'So time flies, and we are still waiting for the coming of the Lord.' " Another hymn brought the indoor meeting to a close.

At the graveside after prayer, the hymn "For ever with the Lord" was sung. Then dear J.H.L. prayed and fervently thanked the Lord for the "blessed hope" of His return which brightened up such a moment with divine joy. Hymn 90 was sung with much feeling at the end:—

"Glory, honour, praise and power

Be unto the Lamb for ever.

Jesus Christ is our Redeemer,

Hallelujah! — Praise we the Lord."

Communications received from many places express the sense of the great loss sustained by the church of God in the departure of our much beloved W.J.L.

One brother from the Continent fully indicates the feeling of the saints when he writes: "We are thankful to the Lord for calling home His dear and faithful servant, although we feel very deeply the church's loss. What a welcome for him in that place of ineffable bliss, from the One whom he served with such remarkable constancy, energy and faithfulness for more than sixty years. He was a man of faith, wonderfully devoted to the Lord's interests, and the preaching of the Word to saints and sinners. He will have a full reward for his labour of love and self-denying service. I have known him for the last forty-four years. When a youth of seventeen I heard him speak for the first time on Num. 4, and ever since have deeply enjoyed his ministry and friendship. He was used for the conversion of many souls in France and Switzerland, and the building up and strengthening in the truth of numbers of saints. He used to say in later years that he remembered with special joy the sweet fellowship he had in gospel preaching in his younger days with my dear departed father some sixty years ago. He was a great friend of ours, and I would be thankful to be with you to-day for the funeral. Soon the Lord will come and our departed ones will be raised from their graves and together we shall meet our Blessed Lord on the cloud to be for ever with Him."

T.W.B. writes: "The work he commenced in Belgium about the year 1878 has borne much fruit. Many happy expressions of gratitude for his love and devotion are still heard to-day among Belgian saints." T.N.V. of The Hague, writes: —"How often in years gone by he spoke to us as young people! How great was his love for the bible! If such men are taken away from us, we feel the loss greatly. A great endowment is taken away this day out of our lives. I remember how often Mr. Lowe was in our midst and awakened our love for the whole bible, not for the New Testament only, but for the Old Testament also. He was always so simple, and full of questions to young people, in order to make them think. But we are glad that the Lord Whom he loved so much has taken His faithful servant to Himself."

The Glory in the Cloud.*

(Exodus 16: 10).

Now freed — no more a slave — 'tis God has saved thy soul,

Proud Egypt's army lies where those deep waters roll,

God wrought alone, not man; His arm the mighty slew,

His mighty power shone forth where I my weakness knew.

But now no place of rest my straining vision greets:

Is this blank barrenness th' exchange from Egypt's sweets?

Is there no food, no drink, through all this desert waste?

Is Marah's bitter well all that my soul must taste?

'Tis true, God showed the tree which made the bitter sweet,

And gently led His own to Elim's glad retreat,

Not less this barren waste doth yet with grief oppress

My heart, so slow to learn for suffering to bless.

But stay, what do I see? What is yon glorious cloud?

What hidden light of God doth penetrate its shroud?

True forecast of the light which once from Jesus streamed,

Fit dwelling-place of rest prepared for His redeemed.

Upon the "holy hill" without a veil between,

For one short moment blest, by favour'd eyes 'twas seen,

When Jesus gave a glimpse of God the Father's plan,—

Glory divine revealed, and shining in a MAN!

This glory cheers my heart and lights my pilgrim way,

Reveals how ev'ry trial prepareth for that day

Which soon with joy shall crown the sorrows of the road,

Explaining outward grief that hides the hand of God.

By tribulation thus my heart's for glory form'd:

How shall I count my days, — all by His love transform'd?

"Years of His own right hand," I find them now to be,

For GOD delights to show what HE can do for me.

Now shall my way-worn harp give forth a clearer sound;

"Tis in the desert, Lord, Thou makest to abound

That grace which e'er shall lead my chasten'd soul along:

Then let no loosen'd string henceforth afflict my song.

E'en death, in his approach, will bring no dread, no fear;

Jesus, not death, I see; not earth, but heaven is near:

He fills my heart anew with a more glorious note;

Though high the waters rise, GOD keeps my ark afloat.

The sting of death is gone since Jesus died and rose,

The captive's chains are riv'n, and vanquished all my foes;

E'en Satan and the grave must cow before His word,

Unwilling yield each saint in likeness to his Lord.

Yet more,—that glorious cloud the wilderness endears,

E'en in its dreariest wastes my drooping spirit cheers:

Thy footprints there, O Lord, by its blest light I trace,

There, Thou'lt unfold to me new secrets of Thy grace.

The desert now, for me, gleams with a new-found joy;

The heart Thy hand has freed Thou wholly wilt employ,

Thou leav'st me in the place where Thou, my Lord, hast been,

And I've to learn THY path amidst this weary scene.

Thus treading in Thy steps, I follow on and see

Th' o'erflowing bitter cup, man, heartless, brought to Thee,

So blind to all Thy love,—slave of his wicked will,—

But Thou didst drink it up, and then… 'twas Thine to fill!

O fitted "Man of Sorrows" a human heart to melt,

And fill with joy a soul which ne'er true joy had felt,

How didst Thou make our ruin the servant of Thy love!

How take a dying thief up WITH THYSELF above!

Midst hatred love-provoked, midst evil only good;

Thy meekness wins the heart Thou'st wash'd in Thine own blood;

In secret teach me, Lord, the movements of Thy grace,

And thus prepare my soul to gaze upon Thy face.

Keep me, my God, in peace, where Marah's tree was found,

And feed me on that "root out of the barren ground,"

Thy substance clothed in flesh, Thine own effulgent light,

Shine in and through my heart, mid darkness make me bright.

Here for a "little while," I wait Thy rest above

When I shall see the SON, and fully know Thy love;

Crowning the life day's work, Thou hast in grace allow'd

Thou'lt bring with Him Thy saints in glory on the cloud.

W. J. Lowe.

*The above poem found among Mr. Lowe's papers is inserted as being the only example of his poetry in English, so far as is known: although several are found in French and Spanish. It reveals his deep-seated feelings, as the true pilgrim he was, pressing onward towards Christ in glory as the goal and magnet of his life.

The Morning Star

“The Morning Star”

Christ Our Hope

Words of Help from the Scripture of Truth, volume 1 1912.

Introductory

Paradise was not long enjoyed by our first parents. Through listening to the suggestion of Satan, they disobeyed the solitary commandment which had been given to test their dependence upon God in the scene where everything was prepared for their happiness, and where communion with their Creator would have been their supreme joy. All the other creatures, being by their nature incapable of this blessing, had been made subject to Adam, according to God’s first purpose, and God brought them to him to give them names (Gen. 1: 26-28; Gen. 2: 19-20). That dominion remained to him after his fall; but Paradise, where it had been for an instant enjoyed with God, was lost to him for ever, — lost through his disobedience. Into the details of God’s subsequent ways with Adam we cannot enter, our present object being to draw attention to the fact that in judging the “serpent”, God intimated that his final destruction would be wrought by the woman’s SEED. She had been, in the first instance, seduced by Satan; and through her, the Deliverer was to come. Besides that, He was to be characterised by the obedience in which both she and Adam had failed.

Such is the real meaning of the words in Psalm 40: 6, “Mine ears hast Thou opened”.* The true sense of this figure in its moral bearing is given by the Greek version, quoted in Hebrews 10: 5, “A body hast Thou prepared Me”. The blessed Lord took His human body, “made of a woman, made under the law” (Gal. 4: 4), in order that obedience might become possible for One who not only had made all things, but sustained and upheld them all “by the word of His power” (Heb. 1: 3). Before taking human form, He had never been in a position to obey; but having taken it, His delight was to carry out to the uttermost the Father’s will who had sent Him, as it is indeed expressed in the words of the Psalm, “Lo, I COME: in the volume of the book it is written of Me, I delight to do Thy will, O My God: yea, Thy law is within My heart” (see John 6: 38; John 8: 29). Ever subject, He learned “obedience by the things which He suffered” (Heb. 5: 8; Isa. 50: 4-7).

{*The word “opened” as stated in the margin of some Bibles means literally “digged” or “hollowed out”; an allusion no doubt to the way in which a potter finishes off his work, by digging out of the clay the ‘‘ears’’ (or handles) which are needed to complete the circular part of the base made upon the wheel. The hearing ‘‘ear” signifies obedience (Prov. 4: 1-4, 20; Prov. 20: 12).}

His supreme act of obedience was His death, when He took upon Himself the penalty attached to Adam’s disobedience, and its consequences: “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous” (Rom. 5: 19). Those words never could be true of any of Adam’s seed according to the flesh. And here let us note how both the divine and human nature of our blessed Lord is clearly established in a way that reaches the heart and conscience of all who can say, He “loved me, and gave Himself for me” (Gal. 2: 20). It will be our joy in eternity.

It is therefore not surprising that the coming of Christ, as expressed in those words, “Lo, I come”, is one of the most prominent truths on the pages of the Old Testament. We find it both in direct and positive statements, and also in figures and in types which proclaim unequivocally not only His personal coming, but also His death and resurrection; for “without shedding of blood is no remission” (Lev. 17: 11; Heb. 9: 22).

As time went on, the unfolding of these blessed truths became more complete in details, as in Isaiah 53 and the end of Daniel 9; but for various reasons, they remained more or less obscure. They were difficult to reconcile with other passages which spoke of His kingdom, power, and glory. The Lord Himself began to unfold them to His astonished disciples from the moment of His undertaking the last journey from Galilee to Jerusalem. He reminded them again of His death, at the last supper, on the night in which He was betrayed; and, again, after His resurrection, He showed how the Scriptures set it forth (Luke 24: 6, 25-47).

It is remarkable that, in the gospel history, not one of the disciples asked Jesus an explanation as to how sins could be righteously forgiven, nor as to the reason for His dying. The scribes and Pharisees reasoned in their hearts when they heard Him say, “thy sins be forgiven thee”; but, not believing in His Deity, they treated it as “blasphemy” (Mark 2: 5-12; Luke 7: 49). No doubt they all believed, from Old Testament Scriptures, that there was such a thing as forgiveness of sins. It had been first proclaimed on Mount Sinai, in the very spot from whence the Ten Commandments had been promulgated. It was given in answer to Moses’ intercession after the first commandment of all had been violated in a way which trampled under foot God’s goodness as well as His power, and also after Moses had broken the tables divinely made and graven; for he was overcome when he saw the extent to which the Israelites had debased themselves in presence of the golden calf. But Moses interceded, and God answered him; such was His grace then; and the moment was well suited for establishing the basis of future access into God’s presence afterwards, figured by the blood sprinkled on and before the mercy-seat (Lev. 16). Thenceforward, the faithful could say with the Psalmist, “There is forgiveness with Thee, that Thou mayest be feared” (Ps. 130: 4). Forgiveness was an established fact, though as yet unaccounted for, and the blessedness of one forgiven could be celebrated, as by David in Psalm 32. But what the needed sacrifice was, or when it was to be offered, had not as yet been clearly understood. Even John the Baptist did not know it, though by the Spirit he had pointed out “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1: 29). Only the Lord Himself could reveal it, and He only did so when the appointed moment had arrived to carry out God’s will.

Many other features of the coming of Christ are set forth in the Old Testament. And these required time for making them known generally. He is the Prophet, Priest, and King. Personally, we find these typically in Abraham, Moses, and David; and the gospels of Mark, Luke, and Matthew correspond thereto respectively. Moreover, in Abraham, we find most particularly the fundamental principle of justification on the principle of faith. It is set forth in Romans 4. Not only so, but the portion of those justified through faith is shown to be heavenly, by the words which directed Abraham’s attention to the stars, saying, “So shall thy seed be”. How, where, or in what circumstances his seed was to be like the stars of heaven was not then stated,* nevertheless there was, in the words used, a present divine purpose for the blessing of Abraham’s own soul, as is shown in Hebrews 11: 14-19. This is why the saints of the present economy of grace are called “partakers of the heavenly calling”. The gospel cannot be properly preached now without insisting on the Saviour’s present place in heaven (Acts 3: 21), which, in His person, set forth God’s purpose of having many sons in glory. There it is that Jesus can say in the fullest sense, according to His own heart’s desire, “Behold I and the children which God hath given Me”. (Heb. 2: 5-15; Heb. 3: 1; John 17: 24).

{*God gave a further intimation of its meaning to Daniel (Dan. 12: 3). Compare with Genesis 15: 6. Righteousness was Abraham’s portion from God as soon as he believed, but it was reserved for others to turn “many” to it, so that the heavenly “seed” might be manifested, as well as their consequent “shining” for the glory of God.}

All the Scriptures which speak of Christ’s power over this earth, when the judgment — over and over again predicted — must be carried out by Him, will also surely have their fulfilment. But even then, the judgment will not be unmixed with grace; for He is Priest as well as King, “and He shall be a Priest upon His throne”, when He shall “bear the glory” (Zech. 6: 13; Ps. 72).

This supposes His coming again to this earth. He insisted particularly on His return, in speaking to His disciples before He left them, and it was definitely promised by angelic instrumentality when He went up from their midst on the Mount of Olives (John 16: 16-22; Acts 1: 11).

It is well to bear in mind, in reading the Old Testament, that its primary intention was to reach the consciences of those to whom it was first delivered, so that they might walk with God by faith in His written Word, and not by their own estimate of passing events.

At the same time, prophetic announcements were, as Peter says, not “of any private interpretation”; that is, they were by no means confined to instruction adapted to the particular circumstances which gave rise to them. “Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost”, and had, by diligent inquiry, to learn that the Spirit was testifying to Christ, and consequently to future events which reached far beyond anything that their actual knowledge of God’s plans and purposes could enable them to grasp (1 Peter 1: 9-12; 2 Peter 1: 20-21). Daniel himself “fainted, and was sick certain days”, and had to record that “none understood” the vision that was shown to him (Dan. 7: 28; Dan. 8: 27).

All predictions of that which was to take place were necessarily partial, though sufficient to accomplish their object; not by flattering the intelligence, but appealing to the conscience of those who heard them. We have the advantage of beginning at the point to which the Old Testament saints looked forward, namely, the sufferings of Christ, which were needed to accomplish redemption. They could celebrate the blessedness of forgiveness as the only possible ground of walking happily with God, but none of them could point to the finished work of the Redeemer as their own start in a new life, to which they could look back. Whereas we, having the cross before our souls, can now enjoy to the full the divinely-given expressions of the blessedness that flows from it (Ps. 32: 1-2; Ps. 130: 3-6; Rom. 4: 3-8).

Faith is now, as it ever was, the only principle for a walk that is pleasing to God, such as Enoch’s. And faith is formed and nourished by revealed truth. The principle is the same for all time (Heb. 6: 17-20; Heb. 11: 4-6). But at any given moment of the world’s history, only so much of the truth could be really made use of as had a direct bearing upon the circumstances of the time being. By this means true exercise of conscience toward God was produced, and the soul was animated by the hope set before it (Heb. 6: 11-12).

Abraham, for instance, had promises for this world, but his portion here was to live as a pilgrim and a stranger, while waiting for the things promised. We, knowing accomplished redemption, have other promises, heavenly in their character, for the full realisation of which we wait, though we are already made “partakers of the divine nature”, and our calling is “heavenly” in principle (2 Peter 1: 3-4, and 1 Peter 1: 3-5).

The above remarks, though short, will, we trust, suffice to explain why it is that, in the Old Testament writings, the first coming of Christ to this world, and His return in glory to set up His kingdom, are often treated as one single event, both advents being referred to in the same verse. The passage which the Lord read from Isaiah 61 in the synagogue at Nazareth is a case in point (Luke 4: 18-19).* His purpose being to show from the Scripture what was the object and character of His ministry in Galilee, He read only so much of it as referred to His first coming, and “closed the book” in the middle of the second verse, when He came to words which spoke of a future “day of vengeance”.

{*The adaptation to the day of Pentecost, of Joel’s prophecy, is another instance (Joel 2: 28-32; Acts 2: 16-21).}

Elsewhere, as for instance in the latter halves of Psalm 14 and Psalm 53, we do find indications of two “comings”, the first in grace and suffering, the second in judgment. But, as a rule, there was no need to speak more definitely at the time when these Scriptures were written, their essential object being to insist upon Messiah’s personal coming to this earth.

He is the “anointed one” whose throne God was about to set upon His holy hill of Zion (Ps. 2: 1-6). His authority must eventually be owned in the place where He was rejected and so suffered for us;* and for His “glorious appearing” every loyal soul, whether he belongs to this Christian dispensation or not, must wait with a longing heart. Paul did so, not expecting his “crown of righteousness” until that day shall come (2 Tim. 4: 6-8; Titus 2: 13).

{*That the coming manifested glory of the Lord in His kingdom is the appointed counterpart of His sufferings here, is abundantly shown by the accounts of the Transfiguration in the first three gospels. Compare also Luke 23: 42-43).}

Nothing is more definite, all through Scripture, than the Lord’s personal coming to this earth. The first intimation of it on the occasion of Adam’s fall and the consequent judgment of the serpent, is given in those striking words, “thou shalt bruise His heel” (Gen. 3: 15). And the closing chapters of the Old Testament remind the faithful among His ancient people (how treated as “Lo-ammi,” Hosea 1: 9; Hosea 2: 23), that the Lord whom they seek for shall suddenly come to His temple (Mal. 3: 1). Indeed the returned captives in Zerubbabel’s time had to be assured that the builder of the only temple that can have a permanent duration must be the Lord* who will “be a priest upon His throne”, true Melchizedek, “the Son of David, the Son of Abraham”; Son of man, and Son of God (Zech. 6: 12-13; Ps. 8: 4; Ps. 80: 17; Ps. 110: 4; Dan. 7; 1 Chron. 17: 13-14; Matt. 1: 1; Luke 3: 38).

{*Presented as “the Branch” i.e. the Son of man who should “grow up out of His place” (compare Luke 2: 40, 52).}

Besides His personal coming into the world, His death is abundantly set forth, not only in type, as by the sacrifices which are everywhere found in the Old Testament from Abel’s onwards (see Heb. 11: 4 & Heb. 12: 24), but also in direct testimony, as in Ps. 16: 10-11, Ps. 22: 15, Ps. 102: 23-24; Isa. 53; Dan. 9: 26, etc. And death was to be followed by resurrection. He “showed Himself alive after His passion” to the “apostles whom He had chosen” during forty days, before He went up in their sight from the Mount of Olives (Luke 24: 50-51; Acts 1: 2-3, 9-10, 12). And to that spot He must return; His “feet shall stand” there (Zech. 14: 4). So that in every way Christ’s return to this earth is abundantly guaranteed.

The last prophecy of the Old Testament, addressed to those who fear Jehovah’s name, presents the Messiah as “the Sun of righteousness” who shall “arise with healing in His wings”. Yet it does not omit the mention of judgment which must also take place at that time, and burn up the wicked (Mal. 4: 1-3; compare Matt. 25: 31, 46). The coming of Elijah the prophet, to prepare the people for that day, is foretold in the same passage, so that grace might run its course instead of judgment. But the Lord, in referring to it, showed His disciples that for those who “could receive it”, Elijah’s mission had been already fulfilled by John the Baptist, who was sent of God to prepare the way of His own Son, by leading the people to repentance (Mal. 3: 1, Mal. 4: 1-6; Matt. 9: 10-14; Luke 1: 67-79; John 1: 6). From this point of view the most important part of Christ’s work was already accomplished at His first coming (see Ps. 40: 7-8; John 17: 4-5), and His present glory with the Father is the answer to it. Indeed, all John’s gospel makes the Lord’s death exceedingly prominent, for without it no one could ever have part with Him in His glory, nor could He have prepared a place for any in His Father’s House (John 12: 24, John 14: 2-3).

He was indeed “the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1: 29), but the Baptist, though divinely instructed to point this out, was unable to tell any one of those who came to him that their sins had been forgiven; nor could he at all understand why Jesus should take a place with those who had confessed their sins at the Jordan (Matt. 3: 14). His mission was simply to put God’s seal, as it were, by baptism on those who, by their confession, took their place before God as sinners; then he was able to direct their thoughts to One who was to come after, and who alone could baptize them with the Holy Ghost (Mark 1: 1-8). For that, however, it was needful that Jesus should, in the first place, ascend to heaven (Mark 16: 19; John 16: 7; Acts 1: 4, 5; Acts 2: 1-4, 33). The Lord hinted that to Nicodemus when He intimated to him that He had “heavenly things” to communicate; and He could not speak to him of eternal life, until He had first shown the necessity of His being “lifted up” upon the cross (John 3: 12-15; John 8: 28; John 12: 31-33). His death opened up the way to glory “above”, in the Father’s house, not to Jews only, but to Gentiles — both being included in the words “all” and “whosoever”. The “other sheep” were Gentiles (John 10: 14-16).

Henceforward every hope, whether for the enjoyment of the FATHER’S HOUSE in company with the SON, or for the accomplishment of the promises made to the fathers by the prophets (Heb. 1: 1), depends upon the return to this earth of Him who, in His cross, laid the foundation of every blessing in store for this sin-stricken world. How and when these things are to take place, we have yet to examine.

In our introductory remarks our thoughts have been chiefly occupied with some of the prophetic announcements of the personal coming of our blessed Lord to this earth. We may say that this is the central truth of the Old Testament from Genesis to Malachi and well it is for our souls if it has an abiding and increasing place in our hearts. None of God’s purposes of grace towards fallen man could possibly have their accomplishment without it. Promises and types all converge around that one blessed truth. The New Testament unfolds what was foretold in the ancient Scriptures: it opens with the account of Christ’s first coming and closes with the assurance of His speedy return.

Now this hope can only be kept alive and operative in our hearts through the power of the Holy Ghost, by means of the Scriptures (John 16: 13, 14). The Christian is thus enabled to walk here below in a way that pleases the Lord, “being fruitful in every good work, and increasing in the knowledge of God” (Col. 1: 5, 10, 27; Col. 3: 4).

The first portion of the New Testament that was written was directed to the Thessalonians, shortly after the apostle’s visit to that city. It speaks in every chapter of the Lord’s coming. Paul only had the opportunity of preaching to them on three successive sabbath days, before he was driven away by persecution raised against him and his companion Silas. The effect of his preaching was so marked that all the people in the country round about were informed of it, and the report which rapidly spread abroad testified as to its extraordinary results on those who had “turned to God from idols, to serve the living and true God; and to wait for His Son from heaven” (Acts 17: 15; 1 Thess. 1: 5-10).

The method adopted by the apostle in his preaching is clearly indicated in Acts 17: 13. In the synagogues he found copies of the Law and Prophets, which served his purpose. Consequently he sought out the synagogues and proved to the Jews, by their own Scriptures, that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the “Christ” to whom they bore witness. He it was who had suffered, as it had been foretold, and was risen again from the dead. Numbers believed the message and in spite of the afflictions that awaited them they were filled with the joy of the Holy Ghost.

It will be of the deepest interest for us now to trace out briefly in the inspired record the way in which “the decree,” which the Lord Himself was to declare according to Psalm 2: 7, was eventually carried out.

It is so to speak from the earth, sanctified as never before by His blessed presence, that He does so, and according to the terms of the prophecy, in connection with God’s settled purpose then and there expressed, “Yet have I set My King upon My holy hill of Zion.” God would set His King there in defiance of all the lawlessness which seeks to set aside and tread under foot every vestige of His authority. He finds delight in His Son alone, and the Son, as born into a world alienated from God, says “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto Me, Thou art My Son; this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the heathen for Thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for Thy possession.”

That prayer has not yet gone up to God. Just before leaving His disciples to go to the cross He poured out His heart to the Father and, in commending to Him all His redeemed whom He owned as the Father’s gift to Him, He said, “I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me; for they are Thine” (John 17: 9). Judgment must be the portion of the world when the Lord returns, as we have already seen, but in the meantime we learn the riches of God’s grace set forth in His love to the Son of His own bosom. Jesus would have His disciples know it, and how deep and full are the words which express it: “As the Father hath loved Me, so have I loved you: continue ye in My love” (John 15: 9).

This is our blessed portion now. In perfect accordance with it we find God working in His own way to carry out the promise He made to Abraham. Heavenly indeed was the promise in its character, but in order that it might be so for sinners, strangers to grace, it had to be carried out, in its most important features, on this earth, where alone the antitype of Abraham’s offering of Isaac could take place. Isaac bound and laid upon the altar became a vivid type of Christ upon the cross. When he was replaced by the ram provided as his substitute God gave Abraham the wondrous promise, “In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed” (Gen. 22: 18; Gal. 3: 16). The seed, says the apostle, is Christ. The promise itself was of such importance that it was repeated both to Isaac and Jacob (Gen. 26: 4; Gen. 28: 14), and surely it was to this that Jesus referred when He said to the Jews “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day: and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8: 56).

Our minds turn instinctively to the earth when we think of the woman’s seed, who was to bruise the serpent’s head. In doing it His own “heel” must needs be bruised. The word “heel”* involves a walk on the earth. But we must ever bear in mind that the promise made of God to Abraham, after he had seen Melchisedec, turned his thoughts away from earth to heaven. He had previously heard that the Most High God was possessor of heaven as well as earth and the contrast was great between thinking of his future posterity “as the dust of the earth” and his having now to hear them likened to “the stars of the heaven” (compare Gen. 15: 5 with 13: 15-17). The former had been sufficient to give him courage to deliver Lot but it needed the visit and the words of Melchisedec in order to keep him from losing the blessing prepared for those who confess that they are “strangers and pilgrims on the earth” (Heb. 11: 13). God was the “God of heaven” as well as of earth and He would be not only a shield to Abraham, but also his “exceeding great reward.” God’s estimate of the future seed was to be measured thenceforward according to the glory of His own dwelling-place in heaven, rather than by Abraham’s path when walking by the sight of his eyes on earth. For journeying from place to place Abraham needed the light of day but God’s further communication to him was made in the darkness of the night, when nothing hindered the manifestation of heavenly glory, in the countless stars which testified of God’s mighty power and wisdom.

{*It is sometimes translated “footsteps” and it is used in connection with the iniquity inseparable from man’s walk on earth in Psalm 49: 5.}

There was at that time no need for any explanation as to how or when God’s Word was to have it’s accomplishment: the effect to be produced by it was the faith needed for the walk here. Heavenly aspirations were doubtless produced by the words, “So shall thy seed be,” but the faith that was formed by God’s Word, and that accepted it, is the faith to which justification is attached (Rom. 4: 3, 5, 9).

As it was for Abraham, so it is for us. Faith, righteousness, grace, and glory all go together and “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost, which is given unto us” (Rom. 5: 1, 2, 5). How blessed to know God in these three displays of His nature: love, glory and righteousness! But for this to be our portion Jesus must die and at His very entry upon this scene say “Lo, I come to do Thy will, O God” (Ps. 40: 7, 8; Heb. 10: 4-10).

Faith and hope are intimately connected and it has pleased God to illustrate both by Abraham’s instructive history, the former more especially in the epistle to the Romans, the latter in that to the Hebrews where our heavenly calling is so prominent: “Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Heb. 11: 1).

We can enter somewhat into Abraham’s joy as, in the silence of the night, he gazed upwards on the well-garnished heavens and all the stars in divine chorus seemed to answer “So shall thy seed be.” The hidden meaning attached to their shining was not needful for enjoying them, it was reserved to the close of the Old Testament canon after the return of the captives from Babylon to Jerusalem (Dan. 12: 3).

But we must follow the line of revelation. Nearly nine hundred years after God’s word to Abraham those same stars thrilled David’s soul and he was inspired to write of the glory of the humbled SON OF MAN, now crowned “with glory and honour” (Ps. 8).

Yet another thousand years, or rather more, had to pass before an angel brought the heavenly light down amongst the shepherds of Bethlehem, as they kept watch over their flocks by night, to convey to them the wondrous news that the Christ, the Lord, was at length born, that He was a Saviour for them and might be gazed upon in the most humble place of all, a place which, because of their occupation, belonged especially to shepherds. There they saw Him after they had heard on earth the acclamations of the heavenly host going up in praises to the Most High God (Luke 2: 8-20).

Shortly after that, on another night, a new “star”, His own, arrested the gaze of Gentiles in the East and in that very quarter of the heavens where the sun is accustomed to rise. It was not at that time to usher in an expected day of glory but to fix their attention on the ONE who was coming and to constrain them to undertake a long and dangerous journey to the West, to see the ‘‘little child” who was “born King” in order to “witness to the truth” (John 18: 37).

Their inquiries for the King of the Jews in Jerusalem, His royal city, awakened consternation instead of joy. But the Scriptures had indicated Bethlehem as the place of His birth and when they sallied forth on another night in obedience to Herod’s order, “His star” again appeared to direct them to the very house where they found Him. There, in the quiet of the night, they were enabled to worship Him while laying their treasures at His feet (Matt. 2: 11). And they disappeared from the scene returning to their country another way.

In all these cases it was not the glory which belongs to Christ’s manifested power on earth which filled the hearts of those that belonged to Him: it was HIMSELF, His own person, who was their all in all. The aged Simeon, directed by the Holy Ghost into the temple at the critical moment, is another affecting example. He had long waited “for the consolation of Israel” but when he took the little child into his arms he was led to see in Him God’s salvation and as to himself, in abounding joy, he could say, “Lord, now lettest Thou Thy servant depart in peace” (Luke 2: 29, 30). Christ was far more to him than all the glory to which an Israelite could look forward.

Such is our present portion while waiting for His return. It is the same for saints still living as for those who are called to rest before seeing the Lord. The great apostle of the Gentiles was enabled, in view of death, to say, “To depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better,” better even than serving Him here below and participating in His sufferings in a scene which cast Him out. The “night” is still running its course but believers are “children of the day” and their aspirations and hopes are formed and maintained by Him who, not only prepared and sent His star on a fitting occasion, but who is Himself, for our hearts, “the bright and morning Star.” That truth carries our hearts away from earth to heaven, centering them on our coming Lord.

Before the blessed Lord left His disciples He took care to comfort them in their sorrow by the assurance of His return. He had come forth from the Father in order to make the Father known to them and it was needful that He should go back in order to send the Holy Ghost (John 1: 18; John 16: 7, 28). Their grief was great to learn that He was going but He said, “I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you” (John 16: 5, 6, 22). That hope is still the comfort of His saints at the present time. We are still, to use the words of the apostle, waiting “for His Son from heaven” (Phil. 3: 20; 1 Thess. 1: 10).

We are all naturally more disposed to be occupied with the things which will take place at the Lord’s return than with the blessedness of seeing Him and being with Him for ever. But if we read the Scriptures attentively we cannot but be struck with the fact that God’s thoughts are concentrated on the Person of His Son, in whom and through whom all His purposes of grace are carried out. And He would have our attention fixed there also so that we may enjoy the communion to which we are all called (1 John 1: 3, 4).

The first promise of the Deliverer was given on the occasion of Adam’s fall. The main point in that account is He was to be the woman’s SEED. She seemed to remember that word when her son was born however mistaken she was as to his character and being also quite ignorant of the time that was to elapse before the Deliverer came. But her words, “I have gotten a man from the Lord,” surely show that, for her, the birth of the son was the chief consideration (Gen. 3: 15; Gen. 4: 1).

Again, in Abraham’s case, God allowed him to enjoy Isaac for many years before he was called to give him back and it was at that moment that God gave the promise, “In thy SEED shall all the nations of the earth be blessed” (Gen. 22: 18). The promise was connected with Abraham’s obedience. Nothing is said as to how or when the blessing spoken of for the earth was to be realised but Jesus says to the Jews, “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day: and he saw it, and was glad” (John 8: 56). We have too the divine assurance that the SEED spoken of is Christ (Gal. 3: 16).

Later on, David’s desire to build for Jehovah a permanent temple in the midst of His people at Jerusalem was answered by God’s assurance that such a work, according to God’s intention and estimate of it, could only be carried out by his “SEED,” whom God would, in the course of time, raise up after him. He alone was competent to carry out the Father’s thoughts in the Father’s own way. And when He received from Peter the true confession of who He was He intimated a new kind of building, spiritual in its nature, which alone corresponded to the full revelation of the Father and the Son. “On this rock,” He said, “I will build My assembly” (1 Chron. 17: 11-14; Matt. 16: 16-18; Rev. 21: 9, 10).

The Spirit of God would keep our thoughts set upon the Person of Christ in whom the Father found His delight. Only so can we really understand any truth affecting ourselves. With such a key for the right intelligence of all prophecy we are not surprised to find that Christ’s second coming is in complete correspondence with His first appearance “born” in this world according to the foreannounced fact, “Unto us a child is born, unto us a SON is given.” His names, including that of “the MIGHTY GOD,” are noted at the same time (Isa. 9: 6). He was born to be seen and believed in when here (John 6: 40; John 9: 35-38). He it is for whom we wait (1 John 3: 2).

All John’s gospel carries the heart on from Christ as seen here to the realisation of the blessed hope of seeing Him again. The interval may effectively be treated as a parenthesis.

A parenthesis is a sentence enclosed between two curved lines in the course of a larger one treating of any particular subject. Though needed for the better understanding of the matter in hand it may, if convenient, be omitted and the sense is not interfered with. The connection between what preceded it and the words which follow it is left unimpaired.

Now this is precisely what we find as to God’s ways with the earth and more particularly with His chosen people Israel. His thoughts as to them are unchanged in spite of their being for the time “Lo-ammi,” that is, “Not my people” (Hosea 1: 9; Hosea 2: 23; Hosea 3: 4, 5). His thoughts about them are set forth by Moses and by David; they had been taken out from among the nations, separated to God, to be on condition of their obedience His peculiar people (Ex. 19: 5, 6; Deut. 4: 7, 8, 20, 31-38; 1 Chron. 17: 20-22). But they, like Adam, disobeyed (Hosea 6: 7) and they lost their land. Notwithstanding that, after the Captivity, a remnant returned to it and in process of time the promised Messiah was born (Dan. 9: 25). But Christ found them as rebellious as ever. On the way to the cross He wept over Jerusalem and had to leave their house “desolate” (Matt. 23: 37, 38).

On God’s side we always find His faithfulness to be unchanging (Ps. 89: 33). Christ came to those that were peculiarly “His own” but “His own received Him not” (John 1: 11). As said the prophet, they smote “the Judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek,” and were in consequence “given up” (Micah 5: 13). Rejecting the counsel of God against themselves and despising their own mercies, they crucified the Son of God and put Him to an open shame (Jonah 2: 8; Matt. 12: 41-45; Luke 7: 30; Heb. 6: 6). Nevertheless Paul, while weeping over them and still praying on their behalf, found comfort in the fact that “the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” He called to mind that “the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises” all belonged to them as God’s special gift; the “fathers” too were theirs and of them, as concerning the flesh, “Christ came” (Rom. 9: 45; Rom. 11: 29). All that remains true and God will never forget it, but it is also true that they killed the Prince of Life, whom God raised from the dead (Acts 3: 15).

That act never could be undone. They refused the light, and darkness came upon them: Jesus “did hide Himself from them” (John 12: 35, 36). He never showed Himself to any but His own disciples after He had been laid in the tomb. All distinctively Jewish hopes lay, so to speak, buried there and there they must remain until His earthly people shall say as to Him in a day still future, “Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord” (Matt. 23: 39). When He was here they said, “We will not have this man to reign over us” (Luke 19: 14).

In that coming day they will indeed look on Him whom they pierced and will mourn for Him as for an only a firstborn son (Zech. 12: 10; Isa. 66: 7, 8). But between these two moments of their final rejection of Christ and future reception of Him intervenes the parenthesis we speak of. When it is over the thread of their history will be resumed in connection with the accomplishment on earth of the promises made to Abraham.

The Lord however did not leave the earth immediately after rising from the dead. He showed Himself to His disciples now and again “during forty days,” but only to the “witnesses chosen before of God” (Acts 1: 3; Acts 10: 41). And He treated them as altogether apart from the Jewish world, taken out of it in order that they might be sent again into the world in its fuller extent (including Gentiles as well as Jews), even as He Himself had been sent of the Father (John 20: 21). He had already prayed for them as the Father’s own gift to Himself and as no longer belonging to the world (John 17: 6-10, 16). It was from their midst that He went up to heaven leaving them still to wait on earth for the promised gift of the Holy Ghost. He fulfilled that promise “when the day of Pentecost was fully come,” ten days after His ascension. Thenceforward every saved soul was no longer considered as being on Israelitish or Jewish ground, with earthly hopes, but on the contrary as having heavenly hopes in and with Christ. Belonging to Him who was risen and glorified, they were “added to the Church” (Acts 2: 1, 47).

We may then consider the first curved line of the parenthesis in this world’s history as being marked by the cloud which received Jesus out of the sight of His disciples when they stood on the Mount of Olives gazing after Him as He was taken up into heaven (Luke 24: 50-51; Acts 1: 3, 9-11). From that moment dates the special calling and portion of the Church. It belongs to Jesus risen and glorified.

The close of the parenthesis is indicated by another “cloud,” which will receive, in like manner, every believing man, woman and child at the moment of the Lord’s return. At the same instant every sleeping saint, that is, everyone who has believed and “died in faith,” will be raised and all together will be caught up “in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord” (1 Thess. 4: 15-17). Blessed is it to think of it!

As soon as the Church is removed from this scene the remnant of Israel, with their earthly hopes, will come once more into prominence and a call to repentance in connection with those hopes will again go forth (Matt. 10: 23). That will be the time of Zion’s “travail” and those who lend a willing ear to the call will be considered as the remnant of Christ’s brethren. They, instead of being added to the Church as we are, will then “return unto the children of Israel” and be reckoned with them (Isa. 66: 8-14; Micah 5: 3). They will also be earnestly looking for the rising of the Sun of righteousness with healing in His wings that “Sun” which the disciples saw for a moment on the mount of the transfiguration (Mal. 4: 2; Matt. 17: 2).

The Church will at that time be seen in her proper place in “heaven, for the righteous shall shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father” (Matt. 13: 43; Luke 12: 33). The glory will be ushered in for us by Him who, through grace, is already known to our souls as “the bright and morning star” (Rev. 22: 16).

Shortly before his departure the Apostle Peter, feeling the necessity of stirring up the saints by putting them in remembrance of what they had already heard, was led to recall that wondrous scene when he, with James and John, were eye witnesses of the Lords glory on the “holy mount”. It was, so to speak, his legacy to the church. And we may notice that he calls especial attention to the “voice” which they were then given to hear, and which centred all their thoughts on the Lord Himself as the object of the Father’s delight. This expression of delight was a notable feature of Isaiah’s prophecy given 750 years previously (Isa. 42: 1), but when quoted in Matthew 12: 18 the word “beloved” is added by the Holy Spirit, thus linking the passage in a very marked way with the testimony already given at the Lord’s baptism and repeated at the transfiguration (Matt. 3: 17; Matt. 17: 6). Peter adds that the voice “came from heaven”, identifying “the excellent glory” they saw with “heaven” whence the Holy Spirit descended in bodily form after the Lord’s baptism (see also Mark 1: 10, 11; Luke 3: 21, 22).

Let us pause here to take note of three wonderful things:

(1) The Father’s good pleasure is equally centred and expressed in the SON, when He condescended to identify Himself in baptism with confessed sinners hoping for mercy as when He shows for a moment His coming glory in the kingdom.

(2) The mystery of the Trinity is for the first time manifested to human eyes and ears at the baptism (John 1: 33, 34; 1 John 1: 13). The communion which we are now called to enjoy is founded upon this.

(3) Though on earth carrying out the Father’s will and purpose the humbled Son of man belonged to heaven and in the mystery of His divine Person was ever there. Consequently, as He says to Nicodemus, He alone was able to unfold “heavenly things” (John 3: 12-13).

These blessed facts lie at the basis of Christianity and have evidently the most important bearing upon “the heavenly calling” of which every believer in the present age is made a partaker (Hebrews 3: 1). It is very little understood and as a consequence the “hope” which should animate our souls is enfeebled and our practical walk often comes far short of what it ought to be. Is it not a sad fact that in the minds of many the “hope” is reduced to a vague idea of getting to heaven eventually because they find they cannot live for ever on this earth as they would like to do? That is very different from the glory of the mystery given to Paul to reveal which he says is “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1: 27). And the practical consequence flowing from the possession of such a hope is that abiding in Him we should walk “as He walked” (1 John 2: 6)

The Christian calling is heavenly in principle because it is God’s purpose to bring “many sons unto glory”. They are made “sons” by receiving God’s testimony about His own blessed Son and they are the Father’s gift to Him, Christ, who was ever His delight the Son in the Father’s bosom who became flesh in order to carry out all His will in redeeming them. Having thus become “the Captain of their salvation” He is now seated at His own right hand in the heavens. It is as speaking from thence that Jesus says, “I and the children which God hath given Me” (Heb. 2: 9-13; Heb. 8: 12; Heb. 10: 8-10, 12-14). Surely all this is in contrast to the blessing reserved for God’s ancient people of Israel who will have their portion on earth in the promised land when Christ shall come in Person to make it theirs (Zech. 14: 4, 5; Mal. 3: 1). And it is this future deliverance of the people which is referred to in Isaiah 8: 17 to Isaiah 9: 7 where there is no mention at all of Christ’s present place “on high”, nor of the coming of the Holy Ghost.

It is true that Abraham’s thoughts were turned toward heaven when God spoke to him of the “stars” but heaven was not mentioned in his call which was simply to go forth into the land of Canaan, into which he came (Gen. 11: 31; Gen. 12: 57; Acts 7: 3, 4; Heb. 11: 8). The earthly inheritance will eventually be made good to the earthly people, that is, to Abraham’s natural descendants, when God’s time is come to establish them once again in Canaan; but in the meanwhile Christ has His own place in glory and with Him are associated in the most intimate way those who are consciously at the present time the fruit of His sufferings on the cross. That is why they are called “holy brethren” and “partakers of the heavenly calling”. And it is to this incorruptible inheritance, reserved for the saints in heaven that Peter drew the attention of the converted Jews to whom he wrote. Naturally enough they looked for the accomplishment on earth of the promises made to their father Abraham, all the more so as they were strangers scattered abroad far away from Palestine. But what they lost on earth was made good to them “in heaven”. It is quite true that the glory of that which is “reserved” for believers of the present day will only be fully known at the “revelation of Jesus Christ” for which we wait; but the “spirit” of it is to animate the souls of those now called to be “partakers of Christ’s sufferings” (1 Peter 1: 3-13; 1 Peter 4: 12, 13).

Everywhere we find in the epistles that this glory is the counterpart of sufferings endured in the present time. It is to be our eternal portion after we have suffered awhile down here (1 Peter 5: 10; so Rom. 8: 18; 2 Cor. 4: 17; 2 Tim. 2: 12 etc.). And how beautifully that is set forth in the transfiguration scene when we learn that Moses and Elias “appeared in glory, and spake of His decease which He should accomplish at Jerusalem”! They were occupied with Christ’s sufferings whereas the disciples had the privilege of seeing His glory, “and the two men who stood* with Him” (Luke 9: 30-32). May the Lord lead our hearts into more constant and diligent occupation with the Person of Christ in His present glory that we may realise more of that change “into the same image from glory to glory”, now being accomplished by the Spirit of the Lord! (2 Cor. 3: 18). We have to be transformed by the renewing of our mind in order not to be conformed to this world (Rom. 12: 2).

{*Compare with this what is said of Moses when called to go up into Mount Sinai the second time, when God graciously stood with him there and showed him as much of His glory as it was possible for him, in his human body, to see (Ex. 33: 21-23; Ex. 34: 58).}

All these Scriptures that we have passed rapidly in review bring us again to the parenthesis in God’s ways of which we have already spoken. How needful is it that our souls should get confirmed in its distinctive and moral features in order that our practical walk may be in accordance with it!

The more we realise its character the more readily we can understand the difficulty felt, even by the apostles who had seen the Lord on earth, in laying hold of the meaning of His words, “Ye are not of the world” (John 15: 19). It needed the presence of the Holy Ghost, who came down on the day of Pentecost, to teach them all things and bring to their remembrance all that He had said to them, besides those other things which they were not able to bear, or enter into at all, until after His death and resurrection (John 14: 26; John 16: 12-16). So complete a change in all their thoughts and aspirations must needs be gradual. His death had seemed to blast all their Jewish hopes in connection with their Messiah whom they rightly believed Christ to be (Luke 24: 21) and when they were assured of His resurrection it was their familiar hopes that were naturally revived. We observe it in the question “Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1: 6). The Lord’s answer was confined to insisting upon the character of their testimony to Himself as He had previously told them (John 15: 27; Acts 1: 8) while waiting for the coming of the Holy Ghost. Little by little their thoughts were turned into another channel as the meaning of His death and resurrection dawned upon them while they still waited for the coming of the Comforter.

