We must still linger a little over the deeply interesting and
instructive scene in the sixteenth chapter of Matthew. It brings
before us two great subjects, namely, "The Church," and "The Kingdom
of Heaven." These things must never be confounded. As to the first, it
is only to be found in the New Testament. Indeed, as has often been
remarked, verse 18 of our chapter contains the very first direct
allusion in the volume of God to the subject of the Church, or
assembly, of Christ.
This, though familiar to many of our readers, may present a difficulty
to others. Many Christians and Christian teachers strongly maintain
that the doctrine of the Church is distinctly unfolded in Old
Testament Scripture. They consider that the saints of the Old
Testament belonged to the Church; in fact, that there is no
difference, whatever; all form one body; all stand on one common
ground; and that to represent the Lord's people in New Testament times
as in a higher position, or endowed with higher privileges than
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is a delusion. It seems strange to such to
assert that Enoch, Noah, Abraham, and Moses, did not belong to the
Church--were not members of the body of Christ--were not endowed with
the selfsame privileges as believers now. Trained from their earliest
days to believe that all God's people, from the beginning to the end
of time, stand on the same ground, and form one common body, they find
it impossible to admit of any difference. It seems to them presumption
on the part of Christians to assert that they are in any respect
different from God's beloved people of old--those blessed worthies of
whom we read in Hebrews xi., who lived a life of faith and personal
devotedness, and who are now in heaven with their Lord.
But the all-important question is, "What saith the Scripture?" It can
be of no possible use to set up our own thoughts, our own reasonings,
our own conclusions, in opposition to the word of God. It is a very
easy matter for men to reason, with great apparent force, point, and
cleverness, about the absurdity and presumption of the notion that
Christians are in a better and higher place, and more privileged, than
God's people of old.
But this is not the proper way in which to approach this great
subject. It is not a question of the difference _personally_ between
the Lord's people at different periods. Were it so, where should we
find, amongst the ranks of Christian professors, any one to compare
with an Abraham, a Joseph, a Moses, or a Daniel? Were it a question of
simple faith, where could we find in the entire history of the Church
a finer example than the father of the faithful? Were it a question of
personal holiness, where could we find a brighter illustration than
Joseph? For intimacy with God, and acquaintance with His ways and
mind, who could go beyond Moses? For unswerving devotedness to God
and His truth, could we find a brighter example than the man who went
down into the lions' den rather than not pray toward Jerusalem?
However, let it be distinctly understood that it is not by any means a
personal question, or a comparison of people, but of dispensational
position. If this be clearly seen, it will, we doubt not, remove out
of the way a great deal of the difficulty which many pious people seem
to feel in reference to the truth of the Church.
But above and beyond all this stands the question, What does Scripture
teach on the subject? If any one had spoken to Abraham about being a
member of the body of Christ, would he have understood it? Could that
honored and beloved saint of God have had the most remote idea of
being linked by an indwelling Spirit to a living Head in heaven?
Utterly impossible. How could he be a member of a body which had no
existence? And how could there be a body without a Head? And when do
we first hear of the Head? When the Man Christ Jesus, having passed
through death and the grave, ascended into the heavens, and took His
seat at the right hand of the Majesty on high. Then, and not until
then, did the Holy Ghost come down to form the Body, and link it by
His presence to the glorified Head above.
This, however, is rather anticipating a line of argument which is yet
to come before us. Let us here put another question to the reader. If
any one had spoken to Moses about a body composed of Jews and
Gentiles,--a body whose constituent parts had been drawn from among
the seed of Abraham and the cursed race of the Canaanites,--what would
he have said? May we not safely assert that his whole moral being
would have shrunk with horror from the thought? What! Jews and
Canaanites--the seed of Abraham and uncircumcised Gentiles--united in
one body? Impossible for the lawgiver to take in such an idea. The
fact is, if there was one feature which more strongly than another
marked the Jewish economy, it was the rigid separation by divine
appointment of Jew and Gentile. "Ye know," says Simon Peter, "how that
it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or to
come unto one of another nation."
Such was the order of things under the Mosaic economy. It would have
been a flagrant transgression on the part of a Jew to climb over that
middle wall of partition which separated him from all the nations
around; and hence the thought of a union between Jew and Gentile could
not possibly have entered into any human mind; and the more faithful a
man was to the existing order of things under the law, the more
opposed he must have been to any such thought.
