“Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another; and so much the more, as ye see THE DAY APPROACHING” (Heb. 10:25).

This verse sets forth the need for assembling together and exhorting one another, and it states that the need increases as we see THE DAY APPROACHING. I take it that THE DAY refers to the Day of the Lord, the time when MAN’S DAY will be over and the Lord’s righteous reign will commence. Scripture tells us that preparatory to the Lord’s 1,000 year reign there will be a time of tribulation which increases in intensity as the second coming of Christ draws near (Matt. 24:21-31). I truly believe that we are on the threshold of that period and that we are seeing all about us events that are “setting the stage” for this time of trouble. Whether we cast our eyes upon the social scene, the religious scene, or the political scene, all join to tell us the same thing: the tribulation period is near.

This period is also the 70th week of the famous prophecy of 70 weeks given to Daniel (Dan. 9:24-27). In verse 27 of this prophecy we learn that this week is begun by the making of a peace treaty. Many expositors believe that it will be made by the head of the revived Roman Empire (or perhaps an amalgamation of European nations, many of which were included in the original Roman Empire) with the Jews who are once again settled in the land of Palestine. Now is it not striking that this is exactly what the world is presently striving for, that is, peace in the Middle East. And is it just coincidental that many national leaders are saying that once the Persian Gulf crisis is settled the Israeli-Arab conflict will be settled next? Even Iraq’s President Hussein has sought to link peace in Palestine with peace in the Gulf.

One thing about the prophecy in Daniel 9 has confused me for some time. Verse 27 reads, “He shall confirm the covenant with many for one week” (that is, a week of years, or seven years). Why would any world leader make a peace treaty with another nation for a limited period of time such as seven years? A clue to this was recently provided by Henry Kissinger in an article in the January 28,1991, issue of Newsweek. Exploring possible approaches to peace between Israel and the Arab nations once the Persian Gulf War is over and assuming the defeat of Iraq, he proposes that Israel return certain territories “to Arab control for a specified amount of time, say five to ten years.” It is beyond the scope of this article to go into further detail on Mr. Kissinger’s proposals; it just struck me that here was an example of an interim, limited-time treaty, just like that mentioned in Daniel 9.

How clear it is that we are seeing THE DAY APPROACHING! And if that DAY is approaching, we know the rapture—the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ to raise up the dead and the living saints to go to be with Himself (1 Thess. 4:13-18)—must be imminent, for I believe that the rapture precedes the tribulation period (Rev. 3:10).

Surely we are living in exciting times! But they are also solemn times in which we need to “watch and be sober” (1 Thess. 5:6). Oh! how we need such encouragement in these dark days! So may we be found in the company of the saints (whether for prayer, for Bible study, for open ministry meetings, etc.) as often as we can, and may EACH OF US seek to encourage one another. We need each other!

“Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon the holy city to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. Know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the Prince, shall be seven weeks and threescore and two weeks; the street shall be built again and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for Himself” (Dan. 9:24-26).

This prophecy given by the angel Gabriel to the prophet Daniel is of great interest and importance. As to the meaning of the term “weeks,” it is clear from history that nothing like this took place within a period of 70 literal weeks, or 16 months. The word itself means “something divided into or consisting of seven parts.” If we interpret these ‘weeks’ as sets of seven years rather than sets of seven days, we shall see that this prophecy has a beautiful correspondence to historical fact.

What about the date of commencement of the 70 weeks? It is stated by Gabriel to be “from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem” (verse 25). In the book of Ezra we have a decree by Cyrus and another by Artaxerxes in the seventh year of his reign; but both of these are concerning the house of God in Jerusalem, and hence neither satisfies the terms mentioned by Gabriel. However, passing on to Nehemiah, we find that “in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes” he issued letters commissioning Nehemiah to go to Judah that he might build it (Neh. 2:1-8). It has been ascertained by scholars that the 20th year of Artaxerxes most likely coincides with the years 454 or 455 B.C.

The expressions in Dan. 9:24 concerning the 70 weeks or 490 years plainly look onward to the full re-establishment of Daniel’s people and city in blessing. The transgression for which they have been scattered will be ended. Jerusalem having “received of the Lord’s hand double for all her sins” (Isa. 40:2), her iniquity will be pardoned and everlasting righteousness, God’s righteousness, will be brought in (Isa. 51), and the holy of holies will once more be set apart.

In verse 25 the period of 70 weeks is divided into three portions—seven weeks, 62 weeks, and one week. The first portion undoubtedly comprises the period occupied in rebuilding Jerusalem and the wall in Nehemiah’s day, for the end of the verse expressly speaks of the “troublous times” during which this was performed (see Neh. 2:19; 4:1-23; 6:1-19). Next we have 62 weeks which reach “unto the Messiah the Prince.” That is, adding the 49 years occupied in the restoration of the city, there would be 483 years until Christ. It must be carefully observed that the expression is general, that neither the birth of Christ, nor His anointing for His mission, nor His death is specified. Some, taking the date of the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem as 454 or 455 B.C., calculate that the 483 years terminated with the death of Christ. (This calculation assumes, what indeed is now commonly accepted, the year 4 B.C. for the birth of Christ and consequently 29 A.D. for His crucifixion.) Had the Messiah been received, the Jewish nation would have been at once established in the kingdom. But instead of that He was rejected, was cut off, and the kingdom and its glory—and along with these the fulfillment of the last portion of the 70 weeks—were as a consequence postponed.

In connection with Messiah’s being cut off, the prophecy goes on to say: “And the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary, and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined” (verse 26). In Daniel 7 we find that the fourth kingdom, the successor to the Grecian Empire led by Alexander the Great, which is to complete the times of the Gentiles, is the Roman Empire. And this kingdom will have no earthly successor but will, in fact, be displaced by the kingdom of the Son of Man (Dan. 7:13,14). While to outward appearances the Roman Empire seems to have passed away forever, Scripture shows that in the end times it will be revived in some form (see Dan. 7; Rev. 13 and 17), and will assume the form of ten kingdoms, confederated under one imperial head—the little horn of Daniel 7 or the first beast of Revelation 13. Moreover, it is clear in the Scriptures that it was at a Roman tribunal, with Pilate as judge, that the Lord Jesus was sentenced to the death of the cross.

Notice, then, that it does not say in Daniel 9 that “a prince shall come and destroy the city and the sanctuary,” but that “the people of the prince that shall come” shall do so. In other words, “the prince that shall come” applies to the future, and, as will be seen in the next verse, is indeed the imperial head of the revived Roman Empire in the last days. The “people” are identified with him because they are Romans of the same kingdom that is yet to reappear, and of which this prince will be the leader. What we have then in this passage is the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in 70 A.D. as God’s judgment upon the Jews for their rejection and crucifixion of their Messiah. Our Lord Himself several times spoke of this sorrowful event and always connected it with His own rejection (Matt. 22:7; 23:37-39; Luke 19:41-44). The Lord Himself said that the Jews “shall fall by the edge of the sword and shall be led away captive into all nations; and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Luke 21:24).

It is now apparent why the last of the 70 weeks is separated from the previous 69. Within one week (seven years) of the death of Christ the 70 weeks spoken of by Gabriel had run their course. Had the Jews repented of having “killed the Prince of life,” Christ would have established at once His kingdom and brought in all the blessings spoken of in Dan. 9:24 (see Acts 3:14-21). But they knew not the time of their visitation (Luke 19:44). As a consequence the course of the 70 weeks has been interrupted, and God does not count time while His ancient people on earth are out of their inheritance and scattered over the globe. There is therefore a blank, so to speak, in Jewish history, an interval during which the nation, though still watched over, has no recognized relationship with God. But, blessed be His name, “Through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy” (Rom. 11:11). For it has pleased God to use this very interval for the unfolding and accomplishment of His eternal counsels in Christ concerning the saints who are to be joint heirs with Christ, and to form His body and His bride. It is precisely this interval, wherein time is not reckoned, which forms the period of the Church; and when this period is ended, God will again put forth His power for the blessing of the chosen earthly people (see Psa. 107:1-3).

“And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate” (Dan. 9:27). It will be perceived that an immense interval is to be interposed between verses 26 and 27. Verse 26 refers to the death of Christ and God’s judgment upon Jerusalem in 70 A.D., while verse 27 passes on to a time after the period of the Church is closed, when the Jews, though in unbelief, will be again in their own land.

The first thing to be decided in verse 27 is who is the person who makes a covenant with the many. Adopting the translation of the KJV, “the covenant,” some have hastily concluded that it is Christ Himself, neglecting to notice that the covenant mentioned is only made for seven years. However, it is now agreed by all scholars that the words should be translated, “a covenant,” and this at once shows that it could not be the Messiah. Indeed, the proper antecedent of the pronoun “he” is “the prince that shall come” (verse 26). What is asserted, therefore, is that the future head of the revived Roman Empire will make a covenant with “many” (or better, “the many”), that is, with the mass or majority of the Jews who at that time will be again in their own land.

The mention of the sacrifice and the oblation puts it beyond doubt that Jerusalem is in question, and that the temple has been rebuilt. This prince will then enter into an alliance with the Jews, professedly as befriending their cause and as protecting them from their adversaries. And it should be well observed that the term of this covenant is one week—that is, for the 70th week. Other scriptures allude to this covenant: “Wherefore hear the word of the Lord, ye scornful men who rule this people which is in Jerusalem. Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us, for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves” (Isa. 28:14,15). It would appear that it will be the fear of another adversary, “the overflowing scourge” (generally identified as “the Assyrian” of Isaiah 10,14, and 31 and “the King of the North” of Daniel 11), who will drive these “scornful men” into the arms of the imperial head of the Roman Empire. It must also be considered that the Antichrist will at this time have his seat and sway in Jerusalem, and that he will act as the prophet—he is also called “the false prophet”—to the prince of the Empire (Rev. 13; 19:20). It will thus be, as led by him, that in fear of their terrible adversary, the Assyrian, they will accept the treaty of alliance proposed by the head of the revived Roman Empire.

At the outset, as noted in Isaiah 28, all will promise well, and the Jews will delude themselves with the thought that they have secured themselves from all possible danger. Shutting God out, they will lean upon the arm of the most powerful monarch of the world. Of whom therefore should they be afraid? But the very one in whom they trust becomes their enemy, for, false to his own covenant, “in the midst of the week” (that is, at the end of 3½ years) “he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease. ” And not only this, but “on account of the protection of idols there is a desolator, and until the consummation that is determined there shall be poured [judgment] upon the desolate” (a preferable translation of the latter part of Dan. 9:27).

