November, 1935
T H E K I N G ’ S B U S I N E S S
412
the rivers of blood that have flowed and are still flowing from the veins o f Israel would never have flowed. The fulfillment o f a great prophecy would have been completed: “ The battle bow shall be cut o ff: and he shall speak peace unto the heathen [i. e., “ the nations” ] : and his dominion shall be from sea even to sea, and from the river even to the ends o f the earth” (Zech. 9 :10 ). With the peace of Jerusa lem would have come the peace o f the world, and the world’s present turmoil, with demon-inspired dictators on thrones of power, would not b e ! What a momentous day that was, when Israel’s King came riding down the side of the Mount o f Olives upon a meek and lowly ass! But what a momen tous day that is going to be, when Israel’s “ K ing of K ings , and L ord of L ords ” shall come riding down through the heavens to the Mount o f Olives on a magnificient white charger that foams and leans against his bits (c f. Rev. 19:11-21)! Hasten, O hasten, Lord Jesus f ¡A world again about to be drenched with the blood o f even little children, needs Thee! Comet Men may ask: If the Jews upon that momentous day had given official recognition to the Christ, and had placed the crown upon His brow, how then would the prophecies have been fulfilled that He must die that week? And, whence the cross for the blood of atonement for our sins ? W e can only reply, first, that, in such a case, the prophecies would have been written otherwise than they were. It must be remembered that the prophecies were not arbitrarily written, and then their fulfillment a matter of compulsion. The prophecies were written under the inspiration o f God who knew beforehand what men, in the full exercise o f their freedom o f will, would do. The offer o f the kingdom on that day was bona fide! As for the shedding of the blood of atonement, it is unthinkable that the holy and just God would have com pelled the Jews against their wills to crown the Lord with thorns instead o f with glory. If, in the freedom of their wills, they had crowned Him with glory, then, with the faith o f Abraham, we can only say: “ My son, God will provide himself a lamb fo r a burnt offering.”
everlasting peace that goes with the kingdom o f the heavens, spurned that offer, and insisted that those should be censured who dared to cherish such a hope. Need we wonder that the King, “ when he was come near, beheld the city, and wept over it”— bursting into tears of uncontrol lable anguish? Looking upon Jerusalem, He addressed the city thus: “ If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day [Lit., “ on this day” ], the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time o f thy visitation.” Thus was the King from heaven rejected. Thus was the kingdom o f God refused. But “ the eternal purpose [of God] which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord” was not to be set aside. God’s oath was back of a promise to David, and that promise must stand. The establishment of the kingdom o f the heavens, with the Son o f David upon His throne, could only be postponed until the day comes when the Stone (o f Nebuchadnezzar’s dream) shall crash forth from the heavens and grind to powder those that resist the eternal purpose o f God (Dan. 2 :34, 35). M en M ay A sk Men may ask: Suppose that upon that day, instead of rejecting the offer of the Messiah, Israel had crowned Him King? Suppose Jerusalem had known “ the time o f [her] visitation” ? Had Israel received her King on that fatal day, the entire history of the world for the past two thou sand years would be a wholly different story. Titus, the Roman, would never have dug his trench about Jerusalem, battered down her walls, and tortured and destroyed her children. T. Annius Rufus, in the days o f the Roman Emperor, Hadrian, would never have run his plowshares through its streets, leaving not one stone upon another. All
Three "Perplexing Questions
[Continued from page 406] Judah from the lost ten tribes. Their min istry was to all the Israelites then in the land, and certainly a Jew is an Israelite. In Luke 1 :80 we read of John the Bap tist that “the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day o f his showing unto Israel.” According to your view, this should read “Judah” in stead of “Israel,” since John the Baptist also confined his ministry to those who were, then in the land. In John 1 :31 the Baptist says o f his Lord that he “knew him not: but that he should be made mani fest to Israel, therefore am I come baptiz ing with water.” But our Lord was made manifest only to the Israelites then in the land, whom you would insist upon calling Jews, and to whom you would deny this term “ Israel.” In John 3 :10 our Lord calls Nicodemus “a master of Israel,” though in verse 1 the record calls him “a ruler of the Jews.” It is true that Judas Iscariot was the only representative of the tribe of Judah among the apostles, and it is significant that it was he who sold his Master (also of the tribe o f Judah) to His enemies; and it is also probably true that we ought to be more careful in making the distinc tion to which you refer. And yet I think
you will agree that the distinction is not always made even in the Scriptures. There is another sense in which the word “Jew” is used, where Paul writes in Ro mans 2:28 and 29 that “he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is-a Jew, which is one in wardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.” But the word “Israel” is used with simi lar significance in Galatians 6:16, where the apostle pronounces a benediction upon “the Israel of God.” III. JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH AND WORKS Question: How can justification by faith alone be a true doctrine when James 2:24 declares plainly that justification is by works and not by faith only? Answer: There are two justifications: one by faith without works, and the other by works and not by faith only. The for- [Continued on page 439]
i i . JEWS AND ISRAELITES Question: Are Jews and Israelites the same ? It seems to me that we should dis tinguish between them, for while Judah rejected Christ, Israel never did so, for they were already out o f the land when He visited the earth. Answer: The distinction you suggest is sometimes found in the Bible, but the rule is not in v a ria b le. Often the term “Israel” occurs in a generic sense as including the whole nation—Judah, Ben jamin, Levi, and all the other tribes; for example, in Matthew 8 :10 our Lord said He had not found so great faith, “no, not in Israel.” In view of this statement, it would be difficult to substantiate your proposition that Israel never rejected the Saviour, while Judah did. In Matthew 10:6 Christ sends His messengers only to “the lost sheep of the house o f Israel.” Since their ministry was confined to the land o f Palestine, it is evident that these lost sheep of the house of Israel were the people then residing in the land and known as Jews. Certainly the messengers^ were not to hunt out those who had joined
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs