Again, "Ye have heard that it hath been said, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy'; _but I say unto you_, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the _sons_ [????] of your Father which is in heaven; _for_ He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.... Be ye therefore perfect [t??e???], even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matt. v. 38-48.)

We cannot now dwell upon those blessed sentences; we merely quote them for the reader in order to let him see the immense difference between the Jewish and Christian economy. What was perfectly right and consistent for a Jew, might be quite wrong and inconsistent for a Christian.

This is so plain that a child may see it; and yet, strange to say, many of the Lord's beloved people seem to be clouded on the subject.

They judge it to be perfectly right for Christians to deal in righteousness, and go to war, and to exercise worldly power. Well, then, if it be right for Christians to act thus, we would simply ask, Where is it taught in the New Testament? where have we a single sentence from the lips of our Lord Jesus Christ, or from the pen of the Holy Ghost, to warrant or sanction such a thing? As we have said, in reference to other questions that have come before us in our studies on this book, it is of no possible use for us to say, "_We think_ so and so." Our thoughts are simply worth nothing. The one grand question, in all matters of Christian faith and morals, is, "What saith the New Testament?" What did our Lord and Master teach, and what did He do? He taught that His people now are not to act as His people of old acted. _Righteousness_ was the principle of the old economy; _grace_ is the principle of the new.

This was what Christ taught, as may be seen in numberless pa.s.sages of Scripture. And how did He act? Did He deal in righteousness with people? did He a.s.sert His rights? did He exercise worldly power? did He go to law? did He vindicate Himself, or retaliate? When His poor disciples, in utter ignorance of the heavenly principles which He taught, and in total forgetfulness of His whole course of action, said to Him, on one occasion in the which a certain village of the Samaritans refused to receive Him, "Lord, wilt Thou that we command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, even as Elias did?"

what was His answer? "He turned and rebuked them, and said, 'Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of; for the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save.' And they went to another village."

It was perfectly consistent with the spirit, principle, and genius of the dispensation of which Elias was the exponent and representative, to call down fire from heaven to consume the men sent by a G.o.dless king to arrest him; but the blessed Lord was the perfect Exponent and divine Representative of another dispensation altogether. His was a life of perfect self-surrender, from first to last. He never a.s.serted His rights. He came to serve and to give; He came to represent G.o.d--to be the perfect expression of the Father in every way. The Father's character shone out in His every look, His every word, His every act, His every movement.

Such was the Lord Christ when He was down here among men, and such was His teaching. He did what He taught, and He taught what He did. His words expressed what He was, and His ways ill.u.s.trated His words. He came to serve and to give, and His whole life was marked by those two things, from the manger to the cross. We may truly say, time would fail us to quote the pa.s.sages in proof and ill.u.s.tration of this; nor is there any need, inasmuch as the truth of it will hardly be called in question.

Well, then, is not He our great Exemplar in all things? is it not by His teaching and ways that our course and character as Christians are to be formed? How are we to know how we ought to walk, save by hearkening to His blessed words and gazing on His perfect ways? If we as Christians are to be guided and governed by the principles and precepts of the Mosaic economy, then, a.s.suredly, it would be right for us to go to law, to contend for our rights, to engage in war, to destroy our enemies; but then what becomes of the teaching and example of our adorable Lord and Saviour? what of the teachings of the Holy Ghost? what of the New Testament? Is it not as plain as a sunbeam to the reader that for a Christian to do these things is to act in flagrant opposition to the teaching and example of his Lord?

Here, however, we may be met by the old and oft-repeated inquiry, "What would become of the world, what would become of its inst.i.tutions, what would become of society, if such principles were to be universally dominant?" The infidel historian, in speaking of the early Christians, and their refusal to join the Roman army, sneeringly inquires, "What would have become of the empire, surrounded as it was on all sides by barbarians, if every one had indulged in such pusillanimous ideas as these?"

We reply at once, If those spiritual and heavenly principles were universally dominant, there would be no wars--no fighting, and hence there would be no need of soldiers, no need of standing armies or navies, no need of constabulary or police; there would be no wrong-doings, no strife about property, and hence no need of courts of law, judges, or magistrates; in short, the world as it now is would have an end; the kingdoms of this world would have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ.

But the plain fact is, those heavenly principles of which we speak are not intended for the world at all, inasmuch as the world could not adopt them, or act upon them for a single hour; to do so would involve the immediate and complete break-up of the present system of things, the dissolution of the entire frame-work of society as at present const.i.tuted.