Not only will this prince cause the daily sacrifices to be removed, but also his own image will be erected by Antichrist and will be endowed with seemingly miraculous powers (Rev. 13), and further, Antichrist himself will, as God, sit “in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God” (2 Thess. 2:4). The Lord Himself refers to this awful fact when He speaks of the abomination of desolation to be set up in the holy place (Matt. 24:15; Dan. 12:11).

The situation can be summarized in this way: The Jews at this time will have returned to their own land and, though for the most part in unbelief, they will have rebuilt the temple and restored the temple services. Antichrist, one coming as the Messiah, will be received as their king. Under his leadership, when threatened by the power of the Assyrian, they will make a treaty with the head of the western Empire. After 3½ years this prince breaks his covenant and abolishes the temple services. With daring profanity, the Antichrist causes an image of the prince to be erected in the holy of holies and demands that divine honors should be rendered to him instead of to Jehovah. God then uses the Assyrian as a rod to break the guilty people to pieces; they are twice guilty—in rejecting Christ and in again accepting idolatry after the house had been swept and garnished. The Jews will be the objects of unceasing judgment and Jerusalem will be given up to the fury of her oppressors.

This brings us to the end of this prophecy, but not to the end of the story. Elsewhere we are told that at the close of this night of great tribulation for the Jewish nation, their Messiah will appear, and “will destroy in this mountain [Zion] the face of the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all nations. He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of His people shall He take away from off all the earth: for the Lord hath spoken it” (Isa. 25:78). (From Daniel the Prophet.)

I sit in my study on January 26, 1991, contemplating the headlines of the past nine days:

“War in Gulf.”

“The War Widens.”

“U.S. Pounds Iraq, Hunts Missiles.”

“U.S. Losses Rise in Hunt for Iraqi Missiles.”

“Iraq Torches Kuwaiti Oil.”

“The Pounding Goes On.”

A multitude of thoughts course through my mind in connection with this tragic situation:

I pray for our troops in the Gulf area, that the Lord will protect them and—more importantly—that the Holy Spirit will bring many of them to a saving knowledge of Christ.

I pray especially for the born-again troops and chaplains over there, that they may be mightily used of the Lord to bring the gospel of Christ to their comrades.

I pray for Presidents Bush and Hussein and the leaders of the other involved nations, that our nations might once again, by the mercies of God, be able to “lead a quiet and peaceable life” (1 Tim. 2:2).

I think about the prophecies in the Old Testament about the great conflict in the Middle East during the tribulation period that will set the stage for the return of the Son of Man with His saints to set up a kingdom of peace upon this earth.

I think about Isaiah’s prophecies concerning the Assyrian, and Daniel’s concerning the King of the North and wonder if Mr. Hussein could in fact be that prophetic personage.

I think about how imminent the rapture—the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ for His redeemed saints—must be in light of the biblical prophecies concerning the end times and all that is going on today in the Middle East and the world in general.

I think about how blessed I and my fellow Christians are, for in the midst of dwindling prospects for world peace (until the millennial reign of Christ), how wonderful it is to have peace with God and the assurance of eternal life as a result of being justified by faith (Rom. 5:1).

And then my thoughts turn from the big war—the Persian Gulf conflict—to the many smaller wars that are being waged daily throughout the world as well as right here in our own country:

The wars being waged by outlaws against the citizens of our country, resulting in 21,000 murders, 94,000 rapes, 1.5 million other violent crimes (armed robbery, etc.), and 12.6 million property crimes (burglary, auto theft, etc.) in 1989 alone (compared to 58,000 killed and 153,000 wounded in the entire 8.5 years of the Vietnam War).

The wars being waged on our city streets and highways by drunk drivers against the rest of the citizens, accounting for an estimated 50% of the total 43,000 deaths due to motor vehicle accidents in 1989.

The morality (or rather, immorality) wars being waged by citizens to broaden the legalization of abortion, pornography, and gay rights, to withdraw accreditation of private schools that dare teach a creationist viewpoint, etc.

And from these smaller, less publicized—but very real and devastating—wars, my thoughts turn to the even more private and even less publicized wars that go on daily behind closed doors of individual households:

Brothers and sisters battling over what they inherit from their parents.

Teenagers battling their parents for permission to use the car, to listen to rock music, or to participate in various prohibited activities.

Parents battling their children to get them to put down the Nintendo and do their schoolwork and household chores.

Husbands and wives striving with each other for the upper hand or the last word, pitting their egos against each other, continually bickering or else not speaking to each other at all (a silent battle that can lead to greater casualties than a noisy one).

With regard to the little household wars, my thoughts and concerns turn particularly to the verbal, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse of children and spouses.

Are these millions of little wars that go on daily—largely unnoticed by the public at large—any less tragic than one big war that directly affects millions of troops and citizens?

A sister in Christ recently wrote me concerning the relationship with her unsaved and abusive husband: “My stomach is wrenched from emotional pain, and fear and loneliness are constant.” This too is tragic!

Another sister shared with me how her husband had been physically battering her for 20 years, beginning even before the marriage ceremony. This too is tragic!

A young brother complained to me that his father—a born again Christian and leader in the local assembly—frequently belittled his children as well as his wife, often in public. This too is tragic!

Earlier this month I was trying to help a youthful employee of a local business who had lost his car keys and had searched inside and outside the building for two hours, but in vain. He told me that his father had another set of keys at home, but that he would rather commit suicide than admit to his short-tempered, abusive father that he had lost the keys. This too is tragic!

In 1985 this country was rocked by the report of a nationwide survey that an estimated 22 percent of adult Americans had been victims of sexual abuse as children—that’s about 38 million people. The public is just beginning to be made aware of the equally large problem of physical battering of spouses. It has been estimated that in the U.S. three to four million women annually are beaten—severely enough to receive police and medical attention—by their husbands, ex-husbands, or lovers, and some 3,000 die as a result. Sadly, this is not at all a phenomenon confined to non-Christians and alcoholics. A study has shown that in Christian homes, 16 percent of the women reported abuse by their husbands, and in a quarter of these, or 4 percent altogether, the abusive treatment involved physical battering.

I believe that God sometimes allows the big wars to break out in an attempt to reflect back to us the millions of smaller wars and household battles that rage on unabated and take their toll on such a tremendous number of individuals— including many Christians—around the world. I have no doubt that there is a common set of attitudes and ambitions that underlie both the big international wars and the little street and household wars. The Old Testament Scriptures tell us: “Only by pride cometh contention” (Prov. 13:10). And in the New Testament we read: “From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members? Ye lust, and have not; ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain; ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not. Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts” (Jas. 4:1-3). Just as in olden days—about 3,400 years ago—when “every man did that which was right in his own eyes (Judg. 17:6), and as in every age, “we have turned every one to his own way” (Isa. 53:6), so today “doing one’s own thing” is the “in thing.”

We all hope that the big war in the Persian Gulf area will be over quickly; but even if — by the mercies of God — it is, I fear that the little wars will continue unabated. So as we pray to the Lord for the safety of our troops and for a quick end to the hostilities in the Middle East, let us at the same time pray for God’s protection on one another from the smaller wars such as those being waged by criminals and drunk drivers, and let us pray also for those involved in the still smaller, more private, household wars, especially those who are known to us.

Finally, I urge that each of us do some serious soul-searching before the Lord as to whether we personally may be the antagonist in one of the little wars. Before we start throwing darts at a Saddam Hussein dart board, let us see if there might perhaps be just a little bit of Saddam Hussein within ourselves.

FRAGMENT “The Lord He is God in heaven ABOVE” (Deut. 4:39).

“And UNDERNEATH are the everlasting arms” (Deut. 33:27).

Where is God? He is above us as Creator and Sovereign. The loftiest place is His by right. He who made all things is far above all that He made — supreme and transcendent.

Where is God? He is beneath His own. Many a weary and perplexed saint has found relief as he realized that the God of eternity was beneath him, bearing up and sustaining him. Those arms are unfailing and everlasting. From their mighty grasp no foe, whether demon or man, can wrest us.      G.M. Landis

Because of the Persian Gulf War, the longstanding Israeli-Arab conflict, and the prominent place the Middle East has in biblical history and prophecy, it might be of interest and profit to our readers to learn a little about the Arabs and their predominant religion, Islam. We trust that this will be of particular interest and help to any of our readers who have the opportunity to share the gospel with Islamic neighbors, fellow-students, or colleagues at work.

First, let us define a few terms:

Arab: The term means “desert dweller” and today refers generally to the people whose ancestors were native to the Arabian Peninsula and are now widely scattered throughout surrounding lands. The following are generally considered as Arab nations today: Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, and Tunisia, as well as many lesser nations along the southern and eastern border of Saudi Arabia. The term also applies to the Palestinians who live in Israel. Other nations such as Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Indonesia are predominantly Muslim (see definition below), but are not considered Arab nations.

Islam: The term means “submission” or “surrender” and is the name of the religion or way of life popularized by the prophet Muhammad (or Mohammed) in the 7th century A.D.

Moslem or Muslim: Different spellings of the same word meaning “one who submits” (to the majesty and will of God), and denoting an adherent of the Islam religion. Today, “Muslim” is the preferable term and we shall use this word henceforth.

Mohammedan: An adherent of Islam; same as “Muslim.” This term is not used by Muslims themselves; one should not use this term in front of a Muslim person unless one wants to make a quick enemy.

Koran or Qur’an: The term means “recitation.” To Muslims, this is the word of God dictated by the angel Gabriel in the Arabic language to the prophet Muhammad who in turn recited and taught it to others. The Qur’an was transmitted orally and not written down until 12 years after Muhammad’s death. The Qur’an consists of 114 chapters (or “surahs”), each of which is divided into verses.

Origin and Capsule History of the Arabs

The Arabs are considered, along with the Jews, as Semitic peoples, that is, descendants of Shem, the son of Noah. Most Arabs claim descent from the patriarch Abraham through his son Ishmael (remember that “Arab” means “desert dweller” and Ishmael and his mother Hagar were sent away to live in the wilderness, Gen. 21:8-21). Some may have descended from Abraham through his son Midian (note in Gen. 37:28 the close relationship between Ishmaelites and Midianites) or his grandson Esau or Edom. The Arabs who migrated to Egypt, Libya, Assyria, and Babylon mingled with the Hamitic tribes in those places (Gen. 10:6-14). (It is intriguing that President Saddam Hussein of Iraq has claimed for himself the titles of Sennacherib II and Nebuchadnezzar II after the renowned kings of ancient Assyria and Babylon.)

Prior to the 7th century A.D. the Arabs were polytheists. Most lived in small nomadic clans and recognized only the authority of the clan sheikh. Inter-clan disputes over water and pasturage were common. The most advanced Arab communities were at the oases of Mecca and Medina (now in Saudi Arabia). Muhammad was born in Mecca around 570 A.D. About 610 he supposedly received revelations which formed the basis of the Qur’an and Islam. Muhammad preached to the polytheists of one God and of the need for man to strive for goodness. He won a number of converts but aroused the opposition of most of the inhabitants of Mecca.

Muhammad then accepted an invitation to go and arbitrate in strife-torn Medina in 622. In Medina, laws for religious life, family life, and other social concerns were “revealed.” Gradually Muhammad welded the various clans of Medina and the other immigrants from Mecca into one community. From Medina Muhammad waged war against Mecca until in 630 Mecca capitulated and accepted Islam. Kaaba, which had been a pagan shrine, was transformed into a shrine of the new faith.

Following the death of Muhammad in 632, Arabs began invading the neighboring territories which were part of the Byzantine (to the west) and Persian (to the east) Empires. Syria, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, and North Africa were all conquered by the Arabs during the 7th century. The Arab empire continued to expand in the 8th century, moving into Spain and the areas now known as Pakistan and Afghanistan. Non-Arabs began to convert to Islam. All Muslims were considered equal religiously and politically, whatever their race or national origin (an attitude that Christians would do well to adopt). However, Arabic became the official language of the entire empire. Baghdad was founded as the capital city of the empire around 763.

Civil wars between various segments of the empire which began in the 9th century led to the effective end of the Arab empire as a political unit by 945. Even though various parts of the former empire were now ruled by independent kings and princes, Islam and Islamic culture continued to spread.

Political stability of the Middle East was hindered by internal dissension and the invasions by Turks and Mongols from Asia and the Crusaders during the 11th to 15th centuries. The Turks were converted to Islam and seized Asia Minor from the Byzantine Empire in 1071. One of the Turkish tribes founded the Ottoman Empire which conquered Syria, Egypt, and parts of Iraq in 1517. The Ottomans also controlled parts of North Africa.

In World War I the Ottoman Turks aligned themselves with Germany and Austria-Hungary. The Peace Conference at the end of the war made all of the lands of the Ottoman Empire, except Turkey itself, mandates of France and Britain. Gradually the nations of the Middle East as we know them today achieved independence. Palestine was made a British mandate at the end of World War I. The British encouraged Jewish settlement in Palestine but promised the Arabs that such settlement would not impinge on Arab political or economic freedom. However, in the years between the World Wars the British allowed the Jews to become more and more influential in Palestine. When the Nazis came to power in Germany, the rate of Jewish immigration greatly increased. Because of increasing Arab unrest in 1939 the British agreed to limit Jewish immigration. After World War II the Zionists (Jews who wanted Palestine to be a Jewish state) and pressure from Britain’s allies forced Britain to allow unlimited Jewish immigration.

In 1947 Britain announced it would resign its mandate of Palestine as of May 14, 1948. The United Nations voted to divide Palestine into an Arab state and a Jewish state. But the Arabs were not satisfied with “half a loaf.” As soon as the British left on May 15, 1948, Arab armies from Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon invaded Israel. The Israelis overcame the Arab armies, retaining the land originally assigned to them and gaining half the land allotted to the Arabs as well. Later attacks (in 1967 and 1973) by Arab nations had similar results. Thousands of Arabs, the “Palestinians,” were evicted from what was to have been an Arab state and have become more or less permanent refugees in Israel.

The Palestinians and their comrades from neighboring Arab states continue to resent deeply the Israeli possession of the land of Palestine. The present Persian Gulf War, provoked by the Iraqi invasion of neighboring Arab state, Kuwait, seems to be—in part at least—tied to a determined effort of the Arabs to regain Palestine from the Jews. Prophecies of Scripture suggest that the struggle between Israel and the Arabs will continue to escalate and involve other nations from the west, north, and east until the culmination at Armageddon (Isa. 28:14-18; Ezek. 38; Dan. 8:23-25; 11:36-45; Rev. 16:12-21) and “the coming of the Son of Man … in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matt. 24:27-30).

Basic Tenets of Islam

Muslims believe in (1) Allah who is unique, all-powerful, and merciful to all Muslims; (2) angels and evil spirits; (3) the Qur’an as the revealed word of Allah; (4) Allah’s messengers and prophets, including the three great prophets— Moses, Jesus Christ, and Muhammad—the latter being the last and the seal of the prophets; (5) the day of resurrection; and (6) destiny, that is, that whatever Allah decrees, either good or evil, must come to pass.

There are five pillars of Muslim practice: (1) repetition of the words, “I witness that there is no God but Allah, and that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah”; (2) ritual prayers; (3) paying of ritual alms; (4) observance of the fast of Ramadan; and (5) pilgrimage to the Kaaba in Mecca.

The Muslims are taught to have a certain respect for the Old and New Testament but are warned that much of the Bible has been corrupted from the pure revelations originally given by God through Moses, Jesus, and others, and that the Qur’an corrects the corrupt doctrines supposedly taught by orthodox Christianity and Judaism.

The Muslims’ thought about God is that He is absolutely unique and inconceivable by man: “Whatever your mind may think of, God is not that.” This, of course, flies in the face of Jesus’ statement, “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father,” and John’s statement, “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him” (John 14:9; 1:18). Muslims absolutely reject the thought of the holy Trinity (surah 4:171); they say that the greatest sin that man can commit is to worship anything else but Allah or to associate any other being on the same level with Him.

Many pious Muslims carry a rosary with 99 beads, each one standing for a name of God. They constantly affirm that God is great (“Allah akbar”) in their prayers, and because of His might and power, they bow in worship, taking the attitude of a slave. God’s grace and mercy are also constantly affirmed in their prayers, and they believe that God will have special pity on Muslims, even though they sin. Muslims have great difficulty with the New Testament concepts of God as Father and Jesus as Son of God (surah 6:101); these truths that are so precious to Christians conjure up in the mind of the Muslim the blasphemous picture of God being married to Mary and having Jesus as offspring.

Muslims profess to believe in Jesus, but it is not the same Jesus that Christians believe in. According to the Qur’an and Islamic tradition, Jesus was one of the three great prophets; He was not the Son of God (surah 4:171); He was a special creation of God (not the Creator Himself!), born of the virgin Mary (surah 3:47); the miracles He performed were only through power delegated to Him by God, and not by His own intrinsic omnipotence. The Qur’an teaches that Jesus was not crucified: “They said [in boast], ‘We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah’—but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them… for of a surety they killed him not” (surah 4:157). The next verse states, “Allah raised him up unto Himself”; most Muslims believe that God took Jesus to heaven just before the crucifixion and that a substitute, perhaps Judas Iscariot, was crucified in His place.

Having deliberately and openly rejected the atoning death of the Lord Jesus Christ as the basis for salvation, the Islamic religion emphasizes that man must work for salvation. He must pray, go to the holy place or mosque, and observe a series of prohibitions, taboos, and commandments in order to earn eternal life. Muslims believe in a coming day of judgment when God will take a balance and weigh the good and evil deeds of each person. If the good deeds outweigh the bad, the man will go to heaven; if otherwise, he will go to hell. Heaven, to the Muslim, is a place where he will be able to satisfy his fleshly lusts with wine, women, and song.

In the next issue, God willing, we will suggest ways of sharing the gospel of Christ with Muslim neighbors, classmates, fellow-workers, clients, etc. whom the Lord brings into our lives.

“This do in remembrance of Me” (1 Cor. 11:24). Mark the touching simplicity and grace of these words. The Lord does not say, “This do, and live for Me,” nor ‘This do and devote thy all to My service.” He asks nothing that could occupy us with ourselves and make us distressed and sorry at our inability to come up to what He desires. He only asks us to remember Him. This is touching in its simplicity! It is like going to a drawer and taking from it some simple object connected with one dearly loved in days gone by. Memory alone does all the work needed. Thus He puts into our hands bread and wine, His body thus in death for us, and if the memory alone is free all shall be well. Tender thoughts, joy, and praise shall all follow in due course.

FRAGMENT

Lord, we would ne’er forget Thy pain,

Thy bloody sweat, the shameful tree—

The curse Thy soul did once sustain,

From sin and death to set us free!                                                                              James G. Deck

Let us turn for a few moments to that solemn night in which our blessed Saviour bequeathed to His apostles and to us the precious legacy of His love. Oh, what tones of perfect love, grace, patience, goodness, and wisdom were heard that night, the atmosphere of which was saturated with the leaven of Satan’s and men’s wickedness! May that night  more constantly be present to our consciences and to the memory of our hearts! Then indeed, when sitting down at the table then prepared for us by our Good Shepherd, we shall better understand the meaning of His tender dying  injunction, “This do in remembrance of Me.”

It was the darkest of all nights—a night the like of which had never been on this earth, nor ever will be again. It was that night when Judas went out to betray his Master with a kiss for the price of thirty pieces of silver. The Holy Spirit Himself distinguished that night from all the dark and terrible nights that had been in this world before, by those words, “And it was night” (John 13:30). We are also reminded of this by the words of the Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul: “The Lord Jesus, in the night in which He was delivered up, took bread” (1 Cor. 11:23 JND).

What a moment when Jesus sat down with His apostles to eat the last Passover with them before He died! Richer  blood had to be shed now—the blood of the Lamb of God—  to procure for them and for us the blessings founded upon it. Before Him was placed the roast lamb, of which He Himself was the blessed antitype. What was the train of His thoughts when the Holy Lamb of God looked at the type before Him? Was it His own sufferings? Yes, but in what way?