When He came down on the day of Pentecost a new era began for them but as yet they had no idea at all of the glad tidings going beyond the limits of Israel; and for the moment they were so enthralled by the great facts of the Lord’s ascension to the right hand of God and of His having sent the Spirit as He had promised that they had enough to do to preach the gospel of the remission of sins to “the house of Israel” (Acts 2: 14-39). They knew full well that this gospel must go to those “afar off”, as the Lord had distinctly told them more than once, but they were very slow to carry it to them and the majority of those converted in Jerusalem could not conceive it possible that Gentiles could be brought into the enjoyment of its blessings. Even Peter himself presented to the Jews the acceptance of the gospel as a reason for the Lord’s immediate return to accomplish the earthly promises made to their fathers (Acts 3: 9-26). Many were scattered abroad afterwards by persecution but the apostles, in spite of the Lord’s charge to them, remained at Jerusalem (Acts 1: 8; Acts 8: 1). They were slow to fulfil their commission of going to “the uttermost part of the earth”. But God carried out His thoughts in His own way as we shall see.

The assembling of so large a multitude on the occasion of the miraculous effects accompanying the descent of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost made it necessary that Peter should show the Jews that their own Scriptures were accomplished by what had taken place. For the Lord’s death, resurrection and ascension to the Father’s right hand had all been set forth in so many words a thousand years previously.* Peter’s preaching was in the power of the Holy Spirit which he had received, an evident token of God’s gracious purpose to lead His rebellious people to repentance, so that they might learn the fullness of His grace in the forgiveness of their sins. Let us, however, not lose sight of the fact that the forgiveness they needed was the Father’s answer to the prayer of His blessed Son at the moment when He was nailed to the cross (Luke 23: 34).

{*The Scriptures quoted by Peter from Ps. 16 and 110 furnished the needed proof His sermon was an example of what is stated in Ps. 68: 18; compare Eph. 4: 7-11.}

Their reception of the gospel message was followed by baptism. It was only right that they should thus testify to a complete and definite change of position, involving their giving up Jewish privileges and boasts in order to own the lordship of the Messiah they had confessed. God had made Him “both Lord and Christ”, and they must needs confess it by being baptised unto His death.

The repentance of the Jews, thus marked, made a distinct change between them and the leaders of their nation who, persisting in their unbelief, soon began to persecute the followers of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 4: 1-22; Acts 5: 17-18, 28, 40). The Lord’s words in John 15: 17-21, both as to the hatred shown towards His disciples, and the persecution of which they were to be the objects, were very soon fulfilled. Those that believed were “added to the church”; those that refused the proffered forgiveness maintained their place and position in the world which hated the Father and the Son (see also Rom. 8: 7).

The importance of such an inevitable separation of the church from the world is too great to be overlooked, all the more so because of the increasing tendency in the present day to obliterate this distinction. The climax of the foretold “strong delusion” will be reached when Christianity is reduced to an outward improvement of the world with a view to finally getting rid of the name of Christ altogether and substituting for Him a political and a religious leader, all whose power, in both cases, will be derived directly from Satan himself (2 Thess. 2: 9; Rev. 13: 4-12). And consequently, wherever God works in His long-suffering grace, a persecution of all who are faithful to Him must necessarily follow. It has often been so in the history of the church, though with less pretension to universal success than at present. But the enemy outwits himself and the supposed emancipation of mankind so much in vogue will end in a slavery far worse than any which they think they have a right to complain of. When the church is gone persecution will burst out in a fresh direction namely, against the Jews who will then once again be God’s messengers to a Christless and Christ-hating world.

But let us pursue the history. After the descent of the Holy Spirit God’s work prospered in Jerusalem for a time. The numerous converts to Christianity felt the necessity of being together and of having “all things common”. The outward unity of the church was thus borne witness to, but they had much to learn as to the faith they professed. That was the case even with Peter himself and with the others who were all slow to understand and carry out their commission to go to “Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1: 8). Though seven deacons were chosen to look after the temporal administration and care of so large a multitude of believers, in order that the apostles might be free for the ministry of the Word, God made use of two of these very deacons to carry out the ministry first confided to the apostles. One of them, Stephen, gave the last and crushing denunciation of Jewish apostasy; the other, Philip, was the first to visit Samaria with the gospel. Later on Peter, much against his Jewish thoughts, received a special call to carry the gospel to Gentiles at Caesarea, after which he was severely taken to task for it by the leading converts at Jerusalem (Acts 10: 9-21; Acts 11: 2-3, 18).

The true character of Christianity was only apprehended by degrees. Peter, led of the Holy Spirit, had spoken of “the Father” on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2: 33), but present relationship with Him, according to the Lord’s first message after His resurrection, “My Father, and your Father”, was not entered into (John 20: 17). Nor does it appear in their prayers, recorded in the early chapters of the Acts. They address God as “Jehovah”, which is represented by the Greek word “Lord”, and once (Acts 4: 24) as Master or “Sovereign Ruler” (as in Jude 1: 4), and they speak of the Saviour as God’s holy “child” or “servant”.* They had not yet realised what the apostle John afterwards described as the Father’s “manner of love” (1 John 3: 12). Jewish aspirations and Jewish hopes filled all hearts, engrafted on a sense of forgiveness by the accomplished sacrifice of Christ, such as had never been known under John the Baptist’s preaching, or since. Peter’s stirring call to repentance in Acts 3 was based, as already remarked, upon the realisation in the near future of national hopes inspired by the prophets of Israel when they foretold the earthly blessings to be inaugurated on Christ’s return.

{*“Son” in Acts 3: 13, 26, should be “child” or “servant”, as elsewhere, and Acts 8: 37 is known to be an interpolation.}

A further testimony was needed of a wholly new character in order that these hopes might become heavenly in accordance with Christ’s present seat at God’s right hand in glory whither He had gone to prepare a place for those whom the Father had given to Him (John 14: 2). This special testimony God, in His sovereign mercy, was now about to bestow. And that it might be effective in every way three conditions were satisfied: the witness had to be a pharisee of pharisees thoroughly versed in Jewish modes of thought and withal a man of spotless life (Acts 26: 5; Phil. 3: 5-6); secondly, the most desperate persecutor of those who followed what they esteemed to be a delusive novelty (Gal. 1: 13-14); thirdly, he was to be admitted to see the personal glory of the Lord (1 Cor. 9: 1; 1 Cor. 15: 8). By such means God not only operated his conversion, but also gave to his ministry the needed power. This witness was Saul of Tarsus, afterwards known as the apostle Paul. He had never seen Jesus on earth and consequently his start on the Christian career bore the stamp of what he saw and heard when, as persecutor, he “drew near to Damascus” (Acts 9: 3-6). The person of Christ in the glory was everything to him, accompanied by the deepest self-judgment (1 Cor. 15: 9, 10); and he was the first to preach Jesus in the synagogues that “He is the SON OF GOD” (Acts 9: 20).

To Paul were confided truths of a peculiarly Christian character and of which we find little or no mention in other writers of the New Testament but which have their source and living expression in a glorified Christ and this explains the fact of the glory being such a remarkable feature in the epistles he wrote, as for instance in Rom. 5: 2; Col. 1: 27; Heb. 2: 10; 1 Thess. 2: 12, etc.

The first particular communication was made to him at the time he wrote the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, explaining how it was that the Lord will bring His glorified saints with Him when He returns to this earth. The fact is stated in Zech. 14: 5 and Jude refers to it as Enoch’s prophecy (though in this case “saints” might refer to angels). But no explanation had as yet been given as to a previous removal from this earth of both sleeping and living believers.

The next became the subject of the Epistle to the Romans which unfolds “the righteousness of God” in forgiving sins on the ground of Christ’s sacrifice and the character of the glory which is to be revealed in those who are made the “sons of God”, so that Christ may be “the firstborn among many brethren”, all of them being “conformed to the image of HIS SON” (Rom. 8: 19, 29-30; Gal. 3: 26).

Another truth was the freshly established ordinance of the Lord for His church on earth, to show His death “till He come” and that is intimately connected with the glory as we find in both Epistles to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 10: 17; 1 Cor. 11: 23-26; 1 Cor. 15: 20, 23, 49-57; 2 Cor. 4: 17-18; 2 Cor. 5: 19).

Lastly, the full revelation of the “mystery” of the body of Christ (unfolded in the Epistle to the Ephesians and referred to at the end of the Epistle to the Romans and in that to the Colossians) was confided to Paul alone and gave colour to the gospel he preached (Acts 20: 27; Col. 1: 25-26).

A very little reflection suffices to convince the attentive reader that all these truths, peculiar to Paul’s writings, depend upon what Christ is in His own Person, now seated “on the right hand of the Majesty on high”, after having by Himself purged our sins when He suffered on the cross (Heb. 1: 3).

And how infinitely precious it is for us to know that Christ must needs, in the first instance, satisfy His own heart, not by a public display of His power in this world, but rather in presenting to Himself His bride-elect, the Church which He has purchased with His own blood (Acts 20: 28; Eph. 5: 25-27). The more we meditate upon these special revelations made to the apostle the more our hearts are drawn out to the blessed Person of the SON OF GOD, which Paul was the first to preach. He began at once in the synagogue at Damascus. The persecutions he had been a chief means of carrying out necessarily recoiled upon himself when he preached the faith he had previously sought to destroy (Gal. 1: 23). But had he not heard from heaven the underlying truth of all his future ministry when Jesus, whom he persecuted, intimated the marvellous identification of His saints with Himself in the glory, in those words of pity and love, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou ME?” (Acts 9: 4).

Paul’s ministry has a character of its own. It is distinctly “heavenly” and is largely illustrated by his life which forms the subject of more than half of “The Acts”. Luke, who was the author of the book, became Paul’s companion when he left Troas to go into Macedonia, and thus take the gospel for the first time into Europe. We may well say that his peculiar testimony had its source in heaven, from whence the Lord revealed Himself to him, when he was intent on persecuting the saints in foreign parts and was approaching the city of Damascus furnished with authority from the chief priests at Jerusalem to deliver the saints to prison or to death (Acts 26: 10-12). The Lord arrested him with the words, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest though ME?” Did not these words contain the essence of the “mystery” afterwards more definitely revealed to him the mystical union of Christ and the church, “which is His Body” (Eph. 1: 20-23)?

Furthermore, Paul received for his own soul a wonderful accession of power, granted to no one else, when he was “caught up into paradise”, whither the Lord took the repentant thief crucified at His side (2 Cor. 12: 1-10). On that occasion the Lord gave His servant a “thorn in the flesh” to keep him humble, and to maintain in him a deepened sense of his own weakness — the proper condition for not merely knowing but feeling that all true power is from the Lord alone. There was real danger lest, through the abundance of the revelations, he should “be exalted above measure”. Dependence upon the Lord is constantly needed for all true ministry and particularly for such as Paul’s.

Besides that, the Lord’s word to Ananias had to be fulfilled in regard to the apostle: “I will show him how great things he must suffer for My name’s sake” (Acts 9: 16). Without the suffering here there can be little spiritual power for entering into the glory set before us; it would be shorn of its true incentive and energy in the soul through not being linked, as it should be, with the blessed Lord’s pathway and life on earth. Consequently the apostle’s evangelistic service was a continuous series of bitter persecutions, especially from the Jews. On his many journeys he had to brave every kind of danger on land and sea and was often in peril of his life, to say nothing of bonds and imprisonment (2 Cor. 11: 23-27). No other witness of the truth was called to suffer in the same degree and thus “fill up”, or complete what might be lacking in those outward afflictions which served to show how the church’s course on earth is practically identified with Christ’s (Col. 1: 24). Every Christian has in some way thus to learn by experience how hostile is the world which nailed Christ to the cross. “Unto you it is given,” says the apostle, “in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him, but also to suffer for His sake; having the same conflict which ye saw in me, and now hear to be in me” (Phil. 1: 29-30).

The Lord Himself, after His resurrection, showed to the two disciples on the road to Emmaus how intimately connected are “the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow” (1 Peter 1: 11). Such indeed is one of the chief burdens of the Old Testament Scriptures (Luke 24: 25-27, 32, 44-47). Is it not precisely on this principle that Christ’s present place in glory, after having suffered, indicates the believer’s hope? A little serious consideration will surely make this plain and [?] first as to life possessed.

The Lord, in answering the cavils of the Jews, shows that every living soul must know the Son of God in one of two ways: either as the life-giving Spirit at the present time (1 Cor. 15: 45), or else as the Son of man to whom all judgment has been committed by the Father (John 5: 19-29). Now the believer, through grace, does not look for judgment, Christ having already borne that for him and met every claim against him in righteousness when He bore “our sins in His own body on the tree”. The assured portion of every redeemed soul is consequently to be with the Saviour in glory and there to enjoy the rest that remaineth to the people of God (Heb. 4: 9). Those who do not thus know Christ through the gospel have before them all the terrors of awaiting the judgment and fiery indignation which shall devour the adversaries (Heb. 10: 26-31). From that judgment to come there is no escape for one who refuses the gospel of God’s grace offered to every one NOW. But judgment is deferred till Christ’s return.

In other words for a believer the present age is characterised by the Lord’s absence from this world as He said to his disciples, “I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world: again, I leave the world, and go to the Father . . . And ye now therefore have sorrow: but I will see you again, and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you” (John 16: 5-6, 22, 28). The gospel has gone forth and it is still being proclaimed. The gospel net has been cast by the Lord Himself into the sea and the work of the fishermen ever since has been gathering “the good into vessels” (Matt. 13: 47, 48). Presently the reverse will take place for at the end of this age “the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just; and shall cast them into the furnace of fire”. The preparatory work of binding the tares “in bundles”, is already going on (Matt. 13: 30, 49, 50). But the saints that form the church have nothing to do with judgment; they await the Lord’s return.

God is still speaking in the SON (Heb. 1: 1). Judgment is, however, rendered necessary by the lifting up of the Son of man upon the cross. It was in view of His death that Jesus said, “Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out” (John 12: 31-36). But previously to the judgment, that is before He begins to carry it out, Jesus will come to take all His redeemed to be with Himself for ever in the Father’s house (John 14: 2, 3). For that we are now waiting. Paul bears constant testimony to the same truth (see Rom. 8: 18-19, 29-30; Phil. 3: 20-21). The Thessalonians, who had only heard the gospel on three successive Sabbath days, were converted — turned to God from idols — “to serve the living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven” (1 Thess. 1: 9-10). They were characterised by their work of faith, labour of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father. There were no printed Bibles in those days; no part of the New Testament had then been even written. Notwithstanding this does not the energy of their faith put us to shame when we think of the advantages we enjoy? Is the Lord Jesus Christ “our HOPE” (1 Tim. 1: 1)? Are we all earnestly looking forward to be with Him? Do our ways and walk prove it to those who know us?

We do well to ask ourselves a further question. Is Christ, in this sense, the “anchor of the soul”? Is it not a fact that the Lord is as it were anticipating the heavenly hope even now, by appearing for us in the very presence of God? (Heb. 2: 10, 13; Heb. 6: 19-20; Heb. 9: 24). His prayer to the Father on behalf of His redeemed must have its fulfilment: “Father, I will that they also, whom Thou hast given Me, be with Me where I am . . .” (John 17: 24). By all these passages is our place shown to be for ever with the Lord. Even a believer who dies in this present time departs to be “with Christ”, which is far better even than serving Him on the earth (2 Cor. 5: 6 8; Phil. 1: 23). Jesus who is already in the glory is our “forerunner”, which He could not be if none were to follow Him there. We should be looking forward at any moment to meet Him in the air (1 Thess. 4: 17, 18). He will never fail us. Does He find us faithful?

Paul’s ministry came early to a close in martyrdom. But the Lord took care that it should receive a final and authoritative confirmation from both Peter and John who survived him and who had both seen the blessed Lord on earth and were also present at the transfiguration scene. The importance of what they then saw and heard “in the holy mount” cannot be exaggerated. We have already referred to it. There were three witnesses whom Jesus expressly called aside and Satan’s object was evidently to get rid of them. Herod put James to the sword but when he was, as he thought, keeping Peter safely shut up in prison for the same purpose, the Lord sent His angel by night to open the prison doors (Acts 12: 1-11).

Both Peter and John were preserved to the end of apostolic history. Peter’s mission was to explain the import of the transfiguration as related by Matthew “the Son of man coming in His kingdom” (Matt. 16: 28). In other words, that is from the point of view of God’s governmental dealing with His saints at the present time of suffering in view of the Lord’s return. This is also pointed out in its moral features in Mark and Luke. John, on the other hand, does not mention the occurrence, but is really occupied with the voice heard “from the excellent glory”. For both in his gospel and in his first epistle he unfolds Christianity from the special standpoint of present relationship with the Father as set forth in the Lord’s message confided to Mary Magdalene: “My Father, and your Father” (John 20: 17). The Gospel of John unfolds this relationship as seen in the person of the SON (John 1-12), and made good in our souls by the power of the Holy Spirit (John 13-17). The epistle deals with the effects of sonship in believers, both as to their life and hope. Finally, the closing page of the Revelation emphasises the hope by confirming the promise made by “the Son of God” to the overcomer in the address written to the church of Thyatira: “I will give him the Morning Star” (Rev. 2: 18, 28).

Peter calls it the “day star”, literally a “lightbearer” or “lightbringer”, evidently referring to its moral character and intimating that darkness still reigns at the time of its rising. We have only to compare the closing chapter of the Old Testament in order to be penetrated by the complete contrast between the Jewish hope, only to be realised after the church is gone and the Christian’s portion in an actually glorified Christ. The “Sun of righteousness” (Mal. 4: 2) speaks of outwardly manifested blessing on this earth, the attendant effects being shown in the expression “healing in His wings”, whereas the “day star” is evidently a call away from this earth, only seen by those who are watching in the night. The saints should be ever watching. How much the Lord insisted upon it shortly before His death! (Mark 13: 34-37). In full accordance with this attitude of watching Peter’s desire is that the day star should be as it were already risen in our hearts, with all its sanctifying power and the day time of Christ’s glory be dawning there.* In his first epistle this is called “the revelation of Jesus Christ” fraught with the final grace of completed salvation (1 Peter 1: 5, 7, 13).

{*The passage, 2 Peter 1: 19, is somewhat obscure in our Authorised Version on account of the position given to the words “more sure”. This is corrected in the Revised Version. The meaning is that the transfiguration confirmed in an extraordinary way, and thus made more sure the “word of prophecy” with which the Jews were more or less familiar. Once this is understood much light is thrown upon the passage. The Father’s voice heard on the mount not only confirms all prophecies relating to the Son but imparts to them a fresh and deeper signification with an accompanying effect on the believer’s heart similar to that of putting aside a candle because the day is dawning. Prophecy refers to future blessing on this earth but it also speaks largely of Christ’s personal sufferings and coming glory. Its scope is therefore not to be limited to the special circumstances or events which gave rise to it in any particular case. In this sense it is not of any private or restricted interpretation, like a human sentence, for “holy men of God spake under the power of the Holy Spirit”.}

In connection with the apostle Peter’s account of the transfiguration, we do well to notice that his second epistle is of a more general character than his first. It evidently embraces the whole church and thus falls into line with the wider application of the gospel, as it was committed to Paul (See Gal. 2: 6-10). To Peter had been committed “the gospel of the circumcision”; which means that Jews and proselytes were naturally first in his thoughts; and ministry to Gentiles, as in the case of Cornelius, was exceptional (Acts 10, 11). Paul, on the contrary, was sent definitely to the Gentiles, while not excluding the Jews whom he necessarily met, and had first to deal with in the synagogues. For his habit was to go there in order to find the copies of the Old Testament Scriptures from which he proved that Jesus of Nazareth was “the Christ” to whom those Scriptures everywhere bore witness (Acts 9: 15; Acts 17: 13; Acts 26: 17, 18).

Peter’s first epistle was addressed more particularly to the converted Jews scattered over the provinces of Asia Minor, probably before or about the time that Jerusalem was destroyed by Titus. All who heeded the Lord’s warning had then to leave the city (Luke 21: 20-24). This extended to a period of forty years after the Lord had suffered on the cross. Terrible indeed were those “days of vengeance” on the unbelieving people, then weeping in vain for themselves and their children (Luke 23: 27-31). We can thus understand better what reproach “for the Name of Christ” meant in those days (1 Peter 4: 14). But in the second epistle, the apostle had good reason to feel that Jerusalem as a centre was blotted out from the earth, and that both Jew and Gentile must rally round the character of the gospel specially entrusted to Paul. It was no longer a question of Jews being blessed in a new way, that is with a full knowledge of accomplished redemption, and of the efficacy of the blood of Christ, but, notwithstanding that, on lines set forth in Abraham’s history, who confessed that he was a stranger and pilgrim on the earth (Heb. 11: 13). True as that must needs remain for Christians in all time, there was and is a still deeper truth at the basis of the church’s standing, namely the personal knowledge of the Son of God. The Jews naturally looked for blessing on earth; the Christian finds it already in the person of Christ.

Now Paul began with this in his preaching at Damascus. And in agreement with it, Peter’s second epistle speaks of the precious things “that pertain unto life and godliness” through the knowledge of God and of our Lord Jesus Christ.* In that “knowledge” we have to grow and increase, learning not only the grace but also the “fulness” which is in the Son (John 1: 14-16). That is the great theme of John’s writings, both of Gospel and epistle.

{*We may usefully compare in this respect 2 Peter 1: 2, 3, 8; 2 Peter 2: 20; 2 Peter 3: 18; with Colossians 1: 10, and Phillipians 3: 8.}

Moreover, it is interesting to notice the humble place that Peter takes, putting “servant” before “apostle” in the opening verse of this second epistle, besides referring so definitely to “all” the epistles of “our beloved brother Paul”, at the close. His conclusion is “Grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” God takes up man as he is, without taking into account national distinctions of any kind; for there is “no difference” in this respect, that “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3: 22, 23). But then again, “the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him”; and with this Peter’s words agree.

His second epistle is addressed “to them that have obtained like precious faith with us.” Do not these words recall what the blessed Lord said on the occasion of the coming of the Greeks who desired to see Him? Speaking of His suffering on the cross, so soon to come about, and of the consequent “judgment of this world,” He added, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all unto Me” (John 12: 32). See also John 11: 52, and John 3: 16. The gospel cannot be shut up within narrow Jewish limits, in spite of their great privilege in possessing the Scriptures. All are naturally dead in trespasses and sins dead to God; and He comes in on their behalf with that quickening power, shown in raising up Christ from the dead (Eph. 1: 19-23; Eph. 2: 1-10). What a blessing it is for us to have this assurance from God Himself!

But if, on the one hand, nationalities are dropped, so that there is “neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all,” there is also another kind of distinction more difficult to overcome, that of religious and class hatred, a distinction found often in the gospel history amongst the Jews themselves, and well illustrated by the parable of the Pharisee and the publican in Luke 18. That feeling was deep rooted in Saul of Tarsus when the Lord met him in grace. But even he had to come into blessing together with the thief on the cross, whose language he practically uses at the end of Galatians 2, when he says, “I am crucified with Christ.” The cross is thus, so to speak, the birthplace of “the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created him” (Col. 3: 10).

And how infinitely precious is this knowledge of the Son of God! Paul’s object in life was to “know Him.” The excellency of that knowledge delivered him entirely from his own righteousness and enabled him to count those things which were, from a Jewish point of view, most advantageous to him, to be but loss for Christ (Phil. 3: 3-11).

We may go even further in considering the account of his conversion and affirm that the practical apprehension of the “mystery,” afterwards confided to his ministry, was in the persons of those whom he most hated on account of his religious zeal. This is a matter of the deepest importance for us all. And we may ask ourselves individually the question, what is the Person of the Christ to my own heart? Are all its hidden, ardent, inward longings expressed in those few words, “That I may know Him”?

When the voice from heaven said, “Why persecutest thou Me?” who were they that, in the Lord’s judgment, were signified and embraced in that word “Me”? Was it not the very ones that Saul was committing to prison and to death (Acts 22: 4, 5; Acts 26: 10, 11)? Are we accustomed to realise and enjoy in this way our position and privileges, as members of the body of Christ? That is to say, not so much by our own personal feelings as by what all His “members” are to Him, and by the love and care which He bestows upon His church? Do we enter practically into the meaning of that word, “to comprehend with all saints . . . the love of Christ” (1 Cor. 12: 25, 26; Eph. 3: 18, 19; Eph. 5: 29)? If not, would it not suggest that, in our minds, there are lurking many of the thoughts and prejudices common to the Pharisees among the Jews? Surely this calls for much self-judgment.

When we begin to learn our own privileges by what is realised in the consciences of our brethren, “love in the Spirit” asserts itself, as in those to whom Epaphras ministered (Col. 1: 7, 8; Col. 4: 12). That love is measured by the Lord’s love to all His redeemed, and again by the Father’s love to Him (John 15: 9-13). May the apostle’s earnest desires be more found in each one of us, as the fruit of the operation of the Holy Spirit, “To know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God” (Eph. 3: 19)! The Holy Spirit’s mission is to take of Christ’s things and show them to us, and thus lead our souls into the practical enjoyment of the Father’s love (John 16: 13-15).

It is true that Paul does not actually refer to the “morning star” in so many words; but all his epistles set forth what it is to the heart occupied with Christ who is now hidden in the heavens. He is our “life,” though not as yet in outward manifestation, for it is “hid” with Him in God; He Himself is also our “hope” (Col. 1: 27; Col. 3: 3, 4; 1 Tim. 1: 1). He it is to whom the Father bore witness on the mount of transfiguration, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him” (Matt. 17: 5).

In keeping with this, Paul gives expression to what he learned on the road to Damascus in that remarkable word, “It pleased God . . . to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him,” and, further on, “The life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me”; and again, “Ye are all God’s sons by faith in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 1: 16; Gal. 2: 20; Gal. 3: 26).

Christ glorified in the heavens is the source of all our present blessing now and occupation with Himself gives power in the soul to enjoy it. He it is who gives us that closing word, ‘I am . . . the bright and morning star.”

Sonship

The morning star has a heavenly character peculiar to itself as a “star,” and is thus connected with the church in a twofold way, as we shall see, whether we consider it as the house of God now on earth, or as the body of Christ. The latter was the “mystery” specially confided to the apostle Paul (Eph. 3: 24). All the truth about the church depends upon and flows from what Christ is in His own Person — the Son of God. And therefore sonship is a prominent feature in the passages which unfold it. This calls for serious attention.

The church is first mentioned in Matthew 16. At the close of His patient ministry in Galilee, the Lord asked His disciples, “Whom do men say that I, the Son of man,* am?” Various were the thoughts about Him, but as soon as He received from Peter the desired answer, He said, “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona: — for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but MY FATHER which is in heaven.” We are thus placed at once in the presence of THE FATHER and THE SON, which is the great theme of John’s Gospel (John 1: 18; John 20: 17). Then Jesus added immediately, “And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter (that is, a stone); and upon this rock I will build MY CHURCH.” Peter was thus recognised by the Lord as a representative “stone” in the building; that is to say, that every one of those who thus form a part of it, are characterised by this confession made to the Lord Himself, “Thou art the Christ, the SON of the living God” (Matt. 16: 13-18).

{*How simply and perfectly are the two sides of the Lord’s Person set forth, without any human effort, in the second Psalm, verse 7! It is Messiah, the Anointed One, who says, “I will declare the decree: Jehovah hath said unto Me, ‘Thou art My Son’ this day have I begotten Thee.” Born into this world, He is declared to be the ‘SON OF GOD.” Compare Isaiah 7: 14; Isaiah 9: 6; Luke 1: 35. The Father’s voice confirmed this when, at His baptism, Jesus associated Himself outwardly with those who had confessed their sins under John the Baptist’s preaching; the voice from heaven proclaimed, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased” (Matt. 3: 16-17). the Lord will have the same confession from the heart and mouth of His disciples, as in the case of Peter (Rom. 1: 4; Rom. 10: 9)}

The word “build” is an evident allusion to a well-known Old Testament figure of the dwelling-place of God in the midst of His redeemed people.* It will have its counterpart in the eternal state (Rev. 21: 3). As an apostle, Peter had his place in the foundation (Eph. 2: 20), the blessed Lord Himself being “the chief cornerstone,” or, according to the passage in Matthew, “the rock” on which the church is built (see 1 Cor. 3: 10, 11). No other foundation can ever be laid. More than this, the fact of God’s present dwelling in the midst of His saints involves personal responsibility on their side which is of the deepest moment (see Ps. 68: 18; 2 Cor. 6: 16). The apostle insists upon it after speaking of the church in its future completed glory, in Ephesians 2: 20, 21. Considered with reference to the future, it is growing “unto an holy temple in the Lord”, but at the same time it is equally true that believers are now “builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit” (ver. 22).

{*See Zech. 2: 10; Zech. 3: 9; Zech. 4: 6-10; Zech. 6: 12-13, 15. It is true that the first form of God’s dwelling-place in the midst of His redeemed people was necessarily a “tabernacle” or tent, as long as the people were in the wilderness, moving from place to place (Ex. 25; 8; 1 Chr. 17: 56). When, after David’s time, they were peacefully settled in the land of Canaan, the tabernacle was replaced by a temple built of stones. In this way Solomon’s Temple, glorious as it was, but finally destroyed by the Chaldeans on account of the sins of the people, is still a figure of what is to be in a yet future day, when the millennial temple described in Ezekiel, will be built (Isa. 2: 23, etc.). Here again there is a divine forecast of the spiritual or heavenly Jerusalem.}

The history of God’s ancient people is full of instruction for us. We are told that, “Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope” (Rom. 15: 4). Consequently we may observe in all these Old Testament passages that we have referred to, besides many others (such as Ezek. 37: 26, etc.), a deeper spiritual signification addressed to the heart and conscience of believers at the present time. The Lord’s answer to Peter involves this, and the epistles, especially Paul’s, make it clear. We need, however, to remember that in the case of Israel their future establishment and blessing will be on earth and in the Holy Land, whereas in the case of the church in its future manifested glory, it is seen to come down from God, “out of heaven” (Rev. 21: 10, 11). This contrast between earth and heaven must be borne in mind.

No adequate estimate of the church, even in its most elementary character as a spiritual building, can be formed apart from its heavenly origin. That is to say that its final manifestation in heavenly glory is but a consequence of its heavenly start in connection with the Person of the Son of God, now seated “on the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Heb. 1: 3; Heb. 8: 1, 2). That its very constitution is heavenly would appear from a comparison of Hebrews 8: 1, 2 with Exodus 15: 17; and we may infer it from the Lord’s words to Nicodemus (John 3: 12, 13). For He came to speak of “heavenly things.” But the formation of the church was still future when the Lord spoke to Peter, for He said, “upon this rock I will build My church (Matt. 16: 18).

Let us then return to consider the question and answer on which the Lord based the first intimation to His disciples of that which He, as a Builder, was about to do. His first care was to draw, from them all, the confession of what He was, and especially of what He was to God. His words were, “whom say ye that I am?” Peter, who answered, had still to learn that what he said was a direct revelation from above, “flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven”. The truth embodied in the answer was new to them all: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”. What could be clearer than, as above remarked, that the heavenly source and character of the revelation centred round the Person of the eternal SON? What that means for the saints of this present economy of grace is unfolded in John’s Gospel. The first message sent by the Lord to His disciples, after His resurrection, shows its effect, “My Father, and your Father;” and “My God, and your God.” Sonship can only be truly known by us as manifested in the Person of the Son, and as the direct fruit of His death and resurrection (John 1: 18; John 12: 24; John 20: 17). It is made good in our souls by the Holy Spirit (Gal. 4: 6).

Furthermore, in considering the formation of the church as the house of God, we see that Christ keeps it in His own hands. He is the foundation, and He constructs it. Every individual believer has his place in it as a “living stone” (1 Peter 2: 5, 6). The position given to each one, assigned by the Lord, is also maintained by Him in such sort that “the gates of hades shall not prevail against it”. What a comfort it is to be assured that all the efforts and power of Satan are fruitless in the case of the Lord’s church!

Peter, in his first epistle, treats of the church as a “spiritual house”, in the Lord’s keeping, and already in existence, so that worship and praise to God may go on in it, and service go out from it. In the epistle to the Hebrews we find the same figure of the “house”; and besides that, an allusion to the heavenly city “Jerusalem which is above” (see also Gal. 4: 26). This was afterwards shown to the apostle John (Rev. 21). It is instructive to notice in all these passages the place that “sonship” has; and that is even carried on to the eternal state (Rev. 21: 7).

Let us now refer briefly to another truth revealed to the apostle Paul that of the BODY of Christ. This was the mystery kept secret, “hid in God”, and of which we find no indication in Old Testament times. The type of the “bride” was indeed seen in Eve and others (Eph. 5: 31); but the figure of the body is different. In this case also, as we have already noticed, the sonship of Christ is prominent.

Paul was the first to preach Him as “the Son of God” (Acts 9: 20). We have only to read carefully his epistles to see the effect of the apostle’s call on his own soul. In writing to the Corinthians, especially as to church order, he begins with reminding them that they had been called by God into the “fellowship of His SON Jesus Christ our Lord”. To the Galatians, who, through Judaising teaching, were in danger of losing this truth, he insists upon it in the most pointed way. (See Gal. 1: 16; Gal. 3: 26; Gal. 4: 47, 28, 29.) And as if to bring home to their consciences what they were giving up, Paul associates with himself “all the brethren” (Gal. 1: 2); for indeed the relationship with the Father was the common portion of them all, and by no means confined to any special leaders or labourers amongst them. As to himself he says, “It pleased God … to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the heathen”. In believers the Holy Spirit is called “The Spirit of His Son”.

The great subject of the epistle to the Romans is the gospel from the particular point of view of God’s righteousness revealed in it (Rom. 1: 16, 17). Yet the opening verses declare that the subject of it is the Son (v. 3); and in Him, and His redeeming work, the love, righteousness, and glory of God are inseparable (Rom. 3: 21; Rom. 5: 2, 5). God’s glory is our “hope”, as soon as justification is known, and sonship in its final character and manifestation in glory is largely developed in Romans 8, as well as that personal witness of the Holy Spirit “with our spirit” which makes it effectual in every believer’s soul. The end and aim of it is the glory of the SON, that he may be “the firstborn among many brethren” (v. 29).

The epistle to the Ephesians which unfolds the “mystery” of the “body of Christ”, subject to the Head in heaven, also opens with this blessed truth of relationship with the Father, who has chosen us in His SON “before the foundation of the world”, and “marked us out beforehand for adoption through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will”.

In Colossians, we are called to give thanks to the Father, “who has delivered us from the authority of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love” (Col. 1: 12-13).

This truth of sonship so characterised the apostle’s early preaching, that in the case of the Thessalonians everybody was speaking of how they had “turned to God from idols, to serve the living and true God; and to wait for HIS SON from heaven . . .” (1 Thess. 1: 10). The Lord grant that, with a deepened sense of this blessed relationship, such waiting and watching may become more vivid and habitual with each one of us!

The Heavenly Call

We have spoken of Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God, and noticed how it was the occasion of the Lord’s first intimation of what the church was to be, and the divine basis of all subsequent revelation as to the church in its varied aspects. We have also traced rapidly the place that same confession had in Paul’s preaching and in his epistles. But the epistle to the Hebrews demands some further examination.

It is this epistle which particularly unfolds the “heavenly calling” of the saints during the present economy of grace, and thus distinguishes them in more than one respect from all those who went before. Of these latter, Abraham was the great example: first as to the character of his faith, which is the same in principle for all believers of every dispensation (Rom. 4: 3); secondly, as to his call “to go out” to another land, and the maintenance of the pilgrim character even in the land to which he went. That has also a spiritual application to believers of the present day; but considered as history, it is just there that we learn the contrast between the Old Testament saints and the church of Christ. Abraham’s call was earthly, that is, out of Ur of the Chaldees to Canaan, on reaching which he built his first altar (Gen. 11: 31; Gen. 12: 57; Heb. 11: 8, 9). Our calling is heavenly from the start, and is maintained in principle by a heavenly priesthood. It is well to note also that, in the description of the “mount Zion” and “heavenly Jerusalem,” which is set before us for our encouragement, the “church of the firstborn” (saints), whose names “are written in heaven,” is distinguished from the “spirits of just men made perfect,” which evidently represent the Old Testament saints (Heb. 12: 22-24).

In this epistle to the Hebrews, who were well acquainted with the letter of the Old Testament, the Spirit of God everywhere insists upon the Sonship of Christ; the Son is prominent from beginning to end, in all the aspects of His glory which are touched upon. Types abound, of course, but their object is to bring out in every case the marked contrast between the type and the antitype. If this simple fact be observed, the whole of the epistle becomes luminous for the believer’s soul, and the most difficult problems are solved. We are exhorted to look off unto Jesus, the Author and Finisher of faith (Heb. 12: 2), and thus to “run with patience the race that is set before us.”

God has spoken in these last days, in the person of the SON, now hidden from our sight, but visible to the eye of faith, and in Him He speaks now “from heaven” (Heb. 1: 2, 3; Heb. 2: 9; Heb. 12: 25). All His work of atonement is accomplished, and He now exercises His priesthood in favour of His redeemed. This priesthood is heavenly in character, and is exercised from heaven, yea, the very highest heaven; for as the high priest of old had to pass from the altar in the court, through the holy place, into the holiest of all, so Jesus has passed through the heavens even to the right hand of the Majesty on high, and His glory is set “far above all heavens” (Ps. 8: 1; Eph. 4: 10). Thence it is that He watches over His own and intercedes for them (Heb. 4: 14; Heb. 7: 26; Heb. 8: 1, 2; Heb. 9: 24).

Besides this, as High Priest, consecrated “with an oath,” which the sons of Aaron never were, He is pre-eminently the SON (Heb. 4: 14; Heb. 5: 5, 8; Heb. 7: 3, 28). Those who despise Him are guilty of treading under foot the SON OF GOD (Heb. 6: 6; Heb. 10: 29).

God’s purpose is to have “many sons” in glory. Christ had therefore to become the Captain of their salvation by means of His sufferings and death on their account; but having now taken His place “on the right hand of the Majesty on high,” He intercedes for and succours all who, through His finished work, are made heirs of salvation. He receives the “children” from God’s hand as a gift to Himself, and looks upon them as having a heavenly character in consequence, though they are still waiting till He comes to fetch them to be with Him where He is; but as belonging to that place in glory, He looks upon them as His companions, or “fellows.” It is that character which He desires we should maintain (Heb. 1: 9; Heb. 2: 14; Heb. 3: 1, 14). He has Himself gone through the whole course, and is now in heavenly glory, and from the height and power of that glory, He, as the great High Priest, ministers to all who are called to follow Him in the race which He has run (Heb. 2: 18; Heb. 4: 15-16; Heb. 5: 79; Heb. 6: 19-20; Heb. 7: 24-28; Heb. 8: 1; Heb. 9: 24, 28; Heb. 10: 35-37, Heb. 12: 13). “Seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession,” and “run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus,” waiting in patience until He come!

The character and effect of Paul’s preaching the “Son of God” (Acts 9: 20) is well set forth in the Thessalonian believers, as shown in the first epistle to them, and which was probably the first portion of the New Testament committed to writing. They were “turned to God from idols, to serve the living and true God; and to wait for His Son from heaven.” This remarkable change was wrought, and maintained in them in spite of circumstances so adverse that the apostle himself feared that they might have possibly been turned aside by Satan’s continued efforts. Being himself hindered from going to them, he sent Timothy to establish and comfort them, and was greatly cheered by the tidings Timothy brought back to him of their faith and love (1 Thess. 3: 1-8). That was the occasion of his writing the epistle, not only to confirm their hope in waiting for the Son of God, but also to impart to them a special revelation from God as to the manner of the Lord’s return.

Up to that time they had had no news of the way in which the Lord was about to redeem His promise of coming for His saints to receive them to Himself, as He indeed told His disciples before He left them (John 14: 13). The early believers of the gospel, including Peter himself, had connected the Lord’s return with the setting up of His millennial kingdom (Acts 3: 20, 21). And consequently the death of some of the converts filled the others with unwonted sorrow, under the impression that the departed ones would necessarily be deprived of their part in the glory they had expected to share in.

Such was indeed a fitting opportunity for the fresh revelation confided to the apostle, for the comfort and consolation of the saints in all time. While confirming the hope of the Lord’s return at any moment, and inspiring the saints in their attitude of waiting with fresh spiritual vigour, it directed their thoughts more definitely than ever to the Lord’s Person, and to His portion in His saints for time and eternity.

When He returns to this earth, He will bring His saints with Him. That had been already foretold (Zech. 14: 5; Jude 14). But how it was to be accomplished was not made known, until it became needful to answer questions which arose out of the difficulties and trials of the Macedonian converts. They had to be assured first of all that the Lord would take His suffering saints, both dead and living, out of this scene, before establishing His kingdom and glory here below; and secondly, that this certainty was to prevent their supposing that the final manifestation of evil and Satan’s power had already begun (1 Thess. 4: 14; 2 Thess. 2: 1, 2).

When the Lord left this earth from the mount of Olives, the cloud concealed Him from the gaze of His disciples (Acts 1: 9). Similarly, the clouds will hide from the knowledge of this world the taking up of the saints at the Lord’s coming “in the air.” As far as the world is concerned, their withdrawal from the earth will usher in the darkness of the “night” which precedes its final judgment (1 Thess. 5: 17).

The Morning Star is indeed the harbinger of the coming day; but it shines in the night with a heavenly glory of its own, which has very little effect on the earth. Those that recognise it, rejoice in it for its own sake. The Lord grant that we may, each and all, be so watching, and occupied with Himself that, as we hear in our inmost souls His assurance, “Surely I come quickly,” our hearts may respond with the Spirit and the bride, “Even so, come, Lord Jesus!”

The Church of the Living God

The Church of the Living God

W. J. Lowe.

The house of God and the body of Christ

Prefatory Note

Many quotations from recent writers in some of the foremost and deservedly valued Christian periodicals, could be given in proof of the fact that there is a growing tendency even amongst those who profess to be zealous for the truth to ignore or set aside one or other of the two aspects of the church, represented by the “House” and the “Body”. But in the present paper it has been thought wiser to avoid all appearance of controversy, and to keep simply to the truth as given in the Scriptures, to which every sincere believer must perforce appeal. The writers referred to, beloved for their works’ sake, must stand or fall to their own master. Each and all can, if they will, compare this present paper with their own; and whatever their matured thoughts may be, it is confidently believed they will lose nothing by so doing. May our common Lord and Master add His blessing.

It surely behoves those who care for Christ’s glory (because they have “tasted that the Lord is gracious”) to look afresh into the Scriptures in order that their souls may be established in the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 2).

W. J. Lowe, New York, August, 1904

{The reader is exhorted to turn up the Scripture references.}

The ‘Church of the Living God’ is presented in two distinct ways in the New Testament, namely, as ‘House of God’ and as ‘the Body of Christ’. With the former is connected every matter of practical holiness and behaviour (Ps. 93: 5; 1 Tim. 3: 15); with the latter, that special character of God’s ways in grace during the present interval, and consequently, all that concerns the spiritual progress and final perfection of those who are soon to ‘bear the image of the heavenly’, and who are now expected to be found waiting, and ‘ready’ for their Lord’s return (Eph. 4: 8-16; 1 Cor. 15: 48, 49; Phil. 3: 20, 21; Col. 3: 1-4; Mark 13: 32-37; Luke 12: 31-40).

The ‘House’ and its character depends upon what God is, Who deigns to dwell therein, and has said, ‘Be ye holy, for I am holy’ (1 Peter 1: 13-16).

The ‘Body’ is the complement of the glorified Son of Man, ‘the fulness of Him that filleth all in all.’ (Eph. 1: 19-23; Eph. 3: 2-12) The unfolding of this ‘mystery’ was specially committed to the Apostle Paul, who had been called to see the Lord Jesus in glory (1 Cor. 15: 8; Acts 9: 3-6; Eph. 1: 22-23).

The mystery of the Body of Christ could not be properly made known until the ‘Head’ was glorified in heaven, after having accomplished His work of redemption (Heb. 1: 3). It was, says the apostle, a mystery hidden during the past ages (Eph. 3: 5-6; Rom. 16: 25), only to be revealed when the full expression of His love for the church has been given at thLes Hodgett (John 15: 13; Eph. 5: 25). There is, however, a faint indication of it in Genesis 2, before the fall of Adam, which sets forth figuratively some of the fundamental truths on which it is based. The passage is referred to and partly quoted by the apostle in Ephesians 5: 30, 31, as indeed previously in the gospels, for another reason, by the blessed Lord Himself, referring to the relation established by God between a man and his wife (Matt. 19: 4, 5; Mark 10: 7, 8). The apostle adds, however, ‘This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the church.’