Now, in the face of all this, how can any one seek to maintain that
the truth of the Church was known in Old Testament times, and that
there is no difference whatever between the position of a Christian
and that of an Old Testament believer? The fact is that even Simon
Peter himself found it extremely difficult to take in the idea of
admitting the Gentiles into the Kingdom of Heaven. Though he was
entrusted with the keys of that kingdom, he was very reluctant indeed
to use them for the admission of the Gentiles. He had to be expressly
taught by a heavenly vision, ere he was prepared to fulfil the
commission with which he was charged by his Lord in Matthew xvi.
No, reader, it is of no possible use to stand against the plain
testimony of Scripture. The truth of the Church was not--could not--be
known in Old Testament times. It was, as the inspired apostle tells
us, "hid in God"--hid in His eternal counsels--"not made known to the
sons of men, as it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets
by the Spirit,[3] that the Gentiles should be _fellow-heirs_, and of
_the same body_, and partakers of His promise in Christ by the
gospel." (Eph. iii.)
[3] The "prophets," in this passage, are those of the New Testament.
This is evident from the expression, "_Now revealed_." He could not
speak of a thing being "now revealed" to men who had been dead for
hundreds of years. Besides, had the apostle meant Old Testament
prophets, the order would assuredly have been "Prophets and apostles."
We have a similar expression in Eph. ii. 20: "Built upon the
foundation of the apostles and prophets." He does not say, "prophets
and apostles." The truth is that the apostles and prophets formed the
first layer of the foundation of the Church of which Jesus Christ is
the chief Corner-stone; and this is an additional proof that the
Church had no existence save in the secret counsels of God until our
Lord Christ, having accomplished the work of redemption, ascended into
the heavens, and sent down the Holy Ghost to baptize believers--Jews
and Gentiles--into one body.
The reader may also refer with real profit and interest to Rom. xvi.
25, 26: "Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my
gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to _the
revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world
began_, but _now is made manifest_, and by the scriptures of the
prophets (literally, by the prophetic writings, that is, of the New
Testament), according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made
known to all nations for the obedience of faith."
We can only reach the great mystery of the Church by walking over the
broken-down middle wall of partition. "Wherefore remember, that ye
being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called
Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh
made by hands; that at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens
from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of
promise, having no hope, and without God in the world. But now, in
Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh _by the
blood of Christ_. For He is our peace, who hath made both one, and
hath broken down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in His
flesh the enmity, the law of commandments in ordinances, for to make
in Himself of twain one new man, making peace; and that He might
reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the
enmity thereby; and came and preached peace to you which were afar
off, and to them that were nigh. For through Him we both have access
by one Spirit unto the Father." (Eph. ii. 11-18.)
Thus, from all that has passed before us, the reader will, we trust,
fully see why it is that our Lord in His word to Simon Peter speaks of
the Church as a future thing. "Upon this rock _I will build_ my
Church." He does not say, "I have been," or, "I am, building my
Church." Nothing of the kind. It could not be. It was still "hid in
God." The Messiah had to be cut off and have nothing--nothing, for the
present, as regards Israel and the earth. He must be rejected,
crucified, and slain, in order to lay the foundation of the Church. It
was utterly impossible that a single stone could be laid in this new,
this wondrous building until "the chief Corner-stone" had passed
through death and taken His place in the heavens. It was not in
incarnation, but in resurrection, that our Lord Christ became Head of
a body.
Now our apostle was not in the least prepared for this. He did not
understand one jot or tittle of it. That Messiah should set up a
kingdom in power and glory--that He should restore Israel to their
destined pre-eminence in the earth--all this he could understand and
appreciate--he was looking for it. But a suffering Messiah--a rejected
and crucified Christ--of this he could not hear just then. "Be it far
from Thee, Lord; this shall not be unto Thee." These were the words
which drew forth that withering rebuke with which we closed our last
paper, "Get thee behind Me, Satan; thou art an offence unto Me; for
thou savorest not the things that be of God, but those that be of
men."
We may gather the gravity of his error from the severity of the
rebuke. Peter had much to learn, much to go through, ere he could
grasp the great truth which His Lord was putting before him. But he
did grasp it, by the grace of God, and confess it, and teach it with
power. He was led to see not only that Christ was the Son of the
living God, but that He was a rejected Stone, disallowed of men, but
chosen of God and precious; and that all who through grace come to Him
must share His rejection on earth as well as His acceptance in heaven.
They are perfectly identified with Him.