Short Papers on Church History

Illustrative of the Seven Churches. (Rev. 2;3)
Introduction.
Rather more than three years ago, two papers appeared in this Magazine, under the title of “Philadelphia.” These were afterward published separately as a little book, with a few foot notes from church history. The reappearance of these papers, in then new form, first suggested the thought of the proposed forthcoming papers under the above title.
Many of our readers, we know, have neither the time nor the opportunity for reading the voluminous works that have been written from time to time on the history of the Church. Still, that which has been the dwelling place of God for the last eighteen hundred years, must be a subject of the deepest interest to all His children. We speak not now of the Church as it is often represented in history, but as it is spoken of in scripture. There it is seen in its true spiritual character, as the body of Christ, and as the “ habitation of God through the Spirit.” Eph. 2
We must always bear in mind, when reading what is called a history of the Church, that from the days of the apostles until now, there have been two distinct, and widely different, classes of persons in the professing church: the merely nominal, and the real — the true, and the false. This was predicted. “For I know this,” says the apostle, “that after my departure shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.” (Acts 20) His second epistle to Timothy is also full of warnings and directions as to the various forms of evil which were then but too plainly manifest. A rapid change for the worse had taken place from the time that his first epistle was written. He exhorts the truly godly to walk in separation from those who had a form of godliness, hut who denied the power thereof. “From such,” he says, “turn away.” Such exhortations are always needed, always applicable — as much now as then. We cannot separate ourselves from Christendom, without giving up Christianity; but we can and ought to separate ourselves from what the apostle calls “vessels to dishonor.” The promise is, that “if a man purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honor, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.”
It is interesting — though painfully so—to mark the difference on this point between the first and the second epistles to Timothy. In the first, the Church is spoken of according to its true character and blessed position on the earth. There it is seen as the house of God—the depositary and display of truth to man. In the second epistle, it is spoken of as what it had become through the failure of those into whose hands it had been entrusted.
Take one passage from each epistle in illustration.
1. “These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly. But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, the pillar and ground of the truth. (1 Tim. 3:14, 15.)
2. “But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, hut also of wood and of earth; and some to honor, and some to dishonor.” Here all is changed—sadly changed. In place of divine order, there is hopeless confusion: in place of “the house of God, the pillar and ground of truth,” there is “a great house”—practically, “the mystery of iniquity.” In place of the house being kept according to the will of God and suitable for Him, it was arranged and ordered according to the will of man, and for his own personal advantage and exaltation. Thus early had the evils, which have been the sin and the disgrace of Christendom ever since, made their appearance. But this was overruled for good. The Spirit of God, in great mercy, has supplied us with the plainest directions for the darkest day of the Church’s history, and has pointed out the way of truth for the worst of times; so that we are left without excuse. Times and circumstances change, not the truth of God.

The mistakes of historians in general.
Some historians, it is sorrowful to say, have not taken into account this sad mixture of evil vessels with the good—of true Christians and false. They have not themselves been spiritually minded men. Hence they have rather made it their chief object to record the many unchristian and wicked ways of mere professors. They have dwelt at great length, and with great minuteness, on the heresies that have troubled the Church—on the abuses that have disgraced it, and on the controversies that have distracted it. Much rather would we endeavor to trace, all down through the long dark page of history, the silver line of God’s grace in true Christians.
God has never left Himself without a witness. He has had His loved and cherished, though hidden, ones, in all ages and in all places. No eye but His could see the seven thousand in Israel who had not bowed the knee to the image of Baal, in the days of Ahab and Jezebel. And tens of thousands, we doubt not, even from the darkest ages of Christianity, will be found at last in the “glorious church,” which Christ will present to Himself, on the long looked for day of His nuptial glory. Many precious stones from the rubbish of the “middle ages” will reflect His grace and glory on that crowning day. Blessed thought! even now it fills the soul with ecstasy and delight. Lord, hasten that happy day, for thine own name’s sake!
The truly godly are instinctively humble. They are generally retiring, and for the most part but little known. There is no humility so deep and real as that which the knowledge of grace produces. Such lowly and hidden ones find but a small place on the historic page. But the insinuating, zealous, heretic, and the noisy, visionary, fanatic, are too clamorous to escape notice. Hence it is, that the historian has so carefully recorded the foolish principles and the evil practices of such men.