Hence, the objection of the infidel crumbles into dust beneath our feet, like all other infidel objections, and the questions and the difficulties which are based upon them. They are deprived of every atom of moral force. Heavenly principles are not designed for "this present evil world" at all; they are designed for the Church, which is not of the world, even as Jesus is not of the world. "If," said our Lord to Pilate, "My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but _now_ is My kingdom not from hence."

Mark the word "now." By and by, the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdom of our Lord; but now, He is rejected, and all who belong to Him--His Church--His people--are called to share His rejection, to follow Him into the outside place, and walk as pilgrims and strangers here below, waiting for the moment when He shall come to receive them to Himself, that where He is, there they may be also.

Now, it is the attempt to mix the world and the Church together that produces such terrible confusion. It is one of Satan's special wiles, and it has done more to mar the testimony of the Church of G.o.d and hinder its progress than most of us are aware. It involves a complete turning of things upside down, a confounding of things that differ essentially, an utter denial of the Church's true character, her position, her walk, and her hope. We sometimes hear the expression, "Christian world:" what does it mean? It is simply an attempt to combine two things which in their source, nature, and character are as diverse as light and darkness. It is an effort to tack a new piece upon an old garment, which, as our Lord tells us, only makes the rent worse.

It is not G.o.d's object to Christianize the world, but to call His people out of the world, to be a heavenly people, governed by heavenly principles, formed by a heavenly object, and cheered by a heavenly hope. If this be not clearly seen; if the truth as to the Church's true calling and course be not realized as a living power in the soul, we shall be sure to make the most grievous mistakes in our work, walk, and service. We shall make an entirely wrong use of the Old-Testament scriptures, not only on prophetic subjects, but in reference to the whole range of practical life; indeed, it would be utterly impossible to calculate the loss which must result from not seeing the distinctive calling, position, and hope of the Church of G.o.d, her a.s.sociation and identification--her living union with a rejected, risen, and glorified Christ.

We cannot attempt to enlarge upon this most precious and interesting theme; but we should just like to point out to the reader an instance or two ill.u.s.trative of the Spirit's method of quoting and applying Old-Testament scripture. Take, for example, the following pa.s.sage from that lovely thirty-fourth psalm,--"The face of the Lord is against them that do evil, to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth."

Now, mark the way in which the Holy Spirit quotes this pa.s.sage in the first epistle of Peter.--"The face of the Lord is against them that do evil." (Chap. iii. 12.) Not a word about cutting off. Why is this?

Because the Lord is not now acting upon the principle of cutting off.

He acted upon it under the law, and He will act upon it in the kingdom by and by; but just now, He is acting in grace and long-suffering mercy. His face is quite as much and quite as decidedly against all evil-doers as ever it was or ever it will be, but not now to cut off the remembrance of them from the earth. The most striking ill.u.s.tration of this marvelous grace and forbearance, and of the difference between the two principles on which we have been dwelling, is seen in the fact that the very men who with wicked hands crucified His only begotten and well-beloved Son--evil-doers, surely, of the most p.r.o.nounced type,--instead of being cut off from the earth, were the very first to hear the message of full and free pardon through the blood of the cross.

Now, it may appear to some that we are making too much of the mere omission of a single clause of Old-Testament scripture. Let not the reader think so. Even had we but this one instance, it would be a serious mistake to treat it with any thing like indifference. But the fact is, there are scores of pa.s.sages of the same character as the one just quoted, all ill.u.s.trative of the contrast between the Jewish and Christian economies, and also between Christianity and the coming kingdom.

G.o.d is now dealing in grace with the world, and so should His people, if they want to be like Him, and such they are called to be. "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect."

And again, "Be ye therefore imitators of G.o.d, as dear children; and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to G.o.d for a sweet-smelling savor."

(Eph. v. 1.)

This is our model. We are called to copy our Father's example--to imitate Him. He is not going to law with the world; He is not enforcing His rights with the strong hand of power. By and by He will; but just now, in this day of grace, He showers His blessings and benefits in rich profusion upon those whose life is one of enmity and rebellion against Him.

