WHEN WILL THE NATIONS BE DASHED IN PIECES?
OBJ.—The children of Israel are to be gathered to their own land; but the new earth never was their land; hence they must be gathered to Palestine in the Age to Come previous to the earth's being made new. This objection involves two important questions; namely, who are Israel? and what is their land? The supposition of the objector is that it refers only to the literal descendants of Jacob; and we can only understand what their land is by ascertaining how they came in possession of the land, and by what title they held it, and under what covenant promise they will return. We should take a comprehensive view of this as of every subject—one that will take in the whole scope of the Scripture, and thus settle the main facts, and harmonize minor points or apparent discrepancies with them; for if we get the foundation laid correctly, there can be no real objection brought against it; for God's word is not yea and nay. The covenant made at Sinai was made with the literal descendants of Jacob, and was the only covenant ever made with them previous to the days of our Saviour. The Abrahamic covenant was identical with the gospel, which was confirmed to Abraham in Christ by the promise and oath of God, and ratified by the death of Christ, whose blood-shed on Calvary is the blood of the covenant. Now I would inquire, Which covenant conveys the title to the land, or under which will they return to their possessions? If we can ascertain the truth on this point we can then, by an examination of its promises and conditions, ascertain whether the objection bears against the view of the utter destruction of all the unbelieving of all nations at the coming of Christ. Before examining the covenant made at Sinai I would remark that the children of Israel were not brought out of Egypt, or into the land of Canaan, because they were a righteous people; on the contrary, they were represented as a stiff-necked and rebellious people. Once the Lord expressed a determination to "disinherit them," and raise up a people from Moses. Num. xiv, 12. At the time they passed over Jordan, only two were left alive of all that had seen the power and glory of God displayed as he brought them out of Egypt; and all the prophets, and the Saviour, testify that as a people they continued rebellious and unfaithful to God even to the time of the calling of the Gentiles. The favor shown to them was solely for their father's sakes, and for the accomplishment of God's purpose as made known to Abraham. This of itself would show that they could not have received the land by virtue of any promise or condition of the covenant at Sinai. But we have more direct evidence on this point. 1. That covenant was based upon a condition which they did not, and could not, keep—they were transgressors, so that they could claim nothing under it in their own persons. 2. The priests or mediators of that covenant could not remove their sins; [Heb. x, 1-4;] so they could not recover what they had lost by transgression. 3. To confirm these facts the, Lord gave as a reason for making a new covenant with them, that they had broken his covenant which he made with them at Sinai; and although he had promised to be their God, and that they should be a peculiar treasure to him above all people, yet when it was broken by them, he could not consistently perform his promise and so he "regarded them not;" they were on a level with other sinful nations. Rom. iii, 9-19. This plain declaration of the Lord should forever settle the question that they could acquire no title, to an inheritance under that covenant. And if they had any claim under it, it could not have been abolished without an infringement on their rights. They did not acquire any title under that covenant in the past, and they cannot in the future; for they cannot fulfill its condition; besides, it has passed away and been superseded by the new; and the new is introduced on account of the insufficiency of the old; therefore, if they return to their own land it must be by complying with the conditions of the new covenant, which indeed is the only one that ever could convey any title to an inheritance. The only question then to be settled is, What inheritance or land is promised under the new covenant? As the original promise was made to Abraham and confirmed in Christ, we must look both ways for an answer to the question; that is, to Abraham who first received the promises, and to Christ the Mediator, who is sole heir, and who alone can grant any right to the inheritance. This I suppose all will admit; that none can obtain it independent of Christ, and of course only under the covenant of which he is the Mediator. Abraham was promised a land for an everlasting possession, and circumcision was instituted as a token of this covenant. Now the objection assumes that a certain part of the earth in its present form must be conferred on Israel to meet the demands of the promise. As the promise itself is but a