p. 312 | GOD'S COVENANT PEOPLE by J. H. W.

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 28, 1868

"GOD'S COVENANT PEOPLE."

By J. H. W.

The doctrine of the Millennium and the "Return of the Jews," has been, and is yet with some, almost a test of orthodoxy. A class of professed Adventists revived the old idea under the name of "Age to Come," and even gave it a more prominent place in their faith than did the old-fashioned millennium believers. With them it is, in fact, the great centre and ultimate of the gospel system.

There was a time when this doctrine was extremely troublesome to our brethren who observed the Sabbath; when those who made that theory almost their sole study took especial delight in perverting those who had not yet closely examined it and determined its falsity. Yet it did seem strange that the advocates of a system which embraced the restoration of the Jews, together with the restoration of their nationality with its laws, rites, and ceremonies, should be so deadly opposed to the Sabbath, which, according to their own views, was a prominent part of those laws. To us it was significant as showing the inconsistent and contradictory nature of the theory. To those who regarded consistency, it appeared singular enough to hear men preach that God is soon going to restore the Jews to their own land, and revive their system of laws, and that the gospel is now calling out and fitting up a class to be "kings and priests" in that age, whose business it will then be to enforce and execute those laws, and yet teach with all zeal and earnestness that they who keep even the most important of those laws will fall from grace, or forfeit the favor of God! When once it was carefully examined, it did not take long for candid, thinking men, to discard such an absurd and self-contradictory theory.

And we are obliged to think that it is not carefully examined by some, and therefore they still query in regard to its correctness, or incorrectness. Individuals sometimes stumble over somebody's exposition of a certain text or prophecy, and linger and doubt as if there were no means at hand of testing expositions. It is not alone by expositions of particular texts, that such questions should be settled, for that might be carried on for ages without arriving at satisfactory conclusions, if we had to depend on them alone. It is by the most evident and comprehensive principles of gospel truth, that we are to test men's expositions of prophecy, and bring the more obscure portions of divine revelation into harmony with that which is plain and clear.

While conversing with an individual not long since on this subject, he said, "You must confess that the Jews are God's covenant people." Now I must not confess any such thing; because I do not believe it, nor do the Scriptures show it to be so. Unless, indeed, our opponents admit the qualifying declaration of the apostle Paul, which they seem unwilling to do. And here is another strange thing to reconcile. If we present the plainly-expressed obligation to obey the fourth commandment of God's law, to keep the holy Sabbath of the Lord, they will not consent to receive the Old Testament as evidence, nor even allow us to show a harmony between the Old and New Testaments; the New Testament is their only rule, and obligations must be made and expressed to the "Gentiles," or to "Christians" by name, or they are worthless. But when we come to the "Return of the Jews,"—the Age to Come—one text from Deuteronomy or Ezekiel, outweighs all of the writings of the "apostle to the Gentiles," and overbalances every principle upon which the gospel of salvation is based. With such errorists, the exhortation to "Come, now, and let us reason together," has but little weight.