The one who sat at the table with the twelve was the same who made the world. Before the foundations of the earth were appointed, He was His Father’s daily delight, and His delights were with the sons of men (Prov. 8:30,31). That which now engrossed His mind and heart was, not the anticipation of His sufferings (the hour of Gethsemane had not yet come), but those for whom He was about to suffer and to die. It was not the travail of His soul, but those that were to be the fruit of it, all whom the Father had given Him out of this world, whom He was going to redeem by His blood. They and we, fellow believer, filled the foreground of His mind and heart before He suffered. And they—and we—are the first of whom He thought and spoke after He had been heard from the horns of the unicorns. “I will declare Thy name unto My brethren; in the midst of the congregation will I praise Thee” (Psa. 22:21,22). “Go to my brethren and say unto them, I ascend unto My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God” (John 20:17).

And did not Jesus know what manner of men they were for whom He was going to suffer? As to that nation for whom He was to die, “He came unto His own, and His own received Him not” (John 1:11). As to His disciples—His apostles—He knew that one of them, who was eating His bread at that very table, had lifted up his heel against Him. And He was aware that the chief of His apostles, with whom He had entrusted the keys of the kingdom of heaven, would in that night deny Him three times. And He knew that all His disciples, the one “whom He loved” and who was then leaning on His bosom, along with the rest, would forsake Him in the hour of deadly peril. He knew it, and He told them. He knew and foreknew every thought and movement of their treacherous, proud, deceitful, and inconstant hearts—and of ours. He knew it all and He felt it too, as only He, perfect God and perfect Man, could know and feel it. But His hand, in the perfect knowledge of all this, did not hesitate even for a moment to take the bread and break it, and likewise also the cup after supper.

And what came next? “And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest” (Luke 22:24). What wretched hearts we have that betray themselves even at such a table and at such a moment, in the very presence of Him who made Himself of no reputation, but humbled Himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross!

But the purposes of the obedient Son could not be shaken by the treason and pride of men’s rebellious hearts. When He came into the world He said, “Lo, I come to do Thy will, O God” (Heb. 10:9). When in service on earth, it was, “My meat is to do the will of Him that sent Me, and to finish His work” (John 4:34). And at the end, in Gethsemane, it was again, “Nevertheless, not My will but Thine be done” (Luke 22:42).

Such an obedience could not be turned from its path by the defection of His own all around. Nor could His purposes of divine love be shaken or modified by the wretched selfishness in the hearts of His disciples—or in ours, Christian reader. No, His obedience was as unswerving toward His Father as His love was unchanging toward those whom the Father had given Him. His love had its motive in Himself who is love, not in anything in us or in our hearts, which are the opposite of love—selfish. Not that we loved Him, but He loved us, and gave Himself for us (Gal. 2:20).

(From “The Gospel and the Church” in The Bible Treasury, Vol. 19.)

Our Lord well knew how prone we are to forget. The disciples had witnessed the feeding of the 5,000, yet the Lord had to reprove them for forgetting that miracle. How significant, then, that it was on the eve of His betrayal that Christ instituted His memorial service. Surely it was no mere circumstance that found the disciples together for this special hour (Luke 22:14). This points to the important truth that the nature of the Lord’s Supper is communal, while baptism, the other major ordinance of Christianity, is individual. Nor was it a mere accident that following the resurrection, the Lord’s day, the first day of the week, was soon chosen for its weekly observance.

The Lord’s deep concern for this holy ordinance is further demonstrated by the fact that each of the three synoptic gospels (that is, Matthew, Mark, and Luke) record almost the same words as used by Christ. Moreover, a special revelation from heaven was given to the apostle Paul, and again we note the same words as in the Gospels.

My thesis for this paper is that the failure of the Christian testimony, both personally and corporately, is due, at least in part, to an incomplete understanding of the meaning and purpose of the Lord’s Supper and to the common indifference toward the serious consequences to all who take of the emblems without “discerning the Lord’s body” (1 Cor. 11:26,34). The corollary inference follows: we cannot expect God’s full blessing in our worship and evangelistic efforts until we are right in our personal and corporate relationship with Him.

The first crisis developed in the early Church when news came to Paul that division was threatening at Corinth. The apostle immediately wrote his first letter to the Corinthians in order to instruct and reprove this assembly for disorders there: following human leaders, allowance of moral evil, and misuse of the Lord’s Supper, “not discerning the Lord’s body.”

Philip Melanchthon, one of the Reformation theologians, asked this question in 1544: “Is there anything more sorrowful, more deserving of tears, than that the Lord’s Supper should be used as a subject of strife and division?” He had good reason to be sorrowful. A few years before, Luther and Zwingli had met at Marburg Castle to continue the discussion of the question of the meaning of “this is My body… this is My blood.” The first Protestant conference failed, and tragically, Luther refused to take the proffered hand of fellowship from his fellow brother in Christ. There would never be another opportunity to heal the breach of the two great branches of Protestantism which they represented.

If Philip Melanchthon were alive today, he might well shed tears because of the indifference generally toward the purpose and meaning of the Lord’s Supper. I must confess that for years I partook of the supper in an unworthy manner, failing to make progress in the Christian life, a “roller coaster” style of experience, having “a wandering mind, chasing butterflies” (Spurgeon). In all this I was blind to the seriousness of the memorial ordinance (1 Cor. 11:27-30).

William Kelly in The Lord’s Supper asks, “How can a Christian partake in an unworthy manner? If the day comes and you merely go to it as a religious habit, it seems very like an unworthy partaking of it.” Familiarity breeds contempt where the soul is unexercised; where self-judgment is kept up, the spirit of worship is strengthened and enlarged.

The Lord’s Supper should not be a perfunctory religious exercise, nor is it a sacrifice with the bread and wine becoming the actual body and blood of Christ as some claim. What, then, is the true meaning of it?

Clearly, the preeminent purpose of the Lord’s Supper is to provide a focal point for the united worship of Christ by His redeemed saints. “As often as ye eat this bread and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He come” (1 Cor. 11:26). The bread and the wine are symbols of the body and blood of Christ: ‘Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you. . . . This cup is the new testament in My blood” (11:24,25). Thus, the gathered saints are reminded afresh by the loaf of bread and the cup of wine of the suffering and death of the Lord Jesus Christ for their sakes. Such a reminder and the meditations that flow from it lead in turn to the fresh outflow of worship from the hearts and mouths of the saints so gathered. It is not only the worship of individuals but it is communal worship—the saints united together in worshiping the Lord whose death they are showing forth. Thus are the hearts of the saints not only drawn out to the Lord in this act of worship, but drawn to one another as “one body in Christ, and every one members one of another” (Rom. 12:5).

But I believe there is even more to it—an aspect of our receiving something from the Lord at the same time as we give to Him our worship. Writing 940 years ago, Berenger of Tours expounded the view that “the body and blood of Christ were present not in essence but in power. The substance remained unchanged; faith on the part of the recipient was needed to make the power effectual” (quoted by E. Lutzer in All One Body, p. 104 ). Or as a brother stated at a recent Bible conference, “Christ ministers Himself to us through the bread and wine. “

As we think of Christ’s words, “This is My body given [given up, totally surrendered] for you,” we are led to realize what was achieved by that giving; for example, “And you . . . hath He reconciled in the body of His flesh through death” (Col. 1:21,22), “We are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ” (Heb. 10:10), “Christ… bore our sins in His own body on the tree” (1 Pet. 2:24). And as we think of His words, “This is My blood . .. shed [poured out] for many,” we are led to realize what was achieved by that pouring out; for example, “Being now justified by His blood” (Rom. 5:9), “We have redemption through His blood” (Col. 1:14), “Having made peace through the blood of His cross” (Col. 1:20), “The blood of Jesus Christ . . . cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7). Then, as we meditate on all that was achieved by the giving up of Himself and the pouring out of His blood, and on the horrible suffering involved in that giving and pouring out, do we not receive a fresh and powerful sense of Christ’s infinitely profound love for us, and a correspondingly fresh desire and motivation to obey and serve Him?

Much more could be written about the significance of the Lord’s Supper. For example, we read in 1 Cor. 10:17 that the one loaf also symbolizes the unity of all believers as Christ’s body: “We being many are one bread and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread.” Also, in Matt. 18:20 we learn that by gathering together unto the name of the Lord Jesus Christ the believers are blessed with Christ’s real spiritual presence with them. There is enough meaning and food for our souls and spirits in the Lord’s Supper to prevent it from ever becoming a mere ritual or something we attend only because we think we should.

Through grace and a more complete knowledge, why should we not look forward with joy and anticipation to remembering Him on the Lord’s day morning with those whose hearts are united in love for Him and for one another. May we relive the experience of those disciples of whom Luke tells us, “He was known of them in the breaking of bread.” Here grace received through the power of realizing His spiritual presence, I believe, will flow through us each hour of each day of the coming week. More and more we shall find ourselves separated from those things that are not pleasing to Him.

Understanding and laying hold of these things will profoundly change our lives. In turn, continuing growth toward maturity and realizing the power of the Holy Spirit living out through us the life of Christ will help to demonstrate to the world the meaning of the one body.

Ed. note: In the preceding article the suggestion has been made that in addition to our giving worship to Christ at the Lord’s Supper, Christ at the same time ministers to us. Stanzas and lines of some hymns that are commonly sung in observance of the Lord’s Supper are now given to illustrate ways in which Christ may minister to us at such a meeting. These hymns are taken from Hymns for the Little Flock (denoted by “LF”) and Hymns of Grace and Truth (“GT”).

In “On That Same Night Lord Jesus,” we find some beautiful expressions concerning the Lord’s suffering: “The depth of all Thy suffering/ No heart could e’er conceive;/ The cup of wrath o’erflowing/ For us Thou didst receive;/ And oh! of God forsaken,/ On the accursed tree./ With grateful hearts, Lord Jesus,/ We now remember Thee.// We think of all the darkness/ Which round Thy spirit pressed,/ Of all those waves and billows/ Which rolled across Thy breast. …” The hymn concludes with the suggestion of a practical response in our hearts to such meditations: ‘Till Thou shalt come in glory,/ And call us hence away,/ To rest in all the brightness/ Of that unclouded day,/ We show Thy death, Lord Jesus,/ And here would seek to be/ More to Thy death conformed,/ While we remember Thee” (G. W. Frazer, LF #245).

“We Bless Our Saviour’s Name,” concludes with the stanza: “O let Thy love constrain/ Our souls to cleave to Thee!/ And ever in our hearts remain/ That word, ‘Remember Me'” (J. G. Deck, LF #146).

