« AnteriorContinuar »
bers of the priests, which looked toward the north ; and behold there was a place on the two sides westward. Then said he unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass-offering, and the sin-offering, where they shall bake the meat-offering, that they bear them not out into the outer court to sanctify the people.” And having then been shown four courts, the prophet adds, "and there was a row of building round about in them, round about them four, and it was made with boiling places un. der the rows round about. Then said he unto me, These are the places of them that boil, where the Ministers of the House shall boil the sacrifice of the people.” (xlvi. 19
- 24.) “And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord God, These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt-offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon." (xliii. 18.) It is also worthy of notice that provision is made for the change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to the eighth or first day : “Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves. And when these days are expired, it shall be, that, upon the eighth day and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt-offerings upon the altar, and your peace-offerings; and I will accept you, saith the Lord God." (xliii. 26, 27.) Concerning this temple we have seen it is the promise of the Lord by the prophet Haggai, “I will fill this house with glory;" * and I looked," says Ezekiel, “and behold the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord, and I fell upon my face." (xliv. 4.)
Once more let us ask, can all this be viewed as intimation of any thing else than the re-erection of the literal Temple, and the re-institution of sacrifice? We are not unaware of the arguments which have been founded on expressions in the Epistles; nor do we seek to conceal the fact that these expressions, taken by themselves, do seem to countenance the opinion that the ritual observances were only designed to continue until the introduction of Christianity. But it is to be remarked, that, in such cases, the argument is generally directed against the abuse of these ordinances; and expressions used, perhaps, concerning that abuse, may seem to bear against the continuance of the ordinance itself. But it would not at all affect the question
concerning Millennial sacrifice, even if it could be satisfactorily established that the observance of the Mosaic ritual was authoritatively discontinued after the death of Christ. But in reality we do not find any authoritative abolition of sacrifice in the New Testament; while the known practice of believing Jews generally, and of holy apostles in particular, demonstrate that there is in sacrifice itself nothing incompatible with the nature of Christianity.* So long as the Temple stood—that is, so long as it was possible to offer sacrifice agreeably to the prescribed will of Heavenso long did Jews converted to the faith of Jesus continue to present their offerings according to the law. It is said of those who witnessed the Saviour's ascension, that they afterwards “returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God." Luke xxiv. 53. Do we not read, that, nearly thirty years after, James and the elders' of Jerusalem thus addressed the apostle Paul? “Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of the Jews there are which believe, and they are ALL zealous of the law.” Acts xx. 21. We read also of Paul him. self, shortly before this,“ having shorn his head, in Cenchrea, for he had a vow.” Acts xviii. 18. And when a false rumour had been circulated, that this apostle“ taught the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs," upon the suggestion of James and of the elders of Jerusalem, to evidence the false hood of those things of which they had been informed concerning him, and that “all” might know “ that thou thyself also walkest orderly and keepest the law," did he not join immediately in charges with other four disciples under vow? (Acts xxi. 20—26) and “purifying himself with them, entered into the temple to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification until that an offering should be offered for every one of them”—the sacrifices, in such cases, including both lambs and rams. (Numb. vi. 14, 15.) When his christian friends at Ephesus pressed him "to tarry longer
• “These were practised by the Apostles themselves, constantly by such as lived in Judea, and occasionally by the rest. The real fault (of certain Jewish zealots condemned by Paul) was the depende ing upon them for salvation, in opposition to the grace of Christ.”. History of the Church of Christ, published by London Tract Society.' vol. i. p. 23.