We will introduce the qualifying expressions of the Apostle Paul, above referred to, in answer to the following query: Do you not believe the promises of the Old Testament? Yes, we do; but we do not believe in every unscriptural construction which may be placed upon them, or unreasonable conclusions which men endeavor to draw from them. Beginning with the promises to Abraham, the real foundation of all the promises to Israel, in all times, we find three prominent elements which we will briefly consider as relatively presented in the two Testaments: 1st, the land, or inheritance; 2d, the seed, or people to inherit it; 3d, the token of the covenant they were to keep. At first view, it might appear that the inheritance embraced only the land of Canaan, and the token was outward circumcision. True, a few texts, even in the Old Testament, gave a wider range to these expressions; they were said to be uncircumcised in heart, and it was promised that the meek should inherit the earth. But in the New Testament, instead of being merely hinted at, it is explicitly stated that the promise to Abraham was, that "he should be heir of the world;" Rom. iv, 13; also Heb. xi, &c.; and that circumcision is not outward, in the flesh, but in the heart; Rom. ii, 28, 29; made without hands. Col. ii. 11. Here is apparently an entire change and enlargement of the terms of the original promise; yet in truth, this shows what the original promise was designed to embrace. This will not—cannot be denied. But what of the remaining term—the third element proposed for examination? Is that also enlarged, or its full meaning explained in the New Testament? or is it alone left to its apparent narrow bounds, confined to the natural descendants of Abraham or Israel? No; on this point we are not left to analogy, which, under these circumstances would guide us to the same result, but the New Testament is most clear and explicit in its language. Who are the seed to whom the promises were made? Who are Jews? Who are Israel? Who are the covenant people of God? Notice how clearly the answer is given, both negatively and affirmatively; "They are not all Israel which are of Israel. . . . . They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." Rom. ix, 6, 8. "For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly. . . . But he is a Jew which is one inwardly." Chap. ii, 28, 29. "And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." Gal. iii, 29.

Now if our opponents will show good scriptural cause why we should also consider them who are not Christ's, Abraham's seed and heirs of the promises; and that the children of the flesh are the true seed to whom the promises are made, we promise to consider it with all the care and candor we can possibly bring to the subject. Will they undertake to do it? And if they present their claims for "literal Israel," "the children of the flesh," will they please to harmonize their proofs and arguments with the above declarations of the chosen apostle? These are a part only of the texts and reasons we might offer against the unscriptural notion that the Jews (outward, in the flesh), are the children of the promises, or the covenant people of God; yet they are sufficient, we think, to convince any one who would believe if one rose from the dead!

But again it may be asked, Were not the covenants made with them? Were they not chosen of God, and the possessors of special privileges and promises? To this we answer, Yes; but they forfeited the privileges granted under the first covenant, by their disobedience, and that covenant was therefore annulled; decayed or vanished away. Heb. vii, 18; viii, 13; Matt. xxi, 43; &c. Ever since the apostles fulfilled the ancient Scriptures in turning to the Gentiles; since the Gentiles were made "fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel," (Eph. iii, 6,) the fleshly Jews have had no especial promises or privileges to claim of God. The "middle wall of partition" which separated the Gentiles from the Jew in regard to God's promises was "broken down," by Jesus Christ, Eph. ii, 11–16, and Paul taught that they who endeavor to build it again make themselves transgressors. Gal. ii, 18. Let the advocates of the Age to Come, take heed to their ways, and be warned by inspiration, to cease their efforts to build up a distinction once broken down by the cross of Christ.

But we are not only informed that the unbelieving Jews are not the children of God, the heirs of the promises; we are also told what they are—what position they occupy in the sight of him who made these promises. The Jews themselves once put forth this same plea to one who was well qualified to settle this question authoritatively. They affirmed before our Saviour, as follows: "We have one Father, even God," and "We be Abraham's seed." But Jesus answered them, "Ye are of your father the Devil." Is there no distinction between the "Covenant people of God," and the children of the Devil? Are they one and the same class?

We should reasonably suppose that those who so lightly regarded such plain and important distinctions between the children of promise and the children of the Devil, would have no very exalted idea of the purity of character and life that is required of the children of God; nor of the exceeding sinfulness of sin, by which individuals or a nation may forfeit the favor of God and be counted the children of the Devil. And such we have found to be the case. The standard of Christian morals has ever been low among them; the law of God, which the apostle of Jesus said is holy, just and good, they have not ceased to revile; it has been the chief object of their hatred. The effect on piety and devotion has been, in the words of one in a Western State, "as chilling as an iceberg!" If the tree were good, the fruit would be also. Those who keep themselves in the love of God, and have his Spirit in their hearts, and its fruits in their lives, will be in little danger from such a theory. Those who do not watch and pray, cannot expect to be kept from temptation and the snares of the enemy.

J. H. W.