All this is perfectly marvelous, but thus it is; and we, as Christians, are called to act on this morally glorious principle. It may be said by some, How could we ever get on in the world--how could we conduct our business on such a principle as this? We should be robbed and ruined; designing people would take advantage of us if they knew that we would not go to law with them; they would take our goods, or borrow our money, or occupy our houses, and refuse to pay us. In short, we could never get on in a world like this if we did not a.s.sert our rights and establish our claims by the strong hand of power. What is the law for but to make people behave themselves? Are not the powers that be ordained of G.o.d for the very purpose of maintaining peace and good order in our midst? What would become of society if we had not soldiers, policemen, magistrates, and judges? And if G.o.d has ordained that such things should be, why should not His people avail themselves of them? and not only so, but who so fit to occupy places of authority and power, or to wield the sword of justice, as the people of G.o.d?

There is, no doubt, very great apparent force in all this line of argument. The powers that be are ordained of G.o.d. The king, the governor, the judge, the magistrate, are, each in his place, the expression of the power of G.o.d. It is G.o.d who invests each with the power which he wields; it is He who has put the sword into his hand, for the punishment of evil-doers, and the praise of them that do well.

We bless G.o.d with all our hearts for the const.i.tuted authorities of the country. Day and night, in private and in public, we pray for them. It is our bounden duty to obey and submit ourselves to them in all things, provided always that they do not call upon us to disobey G.o.d, or do violence to conscience. If they do this, we must--what?

Resist? Nay, but suffer.

All this is perfectly plain. The world as it now is could not go on for a single day if men were not kept in order by the strong hand of power. We could not live, or at least life would be perfectly intolerable, were it not that evil-doers are kept in terror of the glittering sword of justice. Even as it is, through lack of moral power on the part of those who bear the sword, lawless demagogues are allowed to stir up the evil pa.s.sions of men to resist the law of the land and disturb the peace and threaten the lives and property of well-disposed and harmless subjects of the government.

But admitting all this, in the fullest possible manner, as every intelligent Christian, every one taught by Scripture, most a.s.suredly will, it leaves wholly untouched the question of the Christian's path in this world. Christianity fully recognizes all the governmental inst.i.tutions of the country. It forms no part of the Christian's business to interfere, in any one way, with such inst.i.tutions.

Wherever he is, whatever be the principle or character of the government of the country in which his lot is cast, it is his duty to recognize its munic.i.p.al and political arrangements, to pay taxes, pray for the government, honor governors in their official capacity, wish well to the legislature and the executive, pray for the peace of the country, live in peace with all, so far as in him lies.

We see all this in the blessed Master Himself in perfection, blessed be His holy name for evermore! In His memorable reply to the crafty Herodians, He recognizes the principle of subjection to the powers that be--"Render to Caesar the things that be Caesar's, and to G.o.d the things that be G.o.d's." And not only so, but we find Him also paying tribute, although personally free. They had no right to demand it of Him, as He plainly shows to Peter; and it might be said, Why did He not appeal? Appeal! Nay; He shows us something quite different. Hear His exquisite reply to His mistaken apostle--"Notwithstanding, _lest we should offend them_, go thou to the sea, and cast a hook, and take up the fish that first cometh up; and when thou hast opened his mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money; that take and give unto them _for Me and thee_."[9] (Matt. xvii.)

[9] The fact that the tribute-money may have been for the temple does not touch the principle set forth in the text.

And here we get back, with increased moral force, to our thesis, namely, the Christian's path in this world. What is it? He is to follow his Master--to imitate Him in all things. Did He a.s.sert His rights? did He go to law? did He try to regulate the world? did He meddle with munic.i.p.al or political matters? was He a politician? did He wield the sword? did He consent to be a judge or a divider, even when appealed to, as we say, to arbitrate about property? was not His whole life one of complete self-surrender, from first to last? was He not continually giving up, until, at the cross, He gave up His precious life as a ransom for many?