In the original history (Gen. 2), we find that ‘Adam was first formed, than Eve’ (1 Tim. 2: 12). So did the manifestation of Christ in this world precede any mention of the church, which is His Body.*

{*It is noticeable that, in Matthew (Matt. 9: 15; Matt. 22: 2, 11, 12; Matt. 25: 1), the only one of the four gospels which mentions the church, we have three references to the ‘Bridegroom’, whereas the word ‘Bride’ does not occur. The blessed, wondrous fact that there was to be a ‘bride’ is consequently deducible only from the fact that Christ is the Bridegroom of divine purpose in Old Testament scriptures. To that the scriptures in Matthew doubtless refer, as also John 3: 29, if, indeed, this latter passage goes beyond the simple statement of the moral relationship. If not limited to that, it would answer to Psalm 45: 9. But in Matthew we have the added feature of Christ’s rejection, in chapter 21, preparing the way for the ‘marriage’ (chapter 22). In consequence, those who are instructed in the divine secret, the virgins, go forth to meet the Bridegroom (chapter 25: 1).}

The woman was not formed until Adam had slept ‘a deep sleep’, when God took one of his ribs for that purpose. On awaking, he found an ‘help-meet’; and so in a figure we find Christ’s death and resurrection to be the initial act of the church’s existence, without which Psalm 8 could not be accomplished in divine order, nor His present glory have become available for anyone, whether Jew or Gentile. (see John 12: 20-24). In the death of Christ, God deals with man on the broad lines of his being ‘dead in trespasses and sins’ (Eph. 2: 1-13), an epithet which applies to the Jew as well as to the Gentiles. Every national distinction is thus intentionally broken down (Eph. 2: 14-17), and the fulness of divine blessing flows out to the lost, as a consequence of Christ being ‘rejected of men’ (1 Peter 2: 3-5).*

{*It is deeply interesting in this connection to note that the first definite announcement of His sufferings and death made by Jesus at the end of His public ministry in Galilee, was immediately followed by His taking three of His disciples into the mountain and giving them there a view of His ‘coming’, His ‘power’ and His ‘majesty’. See the accounts of the transfiguration in Matthew 16: 28, Mark 9: 1 and Luke 9: 29-31, comparing them with Peter’s use of it in his second epistle, just previously to his martyrdom.}

Types always fade before the divine realities which they foreshadow (Luke 9: 20-22). Were it not for the inspired apostolic comment upon Adam’s words concerning Eve, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh’, – who could have ventured to gather from them the wondrous conclusion, ‘We are members of his body, his flesh and his bones?’*

{*We mention the risen Lord’s assurance to His astonished disciples in Luke 24: 39, as recalling Adam’s words: ‘A spirit hath not flesh and bones as you see me have’? But, as remarked above, the revelation of the mystery of the Church was reserved for the ministry of Paul.}

Such was however the purpose of God for the glory of His Son, set forth in Eden, while Adam was as yet unfallen. And Adam ‘is the figure of Him that was to come’ (Rom. 5: 14). Through this touching history the believer’s heart is led on towards the consummation of those divine counsels which exceed in enthralling power of all the brightness of displayed glory. Many will have part in the ‘kingdom’ who do not belong to the church (Matt. 8: 11), but it is ‘to himself’ that Christ will present the church, without spot or wrinkle, holy and unblemished (Eph. 5: 27). His peculiar portion is in her, who is, – as Abigail was to David, – the companion of His rejection, and she, the brightest jewel of redemption, is known as ‘the Bride of the Lamb’ (Rev. 21: 9).

Thus, in the earliest days of man’s history upon earth, was first indicated the ‘mystery of God’s will according to his good pleasure which He hath purposed in himself’ (Eph. 1: 9). The making of it known was reserved until the Son had fulfilled on earth the Father’s will, and had returned to heaven. But now that it is revealed, it commands the believer’s heart and conscience, when he learns that ‘there is one body and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of our calling’ (Eph. 4: 3-4). He is bound in the sight of God and in fealty to Christ, ‘to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.’ The Spirit is given to Him for that purpose. ‘He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit’ (1 Cor. 6: 17; 1 Cor. 12: 13).

The truth concerning the House of God, faintly set forth at ‘Bethel,’ in Jacob’s history (Gen. 28: 17-22), could not properly be taken up in detail till after the flood, after Babel and the call of Abraham, and after the bondage of his descendants in the land of Egypt. But when it pleased God to accomplish the promise made to their fathers, He gathered out the Israelites as His own peculiar treasure (Ex. 19: 4-6), in whose midst He was pleased to dwell. It is then in Exodus, the book of redemption, that we must look for the simplest and most fundamental principles of the ‘house of God’. The special features of the ‘House’ in the form the Lord has given to it in the present time, cannot invalidate those eternal principles of relationship with Himself, which were clearly established at the first (Matt. 16: 18). On the contrary they confirm them, while receiving additional light from the inspired record of Israel’s passage through the wilderness, and of their sojourn in the promised land.

God having personally ‘come down’ to deliver His* people, and being Himself their leader in the pillar of cloud and fire, it was a divine necessity that He should remain with them, and that the tokens of His presence should be continually before them. In this respect their sojourn in the wilderness was the brightest epoch of their history, and the truth unfolded in the Epistle to the Hebrews refers precisely to that period.

{*The words, ‘my people’ occur here (Ex. 3: 7, 8) for the first time, proving that ‘my’ refers to redemption. Compare Isa. 43: 1, 3 and 1 Cor. 6: 20.}

The answer of their hearts to it, beyond question inspired of God, was, ‘He is my God, and I will prepare Him a habitation, my father’s God, and I will exalt Him’ (Ex. 15: 2). In the marvellous song after the passage of the Red Sea, we find three great principles brought together: a redeemed people, the ‘House’ and the Kingdom; the latter for the time being, as all the song shows, limited to Israel, for all the nations mentioned are there treated as enemies. But the first condition of God’s habitation existing amongst His people was that the people had been previously redeemed to Himself.* God Himself sets His seal to this at Mount Sinai when He says to Moses, ‘Let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them’ (Ex. 25: 8).

{*What a fatal blow is given here to the idea of a ‘national church’ at the present day! Israel was indeed nationally adopted, but the very principle and constitution of the Christian church is that all national distinctions are abolished (Col. 3: 11), and adoption is individual. To establish a church composed of regenerate and unregenerate alike, is to destroy the foundations of the truth.}

One cannot conceive of anything more stirring and heart-searching than the continual sight of the cloud over the Tabernacle in the centre of Israel’s camp – a pillar of cloud by day and of fire by night (Num. 9: 15-33). Every Israelite could see it from his tent door. And yet the history of their murmurings proves how little their hearts really rose up to it (Num. 11-17). Circumstances had more effect upon them than the fact of God’s presence and its proven power and grace. It was then as now a question of faith in God. And may we not ask ourselves whether we show ourselves more believing than they?

Exceptions there were of course even in the olden time. Psalm 27 expresses the right desires and feelings of one who has a sense of God’s presence and of what it involves. It is exceedingly striking in referring to the ‘light’ and ‘salvation’ known in the passage of the Red Sea (compare verses 1 & 2 with Ex. 14: 13, 20). But if salvation is to be appropriated, faith has ever been necessary (Hab. 2: 4, Rom. 1: 17) as God’s only way of righteousness and life for man. It was reserved to Moses to pray that the principle of God’s dwelling with His people should be confirmed to them in the future, and that the tabernacle, ‘the work of their hands,’ (Psalm 90: 1, 16, 17*) should have its eternal counterpart. It will be true in the millennium for Israel, and universally in the eternal state (Rev. 21: 3).

{*Compare the word ‘beauty’ in Psalm 90 with Psalm 27: 4}

Some other principles had to be set forth before the coming of the Son of God to this earth, – incarnate. When Israel was established in the land of Canaan, God, Who had dwelt and ‘walked’ amongst them in the wilderness, would have a permanent habitation, like the palaces of kings. David desired to erect it, and to him was given a fresh revelation that it could only be properly built by Him Who was at the same time David’s son and David’s Lord, the One of Whom God could say in deepest meaning, ‘I will be his father, and he shall be my son’ (1 Chron. 17: 13, 11). Zechariah 6 shows to the returned captives that only His building can endure. Every precious temple, even Solomon’s, though devised and arranged by David under God’s directing hand, was destined to perish in flames.

He Who, in 1 Chronicles 17: 14, is owned to be ‘the Son’, forever to be settled in the house and kingdom of God, is in Zechariah 6 shown to be ‘the man whose name is the Branch,’ growing up out of His place. He, the Son of Man, will bear the glory, and be a priest upon His throne, fulfilling what is said of Him in Psalms 2, 8, 91: 16, 110: 4, etc.

All these facts and shadows of olden time are gathered up by the Lord when He, speaking of Himself as ‘the Son of Man,’ obtained from Peter the required answer to His question: ‘Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God’ (Matt. 16: 13-18). And He adds, ‘Upon this rock I will build my church.’ Here we find the first announcement given in the New Testament concerning that ‘House’ which is composed of ‘stones’ of which Peter was a sample* in his confession that Jesus was the Son of the living God. Such are now ‘builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit’ (Eph. 2: 22).

{*Peter (petros) means a ‘stone.’}

The administration of the kingdom, – now a heavenly one – was confided by the Lord to Peter at the same time, thus maintaining the connection between the House and the Kingdom, first set forth in Exodus 15.

Many confound the ‘church’ with the ‘kingdom of heaven,’ as if they were one and the same thing; but a little attention to the Old Testament scriptures suffices to make the matter plain. The kingdom is the entire sphere subjected to the authority of God, in which His government is exercised. The ‘House’ is His dwelling place, and those who are of His household’ (Eph. 2: 19-21) are in special relationship to Him. They are ‘built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone, in whom all the building, fitly framed together, groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord.’

We may add as to the kingdom in its present form, in accordance with 1 Chronicles 17: 14, that it is the authority and power of God exercised from heaven over earth by Him Who said, ‘All power is given to me in heaven and in earth: go ye therefore and teach all nations,’ etc. (Matt. 28: 18, 19; 11: 27). That being the case, the evangelist can go forth freely, confiding in the Lord’s gracious care, even though he be as a ‘sheep in the midst of wolves’ (Matt. 10: 16), and liable to be brought in judgment before governors and kings for the Lord’s sake, ‘for a testimony against them and the Gentiles.’ Thus it was that Paul suffered.

2

From the rapid sketch above, which we have sought to condense as much a possible, it must be evident to every truly obedient heart, that the discipline and holiness which become the house of God, have foremost claim on the Christian’s attention, not only as to his own personal conduct, of which the epistles speak, but also as to his relations with his fellow Christians in the church or ‘assembly.’ This part of his duty is more difficult than that which is purely individual, from the simple fact that in dealing with others there is much more need of grace, patience and long-suffering. Different temperaments, differing tastes, inclinations, and capabilities, all calling for gentleness and compassionate forbearance, meet one on every hand, to say nothing of disorders arising from past failures and the working of man’s will, augmented by our own inattention to the order of the house of God. It is easy for an energetic servant to make use of the whip in order to enforce compliance with what he deems to be right, but such methods are those of the world which crucified Christ, and they will in due time meet with the Lord’s judgment (Matt. 24: 48-51). If the order maintained in the house does not adequately set forth the claims of Him Whose house it is, it loses its character, and will eventually be disowned of the Lord.

So it was of the temple at Jerusalem which He called ‘My house’ (Matt. 21: 13) and ‘My Father’s house,’ (John 2: 16) but of which He said eventually, “Behold your house is left unto you desolate; for I say unto you, ye shall not see me henceforth till ye shall say, ‘Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.’ ” (Matt. 23: 38, 39).

Everything that has ever been committed of God to man’s hand has been ruined from the very outset. Adam innocent disobeyed his Creator and lost paradise (Gen. 3); Noah, the constituted head of our present world after the flood, was dishonoured through his own failure (Gen. 9: 20-24); Israel broke the law in the most flagrant manner, before the two tables were brought into the camp (Ex. 32); Solomon, who built the temple, built also on the Mount of Olives those high places for the idols of his wives (1 Kings 11: 7-8) which remained a blot upon the reigns of the best kings of Judah until eventually removed by Josiah (2 Kings 23: 13), and even the evil root which had led to their being set up remained unjudged, and the chastisement foretold overtook the unfaithful people (Jer. 3: 10, 11).

The church has been no exception to the rule. Murmurings and deception soon tarnished the joy of the bright beginning and ere the apostles left the scene they had to warn the faithful against every kind of disorder within, not to speak of corrupters who, as Jude says, ‘crept in’ from without. Satan sowed tares amongst the wheat, filled the great tree with the birds which devoured the good seed which was first scattered, corrupted the fine flour with leaven which, once introduced, never could be eradicated (Matt. 13). The purging out of leaven, in as far as that is possible in a local church or company of Christians, became indeed one of the objects of apostolic care (1 Cor. 5: 7), but there is no suggestion in the New Testament that the church, as a whole, will ever regain the simplicity, mutual confidence and self-sacrifice which characterised its start. On the contrary, the ruin which the enemy brought in, has been a prominent feature throughout its history, only relieved in part from time to time, through the raising up of faithful men, whom God has graciously used to recall Christians to the truth given at the first by the Lord Himself and then through apostles. The patent fact of the church, both west and east, having early in the fourth century sold her liberty to the civil power,* should suffice to convince every honest heart of the hopelessness of looking for better things. When has she ever regained what she gave up then? Free churches at the present day may pride themselves on being delivered from this influence, but they prove by their ways that they are quite as political as those who cling to ‘national’ established churches, if not even more so, thus verifying the Lord’s word to Pergamos, ‘I know thy works and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat** is’ (Rev. 2: 13). The Romish power pretends to rule the world – that world which the Lord refused to set right (John 18: 36; 1 Tim. 6: 13); Protestants – episcopalian and non-episcopalian – accept to be ruled or guided by the world, trusting to the power of princes in order to be able to make a stand against Romish pretensions and encroachments. The Greek church is no better. Where can we look to find any considerable following of the rejected Nazarene?

{*And what did she gain by it? If persecution from without was practically brought to an end by putting the church’s judicial administration into the hands of the secular power, it speedily began again from within and in a worse form. Satan raised up trouble through the heretic, Arius, who was before long clever enough to gain the Emperor’s ear, and was on the point of being made Patriarch of Constantinople, when he perished miserably during a procession in the streets of the city. But the mischief he had caused by no means ended with his death, for three centuries the church in the East was torn to pieces with heretical teaching and discussions about doctrine.

**Editor’s note: The throne of Jupiter (the chief idol of the Roman world) stood in Pergamos until the 19th century when the temple was dismantled and set up in a museum in Berlin, Germany.}

That He has had at all times, and will have through grace, a few witnesses to His truth, like Enoch, faith rejoices in. All Scripture testifies to this fact, though even David the king could say, ‘Help, Lord, for the godly man ceaseth, the faithful fail from among the children of men’ (Ps. 12: 1). If ever there was a time when one might be encouraged, surely it was when the king himself was a God-fearing man. Yet such was his testimony given ‘to the chief musician’ to be sung in public.

The comfort is that God’s truth abides, and surely He will sustain and bless every soul that humbly seeks, in dependence upon Himself, to walk according to it (3 John 3-4), while He encourages and helps those who together seek to call upon the Lord out of a true heart (2 Tim. 2: 22). It is in vain that we complain of the faults of others, seeking in this way to account for the failure and disorder, which are in our own individual hearts. The book of Job may well serve as a warning in this respect. That most righteous man (and God bore witness to him as such), a man who was not a Pharisee, but habitually used language that no Pharisee would use; when put into the crucible, was found to be secretly clinging to a testimony from his fellows, which he knew in his heart of hearts would not avail him before God (Job 9: 2, 3, 20, 30, 31). And is there not in every heart a lurking root of self-confidence; a hankering after satisfaction to be derived from comparing ourselves with others, with the conviction that the comparison will turn out to our advantage, God Himself being the Judge? He who through God’s grace could say, in the midst of his bitter trial, ‘I know that my Redeemer liveth’ (Job 19: 25) was brought to say at the end of it, ‘Now mine eye seeth thee, wherefore I abhor myself and repent in dust and ashes’ (Job 42: 5, 6). If that were our state, there would be an end to seeking applause from others.

As with Job, so it is with us. In the path of self-judgment and true contrition, bearing on our hearts the ruin of the church, will be found the divine remedy for the evils which we deplore; not that Scripture warrants our expecting extensive or brilliant results, but faith counts on God to own and bless His Word, and those who do His will in obeying it.

The question is ‘Are the principles and order of the house of God, as given in the Scripture, to be complied with? If not, how can there be for Christ’s glory any true collective answer to the grace of Him Who died to save us, and Who builds the house for His Father (1 Chr. 17: 12), – the house which He calls ‘My church’? Holiness becomes that house forever. Is holiness to be maintained or not?

Surely if we know ourselves at all, we must be conscious of a secret dislike to discipline, when we ourselves become amenable to it. The natural heart will ever be ready to exercise it upon a defaulter, even going so far as to take the law into one’s own hand, but our ill adjusted balances provide excuses for ourselves; and resistance to authority, whether active or passive, is none the less real for being unavowed.

Did the flesh not exist in us, there would be no difficulty. But there it is, and ever will be as long as we remain on earth. Who can truly say, I am free from it? We are swift to detect it in others, and would fain offer to relieve our brother’s eye of the mote we think we see there, forgetful of the beam that is in our own eye. Intelligent, godly young Christians are almost sure to err on this side. One of the most painful things in a Christian assembly is a strong-willed man who lacks the experience furnished by mature age, and yet takes upon himself to set his brethren right in doctrines, principles and practice, as if he alone were the defender of the faith. ‘Not a novice’ (1 Tim. 3: 16) was Paul’s warning to Timothy, and surely we do well to heed it.

Another difficulty, common amongst older men, is a repugnance to obey the Scripture when disciplinary actions are called for, as in Corinth (1 Cor. 5). This may arise from the remembrance of past personal failure, or from a lively sense of the feeble moral condition of those called upon to exercise discipline in obedience to the Lord. The case of Corinth, gross as it was, is full of instruction in this respect. May we not safely say that had the apostle not written to them, they would never have acted at all? His care, as both epistles prove, was the state of the whole assembly and the due exercise of every conscience within it (2 Cor. 12: 20, 21). Does not God permit evils of this kind and the trials they lead to, in order to raise the moral tone of those who may, unbeknown to themselves, be quietly gliding down the stream of worldliness and indifference to Christ’s claims?

Others again, who rightly complain of discipline carried out in the wrong way (for in what may not failure come in?), or in a haughty, harsh or overweening spirit, may feel tempted to go to the other extreme and refuse its exercise in any way at all. This is the case with multitudes at the present time. But whatever may be urged in defence of this argument, it must lead to winking at evil, which is a denial of the first principle of God’s house. For God is light, (Eph. 5: 13), and the light manifests everything. The effect of all independency in principle is to stifle conscience, and encourage indifference to God and His Word. As it was of old, those who turned a deaf ear to God’s warning, sought for men of their own choosing, to whom they could say, ‘Speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits.’

Wrong doing necessarily tries upright souls. But does not God in His providential wisdom, oftentimes permit it, in order that the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed? Thus was Christ rejected by those who ought to have been delighted to receive Him; ‘a sign spoken against,’ and a sword was to pierce even Mary’s soul (Luke 2: 34, 35).

Examples of this are not wanting in Old Testament times. Why, we may ask, did God allow David to consult his great captains, instead of the Levitical instructions, and imitate the Philistines in putting the ark upon a cart, which resulted in Uzzah being smitten (1 Chron. 15: 13)? Did it not look as if judgment had overtaken the wrong man? But only so could the king’s conscience be reached. And when his own grievous fall had to be chronicled some years later, could it be considered as an excuse for Absalom’s rebellion? Surely not. David was no doubt right in bowing to God’s chastening hand and in telling the priests to carry the ark back to Mount Zion (2 Sam. 15: 25), but God brought providentially upon his heartless son a judgment that the king, through his own personal failure, was too weak to carry out.

The Lord has said that ‘offences’, or stumbling blocks ‘must needs come’ (Matt. 18: 7); and so the apostle in writing to the Corinthians: ‘There must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be manifest among you.’ (1 Cor. 11: 19). But on the other hand, ‘God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way to escape that ye may be able to bear it’ (1 Cor. 10: 13). When trials overtake us, surely the first thing we have to do is to see God’s hand in it for the good of all concerned: ‘Hear ye the rod and him who hath appointed it’ (Micah 6: 9). In this way we shall not only find blessing for ourselves, but also have the joy of tracing God’s gracious dealings in caring for the spiritual good of our brethren (Rom 8: 28).

It is easy to seek to get rid of responsibility by crying out against the failures of those who seek in the main to carry it out in obedience to the Lord, and in dependence upon Him; but that is not the path of faith, nor one in which we may expect to find the Lord’s support.

The greater the difficulty, the more need we have of grace, as Paul reminded Timothy, ‘My son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus’ (2 Tim 2: 1). Nothing is more to be deprecated than an assembly dealing with evil in its midst in the spirit of a tribunal. The fact of there being evil in its midst is a reason for self-judgment, and humiliation before the Lord. Those who talk most loudly of what they do being ‘bound in heaven’ (Matt. 18: 18) are often unconscious of the extent to which they have carried out their own wills, without humbly seeking in concert with their brethren to get the Lord’s mind, so they might carry it out in true brokenness of spirit and obedience.

Two things need to be kept constantly before the soul in everything that concerns the assembly – first, the presence of the Lord in the midst (Matt. 18: 20; 28: 20); secondly, the fact of His speedy coming (Luke 12: 35-38; Rev 3: 11; 22: 12). When the thought of his coming being ‘delayed’ enters in the hearts, the ‘servants’ are bound to resort to worldly methods and practices (Matt. 24: 48). The Lord will deal with this Himself, when the proper time shall have come. Oh, may He arouse afresh the hearts of all His saints as to these two things, that we may not lose our golden opportunity for faithfulness to Him, ere He come!

From what we have thus briefly passed in review, the reader can but feel that there is no short, rough and ready, human way of compassing divine principles. Every heart needs to be personally occupied with the Lord, and all those who compose a local assembly need to be exercised as to having one mind in the Lord as to His Word in mutual forbearance, grace and patience. That can hardly be the case unless we follow the Apostle Paul in the ‘one thing’ he did and sought to do (Phil. 3: 8-17).

3

We would now rapidly draw attention to the epistles in which the order and discipline of the church in its local capacity and responsibility are particularly considered.

Foremost amongst those are the two epistles specially addressed ‘to the church of God which is at Corinth.’

In the first epistle, after three chapters occupied with the character of the gospel preached by the apostle, and its effects through the operation of the Holy Spirit, he turns to consider the church in its ‘house’ aspect, to the end of chapter 9, and then takes up the ‘body’ to the end of chapter 14, concluding with the resurrection as the fundamental truth of the gospel in chapter 15. At the end of chapter 3, the ‘house’ or ‘temple’ is introduced as the result of the preaching, the ‘building’ being looked at from the point of view of that which has been committed to man’s hand, bringing into evidence the responsibility of the builders. Throughout, it is a question of privilege, responsibility, and true exercise of conscience towards the Lord.

The coming of the Lord is mentioned four times in the course of the epistle, as giving tone and character to the whole Christian life in all its details (1: 8; 4: 5; 10: 26; 15: 23). And there is a covert allusion to it in the final solemn word ‘Maranatha’ in connection with final judgment at the end (16: 22).

Every subject heart must own that the person of the Lord Jesus Christ is the prominent thought throughout. The epistle, though especially addressed to the local church at Corinth, takes in ‘all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours’ (1 Cor. 1: 2). Consequently it has its value and actuality for all time, as long as the church is on earth. Every matter must needs be referred to the Lord and so considered by every Christian who cares for His interests and glory. Every detail of his service is treated by the apostle from that unique standpoint. If he were a minister at all, he was a minister of Christ (4: 1), accountable to his Master Who will manifest the secrets of every heart. In discipline, the apostle forbore to use his apostolic authority, preferring that the Corinthians should have their hearts and consciences exercised, so as to act in a way becoming the holiness of God’s house (5: 3-13). They could only be renewed as an unleavened lump after putting out the defilement that was in their midst.

The apostle’s anxiety is about them, the gathering as a whole. He explains it further in the second epistle, where he says: ‘Wherefore though I wrote unto you, I did it not for his cause that had done wrong, but that our care for you in the sight of God might appear unto you’ (2 Cor. 7: 12). Even supposing they had felt morally incompetent to deal with the case, or had for other reasons forborne the act, – had they ‘mourned’ (1 Cor. 5: 2) over it in true self-judgment, God might have intervened providentially to remove the offender. Instead of this they were glorying in their gifts and making light of defilement, even when it was of so gross a nature. The opportunity served for admonition concerning other cases of evil conduct, as well as for reminding them that the Christian’s body is the ‘temple of the Holy Ghost’ (1 Cor. 6: 19).

A somewhat analogous expression in chapter 3: 16, refers to the presence of the Holy Spirit on earth in the midst of the saints as a whole. This began on the day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came in fulfilment of the Lord’s promise (John 14: 16; 16: 7-15). On the other hand the Lord’s word, ‘He shall be in you,’ is abundantly testified to in Paul’s epistles, and presents the individual side of the blessing. ‘Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father’ (Gal. 4: 6).

We may indeed note these two things in Acts 2: 2-4, as often remarked, for while the rushing, mighty wind ‘filled all the house where they were sitting,’ it is added that the cloven tongues of fire ‘sat upon each of them, and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.’ This ‘baptism’ of the Spirit, never to be repeated, was the fulfilment of the Lord’s promise previous to His ascension: ‘Ye shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost, not many days hence’ (Acts 1: 5). The Holy Spirit then came down from heaven to abide with them ‘forever’ (John 14: 16) and what a blessing it is to know it!

In verse 13 of chapter 12 of our epistle, the apostle again refers to these two sides of the truth: The former part of the verse relates to the coming of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost answering to the word ‘baptism.’ The later part to the individual reception of the Spirit after conversion: have been all made to drink into one Spirit’ (see also Rom 8: 4, 10, 14; Gal. 5: 16, 25). The importance of this cannot be overrated; it is the power of the Christian’s life and walk.

The character of this walk, in relation to the house of God, is fully gone into in chapters 6-9 of our epistle, even to matters of eating and drinking. It concludes with the ministry, its claims and its privileges, in view of the incorruptible crown reserved for those who have run the race.

Then we have the ‘body’ introduced in chapter 10; a passage reminding us of the examples and warnings to be gathered from the history of Israel in the wilderness, showing the need of trusting a faithful God in order to be brought through.

It will be noticed that in this and the following chapters, the subject is the gathering and what is suitable to this, the order that becomes it, since Christ is the Head of the body and ‘the head of every man.’ The function of every member is thus referred to Him, and every member has its own function needful for the proper working of the whole.

In principle, this goes beyond a local gathering; for there is but one ‘body’ representing the universal church, all gifts being appropriated to the whole and consequently not necessarily confined to a local gathering. But the exercise of the gifts locally is to be after the same order, as chapter 14, shows, love – patient, suffering, forbearing love – being the cementing power and hidden energy of all spiritual action (1 Cor. 13).

The second epistle is in many ways the complement of the first, showing how grace is to reign practically, even when the assembly is called upon to go to the extreme act of exclusion.

It is often forgotten that discipline has its limits quite independently of the state of heart or conscience of the one dealt with. It should in its carrying out, bear the stamp of the God of all grace Who chastises ‘for our profit’ (Heb. 12: 10). He remembers how easily ‘the souls which he has made’ (Isa. 57: 16) may faint before Him. The prophets abound in analogous passages, of restraining grace (Ps. 103: 8-10).

Where there is but little spiritual power, patience is lacking, and the tendency is to resort to exclusion as a short way of getting over a difficulty. How soon, alas, do we forget that the cherubim* of Ezekiel are called upon to act, and the one that takes precedence (cf. Ezek. 10: 14 with 1: 10), and is alone called ‘a cherub’ distinctively, is the patient labouring ‘ox’. Yet it was ‘the same living creature’ previously seen by the prophet (Ezek 10: 20).

{*The cherubim form a part of God’s throne (as previously on the mercy seat), and represent administration or executive power, and are thus of great value in setting forth these principles for church action.}

When exclusion is the only possible remedy for maintaining the holiness of the assembly, it is evident that discipline ceases, for God judges those that are ‘without’ (1 Cor 5: 13). But godly solicitude and prayer has still its place, according to the grace which, in the world, seeks the lost; and there will be a watching to see how God continues His work in the soul of one who has failed, so that the longed for moment may be hailed with joy when it can be said, ‘sufficient unto such a man is this punishment which can be inflicted of many, so that contrariwise, ye ought rather to forgive him and comfort him, lest perhaps such an one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow’ (2 Cor. 2: 6, 7).

It will always be found that true humiliation and self-judgment, go hand in hand with patience and forbearance towards others. If another be overtaken in a fault, we have to seek his restoration in patient grace, considering our own imperfections, ‘lest we also be tempted’ (Gal. 6: 8).

Chapters 8 and 9 of the second epistle to the Corinthians deal with the whole subject of collections, chapter 8 with the godly care needed for their administration, chapter 9 with the privilege of giving and the way the matter should be apprehended and carried out for the glory of God in the assemblies of the saints.

The closing chapters deal with jealousies, recriminations and other fruits of the enemy’s work, who seeks to corrupt and turn away the minds of the saints from the simplicity which is in Christ. This affords an opportunity of setting forth the character of the true ministry of which the apostle in suffering was such a blessed example.

The two epistles to the Thessalonians were also addressed ‘to the church’, and are full of important directions as to personal walk, mutual consideration and godly order, at a time when the chief difficulties arose under the pressure of persecution, and much ignorance of divine principles in the young converts.

The epistles to Timothy and Titus contain apostolic commands to those who were associated with himself in the care of the assemblies. The first to Timothy dealing with a normal state of things which soon gave place to disorder and ruin, so that at the last the faithful servant has to purge himself from vessels to dishonour and follow ‘righteousness, faith, love, peace with those that call on the Lord our of a pure heart’ (2 Tim. 2: 20, 21). That can only be truly done in a spirit of mourning like that of Ezra, when he learned the failure of those whom God in mercy had brought back from captivity (Ezra 9). Comfort for a true heart is found in the fact that ‘the Lord knoweth them that are His’, while his imperative duty as naming the name of the Lord is, to ‘depart from iniquity’ (2 Tim. 2: 19). A most instructive instance of like action is found in Numbers 16,* where these two principles are brought out. See verses 5 and 26.

{*Note the word ‘tabernacle’ in the singular applied to Korah and his company in contradistinction with the tabernacle of the Lord. It is the only case of such a use of the word. See verse 9, and compare 16: 24, 27 with 17: 13.}

The greatest difficulty at the present time arises from the fact of widespread lawlessness, so that healthy discipline is often rendered nugatory by the facility of finding some company or other of Christians who care little about it and yet maintain an outward appearance of enjoying all Christian privileges.

This, as Scripture shows, will go on increasing. But in the midst of all the ruin, God’s truth abides, and God will bless those who walk according to it, and enable them in dependence upon Himself ‘to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’ (Eph. 4: 3). We cannot keep the ‘unity of the body’, as it is sometimes ill-expressed. The idea is unintelligent. The body exists, and there is but one. But we have to show our hearty subjection to the Holy Spirit’s operations and order, so that there may be nothing in our words and ways to clash with it. The ‘unity of the Spirit’ cannot be kept where He is practically ignored, the lordship of Christ forgotten and the Word of God disobeyed.

The enemy is ever ready with apologies and excuses for disobedience, but it is only by implicit obedience that we can walk in the steps of Him Who said, ‘Lo, I come to do thy will, O God’ (Psalm 40: 7). Strong-willed men have rent the church to pieces by their doctrines, ‘drawing away disciples after them’ (Acts 20: 29, 30; Rom 16: 17-19). But ‘God and the word of his grace’ abide for those who have ears to hear, and hearts to obey.

Nest in the Altar

The Nest in the Altar

or reminiscences of the war, 1870,

W. J. Lowe.

(First published as Manchester Series No. 319)

Yea, the sparrow hath found an house, and the swallow a nest for herself, where she may lay her young: even thine altars, O Lord of Hosts, my King, and my God.—Psalm 84: 3.

Preface.

Having had occasion to travel over the scene of the late war, and having been asked to put on record some account of the delivering grace of God and of the way in which He has tested His saints, I have acceded with much reluctance, feeling my incompetency for the task. All I can hope to do is to relate what has come under my personal observation, or what has been communicated to me on reliable authority. The reader will thus not look for a history, but merely a narrative of incidents, which occurred at some intervals of time and space, with the reflections to which they have given rise; and he will consider the few incidents that are here recorded rather as specimens of the kindness of God displayed toward some of His children than as any attempt at a chronicle of events.

If what is written suggests any useful lessons and thoughts to the reader, he will know how to bear with the scarcely avoidable disorder of the way in which it is put together. Should it encourage him to join his heart and voice to those of others in the meed of praise which has gone up to God for His abundant goodness, its perusal will, it is hoped, justify its publication.

It is a blessed thing for the child of God when he can imitate the example of those who, soaring above the din and confusion of this world, find a nest in the altars of the Lord of hosts. (Ps. 84.) Praise is comely, and it fills with real joy the heart of him that offers it. The Holy Spirit bids us rejoice in the Lord alway; and a heart, invigorated by the love of Christ, delights to find new occasions of praise, like a man hunting for treasures where none but the initiated would dream that any existed.

May the Lord lead His people into the sanctuary, there to trace the wondrous ways of Him whose way is in the sea and His footsteps in the great waters; there also to glorify Him, and discomfit the adversary, by new fruits of praise which babes and sucklings are able to cull for Him in the midst of all the wickedness with which this earth abounds.

W. J. Lowe August, 1871.

Introduction.

In the way of thy judgments, O Lord, have we waited for thee; the desire of our soul is to thy name and the remembrance of thee.—Isa. 26: 8.

The goodness of God endureth continually.—Ps. 52: 1.

The object of judgment is to obliterate evil; and when it is a question of sin, according to God’s estimate of it, death is the just and the only penalty in so far as life in this world is concerned. “The soul that sinneth it shall die.” But as that rigorous sentence would carry every soul into eternal punishment, God, who desires not the death of the sinner, introduces the principle of substitution, executes judgment to the uttermost upon His own Son, making Him, who never knew sin, to be sin for us, and then preaches peace and life by Jesus Christ. This at once divides the world into two classes, — those who accept God’s proclamation of peace and life, upon His condition of obedience to His Son, and those who do not. It also leaves God free to act in minor judgment (so to speak) in His moral government of this world. That is, to deal with evil in a way that a divinely instructed man must acknowledge to be holy, just, and good. And this minor judgment (such as loss of friends and property or bodily suffering), suiting itself to the needs of the two classes above mentioned—needs observed and estimated by a God of perfect wisdom and perfect love and grace—takes the form respectively of chastisement (properly child-training), or else, as in the case of the prodigal son, of special appeal or solemn warning. So that what might appear, at first sight, to be judgment, is really nothing but the divine movement of the heart that yearns over His ignorant, self-willed, and erring people, of the God that speaks in righteousness, mighty to save. “Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.”

But this government of grace does not hinder the present execution of real judgment—that is, death—upon those who refuse to receive the testimony which God has proclaimed, and to heed the warnings He has given to them individually. In such judgment God accomplishes two ends: —1st, He manifests His righteous indignation against sin; 2nd, He gives occasion to those who are witnesses of the judgment executed upon others to profit by the warning. But it needs the special interposition of the Spirit of God to enable any one to deny himself and turn to God.

The knowledge of good and evil, which man acquired in the fall, has so constituted him that judgment is the only action of God’s power which he understands; naturally enough, he resists it, and blasphemes God, because his conscience tells him that he must be the object of His righteous vengeance; so that to calm his conscience he tries to persuade himself that he is not wicked, and he hides himself from God, like Adam, and in his folly seizes with avidity the smallest pretext for denying His existence. “The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God.” (Psalms 14; 53.)

But man understands judgment perfectly well, and thinks it the only way of maintaining social order amongst his fellows. He likes to execute it upon his fellow, and, when sober, he is forced to admit its justice when executed by God upon himself; but that does not make him love God; on the contrary, it hardens his heart. And the more he learns what righteousness is, by means of God’s visible judgments, the louder his conscience accuses him, and the more his heart breathes out hatred against the almighty power which he cannot resist (Rev. 16: 9, 21); for “the mind of the flesh is enmity against God.” (Rom. 8.) And when the respite comes, if the longsuffering of God has prolonged the day of salvation, it only finds the heart of the sinner harder and further from God. “Because sentence against an evil world is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.” (Ecc. 8: 11.) Thus, in the Revelation, the effect of the plagues with which the earth is smitten is rather to provoke blasphemy, even though men be forced to give glory to the God of heaven, acknowledging the justice of His decrees while affrighted by them; but they will not give Him glory by their repentance. (Rev. 3: 21; Rev. 9: 20, 21; Rev. 11: 13; Rev. 15: 4; Rev. 16: 9-21.)

Nevertheless, every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess to God. (Isa. 45: 23, 24; Phil. 2: 10, 11.) But neither judgment, nor respite alone will teach a sinner what God is. “When thy judgements are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness. Let favour be shown to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness; in the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly, and will not behold the majesty of the Lord.” (Isa. 26: 9, 10.)

As before noticed, judgment is the only manifestation of the mighty power of God which man understands naturally; and yet judgment is said to be “his strange act.” (Isa 28: 21.) Of himself man is an entire stranger to grace, and the spirit which he outrages is the spirit of grace. (Hebr. 10: 29.) Man lost the knowledge of God when he fell, and now by searching he cannot find out God, moreover God has no place in his heart or in his thoughts. But God will win him in spite of himself, and melt his heart by grace. It is God’s will, God’s prerogative, the necessity of His nature, because He is Love. And therefore He makes judgment an opportunity of acting in grace, so as to bring home in the clearest way to man’s heart and conscience, what is the very hardest lesson for him to learn, namely, that God can and does love the sinner: and that He can be perfectly just in forgiving him. If this be so, it is clear that the more terrible, the more unsparing the judgment, the more the grace which delivers through and from it shines out. “God hath concluded all in unbelief that he might have mercy upon all.” (Rom. 11.) And the power we are called to learn now is the mighty power which raised Christ from the deepest depth to the most exalted height, the power of resurrection. (Eph. 1.) Thus where sin abounded grace much more abounds.

Scripture is decisive in showing that judgment is always the opportunity of grace. God gave coats of skin to Adam and Eve, who had vainly tried to hide their misery: and the moment they accepted their sentence of death as the wages of sin (for “Enos” means “mortal”) they were able to call upon Jehovah, even though banished from the garden; and their relations with God were reset upon the footing of grace. (Gen. 4: 26.)

Thus also the Deluge became the occasion of the wonderful deliverance of Noah and his family; thus Lot was saved from Sodom; and Rahab from Jericho; thus Joshua and Caleb were guarded all through the desert, and brought at length in safety to the promised land. But what need to multiply instances? It is clear that if the Lord puts on the garments of vengeance, the helmet of salvation is seen upon His head as a part of those garments. (Isa. 49: 16-18.) And so in another place: “The day of vengeance is in mine heart, and the year of my redeemed is come.” (Isa. 63: 4.)

It is very important not to confound these two things: —1st, judgment which is sure, though it may seem to linger, and yet which must sooner or later overtake sin; and secondly, the opportunity which is thus given to grace to shine out all the more conspicuously the more terribly overwhelming is the judgment. For grace must work; because God works, and God is love.

But grace never mitigates the punishment of sin. It may change the object of judgment, and thus, by substitution, satisfy the claims of justice, while exercising mercy toward the sinner; but only blood can wipe out sin. “Without shedding of blood there is no remission.”

And, therefore; in the midst of this scene, where one finds so many things incongruous and hard to understand; the Holy Spirit sets the child of God upon his guard, and bids him not judge after the appearance of prosperity, which the wicked seem to enjoy for a time, for death is the appointed portion of all who are not Christ’s. “Surely, thou didst set them in slippery places; thou castedst them down into destruction.” (Psalm 73.)

In accordance with this, we find that the character of the apocalyptic judgments is death, in its four terrible forms: of sword, famine, pestilence, and beasts of the earth. (Rev. 6.) And the Lord Jesus shows, in Matt. 24, that these evils operate in the earth before the time of the end; and so we find it. Witness the wars and the terrible famines and pestilences which have been and still continue to rage amongst all the nations of the earth.

Those who have had occasion to witness the scenes that have lately been transacted in France, in which men have been compelled to admit that the hand of God has been visibly stretched out in righteous judgment on the nation, cannot fail to have observed that the moral effect has been to harden the hearts of the people, and fill them with the desire for vengeance. This accords with what has been stated above. At the same time the trial has given occasion to the constant exhibition of God’s grace, which produces a song of praise from the hearts of His children throughout the breadth of the land. It has also been a good and useful testing time for them, and the thoughts of many hearts have been revealed—circumstances pressing from without, and grace sustaining from within.

The war itself was marked by many attenuating circumstances; and having been carried on almost entirely in the winter, when the ground was covered with snow, the country sustained no material damage by the passage of the troops. The wheat was frozen in some places last autumn, and where that had occurred the fields required to be re-sown in the spring; that, however, was due to the cold, and not to the war. Here and there vineyards were damaged in making temporary military roads, but this, together with the few fruit trees cut down, chiefly by the French themselves, is hardly worth speaking of. And even though many individuals, through a concurrence of disadvantageous circumstances, have no doubt had to deplore considerable losses, the state of the country generally was but little affected. This year the weather has been most favourable, especially for garden produce, which is everywhere rich, and the crops very good. Even the battlefield of Gravelotte, where so many thousands found their graves last August, is now one vast field of oats—thanks to timely supplies from England of seed-grain, together with a steam-plough, which saved much valuable time. Around Sedan, in like manner, the fields present the smiling prospect of being white to harvest. Thus God lavishes His blessing upon an ungrateful world, sending His rain on the evil and on the good, and making His sun to shine upon the just and the unjust. But peace and plenty only lead men to forget their past troubles, and the lesson which those troubles were calculated to teach. Still, God has given His warning, and the earth ripens for yet more terrible judgment. Let us meanwhile count the Lord’s longsuffering to be salvation. May it, indeed, be found to be so to many! And may the Lord grant us eyes to see and hearts in tune with His to judge divinely of His ways! Surely, then, shall we be able to say in reality, “In the midst of thy judgments, O Lord, have we waited for thee, and the desire of our soul is to thy name, and to the remembrance of thee.”

For greater clearness, it is proposed to follow as much as possible the chronological order of events, whilst dividing the subject into Three Parts, under the several heads of “Special Deliverances;” “Military Service;” and “Heart Exercises.”

1. Special Deliverances.

Wait on the Lord, be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thy heart. Wait, I say, on the Lord.—Psalm 27:14.

Seldom, in modern days, has been seen so complete a fulfilment of Isaiah 19: 11-16: — “Surely the princes of Zoan are fools, the counsel of the wise counsellors of Pharaoh is become brutish: how say ye unto Pharaoh, I am the son of the wise, the son of ancient kings? Where are they? where are thy wise men? and let them tell thee now, and let them know what the Lord of hosts hath purposed upon Egypt. The princes of Zoan are become fools, the princes of Noph are deceived; they have also seduced Egypt, even they that are the stay of the tribes thereof. The Lord hath mingled a perverse spirit in the midst thereof: and they have caused Egypt to err in every work thereof, as a drunken man staggereth in his vomit. Neither shall there be any work for Egypt, which the head or tail, branch or rush, may do. In that day shall Egypt be like unto women; and it shall be afraid and fear, because of the shaking of the hand of the Lord of hosts, which he shaketh over it.”

From beginning to end of the late war one finds a series of ill-digested plans unaccountably carried out. Begun without reason, carried on without prudence, ended without settlement: the war has proved, if proof were needed, that man in his best estate is altogether vanity, and that his heart is set upon mischief. God lets the incapacity of the rulers espouse the corruption of society, and man casts the blame of his misfortunes on everyone but himself.

The history of the war has been so uniform that the kind of trials to which the inhabitants of the towns and villages were exposed has been almost the same throughout the north of France, or about one-third of the entire country. First, the passage of the French troops betokened a great battle—in which they generally drove back the Prussians; then it was heard that the French army was almost annihilated, and numbers of them taken prisoners; and then followed the mournful sight of the retreat of the remaining portion in the utmost disorder, and without provisions; regiments of every kind mingled together in hopeless confusion, throwing away arms and baggage in their haste to flee from the Prussians, who followed close upon their heels with the utmost calmness and precision. The details of the retreats varied a little in the neighbourhood of fortresses, for then the army found shelter there, and sustained a siege more or less prolonged, giving rise to a new kind of trial for those who were shut up with them—bombardment and in some cases famine; but the general character of the war was the same everywhere.

The Prussian tactics were to present themselves at first in a body, then to retreat before the French, spreading themselves out to right and left, thus gradually surrounding the advancing French army and overpowering it by numbers: in addition to this, the French administration and commissariat being defective throughout, the result of the conflict was invariably the same and not difficult to understand, especially if one takes into consideration the mutual want of confidence, and the ill-feeling between the upper and lower classes, which exists throughout the country.