We will now turn for a little, and take a general view of the first part of our subject, namely,
THE SEVEN CHURCHES OF ASIA.
These seven epistles, so far, will guide our future studies. We believe they are not only historical, but also, prophetical. Doubtless they are strictly historical, and this fact must be allowed its full weight in studying their prophetic character. Seven churches actually existed in the seven cities here named, and in the condition here described. But it is equally clear, that they were intended, by Him who knows the end from the beginning, to bear a prophetic meaning, as well as an historical application. They were selected from amongst many, and so arranged and described, as to forshadow what was to come. To limit their application to the seven literal churches then in Asia, would be to mar the unity of the Apocalypse, and to lose the promised blessing. “Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy.” The character of the whole book is prophetic and symbolic. The second and third chapters are no exception to this. They are introduced by the Lord Himself in their mystic character. “The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.”
The number seven is characteristic. It marks a complete circle of the thoughts or ways of God as to time. Hence the seven days of the week—the seven feasts of Israel—the seven parables of the kingdom of heaven in mystery. It is often used throughout this book, which takes up both Jew, Gentile, and the Church of God, as responsible on the earth. Hence we have seven churches, seven stars, seven candlesticks, seven angels, seven seals, seven trumpets, seven vials, and seven last plagues. In chapters 2 and 3 only the Church is seen as responsible on the earth, and the object of divine government. From the fourth chapter to the nineteenth she is seen in heaven. Then she appears in full manifested glory with her Lord. “And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.”
In the body of the book, especially from the sixth chapter, the Jews and Gentiles come before us, and are judicially dealt with from the throne of God in heaven. But this will not take place till after the Church—the true bride of the Lamb—is caught up to heaven, and the merely nominal, corrupt thing finally rejected.
The threefold division of the book, as given by the Lord Himself, makes the order of events quite plain, and ought to have immense weight as a principle of interpretation in the study of the Apocalypse. In chapter 1:19, He gives us the contents and plan of the whole book: “Write the things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things which shall be hereafter,”—or, literally, “after these things.” “The things which thou hast seen” refer to the revelation of Jesus as seen by John in chapter 1. “The things which are”—to the time—condition of the professing body as presented in chapters 2 and 3. “The things which shall be hereafter” from the fourth chapter to the end. The third division begins with chapter 4. A door is opened in heaven, and the apostle is called to come up. “Come up hither and I will show thee things which must be hereafter,” or “after these things.” It is the same word in chapter 4:1, as in chapter 1:19. The things which are, and the things which shall be after these things, cannot possibly be concurrent. The one must end before the other begins.
When the number seven is used, not in a literal, but in a symbolic sense, it always signifies completeness. It is evidently thus used in chapters 2 and 3. There were ether churches, we know, besides those named, but seven are selected and associated, to present a complete picture of what would afterward be developed in the Church’s history on earth. The more important moral elements which then existed, the Lord foresaw would reappear in course of time. Thus we have a seven-fold, or divinely perfect picture of the successive states of the professing Church, during the entire period of her responsibility on the earth.
We will now take a rapid glance at the outline of the seven churches; and give a general idea of the different periods in history to which they apply.
Ephesus. —In Ephesus, the Lord detects the root of all declension. “Thou hast left thy first love.” But though true of the apostolic age, it was also solemnly prophetic of the ages following. It is threatened with the removal of the candlestick unless there be repentance. Period—from the apostolic age to the close of the second century.
Smyrna. —The message to Ephesus is general, to Smyrna it is specific. And though it applied at that time to the assembly there, it shadowed forth in the most striking way, the repeated persecutions through which the Church passed under the heathen emperors. Yet God may have used the power of the world to arrest the progress of evil in the Church. Period—from the second century to Constantine.
Pergamos. —Here we have the establishment of Christianity by Constantine as the religion of the State. Instead of persecuting the Christians, he patronized them. From that moment the downward course of the Church is rapid. Her unholy alliance with the world proved her saddest and deepest fall. Period—from the beginning of the fourth to the seventh century, when popery was established.
Thyatira. —In Thyatira, we have the popery of the middle ages. Jezebel-like, practicing all kinds of wickedness, and persecuting the saints of God, under the disguise of religious zeal. Nevertheless there was a God-fearing remnant in Thyatira, whom the Lord comforts with the bright hope of His coming, and with the promise of power over the nations, when He Himself shall reign. But the word of exhortation is “That which ye have already, hold fast till I come.” Period—from the establishment of popery to the Lord’s coming. It goes on to the end, but is characterized by the dark ages.
Saudis. —Here we see the protestant part of Christendom—that which followed the great work of the Reformation. The foul features of popery disappear, but the new system itself has no vitality. “Thou hast a name that thou livest and art dead.” But there are true saints in these lifeless systems, and Christ knows them all. “Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.” Period—from the eventful sixteenth century onwards. Protestantism after the Reformation.
Philadelphia. —The Church of Philadelphia presents a feeble remnant, but they are faithful to the word and name of the Lord Jesus. They shadow forth the out-calling of God in these last days. That out of which they are called becomes Laodicean in character. Christ is in their midst as the Holy One and the True, and is represented as having charge of the house. He has “the key of David.” The treasures of the prophetic word are unlocked for those inside. They are also in the sympathies of His patience, and in the expectation of His coming. “Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth.” Period—since the Reformation; but more especially from the beginning of this century, and still more in the present day. Activity on all hands is rapidly developing the last phases of Christendom.
Laodicea. —In Laodicea, we have lukewarmness—indifference—latitudinarianism; but with high pretensions, a boastful spirit, and great self-sufficiency. This is the last state of that which bears the name of Christ on the earth. But, alas, it is intolerable to Him. Its final doom has come. Having separated every true believer from the corruptions of Christendom to Himself, He spews it out of His mouth. That which ought to have been sweet to His taste, has become nauseous, and it is cast off forever. Period—co-existing with Philadelphia and Sardis, but especially the closing scene.
Having thus taken a general view of the seven churches, we would now endeavor, through the Lord’s help, briefly to trace these different periods of the Church’s history. And we purpose examining more fully, each of the seven epistles as we go along, that we may ascertain what light is shed on the different periods by these addresses; and how far the facts of church history illustrate the scripture history of these two chapters. May the Lord guide, for the refreshment and blessing of His own beloved ones.
Short Papers on Church History
In commencing the study of any subject, it is well to know its beginnings—the original intention or plan, and the first step in its history. These we have in the clearest, fullest way, as to the Church, in holy scripture. There we have not only the original intention, but the plans and specifications of the Great Builder, and the early history of the work under His own hand. “ And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved.” (Acts 2) This is historical. The foundation had been laid, and the work was going on; but the Lord Himself was still the only builder; therefore up to this time, all was real and perfect.
At the close of the Jewish dispensation the Lord added the saved remnant of Israel to the newly formed Church: but at the close of the present or christian dispensation, He will take all who believe in His name up to heaven in glorified bodies. Not one belonging to the Church will be added to the congregation of millennial saints. “For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first; then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” (1 Thess. 4:14-18.) This will be the happy close of the history of the Church on earth—the true spouse of Christ. The dead raised—the living changed, and all, in their bodies of glory, caught up together in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. Thus we have the entire limits of the Church defined, and the whole period of her history before us. But we return to the dawn of her day on the earth.
Under the figure of a building, the Lord first introduces the subject of the Church. And so infinitely precious are His words, that we may adopt them as the text or motto of its whole history. They have sustained the hearts and the hopes of His people in all ages, and in all circumstances; and they will ever be the stronghold of faith. What can he more blessed, more assuring, more peace-giving, than these words? —
“UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH; AND THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT.”
In Matt. 16 the Lord questions His disciples as to the sayings of men concerning Himself. This leads to the glorious confession of Peter, and also to the gracious revelation of the Lord concerning His Church. It may be well to transfer the whole conversation to our pages. It all bears so directly on our subject.