“Lord Jesus! We Remember” also concludes with the practical result in our lives: “From sin, the world, and Satan,/ We’re ransomed by Thy blood,/ And here would walk as strangers,/ Alive with Thee to God” (J. G. Deck, LF #149). In a similar vein, “O My Saviour Glorified” concludes with: “O my Saviour, glorified,/ Turn my eye from all beside,/ Let me but Thy beauty see—/ Other light is dark to me” (F. C. Jennings, GT #56).

Isaac Watts pointedly shows the incompatibility of the contemplation of the wondrous cross of Christ and His transcendent love with our lust of the flesh, lust of the eyes, and pride of life: “When we survey the wondrous cross/ On which the Lord of glory died,/ Our richest gain we count but loss,/ And pour contempt on all our pride.// Forbid it, Lord, that we should boast,/ Save in the death of Christ, our God;/ All the vain things that charm us most,/ We’d sacrifice them to His blood.// Were the whole realm of nature ours,/ That were an offering far too small;/ Love that transcends our highest powers,/ Demands our soul, our life, our all” (LF #283).

“And when the hour was come, He sat down, and the twelve apostles with Him…. And He took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them…. Likewise also the cup after supper…. And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest” (Luke 22:14-30).

The disciples were around the table and Jesus at the head. Looking upon them there as, indeed, He is now looking upon us here, He saw all that was within them as well as what they actually did and said. Scripture records that during that memorable night they showed that they were men of like passions with ourselves—changeable, unreliable, sometimes impulsive in love and earnest zeal, and at other times carried away by foolish and wicked thoughts.

The disciples should have known what was before their Master. Only a few days previous, Jesus had said to the twelve, “We go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn Him to death, and shall deliver Him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify” (Matt. 20:17-19). Jews and Gentiles would unite in His crucifixion and death. He had told them on three separate occasions of His death (Matt. 16:21; 17:22,23; 20:17-19). You would have thought that their interest in and expectation of this startling event would have been quickened on that night—the Passover night. What did the blood of the lamb typify? Did it not recall the hour of judgment and death passed long ago in Egypt? Did not the Lord say when He sat down with them, “With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer” (Luke 22:15)?

Had the apostles considered seriously what the Lord had said to them about His rejection and death, would they not have entered that room with solemn hearts and chastened spirits? Would they not have been filled with a foreboding sense of the sorrow and pain before their beloved Master? We find, however, that they were engaged in petty quarrels, struggling among themselves as to who should be greatest among them (Luke 22:24). Observing, I suppose, the disciple whom Jesus loved taking the place nearest to Him, their jealousy was aroused. Why should John be there? Why not another of them?

What a grief this painful altercation must have been to our Lord! He was contemplating the morrow when He would bear their sins in His own body on the tree—just such selfish sins as these. They could not understand His loving purpose. They were unable to enter into the grief before Him. Such lack of spiritual feeling and sympathy was the sorrowful result after His three years’ service with them. There was for Him no comforter, no sympathizer, none that cared, even among His own. Do not let us judge them too harshly; let us rather judge ourselves. Are we never guilty of the indulgence of unworthy thoughts at the table of the Lord? In the most solemn moments, when the Spirit of God is making to live again before us the hour of suffering at Calvary, thoughts may even then arise in our hearts, altogether out of harmony with the subject of the Spirit of God. We must know that often we ought to bow our heads in shame when our Lord looks round upon us as we are eating His Supper, because thoughts intrude into our hearts which ought never to be there at such a holy season.

(From The Institution of the Lord’s Supper as Recorded in the Gospels.)

“If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there remember that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift” (Matt. 5:23,24). “Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup” (1 Cor. 11:28).

When is it that we are to examine ourselves with respect to partaking of the Lord’s Supper? I fear that all too often—if we bother to engage in such self-examination at all—we don’t think of doing so until we are in our chairs, one minute before the meeting is scheduled to begin. If such examination yields nothing in our hearts or lives needing to be poured before the Lord in confession, all well and good. But if otherwise, what then? All too often, that which we find in our lives needing to be confessed before the Lord also needs to be confessed to one or more other persons.

The verse quoted above from the Sermon on the Mount has a distinctly Jewish setting; nevertheless the principle is most applicable to ourselves at the present. What if I remember, either during or just prior to the beginning of the remembrance meeting, that another brother or sister in Christ in that same room may still be angry with me because of the way I spoke to or acted toward him/her during the past week? How can I enjoy that remembrance feast in fellowship with the other saints gathered there, well knowing that one is not on speaking terms with me because of my bad behavior? And how is the other person going to enjoy the time, knowing that I am there in the room?

It would be difficult and awkward to try to make confession and bring about reconciliation at that time. Therefore, how much better it would be to begin the examination process the evening before, if not earlier. Thus there would be opportunity for reconciliation with the offended brother or sister via a telephone call or visit. Even better would it be to engage in such self-examination on a daily basis. We should keep short accounts not only with God but with our fellow saints and indeed with all persons, as regards our sins and offenses.

What if the offense occurs just before the meeting, such as during the drive there? I know from personal experience the wretchedness of sitting in a meeting for the remembrance of the Lord after having had a spat with my wife or children during the drive to the meeting. More than once have my wife and I exchanged notes of confession and contrition and of forgiveness during such meetings.

Finally, suppose that, for whatever reason, you have hard and negative feelings toward another person with whom you are in fellowship. Perhaps that person has never confessed an offense to you (maybe he/she isn’t even aware of having offended you). Instead of going on, week after week, harboring bitter feelings toward the other, you have a responsibility according to Matt. 18:15-17 to go to that other person arid “tell him his fault.” Or it may be that no specific offense has been committed; you just don’t like the person. In either case, it is incumbent upon you to judge your bitter feelings, confess them to the Lord, freely forgive your fellow saint if there is a specific offense requiring forgiveness, and be reconciled to your brother or sister in Christ. The One who said, “Father forgive them, for they know not what they do,” while He hung on the cross would surely like to find that same attitude among those who are gathered together to remember Him in His death.

“And it shall come to pass, when ye be come to the land which the Lord will give you, according as He hath promised, that ye shall keep this service. And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? that ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of the Lord’s Passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when He smote the Egyptians and delivered our houses” (Exod. 12:25-27).

The Lord’s thoughtful care for the dawning intelligence of the children in the families of His people of old is strikingly brought out in these verses. The Passover was the yearly reminder of His divine interference when their fathers were slaves in Egypt, and brought before them, year after year, the great truth of redemption by blood. It was to be expected that the younger generation, growing up, would look on with wonder, and sometimes amazement, as the various parts of the Passover ritual were carefully carried out by their elders. The question would naturally spring to young lips again and again, “What mean ye by this service?” And the parents were to answer in accordance with the testimony of the Lord. The last Passover feast that God ever recognized was that celebrated by Jesus Himself, with His disciples, in the guest-chamber at Jerusalem. The typical Passover came to an end that night, but on the same evening He instituted the great central ordinance of Christianity, the Lord’s Supper, the memorial of His mighty love and infinite sacrifice. Directions for the keeping of this feast are given clearly in the New Testament, and older believers, who have gone on in the ways that be in Christ, should always be able to give a scriptural reason for everything connected with the observance of the breaking of bread in remembrance of the Lord Jesus Christ. For now, as of old, the younger generation is still likely to ask, “What mean ye by this service?”

Children growing up in the families of believers, accustomed from early childhood to the simplicity of scriptural order, will nevertheless, when definitely converted themselves, soon begin to question either inwardly, or with the lips, the why and the wherefore for each detail which their eyes behold or their ears hear; and as babes in Christ (though older in years) are born into the family of God and brought out of the world into association with His separated people, they, just as naturally, ask the same question as the children of old, “What do you mean by these things?”

It is my desire, as simply as possible, to attempt to answer some of these questions, having in mind not well-instructed and mature saints, but the youngest of God’s children who desire to walk in obedience to His Word.

Perhaps one of the first questions that will be asked is, “Why observe this feast so frequently when, in many places in Christendom, it is but at rare intervals that what is commonly called ‘the communion’ is celebrated?” For answer we reply that Scripture gives us no distinct commandment, as in the case of the Passover, regarding the particular times the Lord’s Supper is to be observed. The Passover was to be celebrated once a year, but when the Lord instituted the Supper, He implied much more frequent observance when He said, “This cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me” (1 Cor. 11:25). It is the Lord’s desire that His people should often show His death in this way, calling to mind frequently His love and sacrifice for them. In the earliest days of the Church’s history, the Christians broke bread daily, but when the first days of transition passed and the new dispensation was fully established, we get the Scriptural example in Acts 20:7, “Upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread….”

In the apostolic days, it is well-known that this was the recognized custom. Now this is not a commandment, but it is a word from the Lord, and He has said, “If a man love Me he will keep My words” John 14:23). A devoted heart does not ask, “How seldom can I do this and yet have the Lord’s approval,” but “What does His Word show to have been the established order in early days?” The Book answers, “On the first day of the week” and also states, “As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till He come” (1 Cor. 11:26). Therefore, we delight to come together on the first day of the week to remember Him.

“But when so coming together,” the children ask, “why is there no officiating clergyman to dispense the elements and take charge of the service as generally in the denominations around us?” Our answer is that we cannot find anything like this in the Bible. There is no intimation anywhere, either in the Acts or in any of the Epistles, of any such officer in the early Church. Believers came together as brothers and sisters in Christ. The Lord Himself has said, “Where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:20). Faith lays hold of that and recognizes His presence. He, the Head of the assembly, is today as true to His Word as in the early days. Wherever two or three are found scripturally gathered He is in the midst to take charge by the Holy Spirit, and to lead out the hearts of His people in their remembrance of Himself. Of old, in that upper room, when the time came to break the loaf and pass the cup, His own lips pronounced the blessing and His own hands gave to His disciples. Just as He used the members of His literal body of old to bless and give the emblems, so now He uses the members of His mystical body—the Church—as it may please Him. Any brother going to the table to give thanks and to break the loaf or pass the cup, simply becomes, for the moment, as hands and lips for the blessed Lord Himself. There is no human officialism required; the simpler the better. It is Christ with whom we desire to be occupied, and He who goes to the table does so as acting under Him. If anything more were necessary, any ordination or official position, the Word of God would somewhere indicate it; but in regard to this we search its pages in vain. “One is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren” (Matt. 23:8).

