1. It may be well said that the prophecies have not been, and never will be,
fulfilled in the letter, because they contain expressions and statements which
do not admit, or certainly have a literal meaning. But the use of figures in a
composition is not enough to make it figurative as a whole; we constantly use
figures of speech whenever we speak, although the main course of our
conversation is to be taken literally. Now this will apply to the language of
the prophets. The words "David," "Israel," "Jerusalem," and the like, are not
so much figures as proper names which have a figurative origin, or words which,
having first had a confined sense, come, as language proceeds, to have a wide
one. All these words convey a literal truth in their substance.
2. It may be asked whether it is possible to consider the Christian
Church, which is so different from the Jewish, a continuation of it.
It may be argued that Christ founded His Church as a new thing in the
earth. Observe--(1.) That the chosen people had in former ages gone
through many vicissitudes, many transformations, before the
_revolution_ which followed on Christ's coming. They had been
shepherds, slaves; the place of God's presence had moved about; they
had been governed by a lawgiver, by judges, by kings, by priests. The
change when Christ came from a local into a catholic form, was not
abrupt, but gradual; what was first a dispersion became a diffusion.
And let it be observed, a change in externals was anticipated as
regards the city of God in the Old Testament. "Thou shalt be called
by a new name," says the prophet (chap. lxii. 4). (2.) It may be
objected that the change was internal, not external only; it became a
Church of Gentiles, instead of a Church of Jews. But changes of this
kind had occurred before, _e.g.,_ the change which destroyed the
substantive existence of the ten tribes; in an earlier age, only two
of those who left Egypt with Moses entered the promised land. The
line of continuity, surely, was not less definite when the Church
became Christian. The sacred writers show themselves aware of this
peculiarity in the mode in which God's purposes are carried on from
age to age. They are frequent in speaking of a "remnant" as alone
inheriting the promises (Rom. xi. 2-5; Isa. i. 9; Ezek. xi. 13; Jer.
xl. 15; Hag. i. 14; Joel ii. 32; Micah v. 8; Zech. viii. 12). There
was no substitution of a new Church for an old; it was the
manifestation of the old law of "the remnant," by which the many were
called and the few chosen. We may consider, then, the word "remnant,"
so constantly used in Scripture, to be the token of identity of the
Creator, before and after the coming of Christ. Paul expressly
inculcates that the promises made to Israel are really accomplished,
without any evasion, in the Divine protection accorded to Christians.
To conclude:--1. Whether we can clear up these points or no, they are
not greater than the difficulties which attend on other confessedly
fulfilled and very chief and notable prophecies, as that of the
dispersion of the Jews. They were threatened with the evils which
have befallen them, supposing they did _not_ keep their law; whereas
in the event the punishment has come upon them apparently _for
keeping_ it; because they would not change the law for the Gospel,
_therefore_ have they been scattered through the nations. In this it
is implied that in rejecting the Gospel they in some way or other
rejected their law, or that the Gospel is the continuation or
development of the law. In a similar way are the prophecies
concerning the elect _remnant_ fulfilled in the history of the
Christian Church. 2. If the prophecies in their substance certainly
have had a literal fulfilment, then this will follow, viz., that the
very appearance of separation and contrast does but make it more
necessary that there should be some great real agreement and inward
unity between one and the other, whether we can discover what it is
or not on account of which they are called one. All Scripture has its
difficulties; but let us not, on account of what is difficult,
neglect what is clear. Perchance, if we had learnt from it what we
_can_ learn by our own private study, we should be more patient of
learning from others those further truths which, though in Scripture,
we cannot learn from it ourselves.--_John Henry Newman: Sermons on
Subjects of the Day,_ pp. 180-198.