re-iteration of promises made to Abraham, we look to them and see that the objection is fully met by the Scripture. The promise to Abraham embraced the land that he saw, and as far as he could see in all directions. He did not see all of the present earth nor any of the new earth; hence we might conclude that his inheritance embraced solely what he saw in this sin-cursed world. But Paul places this matter in another light. He says, "For the promise that he should be the HEIR OF THE WORLD, was not to Abraham,178or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith." Rom. iv, 13. Then Abraham is heir of the world. "By faith he sojourned in the land of promise as in a strange country," as other faithful ones, who, with him, "confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth." Heb. xi, 9, 13. Again, Christ is the seed to whom the promises were made; [Gal. iii, 16;] he is the heir of the world, and the Father promised to give him "the uttermost parts of the earth for a possession." Ps. ii, 8. As he is the heir, so the saints are made "joint-heirs" with him; and by reason of their joint-heirship "the meek shall inherit the earth." To inherit is to receive by heirship; but there is no promise or heirship by which we can receive the earth, except that of Abraham; and Christ receives it, or is heir, by being Abraham's seed: hence the Abrahamic covenant and promise embraced the world, or the earth, even to the "uttermost parts." The land which the children of Israel possessed under Joshua is clearly shown, in Heb. chapters iii and iv, to be typical of the rest which remains to the people of God. We next consider the token of this covenant, which was altogether an outward ordinance, and no one now pretends that it is necessary to observe circumcision as it was first observed in order to be constituted an heir: because the New Testament teaches otherwise. Paul says, That is not circumcision "which is outward in the flesh," but "circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit and not in the letter." Rom. ii, 28, 29. In Rom. iv, 11, the token or circumcision is entitled a sign or seal. In Eph. i, 13, 14, the Apostle says, "Ye were sealed with that holy spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession." This reference to the seal agrees with Rom. ii, 29; and we learn here that the inheritance already purchased is yet to be redeemed, and we receive the token, earnest, or assurance thereof until the redemption. The sign reaches no farther than to the thing signified: we have the earnest or assurance reaching to the point of realization; but it would convey no assurance beyond that point; therefore our inheritance cannot be fully realized till the purchased possession is redeemed. This proves conclusively that the earth renewed, or the new earth, is the subject of the promise of the Abrahamic covenant. Jesus, the mediator and heir, is now ministering for those of both dispensations, or for transgressors under both covenants, "that they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." Heb. ix, 15. All who lived under the first covenant were transgressors; Jesus ensures the faithful amongst them an inheritance—not a temporary possession, but an eternal inheritance; not under the curse as it is at this time, but redeemed; so that the hope of all now rests on "an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away." 1 Pet. i, 4. As before remarked, to inherit is to possess by heirship; and if we receive an inheritance redeemed, incorruptible, undefiled and eternal these conditions must necessarily be attached to the possession named in the will by which we are constituted heirs. This will is the Abrahamic Covenant; therefore it is abundantly proved that the promise to Abraham embraced the new earth, and the New Jerusalem, the "city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God;" [Heb. xi, 10;] and the objection, so far as it relates to the land, is shown to be without force. But there is another part to this objection which I will now consider; namely; who are Israel? or, To whom are these promises made? In answer to this I might refer to the preceding remarks and apply a few New Testament scriptures to show who are the heirs to Abraham's inheritance, and thus pass it by. But I will go back to their origin and trace them through the whole divine plan, and thus get a harmony of the scripture facts and expressions. The name of Israel is significant: Jacob did not receive it because of his birth, but because he prevailed with God. His twelve sons were the heads of the twelve tribes. They went down into Egypt, and their children became bondsmen to the Egyptians. After four hundred years the Lord remembered his promise to their fathers, [Ex. ii, 24,] and appeared to Moses for their deliverance as the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob. He brought them forth from Egypt to mount Sinai in Arabia, where he made a covenant with them. Ex. xix, 5-8. He stated the condition and his promise