So that it is by no means extraordinary that the inhabitants generally complained that the French soldiers were not so well behaved as the Prussians during their passage. The poor French had had nothing to eat for many hours, and came crying for food without allowing time for its preparation, so precipitate was their retreat, and naturally fell upon whatever came in their way; whilst the Prussians were always well provided, and calmly demanded their exorbitant requisitions, which had to be punctually furnished. Some terrible scenes of atrocity are laid to their charge, such as the burning of Bazeilles, near Sedan, Mézières, and other places. But however inexcusable these acts, one must remember how deeply seated is vengeance in every human heart, and when the passions are excited they are more ferocious than wild beasts. At Bazeilles a whole Prussian regiment, headed by Count Bismarck’s nephew, was blown to pieces by the mitrailleuses* at the moment they were quietly entering the village, in the belief that the French had evacuated it; and from that moment its fate was sealed by the Prussians. Mézières refused to surrender when summoned to do so, whilst Charleville—which is enclosed in the same line of fortifications, and only separated from Mézières by a long bridge, submitted at once and was scarcely touched. In other places the Francs-tireurs** were the indirect cause of much calamity, as the Prussians had resolved to put every one of these guerrillas to death, without mercy, when taken: and to burn every house which had sheltered them.

{*machine-guns

**sniper}

The excess of misery caused by wholesale burning gave rise to remarkable efforts to alleviate the sufferings of those thus deprived of house, home, and means of subsistence. Both Sedan and Mézières being frontier towns, much was done, both by the Belgians and English, to meet the need as it arose; and that by individuals as well as by communities. The denying devotedness of some even to death will not, we trust, soon be forgotten. (Dr. C. J. Davis who died of smallpox whilst nursing sick and injured and is buried at Sedan, is just one such example. Ed.)

Surely we can bless the Lord for the exhibition of it which He permitted, while attending to the lesson He would teach us through that remarkable history, which is well known to many. May it lead us to the more careful contemplation of His own gracious ways, who never was unmoved by human sorrow, but sought it out and lived in the midst of it in order to relieve it, and yet would never “show Himself to the world.” (John 7.)

The above sketch will enable the reader to form some idea of the circumstances, in the midst of which the Lord’s children experienced anew the faithfulness of their God. A Father’s care watched over them continually, and compelled them to confess that their greatest suffering, all through the history of the war, was from their own unbelieving apprehension of evil that never came upon them. In the moment of severe trial they were always sustained. Do we not find the lesson hard in practice? Or are we unwilling really to admit that “we walk by faith, not by sight?”

BOUXWILLER. After the taking of Wissembourg and the battle of Wœrth, the French retreated in disorder, closely followed by the Prussians, in the direction of Metz, passing the small town of Bouxwiller, where there are a few Christians. One of these families, consisting of a brother, his wife, and two sisters-in-law, occupies the last house of the town on the west side, which is rather isolated, being about three or four minutes’ walk from the town itself. The Prussians formed their camp close by; and they came constantly to the house for the provisions they required, and the Prussian officers occupied almost all the rooms, but the Lord kept them from doing any violence to His children, beyond depriving them of forage and provisions; and, after all, their prolonged stay of some days was hardly so trying as the distressing sight of the misery of the half-starved French soldiers, whose sufferings there was so little possibility of relieving, both from want of time and means.

ARS SUR MOSELLE. But beyond occupying the country the Prussians did not long remain in those parts. They advanced cautiously, surprised to find the hilly country so little defended, and gradually massing their troops, they encountered, on the 18th of August, a grand division of the French army, near the little village of Gravelotte, some six or seven miles from the fortress of Metz. It was a terrible shock. The battle extended over several miles, and thousands fell on both sides; and after the battle, the villages in the whole of the surrounding country were filled with the wounded. In one of these, Ars sur Moselle, three miles from Gravelotte, reside some of the Lord’s people; one, especially, a dear sister (mother of five children), who has suffered much for the Lord’s sake since she left the Roman faith some years ago. During the bombardment of Metz, whither the French retired, the Prussians had many cannons close to her house, but they did not bring these into play, and the village received a few shots only, from Fort St. Quentin, near Metz. There was plenty of occupation in tending the immense numbers of wounded; but Ars was graciously kept almost exempt from the smallpox, which was very bad in many of the other neighbouring villages, and this was the more remarkable, as almost every house in the place was a temporary hospital, to say nothing of the public buildings, such as churches, &c., which were filled.

A young brother from the south of France was killed in the battle of Gravelotte, and one Prussian Christian soldier is known to have fallen there also. He who searches the hearts alone knows how many others of His own may have fallen on that terrible day, forcibly ranged one against the other in mortal conflict.

SEDAN. Just a fortnight after, on 1st September, similar horrors took place around Sedan. Who would remove the veil from off those scenes which even eye-witnesses have stated to be quite impossible to describe? The facts have shown what man is, and what he is coolly preparing himself for again. On that spot, oblong mounds of earth, scattered here and there over the country, are all that remain to show where the combat was most deadly. In some of these, hundreds lie buried together.

After Sedan, the scene of the war was spread throughout the north of France, as the Prussians advanced continually, with occasional reverses, until the beginning of February of this year, when the armistice was concluded as the preliminary of peace.

ORLEANS. On October 11th the Prussians entered Orleans (four hours by rail south of Paris), after a whole day’s fighting, in the outskirts of the town. In one of the suburbs of the town on the same side, there lives a poor brother, D—, with his wife and six children; the youngest was born only three weeks before the Prussians came; and the shock of the fighting had such an effect upon the mother (for the French stood even in the doorway of their little house, to fire on the Prussians), that she lost all supply of food for her child. A Christian lady however, interested herself in her; and supplied her with tins of preserved milk until she recovered, and thus the child was saved. Another of her children, a little girl of seven, had her nerves so shaken that the skin turned yellow, and peeled off her hands and feet; this little one has now perfectly recovered, though still delicate.

The Prussians remained a month in possession of the town; they were then driven back by the French; but returned three weeks after, on the 4th of December, for the second time, and posted their cannons in the street about five hundred yards further from the town than D—’s house, so as to take advantage of some rising ground for firing upon the town. At that time, D— and his wife, with thirty-three others, hid themselves in a large cellar from three p.m. until the following morning, when all was quiet, after the entry of the Prussians. From that time forward they had continually to lodge two or three soldiers) which was trying, because the Prussians were so prodigal of fire-wood, and there was very little of it; but the Lord graciously sustained them through the whole winter and spring, and no violence was done them. We shall have occasion to refer to them again in the third part of this narrative, and therefore take leave of them for the moment.

DIJON. At Dijon, a city of 60,000 inhabitants (about nine hours by rail south-east of Paris), the National Guards were called out, and amongst them our brother E—, who, being of Swiss origin, ought to have been exempted; but he was forced to exercise with the others for three months; and on Sunday, 30th of October, he had to march against the Prussians. His little house, or rather cabin, is in one of the suburbs of the town on the side where the battle was fought. The French were about 2,000 strong—of which number, one-half were regular troops; the other half, National Guards. The Prussians had ten times as many men and about sixty cannon, whereas the French had none at all. The fighting began about two miles from E—’s house, and it took the Prussians seven hours to drive this little body of French back into the town, which they accomplished at about five p.m. During all that time the Lord had watched over E—: he had not received the slightest wound, notwithstanding, the continuous and terrible fire of the enemy. At the moment of entering the town, when exhausted with so many hours’ fighting, his wife persuaded him to retire quickly into his own house, which is a stone’s throw of the main road, and take some refreshment. This done, he changed his clothes for a peasant’s dress, and went out with her to look after the wounded French, many of whom had been lying for hours in the snow. By this time, the Prussians had advanced close to the town and one of them was posted behind each tree in the avenue which lines the main road, and which being quite straight in that part, was exposed to the whole French fire from the town; it was therefore necessary to pass by the whole of this, and into the very midst of the Prussians to search for the wounded French. E— and his wife were in this manner enabled to succour three, of whom the most severely wounded (by three balls in the left thigh) has since entirely recovered. They continued their work of mercy until prevented by the Prussians, one of whom fired at Mrs. E—, but the ball passed through her clothes, doing her no harm. The firing stopped when day closed in, leaving the Prussians masters of the place. Several houses, in that part of the town where E— lives, were very much damaged; one directly behind his was entirely destroyed; but his own was not in the least injured, all the balls and shells having passed clean over it.

The same unseen Hand of love which was so strikingly outstretched in favour of His beloved children at that time has guarded them since, when they have been exposed to other kinds of distress through cessation of work, the high prices of provisions, and the stringent military regulations of the Prussians, during their occupation of the place.

AMIENS. The Prussians entered Amiens Nov. 28th. Much damage might have been done to the town, as the general in command of the citadel, which is just outside it, would not surrender it, but he was killed by a Prussian ball and there was no further resistance made; so the Prussians remained in quiet possession for eight months, until the 20th July, when they evacuated the town altogether. This long occupation was very trying—one case will be mentioned hereafter.

PARIS. During this time the Siege of Paris was being carried on. Comparatively little damage was done by the bombardment, but the city, being closely shut up, suffered considerably from famine during the month of January; and it at length surrendered, when, it is said, there were only provisions for three days left. The cold was also very intense, and firewood very scarce indeed, and those who had not laid in any provision beforehand suffered very severely, so that the mortality was seven or eight times as great as usual.

The allowance per day of horseflesh was one large mouthful per person, besides two-thirds of a pound of heavy brown bread, composed of wheat, rice, beans, and other grain. That was absolutely all that could be claimed, and to obtain it every family was furnished with an order from the Mayor on the authorised butcher and baker, where each had to await his turn to be served, once in every three days. They called this “doing the tail,” and it was a very trying operation, as it involved standing in the crowd and waiting for two or three hours, or even more, in the bitter cold until one’s turn came to be served with the appointed modicum of bread or meat. The poor usually began to station themselves “in tail” outside the shops as early as three or four o’clock in the morning; so that those who came a little later found the tail was already very long; and the later the hour of arrival the longer became the time of waiting. One Christian brother often made use of the occasion by distributing tracts and speaking to the people. In the same way, if there was need of a little green firewood (for a few of the trees in the avenues were cut down when all the coal and coke were exhausted, and no gas was burnt in the streets), it was likewise necessary to “do the tail.” Nothing was to be had without it. Many had laid in a certain stock of farinaceous food before supplies were altogether stopped, so that the children, in some cases, fared much better than their parents. Wine was plentiful all through the time of the blockade.

In every time of circumstance and trial there was the way of escape according to the faithful promise of our God. His own people felt they were sustained by the prayers of their brethren in other places, and it was a time of joy, in the sense of being cast upon God. One brother stated that he had never been so happy in all his life. During the whole time they were able to meet together every Lord’s Day, and celebrate His name in peace and quietness, and with great joy in their hearts, in marked contrast to all the political excitement which reigned outside. Several of the brethren were in the National Guard, but were happily not called into active service.

But the saints in Paris, in common with many others, were destined to see fighting at their very doors, as well as to taste of famine. During the months of April and May the Communists were in power, and only yielded fort by fort, and then street by street, and house by house, to superior numbers. The brethren who had served as National Guards all hid or left the capital with one exception: he alone yielded to the force of circumstances, unwilling to leave his wife and children, who were dependent upon him, and give up the emolument which was his due as a soldier, at a time when it seemed impossible to obtain other work. In spite of his unfaithfulness, the Lord came in to deliver him, for he was taken ill just three weeks before the Versailles troops entered, and thus escaped the death which, humanly speaking, was inevitable.

The Lord brought His people through that terrible time in perfect safety. It was very trying for husband and wife to be separated at such a moment, which was the case with all who had to absent themselves, so as to escape the military service; but now all can join heart and lips to praise the Lord for His goodness.

MONTBELIARD. In the autumn of last year, the Prussians occupied Montbéliard, but beyond some slight skirmishing, there was very little fighting until the middle of January, when General Bourbaki, with an army said to be five times as large as that of the Prussians, made a last desperate attempt to drive them back. Up to that time the French held the south side of the river Doubs, which runs through the country, and having blown up all the bridges crossing the river, they managed to keep the enemy at bay. Of the eight gatherings around Montbéliard, only one is on the south side of the river, and there they never lodged Prussian soldiers at all, but some of the others were considerably tried.

The reports which have been spread of ruin, devastation, and pillage, caused by the Prussians in that part of the country, are almost wholly without foundation. In walking along the whole line in which the fighting of the middle of January took place, we could scarcely find other traces of damage than the burning of some twenty or thirty houses—nine in one village (Abbevillers), six in another, and a few in other places; with here and there a house, which the Prussians had used as a shooting tower, and the walls of which they had pierced, so as to fire at the French under cover. Near one village several fruit trees had been felled, evidently to tease the Protestants.

At the time of the actual fighting the snow lay on the ground, and thus all the winter crops were preserved, so that there has been very little loss as far as they are concerned. Those who suffered most were the factory workpeople, who mostly live from hand to mouth. One bad year would after all be more felt by an agricultural peasant than all the evil the invaders may have caused him. One can hardly call it a hardship to have to give up a few sacks of oats and potatoes, while the cellar and granary contain more than enough for the year’s consumption.

The most trying loss was the forage, which was all consumed by the immense influx of horses; and, as last year was so remarkably dry, there was only a small provision of hay at the beginning of the season, and even then scarcity was feared; so that during the spring the ingenuity of the peasants has been very much taxed to provide the necessary food for the cattle that were not butchered during the Prussian occupation. But here again the Lord came in to help in a remarkable way. During the last month of last season there was plentiful rain, and the potatoes sprouted out again in such an extraordinary way that the yield turned out to be much larger than usual, though expected to be very small indeed. One brother had nearly twice as much as in an ordinary year, and in the spring they discovered the reason, when they were reduced to potatoes for feeding their cattle.

The brethren in those parts suffered considerably from the impossibility of giving or receiving tidings of one another; all communication was interrupted, and for many weeks it was impossible to stir out of their own villages, so strict were the Prussian patrols and sentinels.

For two or three days in the middle of January the fighting extended along the whole line of country intersecting Montbéliard, and extending many miles in a north-westerly direction. The French were then advancing to the relief of Belfort, which is about 12 miles north of Montbéliard. Being three or four times as numerous as the Prussians, they were victorious along the whole line, but when within an hour’s march of Belfort the retreat was sounded, which resulted in the landing of 80,000 soldiers on Swiss territory in the most pitiable condition (many of them dying of hunger), on the first days of February.

Three villages, in which there are gatherings of the Lord’s people, happened to lie just on the line of the engagement of the 15th and 16th January. They were Terreblanche (near Abbevillers), Béthoncourt, and Désandans. Both Béthoncourt and Terreblanche, and in some measure Désandans also, lie in valleys between the heights on which were posted the contending forces, so that the balls and shells whistled directly over the houses. Generally speaking, the inhabitants remained in the cellars during the firing, but only one or two of the houses in these villages were damaged. In another village, which did not fare so well (for one house in it was almost destroyed), a poor sister was lying, ill in bed, and a ball passed across her room, just over her head, but did no damage. In a village near Désandans lives a poor widow, one of whose daughters has been bedridden for two or three years past: both mother and daughter are the Lord’s. One day, when the firing was very vigorous, a ball entered at the window, passed between them and over the head of a baby in his cradle, at the end of the room, but no one was touched.

The French naturally abstained as much as possible from firing on their own villages, but the Prussians always took shelter in them, in order to gain this advantage over their foes. So that it was almost inevitable that some houses should receive balls, but these cases were rare, and, as a rule, the houses of the children of God were unmolested and untouched. Their Father’s protecting hand was very manifestly stretched out in their favour, and the trial left praises, and not murmurs behind. This was as it should be. As one has said who heard the tale, “it were worth while to pass through the trial if only to experience the delivering grace of our God!”

How many a one has proved the truth of that word, “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” (1 Cor. 10: 13.)

We now proceed to the second part of our inquiry.

2. Military Service.

In the world ye shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world.—John 17: 33.

It has always been a vexed question with the children of God, how far the required obedience to the powers that be authorises or excuses taking up the sword in the service of the Government. “Thou shalt not kill” has been, and still is, thank God, quite enough to decide many a simple soul, who is determined, like the apostles, to obey God rather than man. “Love your enemies” is evidently incompatible with slaying them. The principle to be followed is clear, but difficulties always arise as to the way in which one is to put the principle into practice, as to when and where one is to refuse to handle the sword or the gun, particularly in those countries where every able man is de facto a soldier.

Some have thought to excuse military service on the ground of what God allowed, and even commanded, in Old Testament times. Such persons, therefore, put forward the old at the expense of the new Testament, and in their souls consequently lose the power of both. Others, again, have sought to prove that a soldier is not responsible for his acts when he obeys his commanding officer. God will judge every one justly; but any Christian who weighs the words of the Lord Jesus can surely not hesitate for a moment as to what is his Lord’s mind upon the matter. “My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews.” (John 18: 36.) Never was there a more worthy, a more just cause to fight for than at that moment; but the Lord refuses it entirely on the ground of strangership to this world. If a Christian fights now it is to uphold the glory of the world that crucified his Lord; and it is a virtual denial of that word which tells us that our citizenship is in heaven. (Phil. 3: 20.)

Some Christians have tried to compromise matters by going through the usual military exercises, in the hope that some way of escape will be found in the day of actual warfare, even going so far as to fire into the air instead of at the foe, when in battle. Thus they take the sword and hope not to use it; they would maintain their status in the world on the one hand, and virtually refuse to pay the price which the world imposes for the status it has accorded them. This has always a very ugly appearance, and is fairly branded as cowardice, if nothing worse, and is surely a deep dishonour done to our blessed Lord.

The question should be decided at the outset of the Christian course. Being in the world, are we to be of it? The Lord Jesus says no. (John 17.) What does His faithful disciple say? If we are not of the world, we must, as one has said, refuse its smiles, its honours, and its privileges; and then no one can complain if we also refuse its pains while submitting to its penalties. If we are Christ’s, we belong to the place where He is, and we must be strangers where He had not where to lay His head; and He is soon coming to take us out of this scene altogether, to be with Himself in glory.

But decision in such a path must be the fruit of individual faith, and not servile imitation of another. If a person is converted while he is in a false position, the grace of God will know how to deliver him out of it, and faith and patience will be rewarded. But it is one thing to be found by sovereign grace in an evil position, and quite another to go deliberately into a false position having already received grace. This is very solemn. There are, however, certain cases which are peculiarly trying—such, for instance, as when those who have refused or escaped military service in time of peace are suddenly called out in time of war; and there is no possibility of refusing, or refusal would, perhaps, be met by instant death. And that makes a man hesitate when a wife and children are dependent upon him.

From the earliest days of the Church there have been many who have suffered imprisonment, and even death, on account of their having refused to take up arms. Their names are written in heaven. Those of whom the world was not worthy. May God increase their number, and grant us all to walk by faith, and not by sight! He is ever faithful, in spite of all our failure; and in the midst of the terrible scenes of which we have been speaking, He often showed how. He can reward great faith, and come to the succour of little faith. To His name be all the praise!

In times of peace the Lord has come in to help His people in a remarkable way. The majority have not served as soldiers, or were soon bought out by their friends, which has been allowed in France, although not in Switzerland or Prussia. Many have escaped through some personal disqualification; others have lived in exile from their country for many years. During the late war many, knowing their liability to be called out a second time, engaged themselves beforehand as dressers in the military hospitals. I subjoin here a letter from one of these, translated from the French, and very slightly abridged: —

“… It is a great joy to me to speak of what our God has done for me, for I have seen His hand as plainly as if with the natural eye. At the time of my first departure for military service, I was deeply exercised with the question as to whether I could, as a Christian, take the life of another. After much research, I was convinced that the obedience due to the authorities was limited by the Word of God, and that one called to proclaim the grace of God could not shed blood in obedience to the ‘powers that be.’

“My path was thus clearly traced; it remained to walk in it, and then the difficulty presented itself more vividly, for the military penal code runs thus: — ‘Refusal to march against the enemy or armed rebels— DEATH!’

“What could I do but make known my weakness to God? and He delivered me by putting it into the heart of my relations to purchase me out, at the time that my regiment was embarking for Africa.

“But when the law recalling discharged soldiers and unmarried men under 35 years of age was passed by vote last autumn, I found myself again in the same embarrassing position, and was naturally in great distress; but I had to learn that they who do business in great waters see the works of the Lord and His wonders in the deep.

“In order to evade the daily increasing difficulties, I sought to enter the service as hospital assistant, though such work was very much against my natural inclinations; but at any rate it was better to dress wounds than to make them. Then it was, however, that God’s care of me began to be openly manifested.

“The medical corps to which I was appointed was divided into two sections—one to follow the army, the other for hospitals in the interior; and on my arrival I was offered the choice of the section with which I would remain. Nature would have preferred the hospitals, but such a choice would have had the appearance of cowardice, which ought never to be seen in a Christian. So I refused to choose. The commissioner then insisted upon knowing my motives. I explained to him, as well as I could, all the circumstances. However, I was appointed to the army section; but as that section, created for present need only, was new, it was also necessary to have a new set of clerks; and as my civil profession (of merchant’s clerk) had been noticed, I was appointed clerk in the head office, without my applying for the place.

“How wonderful are the ways of God towards His own! If I had asked to remain in the interior, I should not have seen His hand of love and grace. Many young men, desiring to avoid the difficulties and dangers of the winter campaign, came with letters of recommendation from eminent persons to the Director General of Hospitals, so that I, without any letter, should have had no chance of being employed. But having been nominated to the other section, where there was no competition, I was at once put into the office, and thus relieved from having to follow the army during that severe winter, and from having to encamp in the snow for many days and nights, which my health would never have stood.

“Thus God preserved me; blessed be His name. May His love and goodness be deeply graven in my heart, keeping me ever nearer to Him, in dependence upon Him. But we must not forget that God was mindful of the prayers which His saints offered up to Him at that time, and that by their means He was pleased to lavish His blessings upon His children in trial.”

The above letter is given at length on the ground that one such instance with some detail is of more value than general statements, but it is not at all an exceptional case. The same unslumbering eye and the same ever outstretched hand were active in behalf of all those whom the Lord loves with an unchanging love, and to purchase whom He alone knows the price He has paid.

The young brethren who were called to take up arms in the country of Montbéliard were, in one way and another, kept from actually fighting, and not more than two or three of them ever drew a trigger. Two or three were orderlies, others had some temporary charge of baggage, &c., while their regiment was engaged; others, again, were absent through sickness, or their battalions were never engaged at all.

A brother, from the south of France, wrote, at the end of January last: —“… Five or six other brethren have lately left this for the seat of war, four of whom have been delivered by the grace of God, one scarcely knows how. Without doubt, God had pity upon them, in spite of their little faith, and that is a fresh subject of thanksgiving. The greater number have been kept from taking part in the fighting. One of them changed his regiment the very day of an engagement, and his old regiment was amongst those that fought, but the one he joined arrived on the field just half an hour after the battle was over. Another was just preparing to fire, much against his will, when a ball wounded him very slightly on the side of the head, and he was taken prisoner, and thus delivered…”

The brethren in Paris who were ordered to serve as National Guards were delivered in a similar way. During the Prussian siege there was no fighting, and under the Communist movement they all absented themselves, except one, and he was ill during nearly all the latter half of their reign.

In Germany the brethren petitioned not to be sent to active service, but to be employed in any civil duty the Government might see fit to order them; and the Lord disposed the hearts of the authorities to grant their request.

In Switzerland very many of the young brethren in the army are dressers or surgeons’ assistants. There were a few Christians in the Prussian army; and some few of each of the belligerents seem to have found peace in believing at the eleventh hour. Nothing is impossible with God.

In the presence of the unrelenting power of evil, in the face of foes whose guiding principle is enmity against God, in the place where he who has the power of death binds his captives through slavish fear to do his will, God will never allow temptation to be without a way of escape for those that trust in Him. Death very often has been, and will be yet again, the only door of deliverance open to those that will not deny their Lord. But what a glorious deliverance that is from all the power of the enemy for those who can say, “Death is ours!” and who can boldly face it, being strengthened with the power of their Lord’s might, as they sing with Him, “O grave, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?” The enmity of Satan and the malice of man will yet swell the ranks of the noble army of martyrs, and Jesus says to His followers, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.” He was faithful to death for us; He took the cup of suffering and drank it to the dregs; He went through the most terrific hour of temptation, and having left us an example that we should follow in His steps, He never promises that we shall be kept out of tribulation; but He does promise to sustain us in it— “In this world ye shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.” May He grant to us to overcome, even as He overcame! Thanks be unto God, who giveth us the victory, through our Lord Jesus Christ.

3. Heart Exercises.

And thou shalt remember all the way the Lord thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep His commandments or no. And He humbled thee and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know. That He might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the Lord doth man live.—Deut. 8: 2-3.

Under this third head, we propose to speak of two spheres in which the Lord made all things work together for good during the late war.

First. As to those who passed through the circumstances of trial.

Secondly. As to those outside, who found such a blessed opportunity of ministering to the sufferers, and of sharing their trials.

1. It is always difficult, if not impossible, to speak of what passes between the individual soul and God; but God does teach us by the experience of others, and His ways of love are always legitimate subjects of praise for His children. All that can be attempted, however, is to give some idea of the way in which the Lord turned the circumstances of the presence of the invader into a means of searching the hearts of His people and blessing them.

One of the heaviest trials, because in many cases it was so prolonged, was that of lodging soldiers. When the Prussians were in garrison, the men were evenly distributed; every family had two, three, or more soldiers, according to its means, and these soldiers always had their rations served out to them, but, as this nourishment was insufficient, it had to be supplemented by the families with whom they were lodged, which was a heavy charge upon the poor. For instance, a brother in Amiens had almost continuously to lodge four Prussians, during the eight months of their occupation of that town, that is, from November 28th to July 20th; and during the whole of that time he sold nothing, for, being an upholsterer, there was nothing doing in his line of business. Hence the trial of faith and patience was very great.

Many suffered considerably from the interruption to industry and commerce through the unsettled state of affairs. D—, of Orléans, the brother already mentioned, who is a plasterer and paperhanger, got no work at all through the winter and spring months. He used to go into the fields searching for the horses which had been killed by the Prussians because there was no fodder for them, and cut from the carcasses food enough for his household, and this, with the addition of rice and bread, was their nourishment for many weeks.

Notwithstanding the dryness of the season last summer (1870), he had, with great toil and trouble, managed to cultivate some very fine cabbages in his little garden. A few short minutes were sufficient to dissipate all the hopes centred in the cabbages, for the day the Prussians entered a soldier cut them all for the use of the horses. This disappointment was, however, soon changed into thankfulness, as, on the following night, there was so severe a frost that every thing green in the gardens was entirely destroyed, and then he was thankful that at least the poor horses should have had the benefit of what would otherwise have been entirely wasted.

But the Lord would cast him yet further upon himself. Having heard of the Prussian rapacity, our poor friend hid 80lbs. of potatoes—all his stock—in a loft, so as to ensure their not being taken from him; but he soon had to repent his want of faith, for the whole lot were frozen and uneatable.

Nevertheless, as he himself said, neither he nor his wife and children suffered from hunger. The Lord provided for him, and enabled him to make both ends meet in spite of all the difficulties. Some Christian friends sent him help in money that enabled him to buy more potatoes and other necessaries, as they were required. And then how much happier to receive these mercies directly as a gift from his Father than even as the hard-earned fruit of his own honest labour. A gift is always sweeter than a wage, for pure love that wins the heart takes the place of self-satisfaction, and the affections go out instead of being restrained.

During the passage of the troops, lodging soldiers meant something besides merely receiving three or four men every night and attending to their wants more or less during the day; and in the intense cold of last winter that was really no light trial. In the country of Montbéliard, during January, armies passed and repassed continually, came and went at all hours of the day or night, so that every one had to be on the alert. The villages along the high roads were those chiefly exposed to this necessity.

The Prussians wisely distributed their forces so as to get all their men under shelter during the night, whereas the French under Bourbaki were so numerous that it was utterly impossible to find a place for them to lodge in, and the greater part encamped in the snow, sleeping as best they might by the side of enormous camp-fires. The remains of these fires were to be seen along the roads, all over the country, for months after. Poor fellows! When driven across the Swiss frontier many of them had frost-bitten feet, and many died from the reaction to the system, when they partook freely of food after the great privations and hardships they had endured, some of them having been four or five days almost without food. But the Prussians being less numerous, and supported by an excellent commissariat, always ensured being comfortably lodged.

The first thing they did on entering a house was to take possession of every room where there was a stove, turn out the inhabitants, spread straw on the floor, and make themselves as comfortable as possible. Others took possession of the kitchen to cook their victuals, and as they were always eating it was most difficult for the proprietors to get hold of their stove, even for a short time—to dress some hasty meal; and as for lodging, they had to shift as best they might in cellars or lofts without fires. Even supposing the soldiers to be perfectly well behaved—which they were not always—it was not pleasant to have every room in the house filled with these men, all smoking together as only Germans can smoke, going to sleep even with their pipes in their mouths, and lying so thickly together that one could scarcely walk across the room without treading upon them. In addition to this, there was the pleasure they took in examining every nook and cranny in the house to know exactly its resources, sometimes under the pretext of there being arms or French soldiers concealed. Cases of pillage were certainly rare, and generally the fault of the proprietors, who hid various things and deceived the Prussians about them, who never failed to wreak their vengeance upon such offenders. Those who hid nothing and received the enemies of their country well, were protected and well treated, and the Prussian officers almost invariably held their soldiers in check with that discipline for which they were remarkable.

It will thus be understood that the trial of faith and patience was considerable. Those who received these unwelcome visitors as Christians should receive all—as friends, not as enemies—had no reason to repent of their patience and forbearance: for they were always well treated; but it required great patience, self-command, and quiet confidence in God.

In one village, Désandans, situated upon the high road between Dijon, Belfort, and Strasburg, they suffered more than in many neighbouring villages; still the Lord’s hand in moderating the trial was very marked; for four weeks, from Monday the 26th December to Saturday, January 21st, the passage of troops was incessant, day and night, but both the previous and following Sundays were free, and in the interval there was only one Sunday upon which the brethren were unable to meet together; the next one after the departure of these unbidden guests, they wept for joy at again finding a little company on earth waiting for the Lord from heaven.

During these four weeks of watching and fasting in cold and discomfort of every kind, the Lord gave His people the needed bodily strength. After it was over, the nervous strain necessarily produced a reaction, from which it took several days to recover, and a good deal of sickness followed, as typhus fever, smallpox, &c.

At Béthoncourt they suffered in a similar way, and were prevented one Lord’s Day from meeting together; but not being on the highroad, they had not to lodge soldiers for so many days in succession.

The fighting was more terrible there, and as the Prussians were sheltered in the village behind the railway embankment, several of the French were killed in the meadows round the village, the fighting continuing with more or less violence for three days— Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday, the 15th, 16th, and 17th January.

The Prussian requisitions were another kind of trial. Many had to follow the army with horse and cart for weeks, doing the work of soldiers, who did not care to treat too tenderly the horses and drivers who did not belong to them. But in this case, as in an others, faith and patience were well rewarded. Those who accepted the trial, and remained quietly at their post, taking care of their beasts, were eventually sent back to their homes with horses and cart in good condition; whilst others, who refused to remain, lost both horse and cart; and, in some cases, those who tried to escape were well beaten by the Prussians.

The son of a brother in St. Julien (a village near Désandans), a lad of 18, was put into requisition in this way, and had to follow a regiment into Alsace, and when he returned home fell ill of typhus fever, caught during his absence, or else the effect of the hardships he had endured, and he died in a few days; and one of his sisters also caught the fever, and died.

In the midst of such afflictions human nature is often tempted to look at circumstances as second causes and complain. Only faith can rest unmoved above all this, recognising and seeing nothing but a Father’s hand, who rightly orders all things, not for time, but for eternity, and who only humbles His children to teach them more and more what His resources are, so to wean them from earthly things, and set their hearts upon things in the heavens where Christ sitteth.

The temptations to hide things from the Prussians was very great indeed. It seemed unnecessary to expose one’s little all to be carried away, perhaps even ruthlessly wasted; and it was easy to forget that a Divine Hand guards even the temporal goods of the children of God. But those who did conceal things generally lost much more than they tried to hide.

One poor brother, in weak health, dug, with much difficulty and trouble, a hole in the floor of his cellar to hide fifty bottles of wine there, which he kept for occasional visits from his friends—for, as a rule, he never drank any himself. As he afterwards confessed, the bodily exertion and mental torment which were the inevitable accompaniments of his self-imposed task, cost him much more than the wine was worth, and he was gently rebuked for his want of faith, as the Prussians never came to that village at all, so that his anxiety proved groundless.

The Prussians made continual requisitions throughout the country they invaded for money, provisions, and forage; but these were generally met by the village authorities, so as to avoid their falling unfairly upon single individuals; and their great annoyance consisted in their keeping the people in a constant state of apprehension. As has been already stated, the loss of the hay—which was entirely exhausted in the winter—was what was most heavily felt by all.

Those things which we see and hear work upon our senses, and we are apt to judge after the sight of the eyes and the hearing of the ears, and forget that, were we occupied with praising the Lord for His mercies of the day, we should not have time to be troubled with the cares of tomorrow. He loves us today—that we know and feel—and it is certain that we shall have to own the same truth tomorrow; for though all things change, He changes not.

One brother, who lives in a lonely house, almost surrounded by forests, and far from any village, found himself for some days enclosed by Prussians, who formed a camp there; but his house was speedily turned into a temporary hospital, and his wife and children were left unmolested in the cellar and protected by the officers, and he suffered little beyond the loss of a few cooking utensils, and a few young fruit trees damaged by the passage of the cannon.

Thinking that so lonely a spot was beyond the reach of the strict search of the Prussians, some of the neighbouring villagers had got this brother to stow away some goods, and brick up that portion of the cellar in which they were concealed at the commencement of the war. Happily for him the Lord did not permit this to be discovered.

There were other kinds of anxiety and suspense, which may be more easily imagined than described. Of such were the interruption of postal correspondence, and often the impossibility of getting news from those nearest and dearest—of one’s own family—who were known to be in the midst of scenes, the horrors of which were always exaggerated in the published accounts, and yet more so by oral repetitions. In all such circumstances, however, the Christian has one triumphant answer? “We know that all things work together for good to them that love God, and to them who are called according to His purpose.”

2. We have yet to say a few words as to those who were outside the trial, but still called to participate in it. If the trial itself has called forth praises (as it has, thank God), surely this work of sympathy has been the occasion of double praise to our God and Father,— praises from those who gave voluntarily and promptly, and praises from those who received of their bounty as a proof of their care, love, and interest in their brethren. At such a moment, 2 Cor. 11: 10-15 becomes a living reality, and the promptitude with which the Swiss and English brethren came to the assistance of the sufferers, was very deeply appreciated by the latter. It was chiefly the factory workpeople and labouring men that needed assistance, for all work was at a standstill, through railway and other circulation being almost entirely interrupted for many weeks, and, in some places, for several months. Mercy only waits for a fitting opportunity to show itself; and surely the child of God, who is the favoured object of His love and righteousness, must rejoice in an occasion of manifesting in a practical way the love which sought him in his wretchedness, and brought him to God, making him an heir of glory; and then kindled a fire of love in his heart which goes up to God by Christ in a fountain of praises, and out to others by the Spirit in streams of living waters.

In the end of January last, at the time of the retreat of the French army under Bourbaki from the neighbourhood of Montbéliard, suffering was brought to the very doors of the Swiss in an unexampled way, and every class of society had to strain every nerve to seek to alleviate it. Happy, indeed, were those who could do so for the Lord’s sake, and not merely as actuated by human philanthropy.

It was nearly a fortnight after the retreat was sounded along the whole line from Villersexel to Montbéliard, at the very moment that the Prussians were fleeing everywhere before the advancing French, that more than half Bourbaki’s army was thrown in the wildest disorder across the Swiss frontier. Whether it was the faulty administration of the commissariat department, or the knowledge that another division of the Prussian army was coming down from the north-west to cut off the retreat of the French, that determined the step, one thing is certain, namely, that God permitted the most extraordinary spectacle, for a moment, of two armies running away from each other, and then the French army having been divided by the Prussians, one portion of it got away towards Lyons, whilst the other retreated as fast as possible along the Swiss frontier, as far as Pontarlier, until the circle of Prussians, which had been gradually tightening round them from Belfort by Vesoul, Gray, and Dole, forced them to seek refuge on Swiss soil at Verrières. At this point the railway from Paris passes down the Val de Travers—a narrow valley in the Jura mountains— leading directly to Neuchâtel, and one of the chief passes across the frontier. Pontarlier is in the centre of the Jura range, and said to be one of the most elevated towns in France. At the time the army passed, there were from two to three feet of snow upon the ground. The depth of snow lessens always as one gets into the low country, and at Neuchâtel there were about ten inches.

Bourbaki’s army had already been suffering from privations when fighting at Montbéliard, so what their sufferings were, when all was in the disorder of a hasty retreat by forced marches in deep snow, may be more easily imagined than described. Verrières is a little frontier Swiss village not far from Pontarlier. Being there in safety, these 50,000 men or more halted to rest, until they could be distributed, as far as circumstances allowed, over the Swiss towns as prisoners of war. All these had to pass by Neuchâtel. Some 30,000 others crossed the mountains lower down; and entered by the Canton de Vaud.

Distributed over the whole of Switzerland, this sudden influx of people was an addition of one in forty to the entire population. It will not be difficult, then, to understand that at the moment of their entry it was absolutely impossible to provide for the wants of 50,000 men in a mountainous and thinly populated country, with only one railway passing through it, and no possibility of help from the French side; so that from Verrières downward through the Val de Travers, their sufferings could be only partially alleviated. The horses gnawed the snow, the cart-wheels, trees, everything that came in their way, even one another’s tails; many succumbed with hunger and fatigue, and then men then fell upon them, eating the flesh raw in many cases.

Subjoined are some extracts from a letter written from Neuchâtel, and dated February 10th, 1871: —

“During the last fortnight we have been eyewitnesses of the touching and lamentable passage of a large part of those who were a few weeks ago the most formidable French army that the Republic has set on foot. Night and day, hour by hour, followed each other thousands of disarmed troops, wounded, sick— some limping from frost-bitten feet—all emaciated from the privations and fatigue they had undergone in their late forced marches. On the 30th January we had the first batch of wounded and sick. It was half-past twelve when I heard the town crier calling upon the inhabitants to go to the station to give soup to the French wounded, whose arrival was suddenly announced.”

It was the advanced guard of the French army—a miserable wreck of what had been for a moment the hope of France. It is impossible to convey the expression of destitution expressed in the faces of these soldiers, come from all parts of France.

“Some had no shoes, others had their feet wrapped up in straw or in cloths; others, again, had wooden shoes (sabots) or slippers; all had suffered, and were suffering from hunger. Two days after this the army itself crossed our frontier, and we saw the arrival in our town of the troops that had been considered to be in good condition. Alas! many of them were in such a state that when we offered them food they refused, saying, ‘We only want to die!’ How much must they have suffered to have to come to such a pass! Soldiers of the line, francs-tireurs, zouaves*, Turcos** shivering with cold, foot chasseurs, marines, cuirassiers with dirty white cloaks, dragoons in red cloaks, lancers, &c., &c., all mingled together in one promiscuous mob, dragged themselves through snow at least ten inches deep, with the artillery, military train, and baggage, both men and animals bearing an expression of want which was heart-rending, for bread had completely failed for some days.”

{*Colonial troops

**Algerian riflemen}

The zeal of the population of Neuchâtel did not slacken for an instant. Rich and poor, men, women, and children, hastened to bring warm and comfortable clothing, shirts, socks, linen for dressing wounds, cigars, food of all kinds—in a word, all that ingenious charity could suggest. And when the first needs were supplied, many came forward with paper and ink to write letters for the poor soldiers to their friends. All the colleges and churches were turned into temporary barracks or hospitals. Clean straw was strewn all over the floor, on which the soldiers lay for a day or two until they could be drafted off to other towns, as fast as the trains could transport them.

It took about ten days to get all these men through the town; but it was some weeks before the inhabitants recovered from the wear and tear of those ten days’ work, to say nothing of the typhus fever and smallpox which made their appearance soon after.

The sickness, however, was not confined to a few towns only. Smallpox was general all over Switzerland, and raged nowhere more violently than in the south of France, which had been quite beyond the reach of these terrible scenes.

The Lord Himself has told us that sword, famine, and pestilence are but the beginning of the sorrows called down by the wickedness of mankind. He knows, however, how to humble and try and bless His own people by their means, as He surely has done and does.

The presence in Switzerland and Germany of so many fresh prisoners from all parts of France gave occasion for very many opportunities of spreading the glad tidings of God’s grace, by means of tracts, Testaments, portions of Scripture, &c., which were distributed in great numbers; as also by personal intercourse with the soldiers, who, touched by the kindness they had experienced in Switzerland, were generally very willing to listen to what was said to them. It is indeed known that much, very much of the seed sown has been snatched away by Satan’s evil birds; for the Romish priests have already burnt many Testaments and tracts, and many others have been given away lest the priests should find them; nevertheless, faith looks above the earth and above the human agents who accomplish Satan’s work in it. The Spirit still remains among us to accomplish God’s work; and that He will carry out by means of His written word in spite of all Satan’s opposition— “we also helping together by prayer.”

May the Lord’s people be stirred up also to pray that the benefit of the Lord’s lessons to His people may not be lost through our carelessness, and also that the opportunities which have been seized and made available for preaching the truth and sowing precious seed may be fruitful in a harvest of many souls to our Lord’s glory.

Is there not, too, in all these circumstances a voice to us to be more earnest in attending to the exhortation to pray for the powers that be, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty?

In conclusion, it seems a fitting occasion to render yet more public the cordial thanks returned by those who have suffered during the war to all who have so promptly and liberally come forward to help them. If the more blessed part is that of those who gave, it was nevertheless no trifling joy to read, in that substantial testimony of love and care, a proof that the sufferers live in the hearts and thoughts of their brethren; and that strengthens the bonds which unite all together practically as the members of the body of Christ, so that what is true spiritually is manifested outwardly.

For the administration of this service not only supplies the wants of the saints, but is abundant also by many thanksgivings unto God; while, by the experiment of this ministration, they glorify God for your professed subjection unto the Gospel of Christ, and for your liberal distribution unto them and unto all; and by their prayers for you, which long after you for the exceeding grace of God in you. Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable gift. (2 Cor. 9: 12-15.)

Heard,.. seen,.. handled

“Heard, ... seen, ... handled”

W. J. Lowe, November 1890.

Published: Ealing, A. J. Cowell, 1890 Nov. 1899 2nd edn enlarged.

“That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the Word of life; for the life was manifested...” (1 John 1: 1, 2.)

That Christ is our life, no Christian can for a moment question, any more than that He gives life. “The Son quickens whom He will.” He gives His sheep eternal life. He communicates or gives life, but beside that, He is the life. Both are true. He said, “I am the resurrection and the life.”

God, be it remembered, is self-existent. The name He revealed to Moses was “I AM THAT I AM”. (Ex. 3: 14). “His name is JAH” (Ps. 68: 4). Again, He says, “I AM HE ... I lift up my hands to heaven and say, I live for ever.” (Deut. 33: 39, 40). This last passage is all the more remarkable, as its from implies the Speaker to be on earth. The Name of Jesus, as born here below, is Emmanuel, God with us”; so given in Matthew. It belongs to God to say “I AM”; and therefore Christ could say “I AM THE LIFE.” No one who is not “the true God” could be “the eternal life,” But it is written of Jesus, “He is the true God and eternal life.” In this sense deity and life are inseparable; they cannot be dissociated without assailing the glory of His Person. But in saying this, we do not state or imply that in communicating life to us, He communicates deity. No one whose soul is abiding in the truth would or could suppose such a thing. No believer can say, “I am the life”; I cannot have it apart from Him, or I should be an irresponsible self-existent being. Thank God, that can never be. In giving, He does not give “as the world gives”; He does not give away. The recipient is ever dependent upon the gracious Giver, and, being made alive, enjoys the life in communion with Him, who is both Life-giver and Life-sustainer.

When we think or speak of life practically, everyone will own that we do not mean by it merely the fact that we are alive. What is live to a criminal confined in a solitary cell? It is true he is as much alive as if he were free, and in the bosom of his family; but in the practical sense, is his “life” the same? Would he not describe his prison life as a living death? Now as to the Christian it is written, “He that will love life and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile: let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and pursue it. For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and His ears are open unto their prayers; but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil” (1 Peter 3: 10-13).

In a true conception of life, righteousness is as inseparable from it as is the joy of heart which is from God; and besides that, there is relationship with others who have it. All this is dealt with in detail in the 1st Epistle of John. But in the first place, we read “Whose keepeth his word, in him verily the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in Him. He that saith he abideth in Him ought himself also so to walk, even as He walked” (1 John 2: 5, 6).

Now the question is, what should I think of when the subject of “life” comes before me? For we own that it is of the mere fact that I am alive; and we are not now speaking of the natural life we have as born into this world, but of spiritual life, or the new life. “God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ” (Eph. 2: 5). Our present point is not as to how we get life (Scripture is plain as to this but as to how it is presented to our minds by the Holy Ghost. “Eternal live is God’s gift: it is not earned by law-keeping. (Gal. 3: 21). When ‘law’ is treated of, we find the word ‘life’ (Gal. 3: 12), but in this connection the Scripture takes care never to say ‘eternal life’; for this is a gift of God: it is Christ Himself.” (JND C.W. 7.) I repeat, then, when I think of “life” practically, what am I to think of if not of Christ? Why is it that there is so much effort now made to turn away the thoughts from Christ to something else, such as our “blessedness”?