“When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias: and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
Here we have the two main things connected with the proposed building—the Rock-foundation, and the divine Builder. “Upon this rock I will build my church.” But who is, or what is, “this rock?” some may inquire. Clearly, we answer, the confession of Peter; not Peter himself, as the apostasy teaches. True, he was a stone—a living stone in the new temple; “Thou art Peter”—thou art a stone. But the Father’s revelation, by Peter, of the glory of the Person of His Son, is the foundation on which the Church is built—“Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” But the glory of the Person of the Son in resurrection is the unveiled truth here. “Flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” Immediately on the confession by Peter, the Lord intimates His intention to build His Church, and asserts its eternal security. “Upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
He Himself, the fountain of life, could not be conquered by death, but in dying as the great substitute for sinners, He triumphed over death and the grave, and is alive for evermore, as He said to His apostle John after His resurrection: “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.” (Rev. 1:18.) What majestic, what triumphant words arc these! They are the words of a conqueror—of one who has power; but of power over the gates of hades—the place of separate spirits. The keys—symbol of authority and power—hang at His girdle. The stroke of death may fall upon a Christian, but the sting is gone. It comes as a messenger of peace to conduct the weary pilgrim home to eternal rest. Death is no longer the master, but the servant of the Christian. “For all things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours: and ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s.” 1 Cor. 3:21-23.
The Person of Christ, then, the Son of the living God in His resurrection glory, is the foundation—the solid, the imperishable foundation, on which the Church is built.
As alive from the dead, He communicates life in resurrection to all who are built on Him as the true foundation stone. This is plain from what Peter says in his first epistle. “To whom coming, as unto a living stone.... ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house.” And further down in the same chapter he says, “Unto you therefore which believe, he is precious,” or “an honor.” (See marg.) May both reader and writer note well these two most precious truths in connection with our “Rock-foundation”—divine life and divine preciousness. These are communicated to, and become the possession of, all who put their trust in Christ. “To whom coming,” not to what coming; it is the Person of Christ we come to, and have to do with. His life—life in resurrection—becomes ours. From that moment He is our life. “To whom coming, as unto a living stone.....ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house.” Christ’s own life, as the risen Man, and all that He is heir to, is ours. Oh! wondrous, marvelous, blessed truth! Who would not desire, above all things, this life, and this life beyond the power of death—the gates of hades? Eternal victory is stamped on the risen life of Christ, it can never more be tested, and this is the believer’s life.
But there is more than life for every living stone in this spiritual temple. There is also Christ’s preciousness. “Unto you therefore which believe he is precious;” literally, “the preciousness.” That is, just as the life of Christ becomes ours when we believe in Him, so does His preciousness. The principle in both is the same. The life may be viewed as our capacity to enjoy; and the preciousness, as our title to possess our inheritance on high. His honors, titles, dignities, privileges, possessions, glories, are ours—all ours in Him. “To them that believe he is the preciousness.” Ο wondrous thought! “He loved the Church and gave himself for it.” Such then is our Rock-foundation, and such the blessedness of all who are on the Rock. Like Jacob of old, when a pilgrim and a stranger he rested on the stone in the desert, the whole panorama of heaven’s riches in grace and glory passed before him. Gen. 28
CHRIST THE ONLY BUILDER OF HIS CHURCH
But Christ is also the builder of His Church. “Upon this rock I will build my Church.” It is well to be clear on this point, so that we may not confound what man builds with what Christ builds. There must be the greatest confusion of mind, both as to the truth of God and the present state of Christendom, unless this distinction is seen. Nothing is more important to note here than that Christ is the only builder of His Church; though Paul and Apollos, and all true evangelists, are ministers, by whom sinners believe. The Lord’s work in the souls of believers is perfect. It is a real, spiritual, personal work. Through His grace in their hearts they come to Himself, as unto a living stone, and are built upon Him who is risen from among the dead. They have tasted that the Lord is gracious. Such are the living stones with which Christ builds His holy temple; and the gates of hell can never prevail against it. Thus Peter himself, and all the apostles, and all true believers, are built up a spiritual house. When Peter speaks of this building in his first epistle, he says nothing of himself as a builder. None but Christ has anything to say to this building. It is His work and His only. “I will build my Church,” He says.