We shall leave these questions to find their answer deep down in the heart of the Christian reader, and to produce their practical effect in his life. We trust that the foregoing line of truth will enable him to interpret aright such pa.s.sages as Deuteronomy xiii. 9, 10. Our opposition to idolatry and our separation from evil, in every shape and form, while not less intense and decided, most surely, than that of Israel of old, is not to be displayed in the same way. The Church is imperatively called upon to put away evil and evil-doers, but not after the same fashion as Israel. It is no part of her duty to stone idolaters and blasphemers, or burn witches. The church of Rome has acted upon this principle, and even Protestants (to the shame of Protestantism) have followed her example.[10] The Church is not called--nay, she is positively and peremptorily forbidden to use the temporal sword. It is a flat denial of her calling, character, and mission to do so. When Peter, in ignorant zeal and carnal haste, drew the sword in defense of his blessed Master, he was at once corrected by his Master's faithful word, and instructed by his Master's gracious act,--"Put up thy sword into the sheath; for all they that take the sword shall perish by the sword." And having thus reproved the act of His mistaken though well-meaning servant, He undid the mischief by His gracious touch. "The weapons of our warfare," says the inspired apostle, "are not carnal, but mighty through G.o.d to the pulling down of strongholds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of G.o.d, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ." (2 Cor. x. 4, 5.)

[10] The burning of Servetus, in 1553, for his theological opinions, is a frightful blot upon the Reformation, and upon the man who sanctioned such an unchristian proceeding. True, the opinions of Servetus were fatally and fundamentally false,--he held the Arian heresy, which is simply blasphemy against the Son of G.o.d; but to burn him, or any one else, for false doctrine, was a flagrant sin against the spirit, genius, and principle of the gospel, the deplorable fruit of ignorance as to the essential difference between Judaism and Christianity.

The professing church has gone all astray as to this great and most important question. She has joined herself with the world, and sought to further the cause of Christ by carnal and worldly agency. She had ignorantly attempted to maintain the Christian faith by the most shameful denial of Christian practice. The burning of heretics stands as a most fearful moral blot upon the page of the church's history. We can form no adequate idea of the terrible consequences resulting from the notion that the Church was called to take Israel's place and act on Israel's principles.[11] It completely falsified her testimony, robbed her of her entirely spiritual and heavenly character, and led her upon a path which ends in Revelation xvii. and xviii. Let him that readeth understand.

[11] It is one thing for the Church to learn from the history of Israel, and another thing altogether to take Israel's place, act on Israel's principles, and appropriate Israel's promises. The former is the Church's duty and privilege; the latter has been the Church's fatal mistake.

But we must not pursue this line of things further here. We trust that what has pa.s.sed before us will lead all whom it may concern to consider the whole subject in the light of the New Testament, and thus be the means, through the infinite goodness of G.o.d, of leading them to see the path of entire separation which we as Christians are called to tread; _in_ the world, but not _of_ it, even as our Lord Christ is not of it. This will solve a thousand difficulties, and furnish a grand general principle which can be practically applied to a thousand details.

We shall now conclude our study of Deuteronomy xiii. by a glance at its closing paragraph.

"If thou shalt hear say in one of thy cities, which the Lord thy G.o.d hath given thee to dwell there, saying, Certain men, the children of Belial, are gone out from among you, and have withdrawn the inhabitants of their city, saying, Let us go and serve other G.o.ds, which ye have not known; _then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask diligently_; and, behold, _if it be truth, and the thing certain_, that such abomination is _wrought among you_, thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword. And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the street thereof, and shalt burn with fire the city, and all the spoil thereof every whit, _for the Lord thy G.o.d_; and it shall be a heap forever; it shall not be built again. And there shall cleave naught of the cursed thing to thine hand; that the Lord may turn from the fierceness of His anger, and show thee mercy, and have compa.s.sion upon thee, and multiply thee, as He hath sworn unto thy fathers; when thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy G.o.d, to keep all His commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the Lord thy G.o.d." (Ver. 12-18.)

Here we have instruction of the most solemn and weighty character. But the reader must bear in mind that, solemn and weighty as it most surely is, it is based upon a truth of unspeakable value, and that is, Israel's national unity. If we do not see this, we shall miss the real force and meaning of the foregoing quotation. A case is supposed of grave error in some one of the cities of Israel, and the question might naturally arise, Are all the cities involved in the evil of one?[12]

[12] It is, of course, needful to bear in mind that the evil referred to in the text was of the very gravest character. It was an attempt to draw the people away from the one living and true G.o.d. It touched the very foundation of Israel's national existence. It was not merely a local or munic.i.p.al question, but a national one.