Take, for instance, a sentence constantly repeated of late, “Christ is eternal life, but eternal life is not Christ.” Or again, a parallel instituted to deny that eternal life is Christ: it will not hold. It is this: we say “God is love,” but you cannot Love is God. True; that would make an idol called “love.” By inverting the order of the words in the original Greek, “The Light thereof is the Lamb,” the One so known, familiar indeed to every adoring heart. All Scripture speaks of Him; there is no other. Nor is there any difficulty as to the order of the words.

Some, basing their arguments on the folly and ignorance, real or supposed, which has spoken of eternal life as a “title” of the Lord Jesus, endeavour to show its inapplicability, so as to deny by implication that “eternal life” can be spoken of as “Christ.” I need not say that “life”, which is expressive of an essential quality, cannot be a “title.” But how readily, alas, does the enemy succeed in effacing the latter half of John 17: 3 from the thoughts of Christians. Present relationship with the Father is implied in the revelation of Himself; but it can only be really known to the soul as set forth in Him who has revealed Him, that is, in Jesus Christ, “whom He has sent, “and who said, “I am ... the life.”

Others, again, will tell you that you cannot say ‘Eternal life is Christ,’ because He is more than Eternal life. This is but a miserable worn-out sophism, confounding what He is Himself with divine attributes, or which relationships into which He may enter in grace, or with His power as a “quickening Spirit.” What is not Christ for my soul? not only for me, or for His people, but for God; and He is God; I worship Him. But the argument as to what you can or cannot say, in cases like these, simply depends upon the subject of the sentence and what is stated or predicated about it; and you must know all about both subject and predicate in order to speak of it correctly. In this, Scripture is the only guide. Mere words are used in different senses. Paul says, in one place, he is “in the flesh,” in another that he is “not in the flesh.” There is no difficulty to a simple reader, for the passage makes clear that “in the flesh” is used literally with the meaning “in the body, alive in the world,” and it is used morally to mean the condition of an unsaved soul.

We need waste no time over the argument as to Christ and eternal life not being “interchangeable expressions:” it has no weight with a serious person; for we know that the term “Eternal life” is used in different connections, and conveys a meaning modified according to the conditions which characterise it in various passages. It is applied to earthly blessing in Ps. 133, and to heavenly in Mark 10: 30; 2 Timothy 4: 18. The righteous go away into it. (Matt. 25: 46). It is the goal before the soul of those who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and incorruptibility. (Rom. 2: 7; 1 Tim. 6: 12). All this is incontestable; but we desire now to look at it in the sense of its “manifestation,” as spoken of in 1 John 1: 1, 2, — a most blessed and practical thing for a Christian, in order that his soul may be established on a solid foundation, and be definitely exercised before God as to what life is, and as to how it can be manifested in this world, so that he may bring forth the fruits of divine life that the Father looks for from him.

It has frequently been contended that “manifestation” has a spiritual meaning, and John 14: 21 is quoted in support of this. It is so there; the passage itself states it. The Lord is speaking of the presence and operation of the Holy Ghost, that “other comforter,” who was to come after Jesus had gone to the Father. But even that provokes from Judas the question, “Lord, how is it that Thou wilt manifest Thyself to us and not unto the world”? His question, however little entering into what the Lord was saying, showed, at least, how Judas understood the “manifestation,” and that is our point now: he did not think it possible that there could be a manifestation to them, that would not be at the same time a manifestation to the world. At that time Jesus was in the world, and all were responsible to receive Him; for He Himself said to the Jews, “Ye also have seen me and believe not.” (John 6: 36.)

When Jesus was here, though truly Man, visible to mortal eyes, faith alone could really apprehend who He was. Apart from some divine communication, either direct or in the written Word, — which they had, and thus were responsible, — no human heart was disposed to receive Him. Even John the Baptist, the greatest born of women, filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb, — and the like is said of no other man, — had twice to declare, “I knew Him not.” (John 1: 31, 33). Of himself, he was unable to define anything as to His Person apart from the revelation made to him: “He that sent me to baptise with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, the same is He which baptiseth with the Holy Ghost. And I saw, and bear record that this is the Son of God.” (John 1: 33, 34). The testimony heard carried what John saw down into his inmost soul, and made it a matter of faith, and consequently of power in his heart, so that he “bare record.” On the same principle, his ministry in Israel would be blessed to those who received it; for he had come baptising that Jesus “might be made manifest to Israel.” There can be a true apprehension of Jesus only where there is Faith, and that is necessarily accompanied by a sense of need in the soul. Now “faith comes by hearing.” The works of Jesus left everyone without excuse, but His words went further; He was altogether what He said, and thus, by His words, He made known who He was, as in the case of the man born blind: “Jesus said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? He answered and said, Who is He, Lord, that I might believe on him? Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is He that talketh with thee. And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped Him.” (John 9: 35-38). What marvellous grace and tender condescension in Him, who, though He had put forth divine power in a way never yet heard of “since the world began,” was as yet only distinctly known to that poor man’s soul as “a Man that is called Jesus.”*

{*It is of the deepest interest to note that the more the unbelieving hostility of the Jews compelled him to speak of Jesus, the more his heart warmed into a deepening apprehension of what He was. Occupation with Him produced its effect, even before the full revelation was made by Jesus Himself. Such is simple faith!}

There are thus three condition or degrees of apprehension, where faith exists: —

1) When Jesus was on earth, there was sight, accompanied by the inward perception of faith, depending on some divine communication; but the Holy Ghost had not yet come, — not even when the disciples were gladdened by seeing Jesus risen (John 20: 20).

2) Now that Jesus is on high: there is the inward perception of faith; and that is accompanied by the teaching of the Spirit and a power for knowledge (though it be only in part), through the Holy Ghost given to the “blessed,” who have “not seen,” but yet “have believed” (John 20: 29).

3) When Jesus comes, there will be sight again, and full knowledge through the Holy Ghost’s power and unhindered operation. We shall see Jesus as He is, and be like Him, and know as we are known.

In the case of the natural man, devoid of faith: —

1) Jesus was seen, but only to be rejected and hated, and at length crucified.

2) The world cannot receive the Spirit, for “it seeth him not, neither knoweth him” (John 14: 17).

3) When the Son Man comes, He will be seen for a moment, and known in the execution of judgment by those who would not receive the gospel of salvation preached during His absence (2 Thess. 1: 9). “Every eye shall see Him.”

But in whatever degree Jesus nay have been spiritually apprehended, His “manifestation” was complete in itself when He was here, though it was not in dazzling power; for He had “not come to judge.” But “the LIFE was manifested”; and that is our present subject. The disciples favoured as they where, really apprehended far less than they thought while Jesus was with them: they had not received the Holy Ghost. It is quite false to say they “saw Him to be the eternal life”; there is no scriptural authority for such an assertion. On the very night on which He was betrayed, the Lord said to Philip, “Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me”? To limit the “manifestation” to the effect produced on eye witnesses, merely betrays a heart occupied with man, rather than with Christ. That the life was manifested is the absolute statement of Scripture. Christ was incarnate. The Word had become flesh, and dwelt here on earth. Thank God it was so!

The doctrine of non-manifestation to the world is a direct contradiction of John 6: 40, — “this is the will of Him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on Him, may have everlasting life.” Such a doctrine necessarily implies that there was no manifestation to any who did not believe, and consequently that none did, nor could, believe by seeing Him. But the “Word” that spoke of Him was already in their hands; and they had had John’s testimony, to which the Lord appeals in the most formal way (Matt. 21: 23-27; Luke 7: 24-30). Moreover, in John 5, the Lord gives no less than five witnesses as to who and what He was: — John, the “works,” the Father, the Scriptures, and Moses. Jesus does not speak of His own “words” here except to show the impossibility of believing them, if they did not believe the writings of Moses. This point, if quietly weighed, will, I believe, expose the system, and show how completely the “life” is separated from the Person of the Lord in the minds of those who have been caught by it.

The “eyes” spoken of in 1 John 1: 1 are, then, human, natural eyes; and the “hands” spoken of are human hands. Can there be a doubt, any more than when the Greeks said, “Sirs, we would see Jesus”? The word “see” cannot have there precisely the same sense as in Hebrews 2, where we read, “Now we see Jesus.” In the first case it is the natural eye, in the second the eye of faith. The question, “What was it? It was Jesus Christ, the sent One of the Father, who said, “I am... the life.” (John 5: 20). He is the only begotten Son, and if God has given to us eternal life, it is in the Son we have it. “The dead hear the voice of the Son of God.” The Son quickens. He died for me, and He is my life.

If we now consider briefly “life” in the sense of what a soul has or possesses: is it Christ that I have received, or merely truth about Him? The Apostle answers, “Christ.” (Col. 2: 6). “As ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord so walk ye in HIM, rooted, etc.” “To me to live is Christ.” “Christ lives in me.” Elsewhere, “I in you” “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in Me, and I in you.” (John 14: 20.) “And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.” (John 17: 26)

In the same way, believing on His name is described as the reception of Him: “To as many as received Him to them gave He power [or, the right] to become children of God, even to them that believe on His name.” (John 1: 12). Jesus did not commit Himself to those who only believed through the evidence of miracles they witnessed and could not deny, and which they could own to be “miracles,” judging of them by their natural intelligence. (John 2: 23; and compare John 10: 41). “Believing in His name” might be a mere effect of the unregenerate mind, not wrought by the operation of the Spirit of God. But the Gospel was written not only that we might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, but that believing we might have life through His name (John 20: 31).

Can any humble Christian, reading 1 John 1: 1-2, deny that “the Eternal life” spoken of, and thus personally presented, is Christ? Thank God, He is such for my soul. Thus I think of the life, I am not occupied with my being alive, or with my blessedness, but with Himself. But while I speak of Christ personally as the Eternal life, how does that possibly deny His being set forth in various relations as Messiah, Shepherd, Saviour, Lord, Friend, Head, of the Body, and so on? He was God known; and He is Himself the Word of Life to my soul, that is, I find out in Him what God means when He speaks to me about eternal life as manifested among men in this world; and that is the important thing for my heart and conscience.

——————

It may be asked, How was the life manifested? We answer that it could not but reveal itself, for Jesus was it. If we trace out in the Gospel of John the way in which its prominent characteristics, as given in the Epistle, are spoken of, it may help us to a clearer understanding. Faith, love, holiness, obedience, dependence, righteousness, knowledge of the Father, prevailing prayer, are some of the marks of eternal life. Did He not publicly appeal to the Scriptures, and constantly quote them? Did He not speak of the Father to the unbelieving Jews? Was it not to them that He said, “I know Him, and keep His saying,” and again, “I do always those things that please Him”? Yet had He to say, “If ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins”; and more, “I have many things to say and to judge of you; but He that sent me is true, and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of Him . . . I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things; and He that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone.” (John 8: 24, 26, 28, 29, 55). To those that murmured He said, “No man can come unto me except the Father which hath sent me draw him.” (John 6: 44) Did Jesus hide the fact that the Father who had sent Him was ever further aggravated by His marvellous words of grace: “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work”; and He even adds, “The Son can do nothing of himself but what he seeth the Father do; for what things for the Father loveth the Son, and showeth him all things that himself doeth” (v 17-20). To whom did He say, and where, “Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself; but he that sent me is true, whom ye know mot; but I know him, for I am from him, and he hath sent me”? Those who heard it sought to take Him, but in vain (John 7: 8-30). Was it not to those unbelievers that He asked the question, “Which of you convinceth me of sin”? (John 8: 46). Did He not even pray in public? (John 12: 27-29) And, on another occasion (John 11: 41), using the very words which the Holy Ghost in the Epistle of John (v. 15) appropriates to faith: “Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me, and I know that thou hearest me always” And He adds, “But because of the people which stand by, I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me.” These words are a proof that the more part at least did not believe before those words were uttered; and the Scripture carefully states, a little further down, that “many”, after seeing the miracle — the raising of Lazarus — did believe; but that “some” went and told the Pharisees, — those bitter enemies of Jesus, — who at once gathered the council to plot against His life. Furthermore, when the high priest asked Jesus of His disciples and of His doctrines, did not the Lord refer him to those who had heard His public discourses in the synagogues and the temple? “In secret”, He says, “I have said nothing” (John 18: 19-21). But where shall we stop in following the footsteps of his blessed, divine, yet human life? No where was His love and obedience more marked than at the cross; and Himself presents it as an example to us (John 12: 24-26, compare 1 John 3: 16). Yet, so far from its being hidden from the world, Jesus expressly said, “That the world may know that I love the Father, and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do” (John 14: 31). Everywhere the Scripture shows that He was so manifested as that the world might take knowledge of His life.

The new theology ignores all this. It boldly states that the eternal life was not manifested to the world. Unconscious as its advocates may be of it, they in effect separate eternal life both from the Godhead and the Manhood of Jesus, so that it becomes a question whether “eternal life”, as it is explained to mean, was ever on earth at all, for it is presented to us a mystical thing “in heaven.” As to the Manhood we have already spoken; the paltry plea advanced as to the Godhead is that it is not communicated nor communicable. Everyone agrees as to that. What but reasoning self-occupation could have invented such an argument to becloud the simplicity of Scripture? Christ is my life, and Christ is God; but that does not make me God. The Holy Ghost has written, “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him” (John 1: 18); and again, “No man hath seen God at any time; if we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and His love is perfected in us.” (1 John 4: 12) Shall we trust our reason on such holy ground, or simply believe the Scripture, thanking God for its fulness? Let us put off our shoes and worship that blessed One to whom it all refers.

But unbelief has dared to go further. In explaining the word “handled” in 1 John 1: 1, not only has it been sought to restrict its application to the passage in Luke 24, as if it had nothing to do with the Lord’s life before the cross; but it has been boldly that “it is as the risen and glorified Man He is said to be the true God and eternal life.” Now no one doubts that the blessed Lord was in heaven when the Apostle John was moved by the Holy Ghost to write his Epistle. Can it be that such a sentence could have been based on so superficial an argument? Yet it seems to be the only excuse for it. But is it true? Does the Apostle “speak” of Jesus “risen and glorified” in the passage? On the contrary, he speaks of the One who “is come.” Come where? Is it to the heavenly glory, or to this poor world? The Spirit answers, “He came by water and by blood.” He came to be a man, and die for poor lost sinners, and lay in death the foundation both of life and righteousness for them. “THAT WHICH WAS FROM THE BEGINNING:” Is not the “beginning” here spoken of the manifestation of the life IN THIS WORLD? He who is now in the glory is the One who was heard, seen, handled as Man during His blessed life down here. “He is the true God and Eternal life”. The Lord preserve my reader from speculative analysis of that blessed Person whom “no man knoweth,” separating what God has presented as one and indivisible, and denaturalising the eternal life, which was manifested in all that He was here: for He was it, and wherever He was, He could not be other than Himself.

How can those who accept this mysticism have any sense left in their souls of that grace which, in divine power, and in communion with the Father, could adapt itself to every circumstance of human need? And that is a practical side of the life which is specially to characterise the Christian. When Paul speaks to Timothy of the great mystery of godliness, he was directing him how he ought to behave himself in the house of God. And he sets Christ positively before his soul, “God manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the nations, believed on in the world, received up into glory” (1 Tim. 3: 15, 16). Eternal life, in its full fruition, will assuredly be in heavenly glory; no one questions that. Our Lord’s “will” is to have us with Himself. He has been “received up into glory,” and is “with the Father” (John 14: 28; John 16: 28; 1 John 1: 2). That being so the power of the life in communion with Him is now to be realised by us through the Holy Ghost’s taking of His things and showing them to us. We have the life now, here in this world where it was “manifested,” and we have to walk with Him as he walked here, taking His yoke upon us, and learning of Him.

Some have objected that “life” is an abstraction. This is only another device of Satan for getting rid of the Person of Christ.

In the Old Testament, when God was not revealed, the point insisted on by Moses was that they had seen no form — only heard a voice. In Christ, God is revealed, and more, revealed as the Father of only begotten Son (John 1: 18). The first truth of the mystery of godliness — (of godliness, mark, that is, what is practical for our souls, the secret of our behaviour in the house of God) — is “God manifest in the flesh.”

Is it merely a thing, an abstraction that is spoken of in the 1st Epistle of John, “as seen with our eyes, hear, handled, and looked upon”? Is there no “from” before the soul, called up by the words of Jesus: “I am the Living Bread, which came down from heaven, if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever”? It is the same blessed One, who as risen, said, “Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet that it is I myself: handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have” (Luke 24: 39). We do well also not to forget that it was God’s mind that even the Spirit should once be visible to human eyes: for it is expressly stated that “the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon Him” (Luke 3: 22). Again, on the day of Pentecost, He came upon the gathered disciples as “cloven tongues of fire.” But God the Father is unseen and unknown except as revealed by the Son (Matt. 11: 27).

If we open John’s Gospel, we find this blessed Person, the Eternal Word, who was God, and who became flesh, — became Man, — and dwelt amongst us full of grace and truth. He came into this world, and the world knew Him not — Himself, the Light. Furthermore, John 8 sets forth His words which were rejected by men — words which presented Himself as being “the truth” — as He said, “Altogether that which I also say to you,” and closing with this: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was I AM.” He was the Light of Life. In John 9, His works set forth what He is, and what God is. They are equally rejected, and the favoured object of His sovereign grace is cast out of the synagogue. The “works of God” were manifested in the blind man notwithstanding; for Jesus said, “I must work the works of Him that send Me while it is day; the night is coming when no man can work. As long as I am in the world I am the light of the world.” These two things are taken up by the Lord in the end of John 15. His words (verse 22) — “If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.” His works (verse 24) — “If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin”: and He adds, “But now have they both seen and hated both Me and My Father.”

In presence of these Scriptures, and the end of John 12 from verse 42 (verses 49, 50 especially), I am bold to say that the present effort to deny that the Eternal life was Christ, and consequently to limit the manifestation of it to a certain class of persons, is a work of the enemy, a perversion of Scripture which will spread as a gangrene, and eat away the vitals of everyone who tampers with it.

Dear reader, let not the enemy deprive our souls of Christ. He said, “I am the life,” so that now when I think of life I think of Him. He is, as it were, the embodiment of it for my soul. With Him I have to walk in learning of Him. He is the food of life, my sustenance and joy. I think of that Blessed One who talked with the Samaritan woman at Sychar’s well, and won her sin-stained soul to God, — of Him who fed the multitude, and who laid down His life for the sheep, — of Him who opened the blind man’s eyes that he might see the Son of God and talk with Him, and who said to Peter, Lovest thou me? — I think of Him, and I say, He is my life, Oh to know more of those divine affections and energies ever displayed in this poor world by Him who said, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.” We know Him as now in the glory, where we shall soon see Him. And we learn in His death the judgment and the end of self, and of all that is of man, so that we may reckon ourselves dead to sin and alive unto God in Christ Jesus our Lord. “This is life eternal that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent.”

Christian reader, do you “love life”? and if you do in the best sense of it, how are your desires to be realised but in feeding upon Christ, and living in communion with Him who died for you and is coming to fetch you home to be Himself for ever? Meanwhile, may we walk as He walked!

November 1890

Apocalypse

Sketches in the Apocalypse

Words of Help

13

The Seals Opened

When we come to consider for a moment the opening of the seals in chapter 6 it is hardly needful to remind the reader, who has attentively followed the two chapters preceding, that we enter into a wholly new scene, because it now becomes a matter of dealing in judgment with this world (1 Cor. 5: 13). John has his place in heaven, where the Church is, together with the Old Testament saints, all represented by the “twenty-four elders” around the throne; and as yet, no distinction is made with reference to their varied positions in the future. The chapters 4 and 5 are all occupied with heaven, and the sealed roll or book is “in the right hand of Him that sat on the throne.” In chapter 5 the “Lamb” is introduced. He is seen “in the midst of the throne and is found to be the only One worthy to open the seals, and thus disclose what is still future.

We must ever bear in mind that the number of redeemed saints up to that time is absolutely complete. The Old Testament saints, with whom John the Baptist was counted, do not form a part of the “Bride,” as he himself was given to state prophetically (John 3: 29). The Bride is composed alone of those who are sealed by the Holy Ghost, sent down on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and whom the Lord Himself will “raise” or “change” when He comes in the clouds. That is definitely explained in 1 Thessalonians 4: 15-18. In this first Epistle to the Corinthians, written a short time afterwards, the Apostle Paul calls it a “mystery” (chap. 15: 49-54). Death will then be “swallowed up in victory.” So far, that special glory of Christ as “the first-begotten of the dead” will be complete (1 Cor. 15: 20-23; Rev. 1: 5). And the Lord will present His Bride to Himself “a glorious Church, without spot or wrinkle” (Eph. 5: 25-27).

But that in no way prevents others being present when this heavenly scene takes place. Many “blessed ones” will be “called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb,” as we read in Revelation 19: 9. The saints of the Old Testament times will, no doubt, be found in that company, and also others who become objects of the sovereign grace of God during the period of judgment which will follow the removal of the Church, as we shall see presently; for God delights in mercy, and judgment is His “strange work” (Isa. 28: 21, 22).

From the moment that the saints are called to heaven, or rather taken thither by the blessed Lord Himself, uninterrupted worship goes on there to “Him that liveth for ever and ever” (chap. 4: 10). The “living creatures” of Ezekiel’s vision, which have also the characteristic features of the “seraphim” (Isa. 6) are seen there, intimately associated with the throne of judgment, “in it and round about it” (Rev. 4: 6). And the moment the Lamb is introduced, all, including the glorified saints, fall down before Him in worship. They all have harps of joy and vials of prayers agreeable to the divine presence, and they sing a new redemption song, to celebrate the infinite value of the precious blood which is the purchase-price of their eternal blessing. That had been also the case on earth, as soon as the name of the “Faithful Witness” is mentioned, in view of His “coming with clouds” to Him alone, Son of God and Son of man (John 5: 22, 27; Rev. 1: 5-7).

All that regards believers is “settled in heaven,” as the Word of God ever was and is (Psa. 119: 89). But at length, after prolonged patience, the time has come to make evident and display divine rights in government over this earth, which a giddy and selfish world ever seeks to ignore and despise. Even at such a moment, there is, however, no haste; for there are purposes of grace to be unfolded with reference to this earth, in view of the establishment of the long promised kingdom in Israel, God’s ancient people. They are still “beloved,” though now rejected, in consequence of their rejection of Christ. They are not “cast away” for ever (Rom. 9: 2-29). The Lamb is now about to set up His own kingdom, as promised, in their midst; but they will have to experience the persecution to which He Himself was subject here below, previously to the manifestation of His power on their behalf “in righteousness” (Isa. 9: 6, 7; Isa. 32: 1, 15-17). We perceive that, when the fifth seal is opened; for it evidently refers to them (compare Rev. 12).

The subjoined extracts from the Synopsis (Vol. 5. pp. 523,524) may well find their place here, in reference to the “new song” of Rev. 5 to celebrate the Lamb: —

“What seemed His dishonour and rejection on earth was the ground of His worthiness to take the book. He who at all suffering and cost to Himself had glorified all that God was, is able and worthy to unfold the governmental dealing which sets it forth and is the display of His power not merely in Israel, but in the whole earth … He does not yet “come forth,” but His work is the worthy instrument, the divine motive, for the display of God’s power. The redemption song takes place in heaven, whence the judgment flows: what is to follow on earth now begins, when the seals are opened …”

The living creatures introduce successively what follows on the opening of the first four seals: first, imperial conquest; secondly, internecine wars; thirdly, famines; and then pestilence which affects “the fourth part of the earth.” The last summarises the “four sore judgments” spoken of by the prophet Ezekiel as about to fall upon Jerusalem at the time when the temple was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon (chap. 14: 21).

We may notice here in passing, that in chapter 9: 15, the “third part” of the remainder is mentioned. Always supposing that the same part of the earth is affected in the two cases, the actual number that perish in each of the visitations would be the same, though relatively the second would exceed the former one in violence, as is generally the case in excessive judgments of this nature, when the opportunity allowed for repentance is despised and disregarded (compare chap. 2: 21).

It is thought that in all this part of the book, including chapters 7 to 9, the Roman earth is in question, as well as the mass of unbelieving Jews who are more or less protected by those in power there (compare chap. 9: 4 with 7: 3, the “seal in the forehead” being noticed in both cases). My own impression is that the whole of professing Christendom is included, and that would extend beyond the limits of the ancient Roman empire, especially on the northern and eastern sides. Besides this, the colonies in all parts of the world would naturally follow suit with the mother-countries, and the growing influence of Papal domination wherever Christianity has reached, seems to make this more than probable.

The opening of the fifth seal calls for special notice, inasmuch as we find here “under the altar, the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held.” Here we are on familiar ground: their prayers are such as we find in the Psalms, which proves that their thoughts are inspired by that external relationship with God which characterises the Old Testament. They have Jewish hopes and expectations, knowing that Jehovah is a God of judgement as well as of knowledge, and by Him actions are weighed. Hannah states it in her prayer, which for the first time in scripture, introduces the “anointed” of the God of Israel (1 Sam. 2: 1-10). Prophetically, it refers of course to Christ.

All this would confirm the thought already stated, that we are in presence of a Jewish remnant, amongst which God is working by His Spirit, when the Church’s testimony on earth is closed for ever; for the world, left as it will be then, without any testimony for God, is seen to be hastening on in infidelity to the judgments about to fall upon it. Have we not also the fulfilment of the Lord’s words to His disciples in Matthew 10: 23, when, in one short verse at the close of His sketch of all service for Him during the time of His absence, he shows what will take place “in Israel,” after the Church is gone?

The martyred remnant participate in Messiah’s sufferings, as did the early disciples; and the Apostle Paul, who naturally had occasion to glory in being of the stock of Israel, felt, in writing his second epistle to Timothy, that such a portion must be his also (Phil. 3: 3-5; 2 Tim. 4: 6). Paul departed “to be with Christ,” but “the souls of those that are slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held” are told to wait until others in like circumstances should also be put to death, during the last three and a half years of Satan’s power, displayed in his two instruments, the “beast” and the antichrist of chapter 13, who claim worship on pain of death for any refusal to obey them. Both companies are mentioned in chapters 20 verse 4.

The opening of the sixth seal brings a subversion of the order of created things, affecting the relations of the whole earth with the heavens, on which it is dependent, not only for light, but for the ordering of those times and seasons promised by God to Noah, on the occasion of the burnt-offering offered by him, on leaving the ark in order to re-people a renewed world. (Gen. 8: 21-22). When this judgment takes place, both governors and their subjects think the final judgment had suddenly come about, and they flee to hide themselves if possible. Compare Isaiah 34: 1-4; Matthew 24: 29; Luke 23: 30; and also Joel 2: 10, 31; 3:15; Hosea 10: 8.

Finally, there is a pause before the seventh seal is opened.

W. J. L. 1918

Sketches in the Apocalypse.

14.

“Come” (Revelation 6).

It may seem somewhat a return to the subject of the last sketch (see page 13), but it is not easy to give in a limited space the many-sided features of this wonderful book, which our hearts should not merely be desiring, but expecting, from the opening words of the Spirit of God, “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.”

Those words, “at hand,” written more that eighteen hundred years ago, surely go to prove that it is not a matter of reckoning the whole period historically, as we are in the habit of counting “time”; but that all that is therein set down, is so traced out as to form in the believer’s heart that spirit of waiting upon the Lord, and looking to Him personally, which characterised the gospel preached by Paul to the Thessalonians.

They were turned to God from idols, to serve Him alone, “and to wait for His Son from heaven” (1 Thess. 1: 9, 10). It was to be the unvarying attitude of their souls, and to be so continually, throughout the history of Christendom. Consequently, we should expect to find moral features all though the book of Revelation which suit the reader at any particular time throughout the whole period treated of.

Besides this, it is a fact that special judgments have occurred continually from time to time, reminding people forcibly of what it will be, in increased intensity at the close of the present period, and more especially when every really converted soul shall have been removed from it, at the moment of the Lord’s coming in the cloud to raise the dead saints, and change the living ones, who shall together meet Him in the air (1 Thess. 4: 15-18).

At the present day, real Christians are comparatively few and far between; but what will it be at the critical moment we are now contemplating in our review when, at the Lord’s coming just referred to, not a single saved soul will be left in the whole of this world? That is indeed the state of things when these judgments begin, in chapter 6. We ourselves are accustomed to deplore the presence of careless and often infidel preachers in Christian pulpits; but what is that compared to the time we are speaking of, when, if there should be any church-going at all, it will be for amusement only, and vast multitudes, if they give vent to their ideas, will boast that they have got rid of the Bible? As time goes on, such spirits, under the guidance of Satan, “the god of this world,” get blinded, and shamelessly bolder (2 Cor. 4: 4; 2 Tim. 3: 13). Is it surprising, then, that judgment should at last begin?

In the days of the emperor Diocletion, at the very beginning of the fourth century (A.D. 303), after half a century of comparative peace, the last of the “ten” persecutions began, and went on for ten years. He sought to get rid of all their literature, and destroy every copy of the scriptures, - at that time, of course, all written by hand. God did not allow it; and He will surely prevent it in the day that is coming. But we may certainly expect that the effort will be made just as the judgment is beginning at the opening of the seven-sealed roll. But let us not forget that the action which follows the opening of the seals is confided to the “four living creatures,” which we may describe by the familiar name of “cherubim.”

All through the Old Testament the cherubim never speak. In the book of Revelation they combine the character of the seraphim (see Isa. 6); this is a detail previously noticed. But let us for a moment trace their action. Their intervention at this time coincides with all previous history, proving that the judgment is administrative or providential. It began at Eden, where their flaming sword “turned every way” to prevent any access to “the tree of life,” when Adam was driven out of paradise (Gen. 3: 24).

When the children of Israel left Egypt, and the tabernacle was made, their outstretched wings formed the throne, or seat, over the ark, in the most holy place. The tabernacle was ordered to be constructed by the people, and placed in the centre of their camp. Over it rested the “cloud” of God’s presence, during the forty years that His people sojourned in the “waste howling wilderness,” where He kept them “as the apple of His eye” (Deut. 32: 10). Day by day He provided for all their needs. The people had no cares, no work to do, but simply to prepare as they liked their daily fresh provision called “angels’ food” and the “bread of heaven” (Ps. 78: 21); for God ever delights in showing mercy.

When the kingdom was established in glory under Solomon’s extended rule, the position of the cherubim is changed. In the temple which he built they stand erect, and look outwards, their extended wings just touching and covering the whole breadth of the temple (2 Chron. 3: 10-13). That attitude surely sets forth the character of God’s government for the time being, not only of the people, but over all the territory they occupied. It was a “kingdom” set up on earth, in a chosen place of extending ??? [ed?] blessing, in the land promised to Abraham. As usual, failure came in, and at last, after years of patience, final judgment fell, when both ark and temple disappeared, and the land was also given up to desolation. Jeremiah shows that the ark is not to be placed on earth (chap. 3: 16). Jerusalem itself is to be called “Jehovah’s throne” (ver. 17). And the ark, in a new form, will be found in heaven, being “seen” there in “the temple of God” (Rev. 11: 19).

Some other things need notice in passing. Through David’s repeated victories over the Syrians, the extent of the territory appropriated by the tribes of Israel, when they first divided it out, became very greatly increased toward the north, so that Solomon reigned over all the kings and kingdoms from “the river” (that is, the Euphrates) even to the border of Egypt (1 Kings 4: 21; 2 Chron. 9: 26).* This agrees with God’s first promise to Joshua after Moses’ death (Joshua 1: 4). Compare also God’s word to Abraham in Genesis 15: 18. {*It is interesting at the present time to observe the progress of the British troops at both ends of this territory.}

After the destruction of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar, power over the whole earth was committed to him, and he himself had to learn that, after the warning given by Daniel. For seven years he lost his reason, and was practically transformed into a beast. On his recovery he had to write his own history, and dropped the title of king when he became a worshipper, in Daniel 4: 33-37. A new [form] of the cherubim was at that time communicated to the prophet Ezekiel, himself a captive in Chaldea, who saw things from the point of view of God’s people, scattered as they then were, but still “beloved” in spite of their rejection, as Paul also testified later on in his history (Rom. 11: 1-5). The “cherubim,” described in Ezekiel’s first chapter, were accompanied by “wheels” to run on the earth in a novel way, to show that both heaven and earth were under God’s directing and ruling hand—all judgment proceeding from Him, through the cherubim. They are found again, in chapters 9-11, executing it; and lastly, are seen to return, in the future promised day of glory which ushers in Christ’s millennial kingdom, in chapter 43.

This rapid review must suffice to show why the apocalyptic judgments proceed from the “four living creatures,” as the Lamb successively opens the seals. Each one in his turn says “Come,” and John records what he saw, as the result of the divine order.

The reader will notice that, in the official Revised Version, the words “and see” are in each case dropped. This is quite correct. The available early manuscripts are more or less confused, evidently because the true meaning was not understood.* In the third verse, where John’s “I saw” is also omitted, there is no authority for the addition at all. The living cherubic creatures give the governmental order, which is their regular duty, and the apostle simply records what he saw in consequence of the order given. It is the habitual character of the cherubim, as we have seen, all though Scripture, and most important, though very little understood. The whole passage becomes easy and natural to grasp when the words “and see” are left out. The judgments are providential, that is to say, that the effects observed on earth are the result of the unseen working and ordering in heaven above, where the twenty-four elders are enthroned also around the Lamb. {*See also “Lectures on the Revelation,” by W. Kelly, p. 108.}

Notwithstanding all, judgment is still God’s “strange work”; for the opening of the fifth seal shows nothing fresh to “come,” but is a blessed interruption to reveal the Lamb’s secret working in a few who love Him and suffer martyrdom (chap. 6: 9-11).

1918, W.J.L.

A Word on Galatians

A Word on Galatians

Illustrated by the Orders Given to the Kohathites

W. J. Lowe. 1890

Numbers 4: 1-20, Numbers 7: 1-9; Galatians 5: 1-10, Galatians 6: 12-14.

Food for the Flock vol. 9 (London, Geo. Morrish, 1884.)

It is impossible to read the epistles carefully, beloved brethren, without seeing that the grace of God, as manifested in the cross of Christ, is presented in them in two very distinct ways. First, we find salvation through the redemption that was there wrought once for all. Secondly, we learn that this same grace characterizes the path of the Christian through this world. The apostle says: “God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ [not, ‘By which I have been saved or have been brought to God,’ but] by which the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” That is, not merely does his soul rest in the deliverance wrought for him from Satan’s power, from sin, from death and judgment, but he finds a separation effected between Him and the world, and so completely, that there is no desire on either side to come together again. And that which has made the separation is the cross of Christ. So that we may look at the cross of Christ and say: Well, if I am to go into the world, I must give up what God has vouchsafed to me in that cross; I must outrage Him who was nailed there for me, who showed the depth of His love to me in giving Himself, and in such circumstances of unutterable suffering for the manifestation of divine righteousness in itself and in its effects.

Now there are two sides to this proposition. You might withdraw from the world and say, I stand apart from it; and in so doing might have your heart lifted up with thoughts of your superiority to it in thus standing aside. But the other side of the question presents itself, Would you have the world draw aside from you? Are you crucified to it? Paul had learnt the value of the cross, and accepts the double position.

With the Galatians it was far otherwise. There was on their part an attempt to make a path down here, such as the natural man might walk in; but Paul says, I will not have it nor seek it.

It had not been always so with these saints. They had at first received the truth honestly, and their hearts had burned with affection to Christ and His people. He bears them witness that their love to him, as the minister of it to them, was such that they would have plucked out their own eyes and given them to him. There was every sign of the work being a true one in their souls; at the beginning he had nothing to say against their course at all. But when he looks at them after some years (there is no actual date given, but evidently some years had gone by) such a change had taken place in them, that, in considering their ways, he stands in doubt of them as to whether there was a real work of God in their souls. He says: I have confidence in the Lord about you, but when I look at you, I can scarcely recognise you as my children.

Now what made this difference? You do not find in the epistle that there was any moral evil among them. But the fact was they had given place to an evil principle which was undermining and ruining everything. They wanted to arrange spiritual things so as to suit human nature and thus walk by sight, not faith. They were seeking to get up a system of their own in which everything would go on wheels, as people say; like a machine in working order, you have only to turn the steam on and all is set going at once. That suits the natural man. The Galatians had not got in their souls the sense of the Holy Spirit as a present living power in their hearts, and so they turned to an external machinery, based, no doubt, on what in its origin was divine, but, when misapplied, became the means of resisting God’s present purpose in grace; and by it they brought themselves into bondage to their own ordinances. The apostle goes at once to the root of the matter and shows them that, in so doing, they had really given up the truth that God had sent down the Holy Ghost to dwell in the hearts of those that believe, to guide them into all truth, and to take of the things of Christ and show them unto them, and to be in them a present living power for walking worthy of Him who had called them to His own kingdom and glory, besides giving them the power to cry Abba, Father, and to know what it is to be “an heir of God through Christ.”

I may be forgiven a short digression here for the purpose of making this clearer; for it is of great importance. The admittance that deliverance has been wrought, is quite a different thing from the knowledge that oneself is individually free. Now in the first seven verses of chapter 4, there are two distinct statements as to the work of the Son and the Spirit. There is, first, the mission of God’s Son to redeem those that were under the law. That was Christ’s own work quite apart from us. Then we read: “Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba Father.” This is quite another thing; it is the mission of the Holy Ghost, and is accomplished in us. The cry “Abba, Father,” is much more than the statement that God is Father. It means that the believer has the sense in his soul of the relationship the words imply, and that he rejoices, in it. When I state that such a person is my father, there is nothing in the mere statement which implies my attachment to him, or gives a guarantee that I shall not break away from him and never speak to him again. But when a child addresses his father as such, calling him affectionately “ my Father,” the relationship between the two is evidently being kept up. Now God sends His Spirit into our hearts for this very purpose. Surely it needed a divine Person in us to maintain such a relationship known so as to be enjoyed.

It is based upon redemption: there we find the door of access into it; but we have to learn in our souls individually what it means for a slave to become a son. Let us take the figure of a Negro in slavery. Suppose you wanted to deliver such an one and set him free, how would you go about it? The first step would be, of course, to go to the master and settle with him, as to what price he would take. It would be of no use to ask the slave what he considered his price to be; he could not settle it. It is evident that the act of purchase is entirely apart from the slave. But now, having paid the price, you have to do with the poor man himself, and then the question is how to make him understand that you intend him to be free.

A first impulse might induce you to let him go. But if so, how is he to live? He has no means of providing for himself. He is without friends, without a position, without means in the wide world. You would surely furnish him with means, but what is he to do when the money is spent? The same difficulty recurs. You take him into your house, and let him work for you, and pay him as a hireling for his labour. After a while, let us go and ask him how he likes his new life. We remark to him: You are free now! Free? he answers; what does that mean? I have changed masters, it is true: my present master is very kind to me, so that my life is no longer burdensome to me as it was; but still he is my master, and I am his servant: what do you mean by being free? As long as the relative position remains the same, one born and bred in slavery cannot possibly understand what freedom is. But bring him into the family, make him as one of the children; will he not then learn, through newly awakened affections, what it is to be in another relationship altogether? They have set me at their own table, he says; they treat me as one of themselves; they talk to me as one interested in the family matters; this is different indeed! I feel I am a slave no longer; he who was my master is now my father; now I know that I am free!

And then, what place is ours at the table? Ask the Negro slave again; what place would his slave’s heart dare to crave for? Would he not shrink from being at the same table as the other members of the family? Would he not look on himself and say, I am black, they are white; I cannot sit with them; let them give me a little table by myself, or one in another room? Ah, it is not thus God deals with us. But we must change the simile. The slaves are many, but, there is one SON, and He sets us in the place of His own firstborn.

It is “the Spirit of his Son” that He has sent into our hearts. He would turn our eyes and thoughts away from our miserable selves, that, our gaze may be fixed on the SON, and our hearts, ravished with His glory; and He sends down the Holy Ghost to say to us in living power, “If a son, then an heir, an heir of God, joint heir with Christ.” Everything that belongs to the relationship is ours; for sonship and heirship go together; but the Lord’s heart finds contentment in making known the Father. (John 17: 26.)

Now, while upon this subject, just let me ask you one thing. Which part of the blessing has the greatest attraction for your soul? Is it the inheritance and its glory, or is it the relationship with the Father? Surely not one of us will hesitate to say that the relationship is by far the more precious of the two. But that, dear friends, we have now. We are waiting for the inheritance; we have the hope of that; it is the “hope” attached to the revelation of God’s righteousness, as expressed in this epistle, and inseparable from the relationship into which we are brought. But the relationship, the more blessed of the two, is ours to enjoy now. The doctrine exposed in the Galatians is the fundamental principle of Christianity: God has sent down His Spirit into our hearts here, and that because we have been made sons through redemption. He sends the Spirit into our hearts, that we may know the relationship, and enter into it, and enjoy it. In Ephesians we see the blessed fruits of its exercise and what flows from it, as well as the activities of these divine affections in the power of the Spirit. In Galatians we find the introduction to it and the power for its exercise, the Holy Spirit.

Now the Galatians had practically given this truth up; the apostle has therefore to lay the foundation of first principles, insisting upon the relationship into which they had been already brought, and showing that as to the inheritance which attaches to it, the Holy Spirit is the present earnest. So when speaking of how we are to live down here until we get to the inheritance, he says, “Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.” The Holy Spirit occupies us with the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ as we go on our way, forming us morally in His image. (2 Cor. 3.)

There is a remarkable point too, if we pay attention to it, in chapter 5, which shows the character of this power that works in us. We have in verses 19, 22, the contrast marked between “the works of the flesh” and “the fruit of the Spirit.” Why are the words different? “Works” suppose effort; the natural man understands this; it expresses his life in the world; but there is no effort connected with the thought of “fruit.” No amount of trying would ever get fruit from a tree. If it is in a suitable climate and in a good state and watered, it must bring forth fruit.

Consider too “the fruit” mentioned in verse 22. Would you confide your heart to a person who says, I am trying to love you as much as I can? Would you not feel instinctively there was something wrong? Real love is so engrossed with its object, that it is only tried with the feeling of its own insufficiency: there is no effort, no difficulty about it; it is the natural outflow of what exists within, and only seeks a vent in order to show itself, though never for its own sake. In the same way is it not clear that one who says, I am trying to get joy, or I am trying to get peace, is only painfully manifesting that he has not got it? All these fruits, different and varied as they may be, and admitting of growth and culture, are produced without effort the moment a soul is really subject to the Spirit of God, led of the Spirit and indwelt by Him. But, as with the healthy tree, there must be, for the development and abundance of fruit, the suited climate and nourishment. The vital power is the Holy Ghost; the meat and drink in Christ (John 6); the climate is the grace of God (Rom. 6: 14); the ground we are rooted in, His love (Eph. 3: 17; John 15). We are first “born of the Spirit,” as the Lord says to Nicodemus, that is, made children through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; then we are called to “walk in the Spirit.”

I now desire to look at the practical hindrances which came in to turn the Galatians aside from the path of faith in the power of the Spirit. Paul says to them: “Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?” This is why I read those passages in Numbers, because we find in them several points which bear upon the subject before us. It is a serious thing to find these young saints who had received the word in its fulness from an apostle, turned away in so short a time from the truth they had been taught. Is not this a solemn warning for us all?

In the book of Numbers which contains the Levitical ordinances, we find God’s thoughts as to what He considers His service* in this world. The Levites were first as an entire tribe separated to God, and then their three families made three principal classes (or four, if the priesthood be included), each having a different service to perform. Those who, after the priests, were brought into the nearest place were the Kohathites.

{*The word rendered “host” in Numbers 4: 3 has various meanings. In verse 23 and elsewhere, it is translated “service” in the text, and in the margin “warfare.” It is a word which is constantly translated “war,” “battle,” “army,” “ host.” It means labour or hard duty of warlike character, implying personal suffering. Evidently the better rendering here would have been warfare or service. See Philippians 1: 29, 80.}

Now, without entering much into the details that are given to us, we may notice that the special service of the Kohathites was in connection with the vessels of the tabernacle, with the dwelling-place of God in the midst of His people – those vessels which set forth individually different phases of Christ’s glory. When the camp removed (and the journeying was characteristic of the wilderness), their duty was to bear the holy vessels. They could not choose their burden; they were not even allowed to touch the holy vessels; but after the priests had covered them up in the ordered way and put them upon bars or staves, then the Kohathites came forward to receive each one his appointed service and learn what his duty was. They were not to look at the holy things uncovered, on pain of death. This was a particular ordinance as to their special service. (Chap. 4: 17-20.) It was the priests, who went habitually into the tabernacle, whose duty it was to cover the vessels and prepare them for removal.

None of these vessels might, on any account, be put into wagons, as was all else that pertained to the tabernacle; they were to be carried alone on the shoulders of the Levites. Wagons were offered at the time of the dedication of the altar by the twelve princes of the tribes for the service of Jehovah, and God told Moses to give them to the Gershonites and the Merarites, as useful in transporting the curtains, boards, bars, sockets, and other different parts that fell to their share in the transport; but to the Kohathites He gave none, “because the service of the sanctuary belonging to them was that they should bear upon their shoulders.”

As we have seen, all these vessels thus carried were covered up. There was nothing to be seen, nothing to attract attention except the ark with its covering of blue; all else was under the badgers’ skins. Upon the ark was first put the veil of the tabernacle; then the badgers’ skins, and over that they were to “spread a cloth wholly of blue.” This gave to the ark a very marked place. When the Israelites were moving from place to place, the ark in its blue covering was always to be distinguished, standing out in contrast with the white robes of the priests and Levites. But this exception only brought more fully into view the fact, that all the other vessels of the sanctuary were concealed under the badgers’ skin coverings. No one could tell from the outward appearance what these vessels were, though each Kohathite might know what his appointed charge was. But there was nothing in the service itself, or what was visible of it, to bring glory to those occupied in it. An external looker-on could only have the impression that the Kohathites were set apart for the hardest labour. On no account were they to be allowed the relief of a wagon, for bearing their charge. They were always to carry on their shoulders. Is not this attitude full of meaning for us? The Kohathites were subject to what they carried, and their hearts were exercised as to the value of what they bore; each one must keep in his proper place, and bear his appointed, outwardly unattractive burden. But if any asked them what they did, their answer would be, that they carried the vessels of the sanctuary. And, better than all, they could have the sense in their souls that the eye of Israel’s God was upon them: they were set apart for the service of His house.

Now have we anything in our hearts of the spirit of the Kohathites? God has called us near to Himself, that we may bear His truth in testimony to Him through this world. Are we bearing it as the Kohathites were called to do? It was no question of choice with them: their service was one of simple obedience, yet very near to God and, if their heart was in it, one of singular delight. And observe too, they must needs walk together. No vessel of the sanctuary could be carried without a bar, which supposes at the very least two bearers. Every personal consideration must with them be set aside. One might be stronger than another, or able to walk faster; but neither the strong nor the weak could decide the pace or the time; that depended alone on the cloud which directed every movement of the camp. And none were in more direct dependence on it than the Kohathites. But so walking in their divine order, might they not count on help from Him who manifested His glory on the ark they bore? So it was, on most memorable day of joy in Israel, which we will speak of presently. Their service obliged them to look up to God, both for guidance and help: it was characterised in every detail by obedience and dependence upon Him.

Does not all this transport us at once into the epistle to the Philippians, where we find the aged apostle suffering with joy in prison, despised and forgotten in the world, cheering and exhorting the saints to stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel, to be heavenly minded, “walking by the same rule,” forgetting what was behind and reaching forth to what was before? Could he not present himself to them as an example, having laboured in the gospel in the very spirit of the Kohathites? “Necessity is laid upon me,” he says; so he would have his service without charge; its reward was in itself, in its being for Christ’s sake. So we can understand how deeply he felt the conduct of the Galatians.

Alas, God’s order is easily forgotten by us. As it was with the Galatian saints, so had it been before in Israel: human nature is the same. God has written His judgment of it for our learning and instruction. Let us go over briefly the facts of the history in 2 Samuel 6. It was a wonderful moment for the king after God’s own heart, when he thought of bringing the ark to Zion. Up to that time there had been a moral blot on God’s chosen people: a fortress in the land from which no power of Israel could dislodge the enemy. Joshua, the Judges, and even King Saul, who in his zeal for Israel sought to destroy the Gibeonites, had left it untouched. There the enemy was insolent, more so than anywhere else. The place was impregnable in their eyes: “the blind and the lame” could keep out the hosts of Jehovah. It was a standing reproach on them, and consequently on Jehovah’s name. But as soon as David receives the crown of the kingdom over Israel, and the whole land is at his feet, he feels his responsibility is now to put all at God’s feet; so the first thing he does is to go to the fortress of Zion and wrest it out of the hands of the Jebusites. God owned this act of faith, and chose the place from that time “to place his name there.” That which had been the stronghold of the enemy is to be henceforth the brightest spot of all. But the glory of the victory is not complete until Psalm 132 can be sung there, and David can say in the words of Moses: “Arise, O Lord, into thy resting place, thou and the ark of thy strength.” This leads to fresh exercises of heart, and to fresh lessons of human weakness. Yet David is a Kohathite in heart, and shows, as is clear from the end of chapter v., that dependence on God was his habit; and he finds in practice that God is for him.

But now comes a very different scene. David had been faithful in fighting the enemy: he has to be tested as to faithfulness in God’s house. Then is manifested of how real danger to the soul is the moment after a victory has been gained. The ark has to be carried up to Mount Zion; but David does not think of the Kohathites. His mind is full of the victories God has given him, and he gathers together 30,000 chosen men of Israel, and consults with every leader about bringing up the ark. (1 Chron. 14.) He only finds the world’s wisdom with them, but does not detect it: and they imitate the Philistines with their cart and oxen. But the oxen stumble, Uzzah puts forth his hand to steady the ark and is smitten, and David, displeased, carries it aside into the house of Obed-edom the Gittite.

Why was it that God allowed the oxen to stumble? How is it that David has to give up his enterprise with shame, whereas when the Philistines did the very same thing all went right, and God was glorified? It was as David himself owned soon after, because “we sought him not after the due order.”

The Kohathites were not in their right place. God allowed this to be worked out to its full result, in order that David’s heart might be fully tested and brought into the light of His presence. David’s thought of bringing up the ark was very beautiful, but he forgot “the due order.” Like the Galatians in an after day, he replaced the service of the sanctuary by the Philistine cart and oxen, and did not do it even so well as they: and so it generally happens when God’s saints imitate the world. It seemed so simple and natural; but because it was so, it was manifestly of the world. It was not God’s way.

David however learned the lesson; and when afterwards he set the Kohathites in their proper place, God “helped them” as they bore the ark of the covenant, and the joy in Israel was legitimate and blessed. At every stage of the Levites’ onward progress, they offered a bullock and a ram.

But to return to Numbers 4. There was a special injunction as to the Kohathites that we do not find in the case of the other Levites. The Lord said: “Cut ye not off the tribe of the families of the Kohathites from among the Levites: but thus do unto them, that they may live, and not die, when they approach unto the most holy things: Aaron and his sons shall go in, and appoint them every one to his service and to his burden: but they shall not go in to see when the holy things are covered, lest they die.” There was danger for them that did not exist in the same way for others; for they were in the place of greatest nearness to God. God will not suffer in His presence that which is not worthy of Himself. He does not interfere with the world in its sin. He lets that go on its way until the judgment. But He will be sanctified in those that draw near to Him, and for them especially exists the danger of being cut off if unsubject to the order of the sanctuary. This was what did happen on the day of the consecration of Aaron. The nearer we are to God, the more careful we must be to do everything according to God’s order. Only after the holy things were covered were they to come and take them. They were separated by God to this special service, but they were not allowed to exceed it or look upon the holy things.

What instruction is there for us in this? Is it not, not allowing the natural man, the curiosity of an unsanctified heart, to satisfy itself with that which God has put in His house to set forth the glory of Christ? The natural man must not be allowed to trespass here, even to admire. God has given us His truth in order that the truth may command us, may rule our hearts and form our ways; it is not for the natural man to admire or to criticise it. And those who were in the greatest danger of doing this were those who were brought the nearest. God will have the conscience exercised as to His presence, as to what it is to have to do with Him. The sense of this in the soul is like the ballast in a vessel. The un-laden ship must have ballast. All may go well if the wind happens to be gentle and favourable, but without ballast, if a storm rises, the ship must be lost. God, having brought us in Christ into a position of the greatest nearness and privilege, and having given us a nature capable of enjoying Him, will not have our natural minds working about His truth, or enjoying it as a natural man might enjoy it. Want of care as to this gets us out of the current of God’s thoughts, and leads into the state of the Galatians, who having begun in the Spirit, went on to make a fair show in the flesh. We may enjoy God’s truth in a fleshly way; but then God comes in in judgment.

May our hearts be so exercised before Him that we may become apt to learn more of His thoughts about service and testimony in communion with His own dear Son.

That which is nearest to the Lord’s heart is the church for which He gave Himself. “Christ loved the church and gave himself for it.” Have I got anything in my heart that answers to the Lord’s as to this? God has brought us into communion with His own firstborn Son, and will have our hearts set upon Christ’s interests, our thoughts occupied with Him, that we may be able to understand with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that we might be filled with all the fulness of God.“ United by the Holy Ghost to all saints in Christ,” – you cannot isolate yourself from them without practically giving up the testimony and service He has appointed, and ignoring holiness as God has set it forth in Christianity. The Kohathites must work together.

Of course we do not find the church as the body of Christ in the Old Testament, but we do find there the “order” of the house of God, and in those who are brought so near to God as the Kohathites were, we have a distinct indication of what He seeks in those whom He has now made nigh in His Son.

First, they are under the power of the truth; they bear it on their shoulders, valuing it, and caring for it as that which is most precious. Secondly, they walk together; and what keeps them together too is the position of service in which they are set in dependence upon God. Thirdly, they do not seek to satisfy the craving of the natural heart with God’s holy things; they walk as to them in God’s presence in the Spirit, so as not to satisfy the lust of the flesh. These are the three characteristics of the Kohathites.

What a comfort and joy it is to the heart to know that God has brought His people so near to Himself that He may bless them there according to His own thoughts! Surely He desires for us that we may be practically under the power of the place in which He has set us “IN CHRIST.” The tendency of human nature is always to measure things by the amount of outward blessing or success. It characterises very much so called christian work in the day we live in. But if I am really on God’s ground, I shall be content with knowing that His eye is ever on His saints, and that He thinks of the appointed place and measure and sphere of service that He has allotted to each of His own. In this He is sovereign; but if living in the sanctuary and furnished with His thoughts, we shall get intelligent in discerning His ways, and find ever fresh occasions of joy in tracing them out. Personally we have to ask ourselves, Am I in the place where He wishes me to be? Am I occupied with the service of His Son in the path of obedience, and in constant dependence upon Him, allowing no principle of the flesh or of the world to come in between me and Him so as to hinder my adopting His divine “order”? All the rest must be left in His hand.

The Lord has put His name upon us, and calls us to do whatever, we have to do for His sake. “I know thy works.” Weakness is no real hindrance, for if felt as it ought to be, it only draws us nearer to Him, and becomes the opportunity for His grace to shine forth, and His strength to be made perfect in it. To such He says, “I have set before thee an open door which no man can shut.” God will have us hold the truth in communion with Himself (otherwise it has no power over the soul), in order that we may be found going quietly forward as His witnesses, “led of the Spirit,” and with the constant sense of being in His presence under the power of the truth He has revealed to us.

We shall find that it is the cross of Christ which furnishes the secret of power for testimony: “always bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus, that the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our body.” May it be more and more so with us, through the infinite grace of God. [W. J. L.]

Meeting Place

The "Meeting Place,"

Worship, Communion, and the Lord's Supper.

W. J. Lowe

Ealing, W.: A. J. Cowell, Printer, Oxford Road. 1903.

The Lord's supper is an ordinance. It is not presented as a command to be obeyed, but rather as a precious privilege offered to faithful souls, enabling them to draw near collectively for worship, in the Lord's appointed way.

By such a service, we are carried back in thought to the free-will offerings, ordained for God's ancient people, characterised by the death of a spotless victim (see Lev. 1-3). They answered to real needs in their souls, while maintaining constantly in their minds the sense of having to do with God, and giving them the privilege of drawing near to Him.

In pursuing attentively their history, we find much in it that serves to illustrate the principles which should mark and animate a gathering of christian people with the Lord in their midst (Matt. 18: 20).

The tabernacle in the wilderness, set up in the centre of the camp, with the cloud ever resting upon it, testified in a most striking way to God's presence with them. The altar to which they could approach was there.

To begin then with what is fundamental, touching any possible relationship between God and man, we must own that the thought uppermost in a soul that has tasted of grace and goodness, when consciously in the presence of God, is worship.

If in that presence, and grace be unknown, there must be the sense of necessary judgment, because of sins on the conscience. But the moment access to a pardoning God is opened to man, because God graciously deigns to make Himself thus known, the worshipper must be on his face before Him, like Moses in Exodus 34: 8-9.

Another illustration is that of the man in John 9, when the Lord, who had opened his blind eyes, revealed Himself to him as the Son of God. So also with the women in Matt. 28: they had been to the sepulchre, expecting to find it untouched, and were carrying the message given them by the angel, when Jesus met them saying, "All hail." In answer to the yearning desire of their hearts, He makes Himself known* to them, and they fall at His feet and worship Him.

{*Which was not the case with the two disciples whom He joined later in the day, on their way to Emmaus.}

The wise men from the East afford another blessed example of the same spirit of worship, inasmuch as theirs was rendered to the "little child." He who was "born King* of the Jews" was no ordinary child. They felt that they had to do with God, in undertaking a long and perilous journey in order to "worship Him." The divine direction they had enjoyed assured them of it.

{*He was "born King," not merely born to be a king as in the case of an ordinary heir to a human throne. God was their King, and Christ was so born: "To this end was I born," He says, "and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth." (John 18: 37).}

Let us now consider briefly from scripture what worship is, in what circumstances it can be righteously rendered, and by whom it should be given collectively.

The book of Exodus supplies the first answer, showing unequivocally that it is by a redeemed people. On what other ground could it be possible to approach God so as to fulfil His purpose? The message sent by the hand of Moses to the people, on their reaching Sinai,* was, "Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself" (Exodus 19: 4).

{*And we should remember that worship "upon this mountain" was the "sign" given to Moses, when God gave him commission to bring Israel out of Egypt. (See Ex. 3: 12)}

In perfect agreement with that, we find in Isaiah 43 the words, "This people have I formed for myself." . . . "I have created him for my glory.". . . "They shall shew forth my praise." God had already made Himself known to them as "Redeemer " (see verse 14), having brought them out of Egypt through the Red Sea. Their Redeemer was "the Holy One of Israel," their "Creator," and their " King."

Their first experience of God's power on leaving Egypt, was the sea turned into dry ground before them, and Pharaoh's host drowned in the very waters which had been to them a protecting wall on the right hand and on the left. There was but one way through the sea, lighted by the glory in the cloud. They had only to walk therein and enjoy the deliverance God had wrought, and in which they had had no hand whatever.

Subsequently, we find that He gave them "waters in the wilderness, rivers in the desert," to quench their thirst by the way, all the journey through. That was no greater difficulty to the LORD than making a path through the mighty waters; but it was He Himself who did it.

God's object in redeeming them and thus caring for them, was that they should "show forth His praise" (verse 21); and in consequence, their God-inspired song, under the lively impression of the deliverance He had wrought in the Red Sea, expressed the need of preparing an "habitation" for the LORD, who had become their "salvation," and who was their fathers' God. They felt that God must dwell in their midst (Exodus 15: 2, 3, 17)

Following the chapter in Isaiah, we next come to the sad facts of their history which bring into evidence man's failure in spite of all God's goodness. God sought for praises, but only sins were brought before Him. "Thou hast made me to serve with thy sins," He says, "thou hast wearied Me with thine iniquities" (verse 24). He had laid no hard burden upon them in the sacrifices ordained for worship, but in stead of rendering joyously what was ordered, they committed sins which loudly called for judgment, and thus defeated God's purpose in redeeming them for Himself. He then comes in again to do what could not be done without His direct intervention, "I, even I, am He that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins" (verse 25, see also chapter 44: 21-22).

Such was in reality the divine sequence of the redemption through blood in Egypt, and in power at the Red Sea, though not hinted at before they reached Sinai*. At Sinai they both heard the law and broke it; but God's gracious answer to Moses' intercession (in Exodus 34) was the proclamation of His name as a forgiving God, and that too in the very place in which He had given the law, which brought sins to light and thus exercised the consciences of sinners (Romans 3: 20; 7: 7-10).

{*There is no mention of sins in Exodus 12, nor any reason assigned for the use of "blood" in sprinkling the door posts; the blood was for God's own eye. Neither do we read of a sin-offering previously to the promulgation of the law at Sinai, which set forth man's responsibility, and consequently made clear any and every dereliction of his duty.}

How much we have to learn through the gradual unfolding, by the means of Israel's history, of the hopeless condition of man's heart! If you desire to take the place of a privileged worshipper, you may well ask yourself, "Will God in reality take up such an one as I am, a vile sinner only fit to be driven away from His presence into outer darkness, and make of me a worshipper? The answer to that is the divine forsaking which Psalm 22 looks forward to.

We must remember that the first verse of the Psalm is said, not by a sinner, but by Him who had in His own right the privilege and the power of standing before God in absolute holiness, who could also claim His love and favour as having come to do His will, and in whom was all God's delight. (Ps. 40: 6; John 14: 31). God had come in to lay all our sins and iniquities upon Him, according to Isaiah 53: 6, and under that unspeakable burden of sin and judgment, He cries, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Can you and I, individually, answer that question by saying, "It was for me"? Blessed is he who, like the poor thief upon the cross, can do so in the presence of God, and in His fear!

Those whose only place was banishment from God's sight, under eternal judgment, find One who has taken that place in suffering and death (Ps. 22: 21),— One who, having been "heard" there, rises up out of it, to declare God's name to those He now deigns to call His "brethren" (Heb. 2: 9-13). His identification with them was in His becoming the sacrifice for them, and hence their "Sanctifier." The personal question between each soul and God—that of sins,—is thus met by the only One who could meet it, and who has met it absolutely and perfectly. Those who receive this testimony are already "sanctified"; as to their position before God, they are "perfected for ever" (Heb. 10: 10, 14). They are made "of one," that is, they are identified with Him.

Such is the divinely appointed way for us to learn what an "Assembly " really is, in the practical sense of believers being gathered around the person of the Lord. It is so set forth in verse 22 of the Psalm.

First, there is One who alone is able to declare everything divinely and perfectly, whether as regards His Person or His work, and who now, risen from the dead, stands with those whom He can on that account righteously call His "brethren," and to whom He declares God's name.

Secondly, He has become the leader of their praises, saying, "In the midst of the congregation will I praise Thee."

The first and fundamental accomplishment of this verse, is when Jesus risen "came and stood in the midst" (John 20: 19). There is no mention of worship here, but we find the ground on which christians, as such, can freely worship, through the declaration of the Father's name (see John 4: 23-24), and that, for the first time, in a known relationship consequent upon accomplished redemption, and necessarily in communion with the Son, who then first calls them "brethren." His message to them is, "Go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God." He Himself, about to go to the Father, is to be the object of their hearts, and their blessed portion is communion with Himself, ministered in power by the Holy Ghost sent down in consequence of His going to the Father, as already explained in chapter 16: 7-15.

Then also He, the risen One, breathes on them the breath of that risen life, reminding us of the way in which Adam was quickened at the beginning, when God breathed into his nostrils, and he became a living soul. (Compare John 3: 6 and Romans 8: 2). The Spirit of life was in Christ Himself, now free to communicate it in resurrection, since expiation had been wrought out.

The declaration of the name depends upon what He is—the Son who makes the Father known (John 1: 18). The possibility of relationship and communion with Himself depends upon His finished work.

The Psalm which speaks of His sufferings in death, clearly sets forth both, and thus shows what an assembly, like that of the disciples in Jerusalem on the first day of the week, must needs imply.

Is that the thought of our hearts in gathering to His name? Is our thought on going to the assembly on the first day of the week, that we are going to meet Jesus, and going there with the character given by the angel to the women who "were early at the sepulchre," and to whom he says, "I know that ye seek Jesus"?

We cannot say that faith or intelligent reception of the Lord's oft repeated statement about His resurrection marked their action; but their pious care for the body of the Lord, controlled by respect for the Sabbath day, was evidently prompted by a love which would spend and be spent for Him. They were distinguished by hearts that could be satisfied by nothing short of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. This was a true and intense desire, and the Lord met it as they, in obedience to the angel's order, were going to bring the disciples word (Matt. 28: 9). There was not one of those beloved women to whom the Lord did not reveal Himself before doing so to any other persons (compare Mark 16: 9). Beloved brethren, let us lay it to heart that our faithful Lord will meet every one that is truly seeking Him, as it is written "Ye shall seek me and find me, when ye search for me with all your heart" (Jer. 29: 13).

* * *

In principle, the "meeting-place" supposes that you conform to the Lord's appointment, which is not of your own choosing; you go there to be with Him seeing He has said, "There shall they see me" (Matt. 28: 10, 16, 17). You go there in humble dependence upon the Holy Ghost, who has come here below to take of the things of Christ, in order to reveal them to us—the things that belong to the SON who makes the Father known: "All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you."

The actual presence of the Lord in the midst of two or three, is not a mere promise, but is stated as a divine fact, depending upon what He is in incarnation, Emmanuel, "God with us." Such is His divinely-given name (Matt. 1: 23). His closing word is, "I am with you" (Matt. 28: 20). Two of the gospels were written to unfold this blessed truth: Mark,* referring more especially to His ways; John, to the mystery of His Person; Matthew establishes the fact.** Both chapter 18: 20, and 28: 20, are in the present tense. The former states it in connection with the constitution of the Church, and chapter 28 adds the assurance that it is during the whole of the present "age."

{*In Mark, we meet continually with the statement that He was with them, and they with Him; e.g. 3: 14; 4: 36; 9: 8.

** Emmanuel is His name, as expressed by those gathered around Him, "God with us." "I with you" is the same truth, expressed by Himself, in the midst of those so gathered. He says, "I AM." . . . It is what He is, in His own Person.}

We may add that the first twelve chapters of John's gospel unfold the effect of the presence of the Lord Jesus on earth, the Word become flesh, dwelling among us, "full of grace and truth." The following five chapters show how that is made good for our souls by the Holy Ghost during His absence.

What then is the secret for abiding in the love of Jesus? He has said that it is keeping His commandments; and these are given to those whom He deigns to call "friends"! It is only to one in whom you have implicit confidence that you would venture to impart the secrets of your own heart: not many such are to be found on earth. But the Lord says He has kept back nothing of all that He heard from the Father. To keep His commandments is, in result, to abide in His love, and enter into the communion of the Son in His perfect obedience to the Father's will.

The disciples did not at the time apprehend this communion, nor even the bare fact that Jesus had come from the FATHER and was returning to Him. Their thoughts do not rise above the divine origin of His mission, even as it was said of John, "sent from God." (See chapter 16: 30). The revelation of the Father's name escaped them, and hence the depth of the Sons love, of which the cross was the proof (chapter 14: 31). The Spirit, when He came, made it all plain; and now, through obedience, we too shall find the reality of communion with the Son, and of abiding in His love.

* * *

Let us now turn to 1 Cor. 9: 23, noting that all coming after the word "that" is a direct communication from the Lord in glory, to Paul. It cannot therefore be considered as a comment on a quotation from the gospels. It was given doubtless before the gospels were written.

"The Lord Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread." What is there in those words for your soul and mine? Who took the bread? and what was He thinking of in doing it? It was "the same night in which He was betrayed." He was then and there, Himself, in their midst, to take the bread.

On "that night," knowing all that was before Him, He gave thanks, broke it, and said to them, "This is my body, given for you." Is there any difficulty in understanding what that bread meant? What could it be but Christ Himself personally in death?

And so with the cup "after the supper," who could hesitate as to what that cup set forth? He Himself says, "In my blood." It is not the blood in the body but apart, and separated from it, i.e., in death, all of which is denied by the so-called "sacrifice of the mass."

When the Reformers were gathered* to discuss this, for them, momentous question as to the significance of the elements, and Luther, in order to "strengthen his own faith," in maintaining his thesis against Zwingle, wrote on the velvet cloth, in Latin, the words translated "this is my body," —what was it that he, as also the others, forgot? Was it not this fundamental truth, already set forth in Psalm 22: 22, as a consequence of Christ's resurrection, namely, His presence in their midst? Incredible as it may now appear to us, they forgot that Jesus was there, in the midst of His disciples, to give them the bread, when He said, "Take, eat, this is my body." Had they insisted on that simple fact, their difficulties would have vanished at once.

{*At Marburg, in the castle of Philip, landgrave of Hesse, on 2nd October, 1529.}

It is sad, alas! to have to record that the very first thing that was lost in the church's history (together with the true sense of a present relationship with the Father, revealed by Jesus risen), was the truth of the Lord's presence with His own, gathered to His name on the earth. Ministerialism displaced it, as the Epistle to the Galatians proves. Those to whom Paul had first preached the gospel, listened readily to Judaising teachers, clung to ordinances, and forgot Christ.

But the artifices of the enemy have not ceased. Many, alas, in the present day, preoccupied with the idea that the unbroken loaf is an emblem of the "church," forget that it must needs be broken before it can be partaken of. We read that when He had given thanks, "He brake it." He gave it to them, not whole, but broken. Evidently, then, it signifies His death,— Himself in death, and nothing but Himself.

Think of the loss to the soul, when Christ gets displaced, in order that satisfaction may be found in contemplating the mystical "Body"! Could there have been such a thought presented by the Lord to His disciples on that night on which He was betrayed, and previously to His having gone through that death, without which the church could not even exist? Note again what is said in chapter 10: 16: "The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ. The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? Does that refer to the mystical Christ, as if the "blood" were the blood of the church, or as if "the body" here implied the church? No true believer could entertain the thought for an instant. Are we not shut up to the thought that the body of Christ "given for us" is His own personal (not mystical) body? whereas the act which testifies practically to the unity of the mystical body ("the church," Eph. 1: 21), is that performed by each one gathered, in partaking of an already broken loaf. This reason is stated in verse 17, "For we are all partakers of that one bread.

A further explanation follows, or borrowed from the well-known rites of the Levitical sacrifices, "Are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar?" That is, each and all having part with Christ on the same ground, and in the same way, are they not all shown in the act to be members one of another?

We have thus a practical representation of the church in its entirety, extending beyond those who are for the time being actually and visibly gathered together "into one place." The "body" includes every christian throughout the length and breadth of this world, each and all united to Christ by the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven at Pentecost. (Compare 1 Cor. 1: 2, with 12: 12).

In this way, the act of partaking of the one loaf sets forth the existence of the mystical body of Christ, and the identification of ourselves with Him, and with one another. The loaf, when partaken of, is already broken, the fragments being meant to express the Lord's death, and that it is only through His death that we can have any part with Him in life. "Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone, but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit" (John 12: 24). By the ordinance, we show "His death," until He come. If you lose the sense of His death, every thought is falsified as to the signification of the blessed ordinance in which He is brought so near to our souls. For the apostle, Christ was everything. He could say, "I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me."

On the other hand, in feeding upon His death, let us not lose sight of His presence in the midst, and the communion which flows from it, in "the unity of the Spirit," lest our worship should degenerate and fail in its most characteristic feature.

The secret of communion, as well as its living power, is that it is with Himself, and yet of such an order that the least instructed saint, who is truly subject to scripture, may have his full part in it. Each one can say with the psalmist of old, "My cup runneth over." The sense of the Lord's presence induces worship, as we find twice recorded in Matthew 28, first in the case of the women, and afterwards when "the eleven disciples" saw the Lord in the appointed place in Galilee. Gathered around Himself in a worshipping spirit, we are carried on to the moment when worship will be perfect around the Lamb in glory (Rev. 5: 9-10); and that is forestalled now by the power of the Holy Ghost.

That communion, in its full character, follows upon worship, according to the principles of sovereign grace, the last verse of Numbers 7 clearly shows.

Choice of Faith

The "Choice" of Faith.

W. J. Lowe.

“Arise, and go up to Bethel, and dwell there.”

It is a day of lawlessness in thought as well as in act. People give the free rein to their imagination and foolish reasonings (which seems to be the meaning of the word 'inventions' in Eccles. 7:29); and to this our attention should be directed, not in the way of answering them by counter-reasonings, but by seeking to reach the heart's affections, and the conscience, as to what is due to God and to Christ. The more we have the sense of grace in our souls (the whole work of salvation being of God towards us), the more we shall seek to draw nigh to Him in the deep sense of our need of being kept in an evil day.

The time is short for learning practically what Christ's path was. But in a day of outward 'toleration' and indifference, it is more than ever a matter of choice, and God gives His blessing with it. "Mary hath chosen that good part which shall not be taken away from her." Ruth chose too; a parting kiss could not satisfy her. She clave to Naomi in her sorrow, and a full reward was given to her. Caleb pursued a quiet suffering path of faithfulness to God, walking by faith, and when the proper time came, he used his privilege of choosing Hebron, where the field of Macpelah was. Faith works by love, and avoids reasoning. The apostle prays "that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all intelligence, that ye may judge of and approve the things that are more excellent" (Phil. 1:9-10).

In the ordinary matters of this life, as to our circumstances, etc., faith's path is not to choose, but to give oneself quietly over to God's ordering for us. Lot, in self-confidence, chose for himself, pitched towards Sodom, and then went into it. The first warning God gave him, had no effect upon him; he was delivered at that time by his uncle's intervention, but he had no mind to leave Sodom; and when the wicked city was at length destroyed, he lost everything, and the beautiful plain he had coveted became a burning fiery furnace. Abraham, through humiliating experience in Egypt, learned the first lesson of the wilderness—not to have confidence in himself. Being thus consciously incompetent to choose, he was glad that God should choose for him, and he was blessed.

In spiritual things, the contrary holds good: God expects us to choose what is most excellent in the path which He graciously opens up to us (Eph. 5: 15-17). We have not to seek anything dazzling or out of the way, nor to put forth any remarkable effort that would attract attention, or make other people talk about us. We have simply to walk heartily and joyfully in the Lord's path, having our hearts set on things above where He sits, and receive what He sets before us. Ruth had not to go out of her way to leave her country and cast in her lot with Naomi. The link had been formed quietly and naturally, and she held to it, minded not to leave or give up that which God had set before her; and so she could say to Naomi in quiet confidence, "Thy God shall be my God." Nothing could be more unpretentious. There was no self-assertion, no brilliant resolution or vow as to the future, only a quiet settled purpose to cleave to that which was already hers through grace, at a time when death seemed to have ruined all her prospects.

So with Caleb. He had been sent as one of the spies, had gone forth in obedience, traversed the land from south to north, right up to Lebanon and back again, and he clung to the promise: "Surely the land whereon thy feet have trodden shall be thine inheritance..." He had then a right to pick and choose his inheritance in all the best of the land given to the fathers. And after forty-five years of patience he chose, with its suburbs, that city where the sons of Anak lived, and where the spies felt with terror their own insignificance. It is the only city mentioned in Numbers 13 as being in the land, and was the home of the giants. During seven years' conflict, Joshua and all Israel had left those giants alone; yet Caleb ventures to say, "If so be the Lord will be with me, then I shall be able to drive them out, as the Lord said." It was simple faith, persevering to the end in the humility, and withal the boldness, which faith gives—no pretension, no boasting, but the quiet confidence of one who walked with God. And the "fields (cf. Gen. 23: 17-20) of the city" and the villages thereof were made his for ever (Joshua 21: 12). The "first lot," given to the sons of Aaron, the priest, was the city itself. Such is the choice of faith, working by love; and love must have its object, known to the soul and enjoyed. Without such an object, holiness is not possible for us.

Elisha is another stirring example of the simplicity of faith's choice, showing how the soul is held, as by a chain of gold, in the path of God's ordering and blessing. "As the Lord liveth and as thy soul liveth, I will not leave thee," was the simple answer to the test (and no ordinary test), applied three times to him; and it ended in the expression of acknowledged communion, followed by the thrilling sight of the prophet going up to heaven without dying, and the reception of the double portion of the Spirit as he gathered up the precious mantle which fell to him.

"Draw nigh to God," James says, "and He will draw nigh to you." May it be increasingly our portion, and the more so as the world is carried away by its talk and vain glory, that we may find our joy in serving Christ in obscurity, content with His approval until He come, having the eye and the heart set on that which is unseen and eternal.

Patient suffering for Christ's sake will have its reward when He comes. If the world is against us, we know it was against Him, and hated Him. In the path of faith, the opportunity to choose for Him will be given, when the needed discipline of the soul has been duly carried out. Caleb lost nothing by waiting forty-five years. Moses had to wait forty years after his choice was made, before he was sent of God to help his brethren (Heb. 11: 24-26). May we each of us know more what it is to keep the word of Christ's patience.

You must prove the Bible true before I accept it

“You must prove the Bible true before I accept it.”

W. J. Lowe.

For some 50 years I have never ceased to be astonished at the utter futility of human laws, and parliaments, their inadequacies and mistakes, never-ending tinkering, adding, changing; which all proves the truth of the Bible dictum — “It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps”, Jeremiah 10: 23. Usually, most “M.Ps” are lawyers; yet they cannot make laws that are free of “loopholes”, or are just and wise enough to be permanent, a finality. They are unable to grasp and rectify all points of a problem; and above all, have no foresight as to future needs. Yet, the people who urge so strongly that you “vote” for this mass of confusion and contradiction, are the first ones to scoff at a Book that records laws that once pronounced never needed changing, that by foresight covered future changed conditions; that justly governed a nation for 1500 years without tinkering, failure, jails, police or parliaments, elections or lawyers.

Surely, such a law, without parallel in human history, laid down complete at the beginning and never changed, could not be of human authorship; it and the Book that records it, must be God-inspired. The utter inadequacies and foolishnesses of the most enlightened legislatures of today, by contrast, proves the Divine origin of the perfect Law of Moses. Man had no part whatever or vote in this Law; it was dictated direct by God, see Exodus 20 and on through Leviticus; and Moses just “wrote it in a book… for future generations to obey” Deuteronomy 31: 24; 1 Chronicles 16: 15. No king, parliament or people ever altered one word of this Law. The mere fact that while Israel obeyed this Law for centuries they were happy, prosperous, free and enlightened, while trouble, punishment, dispersion, followed disobedience — proves this Law the only perfect law, and necessarily it and the Book it is written in must be God-inspired.

Human laws merely punish, brutalise, perpetuate offenders; they make no reparations. A man cheats people out of their life-savings; he is jailed, the victims get nothing back. But by God’s law — a thief was not only punished, but compelled to work for wages to pay back the theft to his victims, Exodus 22: 1-4; Leviticus 6: 4. He was not jailed and kept at the expense of the taxpayers, nor did his victims suffer and starve.

Divorce was only allowed for a physical cause of impediment, Deuteronomy 24: 1-4. Adultery between otherwise married couples brought death, Deuteronomy 22: 22-24; misconduct before marriage brought stoning to death, vs. 13-21. Rape brought either death or compulsory marriage, vs. 25-29. Causing wilful injury to any person brought identical retribution, “an eye for an eye” by public legal infliction, Leviticus 24: 10-20. “Juvenile delinquency”, laziness, disobedience to parents, were punished by death, Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. No usury, interest on loans to the poor, was permitted, Leviticus 25: 35-37. Murder brought death, no reprieve, Leviticus 24: 21.

Property always remained in the family, no man could buy up and accumulate a large estate, Leviticus 25: 13-36; Isaiah 5-8; 1 Kings 21-3. Care for the poor, Deuteronomy 24: 19-21 & 15: 7-11; consideration for others, Leviticus 19: 13-14, 32-36; love for neighbour, Leviticus 19: 18; were enforced by law. All through human history, against every race, the challenge has gone forth unanswered — “What nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgements so righteous, as this law?” Deuteronomy 4: 5-10. Who but an all-wise, all-time foreseeing, all righteous Creator-God could give and record such laws?

Little children

“Little children.”

1 John 2.

(continued from page 11, Words of Help from the Scripture of Truth)

It is well worthy of our notice that, in the remarkable chapter under consideration, the apostle begins with the “fathers,” and as we have seen, adds nothing which could suggest the least uncertainty as to what they had received from the first moment of their spiritual existence, or even that added to it in the sense of replacing or setting aside any portion of what they began with.

The Apostle Paul uses the comparison of a “child” in a human way in 1 Cor. 12: 11: “When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.” This is in connection with divine things partially entered into and enjoyed now, while looking forward to full and perfect knowledge when we shall see the Lord as He is, and “love” shall have its full energising character, answering to God’s own nature. So elsewhere, “If any man think that he knoweth anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know; but if any man love God, the same is known of Him” (1 Cor. 8: 2, 3).

All that, referring to human apprehension, is true; but in the Epistle of John it is a question of God revealed in Christ, and of the present, actual, eternal relationship with God, that flows from it in communion with the SON, who alone could make the Father known. Nothing can be added to this, and it remains, thank God, eternally. In the “Word made flesh,” who dwelt here below for a time, “full of grace and truth,” the glory seen was indeed the glory of the only begotten of the Father (John 1: 14).

So the Apostle Paul, when speaking of this subject, states, “God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Cor. 1: 9; compare 2 Tim. 2: 13; 1 John 1: 3). God’s eternal purpose was to have many “sons” in glory; how was this to be accomplished? His Son became man in order to do His will; and in view of that glorious consummation, He says, speaking now as it were from the glory where He is, “Behold, I and the children which God hath given Me” (Heb. 2: 9-13).

All this divine work has been carried out by Christ, who, in identifying Himself with the objects of His grace by suffering for them on thLes Hodgett as their sinbearer, has become “the captain of their salvation,” and is about to come again to receive them, that where He is, they may be also (John 14: 1-3). With this the believer begins; sonship is his portion. The “new birth” ushers into it, or in other words, the expression “born of God” describes a soul who has received Christ. It is no longer a question of national privilege, as that of the Jew, who boasted his descent from Abraham (John 8: 33, 39), nor of any action or fruit of human will, desire or effort, but “of God,” who, of His own will, begets by “the Word of truth” (John 1: 11-13; James 1: 23). “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10: 17, 20; 2 Cor. 6: 6). This is God’s creative work, and there is a sort of illustration of it in the resurrection of Lazarus. In his case, death and corruption were covered by human grave-clothes, but one word of Jesus brought him outside the tomb, where it was an easy matter for those who put the grave-clothes on him to “loose him and let him go.” Life and soundness were there already, or there could have been no object in taking the grave-clothes off.

The more we consider this work of God from the standpoint of His glory, the more our souls are brought to enter into its perfection, for the present joy and blessing of every one who is “turned to God,” to serve Him and to wait for His Son from heaven (1 Thess. 1: 1). Here the spiritual “little child,” begins his career, and the “fathers,” at the end of their course on earth, fall back with increased delight upon One well known in practical life and walk, who was at first for them God revealed in Christ, and still remains for them that which He had ever been. “That which was from the beginning” of the Lord’s manifested life on earth, “heard, seen, and handled” by His disciples, was and is “that eternal life which was with the Father, and was manifested” in the Person of the Son on earth. So the Lord could say to Philip, “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?” Again we read, “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, He had declared Him” (John 1: 18; John 14: 6-11; 1 John 1: 1-3).

To the disciples, and to multitudes of others, it was given to see the Son when He was here on this earth, to hear His words and witness His works of grace and power during the three years of His ministry (John 18: 20, 21). But we have the additional advantage of knowing all the results of His death and resurrection, now made known by the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven after Jesus had taken His place on high with the Father (John 7: 37-39; John 16: 7-16). The Lord forbade His disciples to leave the city of Jerusalem and begin to carry out their commission to preach the gospel among all nations, until they were endued with the power of the Spirit from on high (Luke 24: 49).

It is consequently utterly impossible for any one to return to the state or condition of partial knowledge, which we notice in the disciples who accompanied the Lord during His ministry on earth. No one can believe in Christ now, but in a Christ who had died, is risen and glorified, and is soon coming again, first to receive His own saints to Himself, and afterwards to judge the world that persists in unbelief. Many lose themselves in speculations and reasonings as to a process of transformation in the soul, based upon what might or might not be understood by those who, in the gospel history, were looking for the kingdom to be set up by Christ then, either during His ministry or after His resurrection (Acts 1: 6, 7). All such inference is foolish and mischievous to the last degree. The apostle Paul would know nothing but “Jesus Christ and Him crucified,” a gospel which was a stumblingblock to the Jews and foolishness to the Gentiles (1 Cor. 1: 21-24; 1 Cor. 2: 1, 2).

When that gospel is preached, it is either received, or it is not. If it “be hid, it is hid to them that are lost, in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ who is the image of God, should shine unto them.” If it is received, it is the effect of a divine operation, described, as the apostle shows, in Gen. 1: 2: “And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.” Light was introduced where there was only darkness before (2 Cor. 4: 3-6). We have this treasure in earthen vessels surely, when experience, often bitter, casts a shadow on our life’s history; the treasure, however, is there notwithstanding, and the more trying the experience, the more the soul is cast upon God and His faithfulness. But that adds nothing to the treasure which is unalterable, - God revealed in Christ, His glory shining in the face of Jesus, - our unchanging portion both for earth and heaven (see John 17: 24).

Now this change, or passage from darkness to light, is just what is called being “born again” in John’s writings. And Paul clinches it by saying, “Ye are all sons* of God by faith in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3: 26). The Holy Ghost is afterwards given, not to make us “sons,” but because we are sons already, by faith in Christ Jesus. There is no intermediate state. Either a soul believes or it does not; if not, as the Lord says, the wrath of God abides on it (John 3: 36).

{*The word for “sons” here is exactly the same as in the following chapter (4: 6, 7). Unfortunately it is weakened in the A.V. by the word “children.”}

John, in his epistle, does not go into any detail of what takes place in the soul progressively. His subject is Christianity in principle, in contrast with the denial of it by “antichrists.” The Jewish form of unbelief was the denial that Jesus was the Christ (or “Messiah”) that all natural descendants of Abraham expected would come, as announced by the prophets. This was the great subject of discussion with the Jewish leaders in John 8 (and see John 12: 34); they were well acquainted with the Scriptures, but refused to own that Jesus was the promised Messiah; and He definitely told them, that until they had crucified Him they neither would nor could know Him: “When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am He” (verse 28; John 12: 24, 32, 33). No life-giving knowledge of forgiveness of sins [is possible] without it. But when that truth is received in the soul definitely, the Spirit is given. So says Peter in Acts 2: 38; and it was proved in Acts 10: 43, 44. Paul’s question also to the believers he found in Ephesus supposes the same thing (Acts 19: 1-7). The Lord promised it to His disciples after His resurrection; they could not be witnesses for Him on earth, after His departure, without the Holy Ghost (John 15: 26, 27). Consequently a “Christian” as such, according to God’s thoughts, supposes the knowledge of forgiveness of sins through the blood of Jesus, carrying sonship with it, and supposes also the reception of the Holy Ghost, as “seal” or “unction” (i.e. anointing), in connection with Christ’s return to the Father on high (John 14: 16, 26; John 16: 7,13, 28).

This complete picture of a Christian, so to speak, is what the apostle presents by the figure of a “little child,” that is, as we have already seen, what a Christian is in God’s account, according to God’s eternal purpose and choice in Christ Jesus before the world began (2 Tim. 1: 1; Titus 1: 2). It is, in fact, the result of the Lord’s humanity, revealing sonship, and of His death, resurrection, and present glory with the Father (John 13: 31-35; John 16: 28). Our responsibility is to receive God’s estimate, and hold it in our souls so that we may be found practically walking here to the glory of Christ, keeping His “new commandment,” given for the first time, after Judas had gone out, on the very night in which he betrayed his Master. We cannot love one another as He has loved us unless our hearts are continually feasting on His love, measured by His laying down His life for those whom He honours by the name of friends (John 15: 12-15).

The present glory of the Lord Jesus is the mainspring of the believer’s practical life and walk, as He said when giving the new commandment: “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in Him. If God be glorified in Him, God shall also glorify Him in Himself, and shall straightway glorify Him.” Similarly the blessing and joy of eternity is expressed in His last prayer: “Father, I will that they also whom Thou hast given Me be with Me where I am; that they may behold My glory which Thou hast given Me: for Thou lovedst Me before the foundation of the world” (John 17: 24).

It is interesting to notice that Peter, addressing the Jews who were astonished at the miracle performed on the impotent man, began with the fact of the Lord’s present glory (Acts 3: 13). Here the “little child,” or new-born soul begins, and here the “fathers” end, while waiting to see the Lord face to face (1 Cor. 13: 12). “They know Him that is from the beginning.”

W. J. L. February 1914

Address at Quemerford

Notes of an Address at Quemerford 1886

Matthew  25: 1-13

W. J. Lowe June 1886.

It is upon my heart to say but a few words in connection with what has been already before us. The Lord is, I feel, distinctly calling us back to the first principles of the truth. It is a solemn thing, and the effect of the terrible opposition of the enemy against the truth, that we get occupied with its surroundings, or its results, oftentimes even with details of action connected with it, in such sort that our attention is turned away from the truth itself, and it becomes commonplace, as that which we think we know and have rather left behind on the ground of its being quite elementary. Yet when we come to look at it in the presence of the Lord, it is perhaps the thing [in which] we are most feeble. I do not refer to statements of truth such as you might get in a catechism; the important thing is to have the truth as it is presented in the scriptures.