thus: "If ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: and ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation." The answer or promise on their part was: "All that the Lord hath spoken we will do." The condition was then spoken by the voice of the Lord, and he declared the ten commandments; which, however, the children of Israel did not keep, and of course were not entitled to be considered "a peculiar treasure," for they were not "an holy nation." That they were continually disobedient or transgressors is too evident to need further proof than has been given. Paul testifies that the Lord spoke of them when he said, "All day long have I stretched forth my hands to a disobedient and gainsaying people;" [Rom. x, 21;] and the word of the Lord is given that he did not regard them because they had broken his covenant. But it may be said, that, of them as a people these things were spoken, but there were individuals among them accepted of God, who are heirs to the promises. While I acknowledge that there were many of them accepted of God, I must, on the authority of his word, deny that their acceptance was in consequence of a fulfillment of that covenant according to their agreement; but it was because of their faith in a coming Saviour, who mediates in the new covenant for their transgressions, which mediation would not be required in their behalf had they kept God's covenant, and thereby been holy by personal obedience: so that, so far as that covenant was concerned, all were under sin or condemnation: all had forfeited God's favor or blessing. But has not God promised to show mercy to Israel? Yes, but only under the new covenant; there was no forgiveness granted or offered under the old. Therefore it is evident that those only of the children of Israel can claim the promise of God who embrace it through the faith of Christ the mediator. These, like Jacob, have the significant name of Israel—they prevail with God. The others, though they be "of Israel" also, are not Israel—they do not prevail with God because the mercy of God can only be obtained through Christ. Thus it is clearly shown that they are not partakers of Israel's blessings merely because they are of Israel by natural descent. I will now take a step still further back and examine their claim under another name. Although Jacob was the first that bore the name of Israel, Abraham was counted the father of the Hebrews, and the promise came direct from Abraham to Jacob. But the children of Israel had transgressed and forfeited the blessing of Abraham, as the Apostle says to the Galatians that the law was "added because of transgressions" four hundred and thirty years after the promises were made to Abraham. They could not by future obedience redeem themselves from their transgressions, neither did the children of those with whom the Sinaitic covenant was made obey; therefore Christ was given to redeem them from the curse of the law that they might obtain the blessing of Abraham. Gal. iii, 13, 14. Then we have the following points clearly established: 1. The children of Israel, by transgression, had forfeited the blessing of Abraham. 2. The law was added (when the covenant was made at Sinai) to convince them of sin, and bring them to Christ. 3. They not only continued to transgress, but refused to accept of Christ as a redeemer. Therefore, they were not entitled to the blessing of either covenant, and had no just claim to be called either the children of Israel, or children of Abraham. Accordingly Paul says, "They are not all Israel which are of Israel: neither because they are the seed of Abraham are they all children; but in Isaac shall thy seed be called, that is, THEY WHICH ARE THE CHILDREN OF THE FLESH, THESE ARE NOT THE CHILDREN OF GOD." Rom. ix, 6-8. These facts Paul offers to prove that God's word of promise is fulfilled without them. Verse 6. In remarks on the new covenant I have noticed the fact that the difference between Jew and Gentile is destroyed in the gospel, and they are both one—of the same body—partakers of the same promises. I now proceed to show that this state of things was not only foretold by the prophets, but recognized in the original promise. As the name of Israel was significant, so also was that of Abraham. Said the Lord: "Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be called Abraham: for a father of many nations I have made thee." Gen. xvii, 5. Here the promise was repeated of the gift of the land to him and to his seed for an everlasting possession. That Christ was the seed we learn from Gal. iii, 15; but others shall enjoy these blessings with Christ, so that others become the seed of Abraham secondarily; that is, Christ is the heir—they are joint heirs with him; Christ is the seed—they become the seed also by becoming Christ's. I would call particular attention to what Paul says to the Romans; inasmuch as it is generally supposed that he has here admitted a difference in a sense which he has in other places denied.