a.s.suredly, inasmuch as the nation was one. The cities and tribes were not independent; they were bound up together by a sacred bond of national unity--a unity which had its centre in the place of the divine presence. Israel's twelve tribes were indissolubly bound together. The twelve loaves on the golden table in the sanctuary formed the beauteous type of this unity, and every true Israelite owned and rejoiced in this unity. The twelve stones in Jordan's bed, the twelve stones on Jordan's bank, Elijah's twelve stones on Mount Carmel--all set forth the same grand truth--the indissoluble unity of Israel's twelve tribes. The good king Hezekiah recognized this truth when he commanded that the burnt-offering and the sin-offering should be made for _all Israel_. (2 Chron. xxix. 24.) The faithful Josiah owned it and acted upon it when he carried his reformatory operations into all the countries that pertained to the children of Israel. (2 Chron. x.x.xiv. 33.) Paul, in his magnificent address before king Agrippa, bears witness to the same truth when he says, "Unto which promise _our twelve tribes_, instantly serving G.o.d day and night, hope to come."[13] (Acts xxvi. 7.) And when we look forward into the bright future, the same glorious truth shines, with heavenly l.u.s.tre, in the seventh chapter of Revelation, where we see the twelve tribes sealed and secured for blessing, rest, and glory, in connection with a countless mult.i.tude of the Gentiles. And finally, in Revelation xxi.

we see the names of the twelve tribes engraved on the gates of the holy Jerusalem, the seat and centre of the glory of G.o.d and the Lamb.

[13] It may interest the reader to know that the word rendered, in the above pa.s.sage, "twelve tribes," is singular--t? d?de???????

It certainly gives very full and vivid expression to the grand idea of indissoluble unity which is so precious to G.o.d, and therefore so precious to faith.

Thus, from the golden table in the sanctuary to the golden city descending out of heaven from G.o.d, we have a marvelous chain of evidence in proof of the grand truth of the indissoluble unity of Israel's twelve tribes.

And then, if the question be asked, Where is this unity to be seen? or how did Elijah or Hezekiah or Josiah or Paul see it? The answer is a very simple one--They saw it by faith; they looked within the sanctuary of G.o.d, and there, on the golden table, they beheld the twelve loaves, setting forth the perfect distinctness and yet the perfect oneness of the twelve tribes. Nothing can be more beautiful.

The truth of G.o.d must stand forever. Israel's unity was seen in the past, and it will be seen in the future; and though, like the higher unity of the Church, it is unseen in the present, faith believes it all the same, holds it and confesses it in the face of ten thousand hostile influences.

And now let us look for a moment at the practical application of this most glorious truth, as presented in the closing paragraph of Deuteronomy xiii. A report reaches a city in the far north of the land of Israel of serious error taught in a certain city in the extreme south--deadly error, tending to draw the inhabitants away from the true G.o.d.

What is to be done? The law is as plain as possible; the path of duty is laid down with such distinctness that it only needs a single eye to see it, and a devoted heart to tread it. "Then shalt thou inquire, and make search, and ask diligently." This surely is simple enough.

But some of the citizens might say, "What have we in the north to do with error taught in the south?" Thank G.o.d, there is no error taught amongst us; it is entirely a local question; each city is responsible for the maintenance of the truth within its own walls. How could we be expected to examine into every case of error which may spring up here and there all over the land? our whole time would be taken up, so that we could not attend to our fields, our vineyards, our oliveyards, our flocks, and our herds. It is quite as much as we can do to keep our own borders all right. We certainly condemn the error, and if any one holding or teaching it were to come here, and that we knew of it, we should most decidedly shut our gates against him. Beyond this, we do not feel ourselves responsible to go.

Now, what, we may ask, would be the reply of the faithful Israelite to all this line of argument which, in the judgment of mere nature, seems so exceedingly plausible? A very simple and very conclusive one, we may be sure. He would say it was simply a denial of Israel's unity.

If every city and every tribe were to take independent ground, then verily the high-priest might take the twelve loaves off the golden table before the Lord and scatter them here and there and every where; our unity is gone; we are all broken up into independent atoms, having no national ground of action.

Besides, the commandment is most distinct and explicit--"Thou shalt inquire, and make search, and ask diligently." We are bound, therefore, on the double ground of the nation's unity and the plain command of our covenant-G.o.d. It is of no possible use to say there is no error taught amongst _us_, unless we want to separate ourselves from the nation; if we belong to Israel, then verily the error is taught amongst us, as the Word says, "Such abomination is wrought _among you_." How far does the "you" extend? As far as the national boundaries. Error taught at Dan affects those dwelling at Beersheba.

How is this? Because Israel is one.