We have just been reading, “The Spirit and the bride say, Come.” It is worthy of remark that in the Gospels we read about the “Bridegroom,” not about a Bride; but in the Epistles, when the Lord is gone up to His place in glory, we hear of the “bride” or “wife,” but not of the Bridegroom; Christ is presented rather as the Lord of the church. The Spirit of God, especially in the dispensational Gospel, Matthew, attracts the heart to a Person who is presented in the character of  “Bridegroom.” That supposes a Bride evidently - no doubt the earthly one - but it is not with this that we are occupied. The Spirit sets forth the Bridegroom, and thus forms in the heart divine preparation [without which] there can be no true knowledge of the church as “the Lamb’s wife,” nor the true capacity for receiving the revelation of it. The heart is prepared by feeding on Him in whom all the truth is made known, who is Himself “the Truth.”

In the similitude of the kingdom of heaven in chapter 25, the Lord presents Himself as One already known as “the Bridegroom:” see chapters 9: 15; 22: 2-3. It is in reference to what He is that the virgins go out. This is essentially Christian; it is different from Jewish hope. The Jews were to await Messiah’s coming to them on earth to accomplish the promises. But these leave everything, and go out to meet One who does not propose to give them an earthly portion. He is rejected; they have part with Him in this, as in all else, and leave everything here to go to meet Him.

Ten go forth. It is not to get something for themselves, nor that they may be brought into some place of favour and blessing, but to meet the Bridegroom. It is no question of His coming to settle things here; they go out to meet Him that they may be partakers of the joy of His heart, and the witnesses of His satisfaction in that which yields its highest expression manward. They are tested as to whether they are able to maintain that attitude during the time that He tarries. Here is a first principle of the deepest importance, it gives us the simplest and most elementary aspect of what waiting for the Lord is.

Alas! we read, “They all slumbered and slept;” but yet God in His goodness does not allow them to be found sleeping. At midnight there is a cry made, “Behold, the Bridegroom; go ye out to meet him! Then all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps.” A solemn thing is brought out here. The sense of His coming is upon each of their souls now, at any rate. When this immediate prospect of appearing before Him is really brought home to them, there are five of those who went out at the first, who feel and own that they are not in a condition in which they can stand before Him: “Our lamps,” say they, “are going out.” The others have no fear. Up to that moment they might well have compared themselves one with another: they were all virgins, they all had lamps burning, there was nothing outwardly that made any sensible difference between them that a human eye could discern. But what a change was wrought in all their feelings by the necessity of standing before Him! It can be no question, then, of what I think or of what anyone else thinks, but of what the Lord thinks. Have you and I in our souls this sense of having to stand before Him who is the Judge of everything? And have we from God the perfect love which casts out fear, gives perfect assurance in view of judgment, and carries the heart on with joy to meet Him who has, at infinite cost, given us in Himself a personal and eternal interest? Have we got that which will keep the lamp burning, not merely through the darkness of this world, so that we may be morally irreproachable in man’s eye, but which will enable us to go confidently to meet Him before whom everything is naked and open? Have we His word wrought out in power in our souls by His Holy Spirit?

The truth as it is presented in scripture is what we need to get hold of. One is struck by the delight the Spirit of God takes (especially in Matthew) in keeping the heart occupied with the One who characterises all our position and present portion before God. We are brought into association with Himself. It is to Him that the Father testifies, to Him that the Holy Ghost gathers.

The Lord lead our hearts into this, beloved brethren, that we may be more constantly occupied with Him in whom the Father found all His delight.

Emmaus

Emmaus

A few thoughts on Luke 24

W. J. Lowe.

Words of Faith magazine vol. 1 (London, G Morrish, 1882)

We were hearing, on a previous night, the state of Christendom; then the state of a believer; and last evening, the special kind of blessing attaching to those gathered in the name of Jesus. There is another side of this truth pressed upon me; and it is, as to how far we are morally in the condition of the truth of Matthew 18:20. The solemn question is, Am I in such a condition? Not simply going to a meeting, and having intercourse with “His own.” There is more still, a deeper, more important thing yet. Am I really gathered to the Person of the Lord Jesus? So that as I leave the meeting I may be like the disciples in John, who said, “We have seen the Lord.” If we are occupied with the detail of what this and that one has done, we are incapable of knowing His mind. He will have the moral state and walk to be that of truth. He cannot allow the condition of saints to be different from His doctrine. What is the truth He is calling us back to? Himself - around His Person. As we go through this passage in Luke we shall see the hindrances of the soul, and the Lord’s remedy for them. In Luke 9 the two men in the glory were with the Lord. They were talking of His decease and were happy. It is not merely coming to the breaking of bread, but a living state of connection with Christ, like Moses and Elias, that must characterise us. Now in Luke 24 there is not a word of any one seeing Christ, but there were two souls leaving Jerusalem, and these two were sad, although they, too, were talking of His decease. Something drew them away from Jerusalem, although with sorrow, and the Lord comes and talks to them: “Why are ye sad?” He says. There never had been a more wonderful day for the earth than this, for He who had been crucified and buried, had risen, and although angels were adoring at the resurrection, yet the souls of these two were sad. We learn from this the state often of our own souls. Why was there this slowness of heart? Their reply is given in verse 21. It was what the natural man looked for - a kingdom on earth. They say, “The one whom we looked for is crucified, is dead, and we have no hope.”

It is when the soul is out of communion that we seek temporal deliverances. How does the Lord deal with them? As far as these two go away from Jerusalem He goes with them. What grace! There was no communion nor intelligence with them, but He goes with them to the end, and then He shows them that He has no business at Emmaus. He reveals Himself. Depend upon it, if we are looking for some outside temporal removal of difficulties, we have got outside of our right place. Was it the Spirit that was leading these two toward Emmaus? No, for the Spirit had been leading others to gather together in Jerusalem. The two had gone to Emmaus, little as they thought of it, to know Himself, and so when He had revealed Himself to them, they feel that they, like Him, have no place there. So they return to Jerusalem, in spite of the distance and their fatigue, and find the disciples gathered together! Was it a matter of indifference to Him whether or not these two were going to Emmaus? Was He careful only of the number gathered in the little room” Oh, no; not till these two were brought back to Jerusalem, to those who were already gathered there, does He reveal Himself among them. How precious to know the Lord is just like this!

And we all have our Emmauses. What a comfort to know that if we do wander there, He will never rest, but go after us, reveal Himself, as He did to these two, and bring us back! It is the wandering ones the Shepherd’s heart is ever longing after, and nothing satisfies that heart but the taking of the sheep on His shoulders, and bringing it home rejoicing. Croydon.

Are we a remnant?

Are we a remnant?

(An Extract from a Letter.)

Words of Faith

“We” are not a remnant, except in the sense in which the character of a “remnant” morally ought to be that of each one of us individually. But it is the truth we are to witness to: and God will allow us to do that in grace until Christ comes. Our place is that of Daniel in Babylon, praying with his window open towards Jerusalem. We can’t get out of the ruin, but we have to testify in heart and life to that which is not ruined, and the power for that is being occupied with things above where Christ sitteth. I feel more and more that what Satan has been attacking, is the presence of the Lord Himself, in the midst of “two or three,” and the effect which His presence should have upon our souls. It is His presence that makes the gathering to be real. But, then, if He is there, every heart who owns Him must be subject, and consequently also subject one to another “in the fear of Christ.” It enlarges the affections, and produces an exercise of conscience which nothing else can in the same way, and a respect for the conscience of others, which is inseparable from a walk in the fear of God. That keeps the soul in peace and quiet, too, in the presence of all the troubles that arise, for our trust is in the “living God.”

I was very much struck, the other day, with the contrast in 2 Kings 6 - the Prophet and the King, Dothan and Samaria. Externally who was the mourner? People talk a good deal now about humiliation. But here we see that the man who wore sackcloth was in enmity against God, and showed the depth of his moral degradation in seeking the prophet’s life, that was really to deprive himself of the only existing link between himself and God in grace. For God was acting in grace, through Elisha, and had been doing so all along. But what made the king a mourner was God’s action towards the people. This is deeply solemn, and explains, I believe, much that we find in these days.

it is not surely a time for exuberant joy, but we are to rejoice in the Lord, and to walk with God in the sense of His grace, and expecting to see good from His hand. That is what Elisha ever did: and he was not disappointed. God used the occasion of weakness, sorrow, and distress, to show forth, to His own glory, the resources of His grace, and Elisha was made the blessed instrument of it. What made the king wear sackcloth, only raised the eyes of Elisha to where he knew the chariots of fire and horses of fire were always to be found: “They that be with us are more than they that be with them.” It will be found the same in these days. Satan’s darkness settles down morally on those who forget to think of those things which are above, where Christ sitteth. Had the king’s mourning been true, he would have thought first of getting rid of his false gods, and of turning in heart to the Lord. But he did not believe in God’s power or will to help, and was obliged to confess, in despair, his own powerlessness. It is a sad picture of man away from God. W. J. Lowe.  1882

Words of Grace

Extracts from recent letters.

no.7.

“I was struck with the order in Romans 5, ‘patience’ before ‘experience.’ Eliminate the patience, and surely the tribulation would be but the experience of Satan’s power. But with ‘patience’ in its proper place the experience becomes the experience of God’s goodness, and tribulation worketh patience. So in James 1: 3 and 5: 11 Job’s was a wonderful case in point. For his very failure served to bring God’s faithful goodness more into relief, as Elihu showed him, though he was hardly then in a mood to receive what Elihu said. But he did not resist it. What a character and energy is given to hope, based on God’s love being known in thLes Hodgett, by the expression of what God is in a path of trial here below. Deuteronomy 8 shows God’s purpose in it.” W. J. Lowe. 1898

Sought and Found

Sought and Found

From Thee I wondered, loving sin,

Deceived, and hating Thee,

Till, in patient grace still seeking,

Thine hand laid hold of me.

’Twas then, O Lord, Thou showedst me

The work Thy love has wrought;

Thy full redemption perfect makes

The sinner Thou hast bought.

My sin Thou baredst; wrath divine

Was poured out on Thee;

The bitter cup my sins had mixed

Thou drankest on the tree.

Thy cross, Thy shame, Thy weakness, Lord

Has won my heart to God,

Whose righteousness makes good to me

What Thou hast paid in blood.

Thy glory weans my soul from earth,

Where once I loved to roam;

The rest of God Thou’st made my rest,

Thy Father’s house my home.

The Spirit, earnest of the joys

That Thou with me wilt share,

Now teaches me the ‘Abba’ cry,

While waiting for Thee here.

‘Sought and found,’ and brought to God,

Thine, Thine I am, O Lord;

Such Thy love, Thy mighty work,

The power of Thy Word.

W. J. Lowe.

Taken from ‘The Salvation of God, a Gospel book for the Anxious and Inquiring’

published by R M Cameron, Edinburgh, 1879

Letter to his father

William Joseph Lowe to John William Lowe (father)

au Locle.* Suisse

11 August 1870

My dear Father,

You will see that I am in Switzerland where I arrived yesterday, but I fear it will not be easier to communicate with you than it was when I was in France, as it appears that the route by Germany is closed for the present, and all letters go by France. I rather hastened my coming in the hope that it would not be so, but all is well.

There is so much disturbance in France that from day to day one does not know what trains may be suppressed. They get very little news of the war,** and what they do get is not to be depended upon. So there is very little indignation; and if the emperor does not conquer the Prussians it will probably be the end of him and his dynasty — at least that seems to be the general opinion in France. Nobody cries “Vive l'empereur”.

But for us what a comfort to know that all is in the hands of God. It seems probable that the distress and misery which will result from this war will be unprecedented. And considerable preparations are being made in France and Switzerland for the reception and treatment of the poor wounded. One finds the people in almost every house preparing bandages etc. to be forwarded to the seat of war. Business is almost at a standstill.

As to the actual facts of the war, you probably know them much better than we do; in fact about the best description I have as yet seen of what has taken place was an extract from an English journal. And it appears to go very badly with the French, there seems to be an utter want of proper organization and masterly direction of operations.

But if it is God's will to humble them, He knows how and when to do it. The Catholics are in despair. They had hoped great things against the Protestants by the success of the French arms.

But none of us know what is in the future. The Swiss guard their frontiers and interiorly things are very quiet, only that business is naturally very slack: so many able bodied workmen are now under arms at the frontier.

I had a nice time in the Pays de Montbéliard: there are about 8 gatherings there besides one at Besançon. The brother Mr Schüttel took me around to all and we had meetings almost every evening in one place or another. The brethren are very kind indeed, and there is great interest in the work, but not much prayer — but there is more of the reproach of Christ than there is in England. There are so many sects in England, that a meeting of the brethren is scarcely noticed, whereas on the Continent it is marked at once and an object of the scorn and hatred, chiefly of those who profess to be pastors of Christ's flock.

It makes one feel how much human education and human appointment in the things of God, blinds the eyes to what is really the work of the Spirit of God. There are very few outside the brethren so called who have really got peace in their souls with God; at least in the country villages.

I hope to be at Tramelan if the Lord will in four or five days, but my address for the present will be aux Soins de M. A.Tracol, Coffrane Neuchâtel, Suisse.

Very much love to you and Emma and Charlotte and John

Your very affectionate Son W. J. Lowe

{*Le Locle, a town in Switzerland north-west of Neuchâtel and close to the French border.

** The Franco-Prussian war of 1870-71 was declared on July 19, 1870}

Ancient Dissidence

Notes on the Ancient Dissidence and Brethren in Switzerland and France

by William Joseph Lowe

circa 1870

(Texte revu et conforme à l'édition imprimée.)

Vallée du lac de Joux

Commencement of Ancient Dissidence at Le Brassus — 1816 or 17 — father of Eugène Piguet (of Colombier), who left the valley for Nyon about 1853 & then joined the «brethren». His son Eugène left two or three years before & finally settled at Colombier (near Neuchâtel).

Yverdon — 1843

Essertines. (1 1/2 hr. dist.) spring of 1844 or 5 commenced with 3 brothers. Calame of Yverdon went up two or three Sundays. After 2 or more joined. Less than a month after that 4 others. (nearly all the Christians in the village.)

Then began conversions & the number rose to 60. Agricultural

Auguste Perret-Jordan at beginning of the meeting at Essertines — born September 1819 — converted at 12 years old. Made his first & only long tour April-July, 1848. Fleurier, Noiraigue, Les Ponts de Martel, & c. — Tramelan & country about Montbéliard. Married in November of that year.

Revival in villages about Essertines began in 1824 or thereabouts. Lardon preached in 1826 & following years & died in 1834.

In village of Gressy there was a Christian pastor M. Mellot, greatly blessed about 1824. He had two brothers also pastors in the neighbourhood & also devoted men.

Sainte Croix (1840)

1839. Brother Barbey visited Samuel Bornand who had already separated from the «Nationale» for some years & formed the «Ancienne dissidence».

In autumn of 1840 two or three began to break bread & were soon after visited by J.N. Darby.

Barbey went to Pau where he died.

Samuel Bornand born 1804 converted at age of 12.

Alf. B. 1843 (This line is written in pencil)

Oldest brother at L'Auberson, David Jaques died 13 September 1869 aged 70.

Le Locle 1845

Commenced by Pfisters who removed to that place from La Chaux de Fonds at that time.

La Chaux de Fonds

Ancient Dissidence in 1838 & 1839 commenced 1836.

Brother Ronget visited them about that time. A. Frederick Pfister with them, also — he came to live at La Chaux de Fonds (from France) in 1839.

They first began to break bread regularly every Sunday in the house of Jules Jacot (1796) in 1844 or thereabouts when Ronget came to live at La Chaux de Fonds.

The meeting was held for some time in Ronget’s house & then in the present local at Guyot's.

In 1836, they often went to «Les Bises» about 3/4 hour from the town where an «ancien» of the national church received them, by night when the persecution prevented their going by day.

Considerable persecution in 1838, 39. Jules Jacot’s son Jules (1826) suffered as a boy.

Saint Imier 1834 (?)

Mme Perret & Mme Tschantz (mother of Tschantz of Sonvillier) exercised about truth in Dombresson, & used to meet afterwards in Saint Imier with a few others, & broke bread occasionally. Gradually feeling their way out of system. Rammel, Tracol & others worked here.

In 1842 Tracol commenced a meeting for evangelisation at Mme Vuillieumier's house which was blessed to the conversion of many, as well as her own family.

Meeting very fluctuating as to numbers.

Les Ponts de Martel. 1846-7.

Adolphe Huguenin came from La Chaux de Fonds & established himself at Les Ponts autumn 1846. Meeting began soon after. Félix Ducommun converted at that time took his place afterwards at the table. Auguste Aellen converted year after, also Henri Stauffer, Ducommun (afterwards of Gorgier) & the Perrin.

Berne.

1845-6, chiefly through a Mr Conod & another, both of whom afterwards went back. Mme Huntziker came out at that time.

In 1870 about 30 in fellowship.

Rheinach (Argovie) commenced in 1859 or thereabouts by a brother from Zofingen. More than 100 meeting there in 1869.

Tramelan.

Severe persecution in autumn 1848 & spring 1849. N° in communion then about 15. Several were added at the time so that the number soon rose to 70, which was afterwards reduced by death, secession & other causes.

About 30 in communion up to 1867. 14 added in 1868, 30 more in 1869 and eight others in 1870.

Louis Étienne died 1870.

Geneva.

Madame Séchehay (the Lydia of Geneva) buried 2nd November 1869.

July 1870

Besançon. 1849

Ulysse Junod came to Besançon March 1849 & broke bread with his wife for 3 months. (He came from Courtelary, Val de Saint Imier.) Then he was joined by a brother Arthaud, also from Switzerland, deserter from the army because he would not fight against the Fribourgers. This brother died in Besançon.

The Sunday after Junod’s arrival, when he was very low in spirit, feeling his desolation & in prayer, David Rodt knocked at his door, — an entire stranger to him, but who had heard something of him through an affair what had happened at the Custom, (where Junod rated his goods higher than was usual for conscience sake), — he soon made himself known as a child of God, only very zealous for the established church from which he did not get delivered till 2 or 3 years after. He afterwards married an English sister, & went to Nelson, New Zealand.

Marcelin Jornod came to Besançon 27 months after Junod & through David Rodt, they became acquainted with the family Magnin, who gradually got freed from system & came out about 1854.

M. Jornod remained there 6 1/2 years, till November 1857, when he went with his family to Noiraigue in the Val de Travers.

23 July 1870

Montbéliard

This meeting is more or less connected with the history of Louis Gabriel Vierne.

Born in 1799, converted at Geneva in 1818, connected with M. Guers in the «revival» which took place about 1824, employed as colporteur, (expenses paid by Robert Haldane), — went to Montbéliard in 1827.

Several were converted through his & others means at Montbéliard, Désandans & c.

About 1831, — Vivian, a disciple of César Malan came from Geneva & wanted to «organise» the church of Montbéliard & establish himself as their pastor: but he was quickly resisted by Vierne, & he went to Paris not long after: — (among other things he wanted to impose Malan’s hymn book).

At this time the Christians met simply, through not knowing much ecclesiastical truth & not breaking bread every Lord’s Day.

In 1837, Vierne left for Belgium (near Waterloo) & did not return to Montbéliard till 1843.

Thomas Carey (1807-1869) came about 1840 (while Vierne was away in Belgium) — stayed first in Colombier-Châtelot for a time; afterwards for several months in Désandans, & greatly helped the brethren there to understand the scriptures: from there he went to Montbéliard.

[Note. Thomas Carey carried on the French work in Guernsey till his death 3 May 1869 soon after which his widow went to stay with her niece Mrs. Compain at Puligny. Pierre Compain & his family left Puligny: February 1870, after years solitude in that Roman catholic village, breaking bread with his wife & mother only, his father being unconverted & worldly. He went to Guernsey to carry on Mr Carey’s work.]

Bethoncourt. 1850

Abraham Oulevay came & established himself at Bethoncourt, in the property of the sister he married there, about 1844 — and on the occasion of his marriage François Antoine Schüttel came for the first time.

The meeting was then held in the house of Pierre Perrot, a labouring brother, who soon after went to Marseille, where he now is. The meeting was then held in a sister’s house; but when some difficulty arose, it was transported in 1850 to the house of Pierre Tissot at Bethoncourt.

Here it remained till 1870 & still is though Oulevay has built a new room but not used yet on account of affair spring 1869.

In 1866, F. A. Schüttel came to reside at Montbéliard, & as there were several brethren in the town, they decided to begin a meeting again in Montbéliard leaving that at Bethoncourt to stand as it was.

The meeting was thenceforward held in the house of F. A. S. until the war with the Prussians Autumn of 1870. F. A. S. left at the end of 1870 & went to Sonvilier (Switzerland) others left also & the meeting broke up, those that remained going to Bethoncourt.

Désandans. — Beutal.

George & Pierre Rigoulot received the truth about 1830 from L. G. Vierne at Montbéliard, to whom they applied for tracts & c., being already zealous for the Lord but not freed.

They returned home to Désandans & soon by the publication of a full, free gospel to those that applied to them, many souls became exercised & a few years after (about 1837?) they began to break bead together, once a month, feeling their way, & being in advance of Vierne who was opposed to it & to the doctrine of the Lord’s coming.

There were two dissenting parties at that time — one with Vierne at Montbéliard — the other in a Mr. Jacques at Glay near Terre-Blanche.

Mr Carey remained here some months about 1841 & taught the brethren truth from the Scriptures.

Meeting held at Fréd. Haye-Rigoulot's house (sister of Mme Jacques Jeannin of Terre-Blanche)

Beutal.

Jacques Chavet converted about 1835 by means of his sister who was converted at Blussangeaux.

The Rigoulots showed him there was no need of a pastor for breaking of bread & the meeting began then about the same time as at Colombier.

Pierre Marchand-Chavet & some others converted 1860 & meeting held in his house.

Colombier-Châtelot. 1840

Barbey was the first to set onfoot the breaking of bread about 1840, though there had been meetings at Blussengeaux some few years before that, & also in Colombier; but more or less connected with the «Ancienne dissidence» or old dissenting movement.

Pierre Droz, of Blussengeaux converted about 1832 at Montbéliard when in pension there, for his health, where he used to attend the meetings but he remained a dissenter more or less to the end of his days. He was used to several, but matters in Blussengeaux went ill: the affairs of this life ruined everything.

In Colombier, matters were better, one of the Lochard’s & George Bossardet-Lochard who went to Terre-Blanche were among the first.

Thomas Carey made 3 visits about 1840-5 & Oulevay, Tracol & Pierre Perrot, came often the succeeding years.

(1843) Pierre Lochard (tailor) received the truth from Carey during a severe illness in which Carey & his wife nursed him, & was set free 2 or 3 years after.

Pierre Droz has been always nominally with the brethren — father of Émilie & Marie — & so has Pierre Gein since the beginning 1840.

Terre-Blanche 1848 — {1870 July}

Meeting for breaking of bread commenced about 1848 after conversion of Pierre Jeannin and his brother Jacques a few months after in 1847 or thereabouts & was soon reinforced by several from Colombier-Châtelot who came to work in the cutlery fabric at Terre-Blanche.

The Bossardets came from Colombier about 10 years after, — four brothers George, Pierre, Etienne (died 1869) & Frédéric (died young as well as his wife) leaving many children of whom eldest Louis is in fellowship & ditto Auguste Normand of Besançon. The other brothers also have children many of them grown up & converted.

Meeting held at Jacques Jeannin’s the eldest of four brothers all in fellowship, (Pierre, Frédéric, Charles) the youngest of whom, Charles, took the name of his mother: Mégnin; he married Esther Delacoux half-sister of Abel Delacoux who got «reformed» from military service on account of a swelling in the neck which turned out to be temporary.

Jacques Jeannin born 1825 lost his father 1831 when he was six & was left with his two brothers to the care of their mother who still lives — & was converted after he was. (Charles J. born afterwards).

He married Clémence Rigoulot (of Désandans) born 1831 converted 1847 about same time as he & afterwards went to America for a time before her marriage. Pierre (1830-1887) married first Sophie Ménétrey, then afterwards Catherine Gentil of Valentigney.

Saint Julien. 1848.

Meeting commenced about same time or soon after that of Terre-Blanche & soon after the conversion of Frédéric Bainier, at whose house it has always been held.

At the time there were four or five sisters, converted, who, though attending church, used to meet together to read the word & read tracts & c. Through their means Mme F. Bainier got peace, before her husband.

Frédéric Bainier’s conversion made some stir in the village, which was made a blessing to the soul of another Bainier who had been exercised many years, but given to drinking & he was converted shortly after, & died in 1865. His son was converted on his own deathbed some years before, & was then the means of leading his wife and his mother (Bainier’s wife) to Christ. The son left his widow with one daughter Maryanne. This widow was afterwards married to Junod of Besançon.

There was considerable opposition from the villagers at the time the meetings were first held in Frédéric Bainier’s house & sometimes they were interrupted & disturbed. Fréd. B. born in 1815, converted 1848.

One of the first of the sisters converted was Catherine Bainier-Colin cousin of Mme Oulevay of Bethoncourt — who married an ungodly, wretched man, who gives her but little liberty.

There are two other Bainiers in fellowship brothers, George & Pierre, — cousins of Fréd.

Lougres. 1862.

A Christian pastor, Mr Donzé was blessed to giving many a knowledge of the truth, but it was not till Autumn of 1861, that there was much manifestation. At that time several were set free, the brethren in the neighbourhood especially Beutal helping greatly.

The nominal religion is Lutheran. Most of those converted are more or less nearly related, the family name being Jacquin.

Jacquin the ex-mayor is the most intelligent. He was much exercised during the 8 years he was mayor.

The Lords table was spread in 1862, in the spring.

Two years after this, spring of 1864, there was a little burst of persecution. The occasion was the burial of the child of a brother Martz at Longevelle, the first in these parts, performed by the brethren. The villagers made considerable opposition prompted by the clergy & L. G. Vierne was very roughly handled. [Fred. Lochard (Colombier-Châtelot) bears the marks of the stones flung at him to this day.] But the father succeeded in burying his child. P. & F. Lochard assisted.

Encouraged by this the villagers of Lougres (2 miles from Longevelle) made a «charivari», 2nd or 3rd Sunday after the affair at Longevelle. They assembled together the moment they came out of church at the time of the afternoon meeting, but the brethren aware of the conspiracy did not meet as they expected, & so not finding them some women assaulted the sister Susanne Bourquin aged 17 at the time; & the mayor, the deputy-mayor, & the rural policeman all managed to be absent. This came to the ears of the authorities who severely reprimanded the mayor, who was forced to resign, sent one or two of the worst to prison & sent some gendarmes to guard the meeting room the next Sunday.

August-September 1870

Pays d’En-Haut. 1846

4 Meetings

Rossinières - At David Roch's house

Chabloz - At Vincent Mottier's house

L’Étivaz - At Sophie Favrod's house (since 1870)

Rougemont - Marie Huser-Känel

The ancienne dissidence began.

The venerable Samuel Pilet at Rossinières was one of the first. His son Samuel, adjutant of gendarmerie, also christian but remained a «neutral» at the time of the division in Canton de Vaud (he is now at Lavigny).

Vialet laboured much here about 1846-7. Mr. Darby came up also at the same time & the meetings of brethren began almost simultaneously at all four places.

Melet of Rossinières was much used to help the brethren.

David Roch brought out of Eglise libre.

The Église libre which sprung up soon after the brethren took their stand, & which swallowed up the ancienne dissidence, has a strong hold in these valleys.

In Chateau d’Oex, 1870 it fraternizes very much with Église Nationale.

Les Versions Nouvelles Du Nouveau Testament

Remarques Sur Les Versions Nouvelles Du Nouveau Testament

et en particulier sur celle de M. le prof. Hugues Oltramare de Genève.

W. J. Lowe

Première édition: 1873

Présente édition: Mai 1997 — N° DI001

D.S.L. 34, Grand Rue 30340 Célas (France)

Préface de la présente édition

L’auteur de cette brochure, W. J. Lowe, était l’un de ceux qui a le plus notablement collaboré avec J.N. Darby au Nouveau Testament dit de Pau-Vevey, paru en 1872. Cette brochure est parue peu après, en 1873, à Genève.

L’auteur examine les versions nouvelles à cette époque et avertissait ses frères en y montrant ce que l’incrédulité, la présomption et l’imagination de l’homme s’étaient permis dans la traduction de la sainte Parole de Dieu. Ces versions d’alors sont depuis tombées dans l’oubli, aussi on pourrait penser que ce petit écrit a perdu sa raison d’être. Malheureusement l’incrédulité, la présomption, l’orgueil et l’incurie de l’homme sont toujours bien vivaces, et plus encore maintenant qu’alors; et leurs tristes résultats marquent les versions actuelles.

Cet écrit constitue donc encore pour nous actuellement une mise en garde et une invitation à réfléchir, afin que nous ne recevions pas aveuglément les traductions qui se publient actuellement simplement parce qu’elles sont imprimées, parce qu’elles sont nouvelles, parce qu’elles sont largement diffusées, parce qu’elle sont recommandées par beaucoup ou parce que leur auteur affirme lui-même les éminentes qualités de sa propre traduction.

Nous avons donc à rechercher, avant d’accorder ou non notre confiance à un traducteur, si cet homme s’est tenu devant Dieu, soumis, conscient de sa petitesse devant la grandeur de la Parole et s’il a traduit avec la révérence qui convient ou bien s’il se confie dans ses capacités et qu’il considère les choses profondes de Dieu comme des choses humaines, à sa portée, et qu’il les traite comme telles.

S.L. — Mai 1997

Avant-propos de l’auteur

Quelles que soient les imperfections du travail que l’on présente ici au lecteur, l’auteur espère que la gravité des tendances religieuses actuelles lui servira d’excuse auprès de ceux qui aiment Dieu et qui se soumettent à sa Parole. Les Saintes Écritures devraient être la base de tout enseignement religieux: elles sont la seule pierre de touche du fidèle pour juger de ce qu’il entend. Une traduction qui les altérerait, priverait le chrétien d’une partie de ses armes. Il a donc le droit d’exiger que la Parole de Dieu lui soit fournie dans son intégrité primitive. Ce besoin est, pour lui, d’une importance capitale, et les nouvelles versions qui se succèdent de nos jours en sont la preuve. La bonté de Dieu présente, pour la satisfaction de ce besoin une quantité de découvertes d’anciens manuscrits. La critique intelligente de ces documents, et la traduction exacte et fidèle du texte grec ainsi épuré doit répondre au désir que l’on a de sonder les écrits inspirés laissés à l’Église par les apôtres du Seigneur. Or, il vient de paraître à Genève une version aussi nouvelle dans son caractère que dans sa forme; le texte grec, auquel nous sommes habitués, y est considérablement altéré; et la seule indication que l’on trouve de ces changements sont des astérisques, ou de courtes notes, souvent peu intelligibles. Il a donc semblé qu’une rapide analyse de cette version était un devoir envers l’Église de Christ, devoir auquel on ne pouvait se soustraire. C’est dans ce sentiment que l’auteur a entrepris son travail, regrettant seulement qu’il ne soit pas dû à une plume plus habile et que la publication en ait été retardée jusqu’à présent.

W. J. Lowe — Janvier 1873

Remarques Sur Les Versions Nouvelles Du Nouveau Testament

Dans ce siècle où le droit de “libre examen” s’affirme partout, nous avons un sujet de profonde reconnaissance envers Dieu: c’est que l’on ait été conduit à s’occuper aussi de sa précieuse Parole dans le but de la posséder telle qu’elle a été écrite dans les langues originales; telle qu’elle a été lue et comprise par ceux à qui, d’abord, elle fut adressée.

Deux causes ont contribué à faire perdre, dans une certaine mesure, le sens exact de l’original:

1° Des fautes se sont glissées dans le texte par la négligence des copistes, alors que la Parole de Dieu n’existait que sous forme de manuscrits; ou bien, des changements ont été introduits dans ces manuscrits par des personnes qui, dans leur ignorance du vrai sens, l’altéraient, soit en s’efforçant de l’expliquer, soit en essayant de l’harmoniser avec d’autres passages des Écritures.

2° Les langues de tous les pays subissent, dans le cours des âges, des changements qui modifient le caractère de la société et les relations des hommes entre eux: de là l’obligation de rectifier, de temps à autre, les versions faites dans chaque langue, afin de conserver le sens de l’original.

Il en résulte que, sans parler de tout ce qui a été fait pour améliorer les traductions de la Bible dans les langues modernes, on trouve, dans les langues anciennes, des versions qui diffèrent entre elles quant aux détails et aux formes d’expression. On peut citer comme exemple, l’ancienne version latine du Nouveau Testament. Elle existait dès le deuxième siècle; et fut plus ou moins remplacée par la Vulgate à la fin du quatrième siècle. De même, la version syriaque, dite Peshito, la plus ancienne de toutes, n’empêcha pas qu’on n’en fît une autre au sixième siècle.

Ces soins et ces efforts prodigués à la Parole de Dieu, dès l’époque la plus reculée, ne sont pas seulement une preuve de son importance aux yeux des croyants, mais aussi de la bonté souveraine du Dieu qui a veillé sur elle, et qui a accordé à chaque peuple le privilège indicible de la posséder aussi pure que possible dans sa propre langue.

On peut même ajouter que l’énergie et le talent déployés par les hommes pour attaquer les Saintes Écritures n’ont fait que confirmer leur authenticité; qu’établir leur absolue et suprême autorité. En effet, un être raisonnable ne dépenserait pas son temps et son activité à renverser une chose qui, sans ses efforts, ne manquerait pas, avec le temps, de tomber d’elle-même: “Toute chair est comme l’herbe, et toute sa gloire comme la fleur de l’herbe; l’herbe est séchée et sa fleur est tombée; mais la Parole du Seigneur demeure éternellement.”

Lorsqu’un homme accusé sent que l’accusation est fondée, un seul moyen lui reste pour chercher à échapper à la sentence: c’est de mettre en question la compétence du Juge. De là vient que les hommes font tous leurs efforts pour infirmer l’autorité suprême de la Parole de Dieu et pour établir leur droit de la soumettre à l’examen de leur raison, afin de pouvoir en accepter ou en refuser ce qu’ils veulent. Or, ces efforts mêmes sont la preuve que la conscience, placée sous l’action de la Parole divine, est obligée d’accepter l’autorité souveraine de ce tribunal qui juge et condamne l’homme. A ce point de vue, que devient le droit de “libre examen”?

Dans sa Parole, Dieu nous montre ce que nous sommes, mais en même temps et surtout, Il se révèle Lui-même, Il nous appelle à une communion parfaite avec Lui-même; et, dans ce but, tout en ôtant le péché qui rendait sa communion impossible, Il nous donne, par son Esprit, l’intelligence pour connaître “le Véritable”. Sans la révélation de Dieu, nous ne pourrions le connaître; le péché nous en a rendus incapables. Une sagesse infinie a choisi et arrangé les termes dans lesquels le Saint Esprit daigne nous faire ses communications. Combien n’est-il donc pas important de conserver, autant que possible, la force exacte de chacune de ses paroles, et de ne pas chercher à expliquer, dans une traduction, ce qui n’est pas clair dans l’original! Celui qui est le mieux instruit dans les Écritures ne connaît après tout qu’en partie, et il se peut qu’il se trompe quand il veut donner le sens d’un passage. — Se borner à donner le sens des mots et laisser parler l’Écriture, là où elle est obscure, voilà le rôle du traducteur consciencieux. Mais, pour cela, il faut qu’il soit soumis à l’Esprit de Dieu et à la Parole même; qu’il n’agisse pas comme l’auteur d’un ouvrage purement humain qui cherche à faire tout plier — langage, force et tournure d’expression — sous les efforts de son propre génie et sous les élans de sa propre imagination.

“Toute Écriture est inspirée de Dieu”; il importe donc de conserver, autant que possible, les mots aussi bien que le sens de chaque passage. Une traduction doit être aussi littérale que le génie de la langue le comporte, lors même qu’on risquerait, parfois, de se servir d’expressions peu élégantes. La vraie difficulté est de conserver le sens exact de l’original, en le reproduisant dans une traduction littérale qui soit, en même temps, agréable à lire et facile à saisir par un lecteur ordinaire.

Pour recevoir une traduction avec confiance, il faut examiner en présence de Dieu si la main de l’homme, toujours faillible, n’y a pas porté atteinte aux vérités éternelles, objets des oracles divins révélés dans une autre langue.

Mais il y a une question préalable plus difficile à résoudre: celle des mots exacts du texte original. Les variantes mises au jour par une étude approfondie des manuscrits que l’on a retrouvés, aident beaucoup, et aideront toujours plus, à rétablir le texte dans son intégrité primitive; mais en attendant que l’on puisse, si jamais on y arrive, constater avec une autorité absolue qu’on a retrouvé le texte original, il faut distinguer entre le travail de ceux qui scrutent religieusement la Révélation que Dieu leur a confiée, et l’audace de ceux qui cherchent à prouver, par les défauts et les contradictions qu’ils croient y rencontrer, que toute l’Écriture n’est pas divinement inspirée. Or, “Dieu aura gain de cause quand Il sera jugé.”

Nous venons de placer devant le lecteur quelques-unes des difficultés que le traducteur rencontre dans son travail; avant de parler des dernières versions qui ont paru, nous voudrions rappeler ici deux ou trois points saillants de l’histoire des textes.

Un des fruits de la Réformation a été le besoins de posséder les Saintes Écritures dans les langues vivantes; les réformateurs s’appliquèrent avec courage à y répondre; l’invention de l’imprimerie seconda puissamment leur entreprise, en leur fournissant l’occasion de donner la plus grande publicité possible à leurs travaux. Des hommes lettrés se servirent de ce moyen pour répandre le texte grec du Nouveau Testament; d’autres hommes se dévouèrent à mettre les Saintes Écritures à la portée de chacun, dans sa langue maternelle.

Érasme, Alcala, Étienne et Théodore de Bèze

Le texte grec qui servit de base à toutes les traductions des réformateurs fut, quant au fond, celui que publia Érasme. Si peu qu’il en différât, il était certainement inférieur à celui qui avait été préparé sous la direction du cardinal Ximenès, à Alcala. Ce dernier texte, quoique achevé deux ans avant la publication de l’édition d’Érasme, ne vit le jour que quatre ans plus tard, en 1520, après avoir reçu l’autorisation formelle du pape Léon X. Malheureusement, Érasme s’était trop hâté dans son travail. Partageant le désir de son imprimeur, Fröbenius, de devancer coûte que coûte le cardinal, il prit dans la bibliothèque de Bâle les meilleurs manuscrits qu’il y trouva, et qui dataient du quinzième et du treizième siècles, et les livra presque tels quels à l’imprimeur, sans se donner le temps de les collationner avec d’autres manuscrits, pour corriger des passages évidemment fautifs. Se livrer à une critique approfondie du texte aurait été une tâche gigantesque, sinon impossible, au point où en était alors la connaissance des manuscrits; mais rien ne peut excuser, ni la hâte qui caractérisa l’impression de la première édition d’Érasme, ni la hardiesse d’oser retraduire, du latin en grec, quelques versets de l’Apocalypse qui manquaient totalement dans le manuscrit dont Érasme se servit, et où le texte se trouve intercalé dans un commentaire. Dans ses deux dernières éditions, Érasme profita de la publication de la Bible d’Alcala pour corriger quelques-unes de ses leçons, et Robert Étienne de Paris (1550), ainsi que Théodore de Bèze, se servirent des deux textes pour préparer leurs éditions, en y apportant quelques corrections d’après d’autres sources tout aussi récentes; car, comme Érasme, le cardinal Ximenès n’avait eu à sa disposition que des manuscrits comparativement modernes.

Les Elzevirs

Un siècle après la publication de la dernière édition d’Érasme, les Elzevirs de Hollande (qui avaient reproduit un texte peu différent de ceux d’Étienne, de Théodore de Bèze et d’Érasme) lui attribuèrent, dans la préface de leur seconde édition (1633), le titre de “texte reçu de tous”. C’est là le texte que tous les traducteurs modernes ont aveuglément suivi jusqu’à nos jours.

Quoiqu’il en soit, Dieu a veillé sur sa Parole; et tous ceux qui ont étudié les manuscrits et leurs leçons sont forcés de reconnaître que sa main providentielle a dirigé non seulement la rédaction du texte, mais aussi les traductions. Ainsi, la connaissance des anciens manuscrits ne fait que préciser ce qui était plus ou moins douteux, et mettre en évidence les fautes et les changements introduits par des copistes qui ont voulu harmoniser des passages en apparence contradictoires ou plutôt différents dans l’expression; ou qui, pour toute autre raison, ont modifié le texte original. Dieu n’a pas permis que l’authenticité de certains passages de sa Parole fût mise en question avant que le travail infatigable de plusieurs érudits eût produit assez d’évidence pour mettre chacun à même de se convaincre de la justesse des diverses leçons. Pour ce qui est de ces leçons, dans la plupart des cas, l’évidence interne laisse peu de doute dans l’esprit de ceux qui sont habitués à sonder l’Écriture sous la direction de l’Esprit de Dieu, et non pas avec la sagesse des hommes (1 Cor. 2: 13).

Si, par exemple, Érasme n’avait eu que le manuscrit le plus ancien qui soit connu aujourd’hui (celui du Sinaï), il nous aurait transmis, sans parler des fautes, quelques leçons qu’on ne peut nullement accepter et aurait laissé de côté, pour le moins, deux précieuses portions des Évangiles, tandis que maintenant l’on est à même de profiter pleinement du témoignage inestimable de ce manuscrit, qui est le plus complet de tous, et d’apprécier à leur juste valeur les innombrables corrections qu’il a subies. En effet, beaucoup d’autres manuscrits, et des versions plus anciennes qu’aucun manuscrit, confirment ou condamnent les leçons du manuscrit de Sinaï, qui lui-même n’était, après tout, qu’une copie.

Ce n’est que tout récemment qu’on a osé présenter au public des traductions tenant compte de leçons plus anciennes que celles de l’édition des Elzevirs. Si nous limitons nos observations à ce qui a été fait en langue française,* les premières traductions qui se soient écartées du “texte reçu” sont celle de M. le pasteur Arnaud et celle de M. le professeur Rilliet, imprimées toutes deux en 1858; l’une à Paris, l’autre à Genève.{*Les traductions catholiques suivent généralement la Vulgate latine, version ordinairement très fidèle, surtout si l’on en excepte l’étrange interpolation qui se trouve dans 1 Jean 5: 7-8, qui s’est glissée dans un grand nombre de copies, après le neuvième siècle, et qui, de là, a passé dans le texte reçu. En effet, les mots: “dans le ciel, le Père, la Parole et le Saint Esprit, et ces trois sont un; il y en a aussi trois qui rendent témoignage sur la terre,” ne se rencontrent tout au plus que dans trois manuscrits grecs, tous du seizième ou du dix-septième siècle; et encore, dans ces manuscrits, le passage est traduit du latin! Sauf la Vulgate, aucune version ancienne ne le renferme. Aucun père grec n’en eut connaissance, pas plus que les anciens pères latins. Luther ne les admettait pas non plus.

On peut ajouter que les meilleurs manuscrits de la Vulgate sont presque toujours d’accord avec les anciens manuscrits grecs à lettres onciales. M. Lamennais, dans sa traduction (Paris, 1851), indique quelques différences entre la Vulgate et le texte reçu.}

Arnaud

M. Arnaud tient compte des travaux critiques de Griesbach, Knapp, Tittmann, Scholz, Lachmann et Tischendorf. Comme il nous le dit, il a arrêté un texte qui est, à peu de choses près, celui des éditions de Knapp et de Tittmann, devenues presque classiques depuis que la première a été révisée par Theile (1841) et la seconde par Hahn (1840). Dans le plus grand nombre des cas, il n’a pris parti contre le “texte reçu” qu’avec la plupart des critiques susmentionnés, souvent avec tous. Ces changements sont indiqués dans les notes avec les autorités qui les admettent ou qui les combattent.

Il n’est pas nécessaire d’ajouter ici une appréciation d’un travail qui a été si bien accueilli. Comme pionnier dans cette branche de la critique en langue française, M. Arnaud mérite toute notre reconnaissance. Les grands soins qu’il a apportés à la traduction et à la révision du texte, attirent d’emblée notre confiance.

Cinq ans plus tard, en 1863, M. Arnaud publia un commentaire dans lequel était intercalé son texte primitif, revu et corrigé à l’aide des ouvrages qui avaient paru dans l’intervalle.

Dans un premier essai fait en vue de purger le texte des Elzevirs et d’en présenter une nouvelle traduction, il n’était guère possible de procéder autrement que ne l’a fait M. Arnaud. Il en a appelé aux travaux critiques qui, depuis le commencement du siècle, ont été l’objet du sérieux examen des hommes compétents. Se hasarder à donner un texte à soi, d’après l’étude des manuscrits eux-mêmes, aurait été prématuré. En effet, les dernières dix années ont été fertiles en découvertes de manuscrits nouveaux; de plus, les travaux infatigables de Tischendorf ont mis aujourd’hui à la portée des traducteurs une quantité considérable de matériaux critiques qui leur permettent d’apprécier avec justesse les mérites comparatifs des leçons contestées.

Quant à la traduction elle-même, on ne peut l’accuser de pécher du côté du littéralisme. Il s’y trouve parfois, à l’instar de la version Ostervald, des efforts d’interprétation qui nuisent à la clarté de l’original. Il suffira de citer comme exemple 2 Corinthiens 5: 21: “car il a traité pour nous comme un pécheur, celui qui n’a jamais connu le péché, afin que nous devenions justes devant Dieu par lui”. Il est vrai que l’on donne en note la traduction littérale de la première partie: “il a fait[être] péchépour nous celui qui n’a pas connu le péché”. Mais, en revanche, l’expression: “afin que nous devenions justes devant Dieu par lui”, ne rend nullement l’idée de l’original, qui est: “afin que nous devinssions justice de Dieu en lui.”*

{*Comparez, à cet égard, le commentaire excellent que donne de ces paroles M. Adolphe Monod (Adieux, 4e édit. p. 18). Il est digne de remarque, que l’un des défauts de la version allemande de Luther est reproduit dans sa traduction de ce verset. Quoiqu’il insistât extrêmement sur la justification par la foi, il lui aurait, sans doute, semblé trop fort de dire: “afin que nous devinssions justice de Dieu en Lui”; de sorte qu’il rend le passage par une paraphrase qui s’éloigne du grec plus que celle de M. Arnaud, tout en laissant voir l’effort qu’a fait l’auteur pour conserver les mots de l’original. Luther dit: “afin que nous devinssions en lui la justice qui compte devant Dieu”.}

Rilliet

La version de M. Rilliet a été faite sur le manuscrit du Vatican du quatrième siècle, reconnu comme le plus ancien de tous après celui du Sinaï. Elle est accompagnée de notes nombreuses où se trouvent les leçons de plusieurs autres manuscrits à lettres onciales, ainsi que celles de versions anciennes. M. Rilliet, comme il nous le dit dans sa préface, n’a pas voulu s’aventurer à décider quel manuscrit faisait autorité pour telle ou telle leçon; mais, en indiquant les variantes, il fournit à ses lecteurs le moyen de le faire. Il a préféré traduire un texte réel, le plus ancien qui fût alors connu, mais il fait avec justesse cette remarque: “Nous ne pouvions, en effet, accorder à un manuscrit unique, quelle que fût son antiquité, la prérogative de représenter, à lui tout seul, le texte des premiers siècles, ni laisser croire que, par une vénération mal entendue, nous voyions en lui le type exclusif de ce texte original qu’il n’est plus possible de reproduire dans sa native intégrité. Le manuscrit du Vatican est une autorité qui peut et qui doit, par conséquent, être contrôlée”.

On ne saurait trop apprécier l’édition de M. Rilliet comme livre à consulter, soit à cause des variantes, soit à cause de la traduction, qui fait preuve, en général, de fidélité et d’intelligence. Mais quand il s’agit de mettre la Parole de Dieu entre les mains du lecteur ordinaire, il est évident qu’on ne peut se borner à la traduction d’un seul manuscrit dont il est possible de corriger les défauts. Quelle que soit la difficulté, il faut choisir entre les autorités qui se présentent et en user sous le regard de Dieu, en comptant sur l’aide de son Esprit. Au reste, il y a un sérieux inconvénient à donner des variantes, si l’on ne présente pas, en même temps, le moyen de juger de leur valeur, à ceux qui n’ont ni le temps, ni l’occasion de parcourir les livres qui traitent de ce sujet embarrassant. On jette ainsi l’incertitude sur tout et l’on ne décide rien. Mieux vaut adopter, sans commentaire, tout ce qui est bien établi, et constater avec plus de détails la nature et le caractère du doute, là où il existe.

Quant aux choix qu’a fait M. Rilliet du manuscrit appelé: “Codex Vaticanus”, ce manuscrit est non seulement l’un des plus anciens, mais un des meilleurs de tous. Il appartient à la famille dite “alexandrine”. Or, le résultat général des travaux critiques tend à faire adopter les leçons alexandrines comme celles qui se rapprochent le plus du texte original. Elles sont d’ailleurs, en général, confirmées par les anciennes versions. Plusieurs critiques, qui, comme Scholz, ont commencé par donner la préférence aux manuscrits appelés byzantins, ont fini par abandonner plus ou moins le système qu’ils avaient adopté. L’évidence interne, dans un grand nombre de cas, a justifié leur décision; c’est ce qui explique l’accord assez général qui existe entre les éditions modernes du texte grec. Or, les traductions reproduiront nécessairement cet accord en ce qui concerne les variantes.

Vevey

Les éditions de MM. Arnaud et Rilliet furent bientôt suivies par une troisième, qui parut à Vevey en 1859. Elle prenait pour base les éditions grecques de Griesbach, Matthæi, Scholz, Lachmann et Tischendorf; elle rejetait le “texte reçu” toutes les fois que ces éditons étaient d’accord pour le rejeter; elle l’admettait toutes les fois que ces critiques n’étaient pas d’accord entre eux; suivant ainsi, à peu près, la méthode de M. Arnaud. Outre cela, la traduction était plus littérale et plus fidèle qu’aucune des précédentes.

Ce travail fraya le chemin à une seconde édition de cette même version, publiée dans le courant de l’année passée (1872). Elle remplit, pour la première fois, à notre avis, les conditions que nous avons exposées plus haut. La préface donne, au lecteur ordinaire, des directions suffisantes pour qu’il puisse juger de la valeur respective des manuscrits. Les leçons généralement acceptées ou bien établies, sont adoptées, sans autre commentaire qu’une simple indication pour chaque déviation du “texte reçu”.

Quand il y a des difficultés, elles sont indiquées avec les autorités pour ou contre telle leçon, toutes les fois que cela a paru nécessaire. Quelquefois il s’y trouve des données assez intéressantes sur l’origine des variantes. Les notes renferment encore des renseignements sur l’emploi et la signification des mots grecs qui, pour leur traduction, présentent plus ou moins de difficulté. Le texte de la traduction est, au fond, celui de la première édition, mais amélioré en plusieurs endroits et arrangé de manière à reproduire, en français, l’original grec aussi exactement que possible.

Oltramare

La publication de la seconde édition de la version de Vevey a été devancée de quelques semaines par celle de M. Oltramare, de Genève. Cette dernière s’écarte du “texte reçu”, sans donner d’autre autorité que celle de Tischendorf et le jugement de l’auteur; dans la traduction elle-même, on trouve aussi des éléments nouveaux. Ce travail mérite, de notre part, un sérieux examen; d’abord à cause de l’autorité que la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Genève lui a conférée en l’adoptant; puis, parce que sa forme est populaire et non pas critique.

Dans la préface de cette version, on a noté trois passages que le traducteur a conservés dans le texte, mais en les mettant en italiques et entre crochets. Je ne dirai rien de Matthieu 6: 13, vu qu’il y a assez d’évidence, externe et interne, pour que tous les éditeurs aient rejeté la fin du verset. Il faut pourtant remarquer que l’on a ici un exemple du système dangereux suivi par l’auteur. En lisant la préface, on pourrait supposer que les trois passages doivent être rejetés ou acceptés d’après la même autorité. Que dira donc le lecteur quand il apprendra que ce n’est nullement le cas? Pour rejeter Marc 16, 9-20, on n’a que l’autorité de deux manuscrits (les plus anciens, il est vrai) et quelques exemplaires de certaines versions anciennes; mais d’autres exemplaires de ces mêmes versions, ainsi que les autres manuscrits et toutes les autres versions (dont quelques-unes plus anciennes qu’aucun manuscrit), sont d’accord pour admettre ce passage qu’Irénée a déjà cité au deuxième siècle.

Il n’en est pas ainsi de Jean 8: 1-12, dont nous parlerons tout à l’heure. Pour le moment, nous voulons seulement montrer que le système adopté par M. Oltramare, pour le choix du texte, n’est guère propre à inspirer de la confiance au lecteur. On aura peine à croire que, dans le chapitre 25 de Luc, il ait mis de côté deux versets entiers (v. 12 et 40) uniquement sur l’autorité d’un seulmanuscrit du sixième siècle, et sur celle de quelques exemplaires, soit de l’ancienne version latine, soit de la version syriaque. Il en est de même de Matthieu 21: 44.* — Il est évident que si, pour des raisons aussi futiles, l’on rejette des passages, sans même fournir au lecteur l’occasion d’en juger, il ne reste aucune garantie pour l’exactitude du texte qu’on a adopté. Dans tous ces cas, et dans plusieurs autres que nous pourrions signaler, l’évidence interne est concluante en faveur des passages que l’on voudrait ainsirejeter.

{*Le fait que le verset de Matthieu 21: 44 se retrouve en Luc 20: 18, ne prouve rien. Il se peut que l’introduction du verset 43 (qui est particulier à Matthieu) ait donné lieu à des copistes, de penser qu’il devait remplacer le verset correspondant dans Luc, et qu’ainsi ils aient retranché le verset 44. Or, il faut rappeler que Matthieu, aussi bien que Luc, s’occupe du jugement d’une manière spéciale; ce qui n’a pas lieu pour Marc et pour Jean (comparez l’addition des mots: “et de feu” (Matthieu 3: 11; Luc 3: 16) en parlant du baptême du Saint Esprit). Quant aux versets 12 et 40 de Luc 24, ils ne sont pas textuellement les mêmes que ceux qui y correspondent dans l’évangile de Jean; la différence entre eux fait ressortir le caractère de l’évangile de Luc, et ne laisse aucun doute sur leur authenticité.}

On nous dit, dans la préface, que M. Oltramare a cherché à donner pour base, à son travail, ce qu’il y a de plus sûr en fait de texte grec; puis on ne nous cite que deux ou trois passages isolés qu’on entoure de marques de discrédit, sans dire un mot à l’égard de plusieurs autres, qui ont été changés ou rejetés pour des raisons tout à fait insuffisantes. Ne faut-il pas convenir qu’un tel procédé a pour effet de donner une fausse sécurité au lecteur confiant?

Quant à ce qui concerne Marc 16: 9-20, on a souvent fait remarquer à quoi tient, au verset 9, le changement dans le courant de la narration. Le verset 7 ayant dirigé les pensées vers la Galilée (comme dans Matthieu 28), le verset 9 reprend, dans un but spécial, le récit des circonstances arrivées au jour de la résurrection du Seigneur; de là vient la difficulté qu’on a trouvée dans le passage. Mais quand on l’examine attentivement, il est impossible de ne pas y reconnaître une harmonie divine avec le reste de l’évangile de Marc. Aucun autre évangile ne fait autant ressortir l’incrédulité du cœur naturel, se reproduisant sans cesse, malgré les preuves les plus convaincantes de la puissance et de la fidélité du Seigneur Jésus. Mais, en même temps, nul autre ne montre, avec la même clarté, cette patience infatigable de Jésus Christ, le parfait serviteur de Dieu, qui ne voulait pas abandonner ses disciples avant de les avoir associés à Lui, dans son service, malgré toute la dureté de leur cœur et leur peu d’intelligence (comparez chap. 8: 17-18).

On peut ajouter que Marc insiste tout particulièrement sur la résurrection comme sur ce qui fortifie le cœur du serviteur de Dieu, dans un monde où la mort règne à cause du péché (comparez chap. 9: 1-10 avec 2 Corinthiens 1: 9). Qu’il est beau de voir, à la fin, toutes ces choses réunies en quelques versets! La lenteur des disciples à croire à la résurrection du Seigneur, ne fait que mettre en saillie la condescendance de sa grâce. Il leur apparaît à plusieurs reprises; Il rassure leurs cœurs tout en leur reprochant leur incrédulité; Il leur donne la commission d’aller prêcher; puis lorsque, enfin, ils agissent en conséquence, et commencent leur œuvre sur la terre, le Seigneur, étant déjà assis à la droite de Dieu, les soutient par sa toute-puissance; coopère avec eux; et confirme la Parole par des signes qui l’accompagnaient. Le dernier verset du chapitre suffit, à lui seul, pour mettre hors de doute les rapports qui existent entre le passage en question et le reste du livre, et pour établir son authenticité comme partie intégrante de l’Évangile; il est le couronnement de tout son enseignement; — enseignement qu’on peut résumer en deux paroles du Seigneur Jésus lui-même: “Venez après moi, et je vous ferai devenir pêcheurs d’hommes” (chap. 1: 17); puis: “séparés de moi, vous ne pouvez rien faire” (Jean 15: 5).

Trouvera-t-on un chrétien quelconque, habitué à étudier l’Écriture en présence de Dieu et avec l’aide de son Esprit, qui accepterait, comme mot final en harmonie avec l’évangile de Marc, cette parole: “car elles avaient peur”? Ne serait-ce pas contraire à toute l’analogie des Écritures? Je ne dis rien du cachet divin imprimé sur chaque mot des onze derniers versets du chapitre 16. Et pourtant on veut jeter du discrédit sur ce passage, malgré la force écrasante de l’évidence interne et externe en sa faveur. A dire vrai, le fait que les deux plus anciens manuscrits n’ont pas ce passage nous engage à nous tenir sur la réserve à l’égard de toutes leurs leçons, quelque excellentes qu’elles soient d’ailleurs. En effet, ces manuscrits ne sont que les copies d’autres, plus anciens encore; ils ont peut-être été altérés par des copistes qui croyaient pouvoir harmoniser, améliorer ou corriger la Parole de Dieu.

Quant à l’authenticité de Jean 7: 53 à 8: 12, il n’y a pas une évidence externe aussi forte que pour Marc 16: 9-20. Cette évidence a plutôt un caractère négatif; mais quand on examine tout ce qu’on a écrit contre l’insertion du passage, on trouve que cela se réduit à bien peu de chose. — Parmi les plus anciens manuscrits qui contiennent tout le Nouveau Testament, on n’en trouve que deux: le Sinaï et le Vatican, qui n’offrent aucune trace de l’existence du passage en question, car le “codex Alexandrinus” (A) et le “codex d’Ephrem” (C) sont défectueux à cet endroit. On affirme, il est vrai, qu’en comptant les lignes, il est facile de s’assurer que ces deux documents ne contenaient pas ce passage; mais cela ne prouve rien, car il se peut que, dans les pages qui manquent, il y eût un espace, comme on le trouve dans deux autres manuscrit (L et D),* ou tel autre signe indiquant que le passage existait dans beaucoup de manuscrits, bien qu’il ne se trouvât pas dans celui dont on donnait la copie. La défectuosité des manuscrits A et C paraît bien significative, quand on la rapproche du fait que l’on a déchiré les deux pages qui contenaient le passage dans l’un des meilleurs manuscrits de l’ancienne version latine.{*En D, le copiste avait premièrement écrit: “Jésus donc leur parlait encore;” tout des suite après: “n’est pas suscité de Galilée;” puis, l’ayant biffé, il laissa un espace et recommença un peu plus bas.}

Il manque au manuscrit A le texte de Jean 6: 50 à 8: 52, quoiqu’il soit, d’ailleurs, presque sans défaut depuis Matthieu 25, plusieurs pages du commencement du Nouveau Testament ayant été perdues.

C ne contient que des fragments des évangiles, et fait défaut du chapitre 7: 3 au chapitre 8: 34.

Il n’y a que deux autres manuscrits à lettres onciales qui paraissent laisser le passage entièrement de côté. L’un, T, “codex Borgianus”, du cinquième siècle, ne contient que deux petits fragments de l’évangile de Jean, avec une traduction thébaïque; ce sont le chap. 6: 28-67, et le chap. 7: 6 jusqu’au chap. 8: 31. L’autre, X, du neuvième ou dixième siècle, contient beaucoup de fragments des évangiles, et, entre autres, le chap. 7: 1 jusqu’au chap. 13: 5, sans interruption, en omettant le passage en question.

D, “codex Bezæ Cantabrigiensis”, du sixième siècle, et six autres manuscrits à lettres onciales, donnent le passage en entier; dans E et quatre autres, il est pointé.* Il se trouve également dans la plus grande partie des manuscrits de l’ancienne version latine, ainsi que dans la Vulgate; mais il paraît que les plus anciennes copies des versions syriaque et arménienne ne l’avaient pas.

{*Il y a, dans ces manuscrits, quelques différences quant aux mots du passage, différences qu’ils présentent, du reste, partout dans les évangiles. Au verset 2, D omet: “et étant assis, il les enseignait;” — au verset 9, D et quatre autres omettent: “l’ayant entendu et étant repris par leur conscience”; — et au verset 10, D et trois autres omettent: “et ne voyant personne que la femme”; et “ceux-là les accusateurs”. Le fond du récit est cependant mot à mot le même en D que dans le “texte reçu”.

J’ajoute cela en note, parce qu’une remarque du Dr Tregelles “on the printed text of the Greek testament” laisserait supposer le contraire.}

Les trois quarts environ des manuscrits grecs cursifs renferment le passage; il est pointé dans la neuvième partie et omis dans les autres.

Quoiqu’il en soit, il est hors de doute que ce passage ne se trouvait déjà plus dans un grand nombre des plus anciens manuscrits; et il paraît que les pères des trois premiers siècles n’en font pas mention. Augustin croit qu’on l’avait éliminé des anciens manuscrits de peur de favoriser l’immoralité; et sa remarque semble plausible si l’on tient compte que, dans le codex Veronensis de l’ancienne version latine, deux pages ont été déchirées précisément à cet endroit, et que les deux anciens manuscrits à lettres onciales A et C présentent la même lacune.

Mais le simple fait que l’histoire de la femme adultère manque aux plus anciens manuscrits, ne prouve pas l’absence de ce passage dans tous les manuscrits, mais seulement dans ceux dont ils étaient les copies. Il est positif que le passage était connu avant la date des plus anciens manuscrits qui nous restent, car Jérôme et Augustin constatent que, de leur temps, on trouvait des exemplaires qui le contenaient et d’autres qui ne le contenaient pas. Il existait dans l’ancienne version latine faite au deuxième siècle, mais non pas, il est vrai, dans toutes les copies. Il se pourrait donc que les copies en usage en Afrique, et dont se servaient Origène et Tertullien, ne l’eussent pas. Quatre manuscrits grecs cursifs placent le passage à la fin de Luc 21; dix ou douze autres à part, à la fin de l’évangile de Jean. Tout cela témoigne d’un profond sentiment que ce passage devait prendre place quelque part, marqué comme il l’est du cachet de l’autorité divine. — Pourquoi, en effet, le retrancherait-on sur le témoignage des plus anciens manuscrits à lettres onciales, puisque ceux-ci rejettent la fin de Marc, en dépit de l’évidence la plus incontestable de son authenticité?

Le cœur de l’homme est disposé au légalisme et opposé à la grâce souveraine. On comprend bien que des personne zélées, qui insistaient beaucoup sur la conduite morale, aient trouvé à propos de mettre de côté ce tableau si net et si positif de la grâce qui pardonne. Or, je le demande, qui aurait pu inventer un pareil moyen de réduire au silence la présomption insolente des Pharisiens? Tout le passage n’est-il pas digne de celui qui émerveilla ces mêmes Pharisiens en leur disant: “Rendez les choses de César à César, et les choses de Dieu à Dieu”? N’y a-t-il pas un accord parfait entre l’action du Seigneur envers la pauvre femme adultère, et cette douceur, cette humilité, cette bonté toutes divines qu’il manifestait en demandant un service à la femme de Samarie (Jean 4), afin de trouver le chemin de sa conscience et de son cœur?

Dieu, nous le répétons, a veillé sur sa Parole. Il n’a pas permis que les efforts de l’adversaire et la faiblesse de l’homme fissent disparaître une seule de Ses paroles.

La comparaison du passage avec le contexte nous donne, en outre, l’assurance la plus positive qu’il est bien à sa place. Le chapitre 8 est le premier d’une série de cinq chapitres qui traitent d’un nouveau sujet: celui de la lumière. Les cinq chapitres précédents traitaient de la vie. Les cinq suivants (13-17), de l’amour.

On peut remarquer que Jean, lorsqu’il entame un sujet nouveau, rapporte habituellement un incident qui sert à illustrer la doctrine que l’Esprit de Dieu a en vue. C’est ainsi que le chapitre 3 nous présente d’abord un respectable Pharisien, docteur de la loi, qui cependant avait besoin d’une nouvelle naissance, d’une vie nouvelle, pour entrer dans le royaume de Dieu. La suite du chapitre et les suivants, développent toute la doctrine de la vie dans sa source et dans ses effets.

Au chapitre 8, la manifestation de la lumière divine dans la personne de Jésus, — gloire plus grande que celle de la loi de Moïse (comparez 2 Corinthiens 3), — chasse du sein de la lumière ceux qui étaient venus pour juger selon la Loi. En même temps, elle bannit toute crainte du cœur de celle qui, atteinte et convaincue de péché, n’attendait plus que sa sentence de mort. “La lumière fut” dans l’âme de la pauvre femme; ensuite, “la lumière du monde” devenait, pour cette âme pardonnée qui allait suivre Jésus, une force morale pour la conduire selon sa responsabilité nouvelle de ne plus pécher, — responsabilité qui découlait de la position, toute nouvelle aussi, dans laquelle elle se trouvait placée. Le chapitre 13 introduit le touchant épisode qui nous montre le Seigneur lavant les pieds des apôtres. Les chapitres suivants nous révèlent les bénédictions indicibles qui découlent de ce privilège: “d’avoir part” avec Jésus.

Outre le passage capital dont nous venons de parler, il en est d’autres d’une importance moindre dans lesquels M. Oltramare a suivi Tischendorf, en s’écartant du “texte reçu”, sur des autorités peu satisfaisantes. Il suffit d’indiquer Luc 24, où ces mots: “et leur dit: La paix soit avec vous!” (verset 36), puis encore ceux-ci: “et fut élevé dans le ciel. Et eux, lui ayant rendu hommage” (verset 51, 52), sont bannis du texte sur l’autorité de D seul, entre tous les manuscrits à lettres onciales. Il est vrai que les plus anciens exemplaires de la première version latine les suppriment; mais toutes les autres versions sont d’accord avec le texte ordinaire. Il en est de même, comme on l’a déjà fait remarquer, pour les versets 12 et 40 tout entiers du même chapitre.

En somme, le lecteur trouvera, pour les évangiles, (version Oltramare), 151 leçons indiquées au bas des pages. En comparant, sur ce point, la version Oltramare avec la version de Vevey, on trouvera que celle-ci accepte 61 des leçons de la première; 24 y sont indiquées comme devant être reçues avec plus ou moins de réserve; de plus, les raisons que l’on peut alléguer pour ou contre y sont souvent données.

Restent donc 66 leçons, rejetées par la version de Vevey, en accord avec le “texte reçu”.

En outre, un grand nombre de variantes, — telles que l’insertion ou l’omission des articles ou des petits mots: “et; aussi; donc;” etc.; et d’insignifiants changements dans le temps des verbes, — ne sont indiquées que par un astérisque dans la version Oltramare, tandis que la version de Vevey les signale en toutes lettres au bas des pages.

Sous le rapport des leçons, il n’y a pas grand-chose à remarquer dans les Actes, les Épîtres et l’Apocalypse; les éditeurs étant pour la plupart d’accord; toutefois il peut être utile, à titre de comparaison, de présenter sous forme de tableau les différences entre la version Oltramare et celle de Vevey.

Version Oltramare

Nombre de leçons indiquées au bas de la page, dans lesquelles le “texte reçu” est abandonné.

Évangiles - 151

Actes - 72

Ép. catholiques - 76

Ép. de Paul - 207

Apocalypse - 75

La version Oltramare suit généralement la 8e édition* de Tischendorf; mais souvent aussi la 7e lorsque les deux éditions diffèrent entre elles. Tischendorf étant d’accord (à une ou deux exceptions près) avec toutes les leçons adoptées dans la version de Vevey,** il s’ensuit que, dans cette version, il n’y a guère de variantes d’avec le texte reçu que ne reproduise pas celle de M. Oltramare; — de sorte que le tableau ci-dessus donne une idée juste de la mesure comparative dans laquelle ces deux versions s’éloignent du “texte reçu”.

{*La 8e édition n’était pas encore publiée en entier lors de l’impression de la version Oltramare.

**Il va sans dire que Tischendorf présente beaucoup de différences avec le “texte reçu”, outre celles que la version de Vevey a adoptées.}

Nous n’avons rien dit jusqu’ici de la version de Lausanne,* parce qu’elle a été faite sur le texte grec des Elzevirs; mais du moment qu’il s’agit de la traduction, il faut en tenir compte. Elle est peut-être la plus littérale de toutes les traductions récentes, et penche tellement de ce côté que le sens est quelquefois en danger de se perdre, vu les différences d’idiome entre les langues grecque et française.**

{*La première édition de cette version parut en 1839, la quatrième vient de paraître.

**On peut citer comme exemple 1 Corinthiens 15: 19, traduction qui défigure toutes les éditions de la version de Lausanne. Chose étrange, M. Arnaud est tombé dans la même faute, en faisant dire aux Écritures qu’il faut espérer en quelque autre chose à côté du Christ! — “Si, dans cette vie, nous avons mis notre espérance dans le Christ seulement, nous sommes de tous les hommes les plus misérables”. En conservant l’ordre des mots grecs on a détruit complètement le sens.

La note de la version Oltramare, à cet endroit, indiquant le leçon du “texte reçu”, ne peut qu’induire en erreur. La différence des leçons signalées est seulement dans l’ordre des mots “espérer” et “Christ” — ce qui n’affecte nullement le sens. Le texte adopté lit: “en Christ nous avons mis notre espérance;”; — le “texte reçu”: “nous avons mis notre espérance en Christ”; — dans les deux cas le mot “seulement” se trouve en grec à la fin de la phrase, séparé de “en cette vie” qui est au commencement. Mais que le lecteur n’en tire pas la conclusion que le sens soit douteux. Si le grec voulait dire: “en Christ seulement”, nous aurions l’adjectif “movnw/” au lieu de l’adverbe “movnon”. On retrouve dans le Nouveau Testament de nombreux exemples de cette construction. Comparez Matthieu 4: 4; 1 Corinthiens 9: 6; 14: 36; Galates 6: 4; 2 Jean 1, etc.

La règle poursuivie à outrance, de rendre le même mot grec par le même mot français a aussi beaucoup nui à la version de Lausanne.

Nous trouvons ainsi: “envoyé” pour “apôtre”; — “défenseur” pour “Consolateur” et “Avocat”; — “voyageurs de la dispersion” dans 1 Pierre 1: 1; — “relèvement” pour “résurrection”; — “amen” pour “en vérité”; etc.}

La traduction Oltramare est, au contraire, si peu littérale qu’on se demande parfois, en la lisant, si elle n’est pas une paraphrase. En voulant s’efforcer d’expliquer quelques passages ou de les rendre plus clairs, le sens en a été complètement altéré et même perdu. De plus, on trouve des passages où l’idée de la divinité du Seigneur Jésus Christ semble avoir été écartée de la traduction. Cela acquiert une bien sérieuse importance aujourd’hui que de soi-disant “pasteurs” des brebis de Christ osent publiquement nier sa divinité. S’ils peuvent trouver dans les Écritures un appui à leurs blasphèmes, l’ennemi des âmes en tirera un double avantage. Il est de notre devoir de protester de toute notre force contre une pareille manière de traiter la Parole de notre Dieu. Nous nous proposons d’examiner en détail quelques-uns de ces passages.

Jean 1: 1. On sera frappé de voir que le mot Dieu est écrit avec un “d” minuscule, quand il s’agit du Seigneur Jésus Christ: “La Parole était avec Dieu, et la Parole était dieu”. On se demande pourquoi?

Peut-être dira-t-on que c’est à cause du manque de l’article grec au mot “Dieu” la seconde fois, tandis qu’il se trouve à la première. Mais ceux qui connaissent un peu le grec verront ici, comme partout ailleurs, une preuve de l’admirable sagesse de la parole divine. — L’article devant “Qeov"” aurait fait de la phrase: “La parole était Dieu” une proposition réciproque: c’est-à-dire: la Parole était Dieu, et Dieu était la Parole, — ce qui donnerait lieu à toute sorte de fausses conceptions de la divinité. Sans l’article* la phrase ne peut avoir qu’une signification: la déclaration la plus nette, la plus positive de la divinité de la Parole faite chair.{*Comparez le grec dans les expressions: “Dieu est Esprit” Jean 4: 24; et: “Dieu est amour” 1 Jean 4: 8, 16.}

On est vraiment confus d’être obligé d’établir une vérité qui resplendit à chaque page des Écritures. Ce mot seul: “la Parole fut faite chair” ne pourrait évidemment pas se dire d’un homme né de la chair. Pourquoi donc M. Oltramare écrit-il “dieu” avec un “d” minuscule, quand il s’agit de Christ.*{*Dans la version de Vevey, l’emploi des minuscules, au lieu des majuscules honorifiques, est expliqué dans la préface. Dans cette version, on a suivi l’habitude du grec et on ne met des majuscules qu’aux noms propres. Le passage en question, Jean 1: 1, est ainsi rendu dans la version de Vevey: “Au commencement était la parole; et la parole était auprès de Dieu; et la parole était Dieu”. Ce qui fait ressortir d’autant plus clairement la divinité de “LA PAROLE”.}

Dans Romains 9: 5, M. Oltramare, qui a suivi la mauvaise ponctuation de Dr Tischendorf, a, de nouveau, fait violence au grec, en détournant de la personne de Christ l’expression “qui est sur toutes choses Dieu béni éternellement”. Il met un point après; “desquels selon la chair est issu le Christ”. Puis, commençant une nouvelle phrase, il ajoute: “Que celui qui gouverne toutes choses, en soit Dieu, béni éternellement”.

On n’a qu’à examiner les expressions semblables, contenues dans les écrits de Paul, pour comprendre qu’il ait fallu tordre le grec afin d’arriver à une pareille traduction*.{*S’il en était ainsi le grec aurait:

“Eujloghto;" oJ QeoŸ" oJ w]n ejpi; pavntwn,”,

ou “Eujloghtov" o; w]n ejpi; pavntwn Qeov"”.

Comparez les passages Luc 1: 68; Romains 1: 25; 2 Corinthiens 1: 3; 11: 31; Éphésiens 1: 3 et 1 Pierre 1: 3.}

D’ailleurs, pourquoi dire: “ensoit béni”? Le “en” ne se trouve pas dans le grec. M. Oltramare a fait violence au sens du passage; et on peut ajouter qu’il l’a fait en dépit de toutes les versions anciennes et modernes* et de tous les écrits des pères dignes de notre confiance.{*Il est vraiment étrange de voir que Tischendorf, pour défendre sa ponctuation, ose citer les épîtres supposées qui ont été faussement attribuées à Ignace; aussi bien qu’un passage d’Eusèbe dont les tendances ariennes sont connues.

Voyez la note de M. Arnaud sur ce verset (Commentaire 3: 74): “On a proposé deux autres traductions de ce passage, les uns mettent un point après Christ,… les autres après toutes choses… Ces deux traductions, qui font disparaître la divinité de Jésus Christ de l’enseignement de l’apôtre, sont forcées et exigent des constructions grammaticales arbitraires”.}

En accord avec la fausse interprétation donnée aux deux passages dont on vient de parler, on a introduit le petit mot “de” avant “notre Sauveur Jésus Christ” (Tite 2: 13), de sorte que l’expression “grand Dieu” ne s’applique plus au Seigneur Jésus Christ.

Nous sommes pareillement frappés de la construction faussée et torturée de 1 Jean 5: 20, où, par l’insertion répétée du mot “Dieu”, et par celle du mot “étant” avant “en son Fils”, on parvient à empêcher l’application des mots “le Dieu véritable” à “Jésus Christ”, en dépit du grec qui les unit de la manière la plus formelle.

Voici en regard les deux traductions:

Traduction ordinaire:

Il nous a donné l’intelligence pour connaître le Véritable; et nous sommes dans le Véritable, dans son Fils Jésus Christ: Lui est le Dieu véritable et la vie éternelle.

Celle de M. Oltramare:

Il nous a donné l’intelligence afin que nous connaissions le vrai Dieu; et nous sommes en ce vrai Dieu, étant en son Fils Jésus Christ: il est bien le vrai Dieu et la vie éternelle.

La traduction extraordinaire de Jean 17: 3, laisse aussi, dans l’esprit du lecteur, la même impression pénible. La connaissance personnelle de Dieu le Père et de Jésus Christ, dont parle le grec, est transformée, par la version Oltramare, de telle manière qu’elle ne devient guère que l’admission intellectuelle d’un dogme.

Traduction ordinaire:

Et c’est ici la vie éternelle, qu’ils te connaissent seul vrai Dieu et celui que tu as envoyé, Jésus-Christ.

Celle de M. Oltramare:

Or c’est ici la vie éternelle, qu’ils te connaissent, toi, pour le seul vrai Dieu, et pour Messie, Jésus que tu as envoyé.

Porter atteinte de quelque manière que ce soit à la divinité du Seigneur Jésus Christ, Emmanuel, “DIEU AVEC NOUS” est chose impardonnable à ceux qui se disent chrétiens; mais oser le faire dans une traduction des Saintes Écritures, est une hardiesse infiniment plus grave. C’est toucher au fondement de la foi chrétienne et faciliter l’œuvre de ceux qui, aujourd’hui, font tout leur possible pour la renverser.

L’ancienne parole: “Quoi! Dieu a-t-il dit…?” résonne de nos jours assez souvent à nos oreilles. Celui qui le premier l’a proférée, peut se transformer en ange de lumière (2 Corinthiens 11: 14); mais quiconque a des oreilles pour entendre la vérité n’aura pas de difficulté à reconnaître en lui le séducteur de nos premiers parents dans le jardin d’Éden. Quel chef d’œuvre diabolique que la corruption de la Vérité même!

Dira-t-on que ces paroles sont trop dures? A notre avis elles ne sauraient l’être. Si le fondement est détruit, tout croule.

Après ce que nous avons fait ressortir, on ne sera pas surpris de trouver d’autres passages bien affaiblis, et leur sens détruit. Il faudrait un volume pour les examiner en détail. Contentons-nous de quelques exemples.

Nous avons déjà parlé de 2 Corinthiens 5: 21. Ici, M. Oltramare suit Ostervald pour la première partie du verset: la seconde partie est une de ces paraphrases qui abondent dans sa version; il dit ici tout autre choses que l’original. Le passage est ainsi rendu: “Celui qui n’a pas connu le péché, il l’a traité pour nous comme pécheur, afin que nous possédions en sa personne la justice qui vient de Dieu”. On n’a pas besoin de s’étendre sur la différence qui existe entre posséder une chose et la devenir (dans la Vulgate on trouve “efficeremur”); de même l’introduction des mots: “qui vient”, ne fait qu’obscurcir le sens.

En 2 Corinthiens 13: 2, le passage est faussé de manière à contredire le grec et ce que l’apôtre avait avancé dans toute l’Épître* (notamment chapitre 1: 15; 2: 1). La seconde visite de l’apôtre n’était que projetée; elle n’avait pu se réaliser à cause de l’état moral des Corinthiens; car il ne voulait pas retourner à Corinthe avec tristesse. De là l’emploi de l’expression: “troisième” (chap. 12: 14; 13: 1), comparez chap. 1: 16, où tout est expliqué. Faute de saisir cela, M. Oltramare parle en toutes lettres, non seulement d’une seconde visite, mais d’un “second séjour”, dont le grec ne dit absolument rien, non plus que les versions de Martin, d’Ostervald, d’Arnaud, de Vevey et tant d’autres. La version de Lausanne, qui lit: “comme [quand j’étais] présent…” a altéré le sens par l’introduction des mots entre crochets: “quand j’étais”.

{*Cette contradiction est moins apparente dans la version Oltramare, parce que, au chapitre 1: 15, “une seconde grâce” est traduit par “un double plaisir”. Ce qui empêche que le lecteur ne rapporte le mot “grâce” à la visite projetée de l’apôtre: l’une des fautes cache l’autre, et le lecteur est induit dans une double erreur.}

Voici en colonnes parallèles:

La véritable traduction:

J’ai déjà dit et je dis à l’avance, comme si j’étais présent pour la seconde fois, et maintenant étant absent.

La version Oltramare:

Je vous l’ai déjà dit, et je vous en préviens; comme je fis lors de mon second séjour, étant présent, je le fais encore aujourd’hui que je suis absent.

Galates 4: 7. “Par la grâce de Dieu” est une explication qui n’en est pas une. Le grec, suivant le texte adopté, dit: “par Dieu”.

Romains 7: 24. “corps qui cause cette mort”, est également une interprétation fausse et incompréhensible de “ce corps de mort”, ou bien “corps de cette mort”.

De même, on trouve, en Hébreux 9: 9: “amener à la perfection réclamée par la conscience” pour “rendre parfait quant à la conscience”. Cette différence est importante. C’est Dieu, non pas la conscience, qui réclame la perfection. Mais Dieu donne un bonne conscience, c’est-à-dire une conscience quitte du péché à ceux qui acceptent pleinement l’éternelle efficacité du sacrifice de Christ.

Jacques 4: 5 ne se reconnaît plus dans la version Oltramare qui dit: “C’est avec jalousie que Dieu chérit l’âme qu’il a mise au-dedans de nous”. Malgré les difficultés que présente le passage, on se demande comment on a pu tirer un sens pareil de l’original qui dit: “L’esprit qui demeure en nous désire-t-il avec envie?”

Hébreux 9: 14: Où M. Oltramare a-t-il trouvé les mots: “doué d’un” qu’il a insérés avant “esprit éternel”, dans le passage qui doit se lire ainsi: “Christ qui, par l’esprit éternel, s’est offert…”?

1 Timothée 1: 4: “Avancent le règne de Dieu”, n’est certes pas une traduction juste de l’original qui dit: “l’administration de Dieu”; le texte reçu dit: “l’édification de Dieu”.

Les expressions Syzygos (Philippiens 4: 3), et Kyria (2 Jean 1: 1, 5), sont simplement des mots grecs que l’auteur n’a pas traduits, les prenant, assez mal à propos, nous semble-t-il, pour des noms propres.

Quelques personnes seront étonnées de la note mise au verset 19 de Jude, que M. Oltramare traduit ainsi: “Vous reconnaissez là ceux qui poussent à la séparation (T.R. là les dissidents), gent animale qui n’a point d’âme”.

Il s’agit tout simplement de l’omission du mot “eux-mêmes” qui se trouve ajouté à l’original grec dans le “texte reçu”. Tout le passage dans la version de M. Oltramare est l’une de ses paraphrases habituelles. Les mots “vous reconnaissez” sont une invention de l’auteur; et “âme” est substitué à “esprit” comme dans Jacques 4: 5. La véritable traduction est la suivante: “Ceux-ci sont ceux qui se séparent [eux-mêmes], des hommes naturels qui n’ont pas l’esprit”. L’expression “s’ils se séparent”, par laquelle M. Oltramare rend un tout autre mot, verset 22 (puis confondez les uns s’ils se séparent”), veut dire seulement “qui contestent”, ou bien “qui font une différence”. On doit traduire cette phrase ainsi: “reprenez les uns qui contestent”.

L’Apocalypse est en général assez fidèlement traduite. On y trouve cependant “rejeton” pour “racine”, 5: 5; 22.16; — “harpes sacrées” pour “harpes de Dieu”, 15: 2; — “de cochers et d’esclaves” au lieu de “de corps et d’âmes d’hommes”, 18.13; — “vertus” au lieu de “justices”, 19: 8.

En résumé, quand on voit l’original ainsi torturé, paraphrasé d’une manière inexacte, souvent même contredit, on a des raison suffisantes pour ne pas accorder de confiance à cette version qui ne peut guère être appelée une “traduction”. Les livres historiques eux-mêmes n’ont pas échappé à cette manie d’expliquer au lieu de traduire. Les mots ajoutés ça et là en italiques tiennent au système; mais, quelle que soit leur justesse, le lecteur est toujours à même d’en profiter ou de les rejeter; le fait qu’ils sont en italiques indique qu’ils ne se trouvent pas dans l’original.

Arrêtons-nous. Nous croyons avoir suffisamment exposé le caractère de la version Oltramare que viennent d’adopter “les chefs spirituels de l’Église de Genève”. Calvin approuverait-il ses successeurs? Nous ne le pensons pas. On nous dit dans la préface que “le protestantisme n’a jamais attribué à un traducteur quelconque le don d’infaillibilité; l’Église de Genève, en particulier, par sa tradition de révision permanente, a constamment rappelé que toute version est nécessairement une œuvre humaine et perfectible”. Nous en convenons, mais le sens dans lequel se fait ce “perfectionnement” n’en présente pas moins un symptôme très alarmant. Si l’Église de Genève est fidèlement représentée par ses chefs spirituels, et ses idées par les leurs, elle se trouve sur la pente glissante du rationalisme. Dans la version Oltramare, il n’y a ni fidélité à l’original, ni respect pour le divin Auteur des Saintes Écritures. Il semble qu’on ait oublié que cette Parole est l’Évangile du Dieu vivant “touchant son Fils, Jésus Christ, notre Seigneur” (Romains 1: 3). On la traite comme n’importe quel livre classique que chacun arrange et explique à son gré, et l’on appelle cela: “la recherche du sens véritable”. Nous aurions cru que la recherche de la vérité consisterait à rendre l’original aussi littéralement que possible, de peur d’ajouter ou de retrancher quelque chose à la Parole divine. Mais non! les explications scientifiques de la théologie conviennent mieux aux philosophes du XIXe siècle! Dieu nous a dit d’avance où cette voie doit aboutir.

Il est possible que le mauvais usage qu’a fait le traducteur genevois des découvertes et de la critique modernes, conduise plusieurs chrétiens sincères à repousser toute révision du texte et les rattache plus fortement que jamais aux versions basées sur le texte reçu. Qu’ils veuillent bien considérer d’abord, que la Parole de Dieu ne peut rien avoir à redouter de toutes les investigations de la vraie science; ensuite que, de fait, les anciens manuscrits, versions et écrits des pères, ne font que confirmer d’une manière remarquable le texte qui nous a été transmis à travers dix-huit siècles et conservé par les soins admirables de notre Dieu. Ces soins, le chrétien n’en peut douter, Dieu les continuera; car il n’est pas possible qu’il laisse s’affaiblir la lumière qu’il a Lui-même donnée à ses enfants pour les amener, dans “l’unité de la foi et de la connaissance du Fils de Dieu, à l’état d’homme fait, à la mesure de la stature de la plénitude du Christ”.

APPENDICE

Il existe encore une nouvelle version en voie de publication, et qui paraît depuis plusieurs années par livraisons annuelles (ou à peu près), soit de l’ancien soit du nouveau Testament. En voici le titre:

La sainte Bible, ou l’Ancien et le Nouveau Testament. Traduction nouvelle d’après les textes hébreu et grec, par une réunion de pasteurs et de ministres des deux églises protestantes nationales de France.

Les livres suivants du Nouveau Testament ont déjà paru: Matthieu, Marc, Romains, et les deux épîtres aux Corinthiens. Une note sur la couverture de la quatrième livraison mentionne l’usage qu’ont fait les traducteurs du texte grec de Dr Tischendorf, 7° édition. Les passages qui s’écartent du “texte reçu” ne sont pas indiqués dans le corps de l’ouvrage. Le texte paraît se rapprocher beaucoup de celui de la version Oltramare; mais la traduction en est plus littérale et plus fidèle. Le passage célèbre, Romains 9: 5, est presque aussi fautif que dans la version précitée. La divinité de Christ en est écartée.

Liste des versions modernes examinées dans cet opuscule.

ARNAUD. (l) Le Nouveau Testament de notre Seigneur Jésus Christ, ou les livres sacrés de la nouvelle alliance. Version nouvelle, faite sur le texte comparé des meilleures éditions critiques, avec l’indication exacte des corrections apportées au texte reçu, etc. 1 vol. in-18°. Paris, 1858.

(2) Commentaire sur le Nouveau Testament, renfermant une analyse explicative du texte, des notes historiques et exégétiques particulières, de brèves introductions à chaque livre, et une version française faite sur l’original. 4 vol. in-12°. Paris, 1863.

RILLIET. Les livres du Nouveau Testament, traduits pour la première fois d’après le texte grec le plus ancien, avec les variantes de la Vulgate latine et des manuscrits grecs jusqu’au dixième siècle, les citations de l’Ancien Testament, etc. 1 vol. in-8° (en cinq parties). Paris. Genève, 1858.

VEVEY. (1) Les livres saints connus sous le nom de Nouveau Testament. Version nouvelle. 1 vol. in-16°. Vevey. St-Agrève (Ardèche), 1859.

(2) Les livres saints connus sous le nom de Nouveau Testament. Version nouvelle. Deuxième édition revue, suivant un texte revu de l’original grec. 1 vol. in-16°. Pau. Vevey, 1872.

OLTRAMARE. Le Nouveau Testament de notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ. Version nouvelle. 1 vol. in-8°. Genève. Paris, 1872.

LAUSANNE. Le Nouveau Testament de notre Seigneur Jésus Christ, traduit par une société de ministres de la Parole de Dieu sur le texte grec reçu, et suivi d’un choix de variantes. Quatrième édition revue et corrigée. 1 vol. in-8°. Lausanne, 1872.