Answers to Correspondents.
By J. H. W.
Does Jer. 33:10, 11, Eze. 20:40, 41, and Amos 9:14, 15, refer to the national restoration of Israel in their persistent adherence to their Jewish faith and to be fulfilled previous to the first resurrection? or will these prophecies have their fulfillment in the earth renewed? W. W. L. To say that any promise of restoration, in either an individual or national sense, can be fulfilled “in their persistent adherence to their Jewish faith,” which means their rejection of Christ, is to do violence to the plainest and most essential doctrines of the gospel. The covenant under which the natural seed of Israel had special promises has passed away, and when the new covenant was made, the middle wall of partition was broken down, and the Gentiles were constituted fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of the same promises, Eph. 2 and 3. Therefore no promise can now be claimed for one born a Jew which cannot be claimed also for one born a Gentile, unless we build again the things which were destroyed, in doing which we make ourselves transgressors. Gal. 2. All the promises of God are now through Christ, the mediator of the new covenant. This is considered at length in the pamphlet on the Age to Come. Again, in examining prophecies concerning the restoration of Israel, we must consider two things. 1. When they were written; 2. How they may be fulfilled. Some were written long before the Babylonian captivity, and were fulfilled in their return therefrom. And some, though written before that time, could not possibly have been fulfilled then, as their expressions clearly show. This we shall presently see. ANSWERS desired to the following questions on the prophecy of Jeremiah 48:47. Yet will I bring again the captivity of Moab in the latter days, saith the Lord. Thus far is the judgment of Moab. What is the nature of the return of Moab? Is it religious or political? individual or national? Has it been accomplished? If so, how was it fulfilled? If not, how will it be? Are there any people, tribe, or nation, now existing, which are considered as descendants of the Moabites? Similar information is desired concerning the Ammonites, to whom a return is promised in Jeremiah 49:6. G. E. F. It would be very unreasonable to claim for Moab and Ammon, in either a national or individual sense, more than we have a right to claim for Israel in the same sense. If Israel “according to the flesh” has no promise of a restoration, neither can Moab or Ammon have. The restoration or “gathering” of all is in the same sense and at the same time. See Eph. 2 and 3; Gal. 2; and compare Rom. 11; 2 Thess. 2:1; Isa. 27:12, 13; Matt. 24:30, 31, &c. How do you understand Hosea 3:4, 5? It is supposed by some to teach the restoration of the Jews, or world’s conversion. This differs materially from the first question, for, though it was written before the first restoration, its terms are such as to prove that it could not have its fulfillment there. To seek “David their king” could not be fulfilled literally then, for David was then dead. It must refer to David’s seed or heir, that is, to Christ; and is, therefore, a prophecy of gospel times. To the term “Israel” we must apply the words of Paul in Rom. 9. The work referred to in the text in question is also given to the gospel in the most positive manner by the apostle in Acts 15. This setting up the tabernacle of David, or restoration of his kingdom, embraces the whole work from its inception to its completion; from the presentation of David’s son to the Jews, the gathering of the true seed out of all nations, to the giving “unto him the throne of his father David,” the destruction of the nations, and the establishment of his kingdom “under the whole heavens.” The throne is given to Christ, and the nations are destroyed under the seventh trumpet. Rev. 11. It cannot refer either to a return of the Jews as such, or to the world’s conversion; both these popular doctrines contradict the very plainest principles of the New Testament. J. H. W.