“Why do you have one unbroken loaf upon the table as the feast begins, and why is it afterwards broken?” Because the one loaf pictures the precious body of our Lord Jesus Christ in its entirety, and the breaking signifies His death. Also we are told, “We being many are one bread [or literally, one loaf], and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread” (1 Cor. 10:17). To cut the bread into small pieces, as is done sometimes, is to lose sight altogether of this striking symbolism. As it is passed from one to the other, after having been blessed and broken, each again breaks for himself, thus indicating his communion with the body of Christ.

“What is in the cup, and why do all drink of it?” The cup contains the fruit of the vine. It speaks of the precious blood of Christ, the price of our redemption. “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). Just as the rich clusters of grapes are cast into the winepress and crushed to give forth what Scripture calls the blood of the grape (Gen. 49:11; Deut. 32:14), so Christ endured the judgment of God for our sins, and, when crushed in death, His precious atoning blood flowed forth for our salvation. As we drink in solemn silence we recall, with grateful hearts, the mighty cost of our redemption.

“Why is not so sacred and precious a feast open for everyone? Why such care to see that only those who know what it is to be saved, and who are seeking to walk with God and to confess His truth, gather together about His table?” It is because He will be sanctified in them that draw nigh to Him (Lev. 10:3). This sacred observance is for those who have a common interest in the death of Christ and have been saved by His blood. In 1 Cor. 5:9-11 we are distinctly directed to walk in a path of separation from evildoers, and regarding certain ones we are told, “With such a one, no, not to eat.” This clearly includes the Lord’s Supper, and shows us the importance of care as to those received. Again in 1 Cor. 6:1-20 and 2 Cor. 6:11-18 we have impressed upon us the importance of walking apart from the world if we are to have fellowship in the things of God. And while it is true that each individual is responsible to examine himself, in the fear of the Lord, before sitting down to eat of that loaf and drink of that cup, there is also grave responsibility resting upon the assemblies of Christians to maintain a fellowship that is holy and consistent.

“Why is there no previously arranged program as to the order of this service, the hymns to be sung, the prayers to be offered, and ministry to be given out? Is not time wasted in silence which might be occupied in teaching or expounding the Scriptures?” It is important, first of all, to understand that we do not come together to pray, nor yet to minister, nor to listen to teaching or exhortation, and certainly not simply for singing hymns and enjoying one another’s fellowship. We come together to meet the Lord Himself, and to be occupied with Him, to offer Him the worship of our hearts, and to remember what He passed through for us. Let me put it this way: suppose that on a given Lord’s day morning it were known definitely that our Saviour, in Person, would be present in the meeting-room, and that all who were there from, say, 11:00 to 12:30 would have the great privilege of looking upon His face; how do you think real Christians would act on such an occasion? Would we not enter the room with a deep sense of awe pervading our spirits? Surely there would be no lightness of behavior, no frivolity, no worldly joviality manifested as we came together. Nor would we be coming to listen to someone preaching or expounding. Our one desire would be to see Him, to fix our adoring eyes upon His blessed Face, and, if we spoke at all, it would be to rehearse something of His sufferings for us, and the gratitude and worship that would fill our hearts as we recalled the agony endured on the cross, and now beheld His glorious countenance. At such a time one can well understand how all might join in a burst of melody, singing together some hymn of praise in which His wondrous Person, His past sufferings, and His present glory, were celebrated! But surely anything like mere fleshly formalism would be altogether out of place. If one ministered audibly, it would be simply to praise His name or to bring to the mind of saints some portion of the Word that would give a better understanding and apprehension of His Person or work. No one would have the effrontery to set Christ, as it were, to one side, by taking the place of a teacher of others at such a time, unless indeed directly requested by the Lord to minister.

Now, if it be borne in mind that, when we thus come together as gathered to His name, Christ is just as truly present as though our human eyes beheld Him, we will realize how we ought to behave in the house of God on such occasions. There will be room for praise and for reading a portion or portions of the Word of God that will bring more vividly before our souls the object for which we gather. But any brother would be decidedly out of place who sought to occupy us with lengthy expositions of Scripture, or exhortations as to conduct that have no bearing on the object for which we came together. The sense of awe which comes over the soul consciously in the Lord’s presence will put a check upon the flesh, and any participating, either in the giving out of a hymn or in leading the assembly in vocal thanksgiving, or reading a portion of the Word, will be very sure that it is the Holy Spirit Himself who thus guides. If there be periods of silence there will be no wasted time as we all sit gazing with rapt, adoring eyes upon Himself whom we have come to meet.

It will be readily seen also that prayer of a general character, as for the salvation of sinners, individual blessing, and temporal matters, however proper in a prayer meeting, is quite out of place while we are gathered simply to remember Him. After the partaking of the loaf and cup, the meeting may possibly take a more general character, but certainly not before.

If this one thought be clearly fixed in heart and mind, that we gather to remember Him in subjection to the Holy Spirit, all else will soon be regulated.

In closing, let me press upon all who thus come together the importance of being present on time, that there may be no distraction as the meeting goes on. A little care as to this will often go a long way towards a precious and happy meeting. On the other hand, individuals coming in late and distracting the attention of others may greatly hinder the worship of the heart. It is a pitiful commentary on the state of many believers that they can be punctual every weekday morning at their places of business or employment, and yet be among the stragglers on the first day of the week when the hour set is much later than that at which they frequently go to work. Heart for Christ is what is needed to put all right.

“This do in remembrance of Me” (Luke 22:19). Sometimes we hear well-meaning believers saying, “Why isn’t so-and-so in fellowship and remembering the Lord? The Lord asked us to remember Him and that’s a command.” I have often wondered if the Lord’s words really should be thought of as a commandment to be obeyed in a legal fashion. I rather believe that it was an expression of the deep desire of His heart, intended to evoke a loving response from our hearts. The deeper our realization of our precious Lord’s infinite love toward us, expressed in giving Himself for us, the greater will be our desire to unite with our fellow saints in the remembrance of Him in His death, and the greater will be the outflow of praise and worship from our hearts and lips. If we are attending the meeting simply as a matter of obedience and routine, it will not bring much satisfaction to our Lord nor blessing to ourselves.

While it is a wonderful privilege to be in fellowship with our fellow believers, and to participate in that wonderful expression both of fellowship with one another and of worship and thanksgiving to our Lord in remembering Him in His death, a great responsibility is involved as well. Each one thus in fellowship is accountable to the entire assembly as well as to the Lord, and his or her behavior and manner of life will reflect upon the entire assembly. If there are those who do not feel ready to accept such a responsibility and public accountability for their behavior, I believe it unwise to urge and cajole them to take their place at the Lord’s table. Let them rather be drawn to that place by the sense of the wonderful love of their Lord who gave Himself for them.

“And Abraham said unto his eldest servant (a type of the Holy Spirit) of his house, that ruled over all that he had, ………. thou shalt go unto my country, (Mesopotamia) and to my kindred, and take a wife unto my son Isaac. ……Beware thou that thou bring not my son thither again.” Gen. 24:2,4,6.

Question— Why must Isaac, the risen son, remain exclusively in Canaan, and on no account to leave it?  

Answer — Isaac must remain in the place which is the well-known type of heaven; at least, during that transaction, the bridegroom abides only in Canaan. The Son of the Father, while the bride is being called, has no relation with the world, and is seen exclusively in heaven at the right hand of God …… We have not only been blessed with Him but with Him in heaven in the presence of God. Such is our blessing who are in the place whence He has been ignominiously cast out; and our blessing is in Him now, while He is on the right hand of God. During the Call of the Church, Christ sustains no direct relationship with the earth; He is simply the glorified Head on high . …. . It is in heaven, and only in heaven, that Christ is viewed in relation to the bride. It is from heaven that the Holy Ghost comes down; it is for the marriage supper of the Lamb in heaven that the bride is destined, and it is while the risen Bridegroom is in heaven that she is in process of being formed here below, before He comes to receive the saints to Himself and present them above.

First of all it may be well to define the term we use. What is mysticism?

It deals largely with ourselves, and our own state and apprehension of the truth. It is occupied not with divine realities themselves, but with how we become conscious of those realities, and of the way they work out certain results in us.

The Word of God deals with the state of His saints. It throws light upon the progressive work of the Spirit in our souls. All this truth, which we speak of commonly as subjective, is of great importance, and we do well to maintain it, firmly holding it in its true connection with the great objective realities themselves, since every action of the Spirit within us subjectively is in strict accord with the objective reality by which He works.

Mysticism, however, does not preserve the Scriptural order and balance as between these two sides of truth. In its eyes the subjective side appears so great that the objective realities are largely obscured. We say largely because it does not deny God’s revelation in Christ, nor the reality of the work He accomplished for us, nor that which He will yet accomplish for us at His coming again. It admits these things theologically, and then relegates them into the background of the picture in order that the foreground may be the more effectually occupied with the Spirit’s work within us. Consequently to the mystic this subjective side of things becomes the only thing worth consideration. The consciousness of the thing becomes in his thoughts virtually the thing itself. He talks therefore continually about his consciousness, his apprehension, his experiences; which is only another way of saying he is wrapped up in himself. He speaks of Christ, but views Him as the One who produces these impressions.

Nor is this all. If people could be found marked only by these characteristics, it is doubtful if the term “mystics” could be properly applied to them. The essence of mysticism lies in this, that the seat of authority is transferred in the mind of the mystic from the external ” Word of God” to the spiritual consciousness — the “spiritual man” — internal to themselves. Homage of quite an orthodox kind may be verbally rendered to the Scriptures, and yet they may be largely displaced. The spiritual conception of the mystic, who flatters himself that he is indeed a spiritual man, are all important to him. He soars above and beyond the Scripture. Its letter he disdains, even if he does not speak against it. It has little or no restraining effect upon the flights of his imagination. He quotes it of course, but only as supporting or illustrating or adorning his own conceptions of truth.  His conceptions become the primary things on which the main emphasis must be laid. Scripture must be interpreted in the light of those conceptions, and its words become of secondary importance.

At the opposite pole to mysticism lies a cold orthodoxy devoid of power. It is sadly possible to insist correctly on all the great objective verities of the faith without much exercise of conscience as to a positive entrance upon these realities in the power of the Spirit of God. Truth may thus be stated and Scripture correctly expounded without the warmth of the love of the truth. In this frame of mind people seem to fear what is subjective and experimental in ministry as though it in some way robbed them of truth itself, instead of it being only calculated to divest them of an easy-going mental acceptance of truth and of the self- complacency which goes with it, and plunge them into genuine exercise of heart before God. In all this tendency there is something poor and shallow, and earnest souls are by it repelled.

Mysticism has about it an apparent profundity of thought and utterance. It promises a far greater depth of understanding, which is alluring, and especially to minds of a certain contemplative type, fundamentally disposed towards introspection and self-occupation. Though the present age is one of turmoil and shallow reasoning, mysticism still makes its voice heard, and by its very contrast offers certain attractions. Hence we believe a few words of warning may be profitable, especially, as its ultimate tendencies have always been towards not only indefiniteness of doctrine and statement, but to the maintenance of teachings quite foreign to and astray from the Word of God. As before, so again it has led to grave and fundamental error.

Once again we take up our meditations on the life of young King Solomon, in connection with privilege and responsibility. As we do so we come again to some of the lovely expressions made by his father David in this 29th chapter of 1 Chronicles, while giving out instructions for the establishing of Solomon as king in his stead, and the building of the palace, etc. In verse 17 David says, “I know”. What a difference there is between guessing, thinking, and KNOWING. The blind man in John 9 could say, “I know”, and, added to that, Paul says, “I know”, in I Tim. 1:12. We often hear one of these phrases; “I guess so” or “I think so”, but our God would not have us to be “guessers” or “thinkers”. He wants us to have and enjoy definitely the knowledge of Himself and the Son of His love, our Lord Jesus Christ.

‘Well, now, what does David know? Ah! my brethren, listen. “I know also, my God, that thou triest the heart, and hast pleasure in uprightness.”  yes, most certainly, “PLEASURE IN UPRIGHTNESS”; that is, he has pleasure in those activities of ours which He sees and knows ”are done” with a sincere desire that His name may be honoured and glorified. And who knows better than He? He knoweth all things and so we cannot fool Him. Neither should we do or say things that will fool our brethren. “As for me, in the uprightness of mine heart”, ….. David had learned many lessons in his personal experience and therefore was in a position to give instruction and encouragement to one who was to take up where he was about to give up.

Knowing that this definitely is the principle on which our God works until His purposes are fulfilled, how grievous it is when those to whom we look fail and, so to speak, deny practically that which they have taught in principle. It was recently remarked, “If he is right now, then he was wrong for thirty odd years, and if he was right for thirty years, then he is wrong now”. Yes, and that is verily true, for the Word is like Himself — it is unchangeable. David willingly offered. He set the example and had the joy of seeing others do the same. So we are reminded of our blessed Lord, He “suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow His steps”. 1 Peter 2:21.

Then he goes on, in verse 18, with words which prove conclusively that he acknowledged the sovereignty, position, power, and relationship of our Lord. He expresses a desire for the people first and for Solomon second. What does he say? “Keep this forever in the imagination of the thoughts of the heart of thy people, and prepare their heart unto Thee: And give unto Solomon my son a perfect heart, to keep Thy commandments, Thy testimonies, and Thy statutes, and to do all these things, and to build the palace, for the which I have made provision.

After this be says to the people, “Now bless the Lord your God”. And so they did, bowing their heads and worshiping. Then they offered their sacrifices unto the Lord, and did eat and drink before the Lord that day With GREAT GLADNESS. They made Solomon king the second time, and Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord. Notice carefully this expression — “The throne of the Lord”. In other words, in the place which the Lord had made for him. And in that place he prospered. And that can be our daily portion, and will be if we are putting our blessed Lord in His place. Then we will be found in our place, and there will be obedience and submission to those things which are taught in the Word, for our spiritual progress. Oh, what blessing can be ours! Read verse 25. We see now in the remaining verses the climax and recording of the reign of David, Solomon being firmly established as king in his stead.

There is nothing, perhaps, that draws out true praises from the heart of faith to the Lord (the only one who is truly worthy of it), more than when the soul finds himself broken before the Lord and in His presence, as, for instance, with Isaiah (Isa.6: l-5), Job (Job 42:5-6), and David, as we see in Psalm 39.

In this regard the title of this Psalm is strikingly appropriate, for it is “To the Chief Musician, even to Jeduthun (meaning “Let them give praise”), a Psalm of David”. And while it is “A Psalm of David” (the beloved), each one of us who know the Lord can appropriate it for ourselves. And how akin to our own experiences we find it to be.

Who is there amongst us who have not desired to take heed to our ways and the words of our tongue (verse 1), but can we say that our resolutions were always carried out? How often we learn our frailty and vanity  (verse 4 and 5) by the things that we do and say that we “would not”. (Romans 7:19). We find that “(the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity” (James 3:6), and when argument with some enemy looms up before us, we would do well, as David did, to be “dumb with silence” (verse 2) and to hold our peace “even from good”. Instead, alas, how often we add fuel to the fire, instead of letting it die out. (Prov. 26:20).

David’s exercises of soul were not small. ln his dumb silence, he tells us, “My heart was hot within me, while I was musing the fire burned”. But notice, he still keeps his lips from speaking guile and lets his enemies speak on, while he only presents his trouble to the Lord.

And is it not interesting and instructive to notice how he does so? Verses 4—9 show us that while he knows the condition of every man (read verse 6), he occupies himself before the Lord only with his own frailty, weaknesses, and transgressions. He knew that without the Lord’s help and mercy he would be “the reproach of the foolish” (verse 8).He knew, too, the wicked could see the Lord’s chastening hand upon him, though only by way of fool-hardy criticism, instead of realizing God’s intended blessing from it. (Read Hebrews 12).

But David’s heart of faith knew the true hope God had given him (verse 7), and could say “My hope is in Thee”, though recognizing God’s consuming stroke upon him for correction, which he knew could go to such lengths as to result in fading beauty (verse 11).

Yet his heart was reached. To all this he could say “Selah” — “Stop and consider”. His chastenings were well worth considering. And so with his heart reached, he knew he could ask for and expect the Lord’s mercies. He does so and amidst his tears he begs the Lord to “spare me that I may recover strength, before I go hence, and be no more”, as far as this present life is concerned,(verses 12 and 13).How he wanted to be used of the Lord and to enjoy “the peaceable fruit of righteousness” after being properly exercised in his soul as to such personal dealing with the Lord that He alone knew were needful.

May each of us covet the spirit of brokenness and submission evident in David here and elsewhere in the Psalms.

R. Gerald Davis

FRAGMENT Love is the only power by which evil can be overcome. Most of the failings in our brethren could be overcome in this way, while they are only multiplied when we attempt to pluck them out by the roots. The same could be said of worldliness in dress, habits, or conversation. Often it is mere emptiness, which can be filled with the precious things of Christ, to the joy of the person who would resent as impertinence any attempt at setting him right.                               H. & F. 1893.

FRAGMENT In regard to Questions & Answers on page 58, I wish to add that when Rebecca was asked “Wilt thou go with this man?’* that “She said, I will go.” He (The Spirit of God) leads her home thru the wilderness a journey all across the desert, to be with him! to be with “Jesus Christ: whom having not seen, ye love; in whom though now ye see him not, yet believing ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory”                                                                      1 Pet. l:7,8 (F.W.G.)

SUGGESTED GOOD TIMELY READING

The Call of The Bride, W.K. (also one by W.T.P.W.)

Limits of Discipline, S.R.

Lectures on The Church of God, W.K.

Nicodemus is introduced to us early in the Gospel of John, and we do not see the last of him until near the close. Three times in all he is spoken of, and it does not seem difficult to see an advance in each occurrence. The most familiar, and may we not say the most important, is when he first came to the Lord Jesus by night (Jno. 3) — apparently from timidity, the fear of man — and acknowledged, “Thou art a teacher come from God!” The Lord’s answer goes to the bottom: “Verily, verily, 1 say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” It was no question of following a teacher, of acknowledging miracles, but the entire nature of man; he himself needs, must be, born anew, if ever he is to see or enter God’s kingdom — whether in its earthly display for Israel, or the heavenly home prepared for the Church and shared with other saints of former and later ages. How helpless, and in himself how hopeless, is man in face of this great necessity! And what infinite grace of the Lord to present along with this great fact of the cross, and life through the crucified One, provided in the love of God. John 3:16 is the fitting and divine companion to John 3:3. Thus Nicodemus is left with our Lord’s full testimony of his need and God’s provision for him, We do not know the immediate effect upon him, but we cannot fail to think it produced deep exercise and searching of heart.

We next see Nicodemus a member of the Sanhedrin, or council of rulers (Jno.7:50-52), where many of the Pharisees were seeking to make away with the blessed Lord. The opposition and enmity had been steadily increasing. Every act of power, every word of truth and of grace instead of softening their hearts, only made His enemies more determined to compass His destruction. Here at the Feast of Tabernacles, where His words of grace were so clear, and His testimony so unequivocal, they sent officers to arrest Him.. Returning without Him, the officers, in answer to the question, “Why have ye not brought Him?” reply, “Never man spake like this Man!” Again the Pharisees seek to put contempt upon Him: “Have any of the rulers, or of the Pharisees, believed on Him?” As though to answer their question, one of their own council speaks out, pleading at least for fair treatment for the Lord. And if they were willing to give a fair impartial examination of His acts and words, there would be but one result. Here at least Nicodemus comes out openly and claims the fairness which the law of God demanded when one was accused. He refuses to join in the persecution of one who was not proven guilty; may we not well believe he would have gone further and say  he knew He was innocent? But human and satanic hatred will not be denied. They must go on to the full accomplishment of their awful hatred. The holy Lord, to accomplish His Father’s will, does not use His divine power to thwart their wickedness indeed. He had come into the world to effect redemption by the sacrifice of Himself, and so goes to the cross without a murmur. Blessed Lord! Well could it be said of Him, “Having loved His own which were in the world, He loved them unto the end.” And so He goes on until the last prophetic word written of Him is accomplished, and He can say, “It is finished!” — finished all the predictions of His death, all the types and shadows, all the demands of a holy law broken by us; all that the glory of God required justly to let His infinite love and grace flow out to lost, guilty men. All was provided for this – all was finished.

But there, in the eyes of His enemies, is the lifeless body of One whom they branded as an imposter and a malefactor. It was the hour of apparent triumph, for Satan and his dupes. The world had its way. But just here at the time of the greatest darkness, the faith of Nicodemus shines out brightest. He, along with a rejected, crucified, lifeless Christ! By so doing, they proclaimed their faith in Him, and their separation from those who had rejected Him. And so may we not think of Nicodemus. as identified with the fragrant spices which he brought? Like Mary’s, the perfume was not only the tribute of love and devotion to die Lord, but a witness of a faith in Him which had at last shaken itself free from all fear of man, and in the darkest hour, apparently of the Lord’s defeat, proclaimed Him as the Victor, and offered the sweet savor of His victory as a worship and thank offering.

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints”.

                                                                                                                                         1 Cor. 14:33.

B.C.G. – Chapter xiv., verse 33 is on the same line; we know that this is the chapter that regulates the ministry of the Church when it comes together. It is a sample case. After giving all these directions, he says the reason is, “For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace.” In all the churches it is the same. How could the apostle say this – how could he vouch for the various gatherings if this were not so? It is not but that gatherings may differ in their spiritual condition, but there was but one order maintained. There was but one centre; but one order of the assemblies coming together. So he can speak for all the assemblies of the saints. Now this is specially to be noticed, for I was challenged more than once across the sea, and have been this side, as to this expression which has been used, as to the “circle of fellowship.” A person said to me: I do not agree with what some of you American brethren say as to the circle of fellowship. Well, I said, if you can give us a better name to express a divine fact, we will be glad for any good name, because we know the name is but human but the thing is divine, and we do not want you, in objecting to the name, to do away with the thing. Here is a circle of fellowship — here is an order that the apostle can vouch for — that if you leave Corinth and go to Ephesus you will find it there too. So we have got to look into it to see what this order is. If we go to Ephesus, what ought we to do? We bear a letter from Corinth, we go to the same fellowship in Ephesus that we leave in Corinth; we are in the fellowship wherever it may be. Some people, for convenience or other reasons, do not put in their claim elsewhere, and they say they do not belong there for the time. That is not true. The day they land at the other place they belong there.

S.R. — Yes, and are under the discipline of that place – of the saints as gathered there. We, for instance, have been under the discipline of the assembly at Toronto for the last three days; subject to the discipline of the House of God as expressed in the assembly of Toronto of which for the time being we form part.

B.C. G. — In connection with that, then, if we had presented something here that the brethren were assured was a very evil thing, and they protested against it, and we still held to it, then the next thing, inasmuch as the order of the Church of God is but one, there should at once be an appeal made from us to those we came from. Why? because they are responsible — they sent us in a sense, or commended us; so that would stop any such mischievous notion as that we should deal with evil short and sharp and cut people off before those they came from have a full opportunity to identify themselves with the matter. If you are right in taking us up for something we have presented here, then the brethren, in deference to them should have an opportunity to act with you in all that is done.

F.J.E. — In connection with the circle of fellowship, would you say now that in view of the failure that has come in amongst those professing to be and actually gathered out to the Name of the Lord, that “circle of fellowship” is confined to those who are holding to the truth of God as it was accepted when the movement first took place?

B.C.G. — Certainly.

F. J. E. — That is to say, to take ourselves, for instance: Is it not confined to that “circle of fellowship” apart from other companies of those who are called brethren?

S.R. – Certainly. We cannot vouch for other people maintaining that which we do not know they are maintaining.

F. J. E. – If that is the case, we would say we are in the “circle of fellowship” on what ground? For what reason?

S.R. — To maintain the truth which we find in the Scriptures.

F.J.E. – Then that practically condemns the other circles.

S.R.— It does, unquestionably, brethren, and I do not believe we ought to have the slightest hesitation in saying that we are where we are by conviction, and that by God’s grace we maintain in love and lowliness, but with all firmness, our separate position as gathered to the Lord’s Name in subjection to His Word, and that we look on our dear brethren in the sects, and on our dear brethren who are not, but who are practically forming sections in that way, we look on them all alike, we test them all by the Word of God. Some have more truth; some have less truth, but none of them, for one reason and another – none of them can have that which commends them to us as being on the ground of God’s Word simply and only. The only way we can leave the ground we occupy is by conviction that it is wrong and unscriptural. That is the only upright and conscientious way that we can change our position — that is not according to God, and take a position that is according to God, whether it be with some other company or if we have to stand alone.

Ch. 1:2-7 inclusive (Bride)

Ch. 1:8-11 inclusive (Bridegroom)

Ch. 1:12-14 inclusive (Bride)

Ch. 1:15 inclusive (Bridegroom)

Ch. 1:16 to Ch. 2:1 inclusive (Bride)

Ch. 2:2 inclusive (Bridegroom)

Ch. 2:3-10 ends with “My Beloved spake unto me” (Bride)

Ch. 2:10 begins with “Rise up” to Ch. 2:15 inclusive (Bridegroom)

 Ch. 2:16 to Ch. 3:11 inclusive (Bride)

 Ch. 4:1-16 ending with “may flow out” (Bridegroom)

Ch. 4:16 “Let my beloved come….fruits” (Bride)

Ch. 5:1 (Bridegroom)

Ch.(5:2 ending with “knocketh” (Bride)

 Ch. 5:2 “Open to me” to end of verse (Bridegroom)

Ch. 5:3-8 Incl. (Bride)

 Ch. 5:9 (Chorus)

 Ch. 5:10-l6(Bride)

 Ch. 6:1 (Chorus)

 Ch. 6:2-3 Incl.(Bride)

 Ch. 6:4-9 Incl.( Bridegroom)

 Ch. 6: 10 (Chorus)

Ch. 6:11-12 (Bridegroom)

Ch. 6:13 ending with “look upon thee” (Chorus)

 Ch. 6:13 “What will ye see in the Shulamite?” (Other Virgins)

 Ch. 6:13 “As it were the company of two armies”(Chorus)

Ch. 7:1-9 Incl. (Bridegroom)

 Ch. 7:10 to Ch. 8:4 Incl. (Bride)

Ch. 8:5 balance of verse (bridegroom)

Ch.8:6-7:, Incl. (Bride)

 Ch. 8:5 ending with “upon her beloved” (Chorus)

 Ch. 8:8–9 Incl. (Chorus)

 Ch.8:lO-l2 Incl.(Bride)

Ch. 8:13 (Bridegroom)

Ch. 8:14 (Bride) I suggest, that in your Bible, you bracket these difference portions blue and red respectively, for bridegroom and bride.

The time came for two young eaglets to fly.

“Wake up!” the mother cried; but they were already clamouring with wide-open bills for their breakfast.

“Little ones,” she said, “what do you think is to happen today? You are to begin to fly.” They were quite delighted. Had they not watched their father and mother sailing through the skies, and did it not look most delicious? And they did it so easily; there was nothing difficult about it, certainly.

After breakfast, a long time was spent in pluming their feathers, when mother said, “Now, that will do.”

They all came to the edge of the rock on which their nest was built.

“Follow me,” cried the father, and he rose in the air. The mother followed, but the two young ones stayed sitting on the rock.

Mother came back. “Why do you not come?” she asked, “do as we do, and all will be well.” But was it enough to say, “follow me”? Must they find out how to do it themselves, or could she tell them?

“We were not ready,” they said.

“Come, then,” she answered, and flew, but still they did not come.

“Don’t you want to fly?” she asked.

“Yes, very much; we long to fly, but -“

The father scolded, the mother looked perplexed.

“Oh, mother, mother,” they cried; “you don’t mean us to throw ourselves down upon nothing!”

“On nothing?” asked the father 

.”Yes, father, on nothing; there’s nothing for us to fly on; we shall fall, and be killed.”

“What you call nothing is the air, the very thing that makes us able to fly.”

“But we can’t see it,” they said.

“No, and you never will see it, but you can feel it. Flap your wings, and you will feel it.”

So they flapped their wings; and one said, “I know what you mean, but it does not make me feel safe or happy, or ready to begin to fly on nothing.”

And the other said, “I don’t feel anything except my own wings!

What was to be done? They did want to fly; why were they so silly about not seeing, and not feeling? If they would only throw themselves down on what they called “nothing,” that very thing would hold them up, as they fluttered their wings, and carry them out of the shadow of the rocks and mountains into the glorious sunshine.

“Come,” said the mother, and she lifted them on her wings; but the little cowards made her promise not to drop them, and then they sailed with her in the air, and found out how lovely it was.

“Now you will try alone,” she said.

“No! no!” they cried, “not yet; take us again, and if you take us always, then we need not trouble to learn.”

“No, indeed!” said the father, “you idle little cowards, what are you afraid of? Fly, fly this minute! Fly because your father tells you to, and leave your seeings, and feelings, and nonsense alone. Fly, because I tell you to.” They turned to find their mother but she, brave bird, was hovering above, too fond of her little ones to let them lose the end of their creation by disobedience, and in another instant they were struggling and fluttering in the air, and then, as they flapped their wings, they found what they had called “nothing” was what saved and protected them.

It is a beautiful lesson in faith, the young eaglets learning to fly. Our wings are weak at first, but faith strengthens by use. Nor are we left to guide ourselves; our eye fixed on the Sun of Righteousness, He is our guide, and not only our guide, but our goal and our haven; for at the last we shall see Him “face to face,” and enter into the glory of His presence.

“As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketb them, beareth then on her wings; so the Lord alone did lead him, and there was no strange god with him.” Deut.32:11,12.

May we realize this royal independence of all but God, and learn how faith mounts up with wings as eagles by waiting on Him!

He giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength.                     Isaiah 4:29.

(Same-root word uses of redemption shown in italics)

“HE IS ABLE to SAVE COMPLETELY those that approach, to God thru him, ever living as he is to intercede for them.” Heb. 7:25 (W.K.)

“And lo, there was a woman, having a spirit of infirmity eighteen years, and was bent together,  and WHOLLY UNABLE to lift her head up ….. Jesus said to her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity . . . . and immediately she was made straight …. And this woman . . .. whom Satan hath bound, lo these eighteen years, ought she not to be loosed from this bond.” Luke 13:11,12,13,16. (W.K.)

“Who delivered us from the authority of darkness and translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of his love; in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” Col. 1:14 (W.K.)

“Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold …. but with the precious blood of Christ.” 1 Pet 1:18,19.

“By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Heb. 9:12.

“This Moses whom they refused …. the same did God send to be a ruler and a deliverer.” Acts 7:35.

“Having a desire to depart to be with Christ; which is far better.” Phil 1:23.

“Even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.” Rom. 8:23.

“Judge not…condemn not,.. forgive, and ye shall be forgiven. Give, and it shall be given unto you.” Luke 6:37,38) NOTE: Compare with the above such verses as Gal. 5:1 and Rom. 8:21 in respect to liberty and freedom. Ed.