time with them, he consented not; but bade them farewell, saying, I must, by all means, keep this feast that cometh, in Jerusalem.” Acts xviii. 20, 21. - And when falsely accused before Felix of having, contrary to the law, introduced Gentiles into the inner court of the Temple, he denied the charge, saying, “I came to bring alms to my nation and offerings, whereupon certain Jews from Asia found me purified in the Temple, neither with multitude nor with tumult.” Acts xxiv. 17, 18. And when afterwards sent prisoner to Rome, he could still aver to “the chief of the Jews” there, that he had “committed nothing against the people or customs of our fathers.” Acts xxviii. 17. Thus then we find that Jewish converts to Christianity, including eminent apostles, did not on their conversion deem it necessary to abandon the institutions of Moses. Nor can this be imputed to their ignorance of the spirituality of the New dispensation. Paul was not unacquainted with “ the genius of the gospel,” por unskilled in its minutest requirements. But we are here met by objectors with the assertion that Paul's conduct in this respect was merely to conciliate the affection of his brethren, the Jews. And was this to be purchased at the expense of an entire departure from Christian principle by “many thousands of believers? And was Paul one of those who would sacrifice the truth to a false principle of expediency? No, no. Willing as he was, for the good of others, to yield up his own convenience, his comfort, his liberty, his life itself, he deprecated as unlawful the principle of doing "evil that good may come;" and charged withslander” those who imputed it unto him. (Rom. iii. 8.) Had the apostle's only reason for following the law of Moses been a desire to yield to the prejudices of the Jews, on what principle are we to understand his refusal to bring Gentile converts under a similar obligation ? No less strenuously was this insisted for, by Jewish converts, than their being allowed themselves to adhere unto the law. But Paul and all the other apostles peremptorily rejected this demand. (Acts xv. 24.) So also while Paul, in compliance with the desire of the Jews, “took and circumcised” Timothy, “the son of a certain woman which was a Jewess, and believed ;" when it was demanded that Titus should submit to the same rite, to those who required this, the Apostle “ gave place by sub
jection, no, not for an hour," Titus " being a Greek."- Acts xvi. 1. Gal. ii. 3—5. The apostle must therefore have been influenced by another principle besides that of pleasing the Jewisa principle which led him to distinguish between the Jew and the Greek, exempting the one from an ordinance he imposed on the other. · And where then is the evidence of the entire and authoritative abolition of sacrifice, and its incompatibility with the Gospel of Christ ? And if believing Jews, under the gospel, thus adhered to the law of Mosès so long as the Temple stood, on what ground do we "reject the testimony of God” by His prophets, of
” the future re-erection of the Temple, and the re-institution of its ordinances ?
The last circumstance we here notice concerning this future Temple is, that in it a new river is to have its
“ Afterwards he brought me again unto the door of the House;" says the prophet," and behold waters issued out from under the threshold of the House, eastward, (for the fore front of the House [its proper front] stood toward the east,) and the waters came down from under, from the right side of the House, at the south side of the altar. Then brought he me out of the way of the gate northward, and led me about the way without unto the outer gate, by the way that looketh eastward; and behold there ran out waters on the right side. And when the man that had the line in his hand went forth eastward, he measured a thousand cubits, [fully one-third of a mile, and he brought me through the waters; the waters were to the ancles. Again he measured a [second] thousand, and brought me through the waters; the waters were to the knees. Again he measured a (third] thousand, and brought me through ; the waters were to the loins. Afterward he measured a [fourth] thousand; and it was a river that I could not pass over; for the waters were risen, waters to swim in, a river that could not be passed over. And he said unto me, Son of man, hast thou seen this ? Then he brought me and caused me to return to the brink of the river. Now when I had returned, behold at the bank of the river were very many trees, on the one side and on the other. Then said he unto me, These waters issue out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, and go into the sea; which being brought forth into
the sea, the waters shall be healed. And it shall come to pass
that every thing that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live; and there shall be a very great number of fish, because these waters shall come thither; for they shall be healed; and every thing shall live whither the river cometh. And it shall come to pass, that the fishers shall stand upon it, from Engedi even unto Eneglaim; they shall be a place to spread forth nets. their fish shall be according to their kinds, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many."* Ezek. xlvii. l-10.
THE NATIONS COMING TO WORSHIP IN JERUSALEM.
The Redeemer having, with wonderful condescension, deigned to dwell with men, and his Temple being rebuilt in Jerusalem, the nations are represented as coming to
The Rev. Mr. Mason, in his Gentiles' Fulness, almost seems to admitas it will be difficult for any one after carefully reading the 41st and following chapters of Ezekiel to deny—that the Jewish Temple shall yet be re-erected, as he refers, (page 134,) to. “ the duties and provision of their priests,” so minutely described by the prophet. But he afterwards censures severely a writer for expressly declaring this, and for supposing the waters to be real which are
thus represented as having their source in the Sanctuary. But if the Sanctuary itself be real, (and every thing in the description forbids any other interpretation,) how else are we to explain the waters which the prophet saw issuing from under its threshold forming a stream, to observe the course of which he was brought without the outer gate--which gradually enlarged in its progress, from ancle depth till it became an impassable river-the waters of which abounded with fish of various kinds, and whose banks were covered with fruit-bearing trees--which flowed down through the desert till it- emptied itself into the sea, and, on a certain portion only of which, fishermen were employed in spreading forth their nets? The rise of this river is also predicted by the prophet Joel: " And a fountain shall come forth of the House of the Lord, and shall water the valley of Shittim." Joel iii. 18. It seems somewhere to divide, forming two distinct rivers, flowing in opposite directions: “ And it shall be in that day, that living waters, (waters always springing and running) shall go out from Jerusalem, half of them toward the former sea, (the eastern or Dead Sea,] and half of them toward the hinder sea (the western or Mediterranean sea] : in summer and in winter shall it be.” Zech, xiv, 8.