Let us now see from the word of God what man builds—what materials he uses, and the way he goes to work. In 1 Cor. 3 and 2 Tim. 2 we have these things brought before us. “A great house” is raised by human instrumentality: but which, in a certain sense, is also the Church, and the house of God. As in 1 Timothy 3:15 we read of “the house of God, which is the Church of the living God.” It is also spoken of as Christ’s house in Hebrew 3:6, “whose house are we.” But the house soon became sadly corrupted through human infirmity and positive wickedness. The authority of God’s word by many was set aside, and man’s will became supreme. The effect of human philosophy on the simple institutions of Christ was soon painfully manifest. But wood, hay, and stubble, can never be “fitly framed together” with gold, silver, and precious stones. The house became great in the world; like the mustard tree, in the brandies of which many find a convenient lodging. Connection with the “great house” gives man a status in the world, in place of being like the Master, despised and rejected. The archbishop stands next to royalty. But the professing Church is not only outwardly great, it is most pretentious, and seeks to put the stamp of God on its own unhallowed work. This is its greatest wickedness, and the source of its blindness, confusion, and worldliness.
Paul, as one chosen of the Lord to do His work, laid the foundation of “God’s building” in Corinth, and others built upon it. But they did not all build with divine materials. The right foundation was laid, and every man was to take heed how he builded thereon. In connection with the true foundation, some might build gold, silver, and precious stones, and others wood, hay, and stubble. That is, some might teach sound doctrine, and look for living faith in all who applied for communion: others might teach unsound doctrine, and receive into the fellowship of the Church, persons in whom was no faith—the mere outward observance of ordinances taking the place of faith and eternal life. Here man’s instrumentality, responsibility, and failure came in. Nevertheless, the builder himself may be saved, having faith in Christ, though his work is destroyed. But there is another and a worse class of builders, who corrupt the temple of the Lord, and are themselves destroyed. We give, for the convenience of the reader, the entire passage. Nothing can be plainer. “According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is. If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.........If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy.” Verses 10-17.
We may further observe on the Lord’s words, “upon this rock I will build my Church,” that He had not begun to build it yet, He is telling them what He is going to do. He does not say, I have built it, or I am building it, but I will build it; and this He began to do at Pentecost.
But there is another truth most intimately connected with the history of the Church, and linked up with its condition and character, on the earth, that we must notice, before proceeding with its actual history. We refer to the truth contained in the expression, the keys of the kingdom of heaven.
This leads to the “great house”—already referred to—of outward profession. At the same time, we must bear in mind, that though intimately connected, the kingdom of heaven and the great house are quite distinct. In title, the world belongs to the King. “The field is the world.” His servants are to go on sowing. In result, we have “a great house,” or Christendom. But when all that which is merely nominal in Christendom shall be swept away by judgment, the kingdom will be established in power and glory. This will be the millennium.
While still speaking to Peter about the Church, the Lord added “And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” The Church, as built by Christ, and the kingdom of heaven as opened by Peter, are widely different things. It is one of the great but common mistakes of Christendom, to use the terms interchangeably, as if they meant the same thing. And theological writers in all ages, from assuming, as a basis, that they are the same, have written in the most confused way, both as to the Church and the kingdom. The expression is dispensational, just as the similar phrase, “the kingdom of God,” is moral. But unless we have some acquaintance with the dispensational ways of God, we can never rightly divide His word. That which Christ Himself builds, and that which man builds instrumentally, by means, it may be, of preaching and baptizing, must not be confounded. The Church which is Christ’s body is built upon the confession that He is the Son of the living God, glorified in resurrection. Every truly converted soul has to do with Christ Himself, before it can have anything to say to the Church. The kingdom is a wider thing, and takes in every baptized person—the whole scene of Christian profession, whether true or false.
Christ does not say to Peter that He will give him the keys of the Church, or the keys of heaven. Had He done so, there might have been some show of reason for the evil system of popery. But He merely says, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven”—or of the new dispensation. Keys, we know, are not for budding tern-pies, but for opening doors; and the Lord honored Peter to open the door of the kingdom, first to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles. (Acts 2:10.) But the language of Christ about His Church is of another order. It is simple, beautiful, emphatic, and unmistakable. “My Church.” What depth, what fullness there is in these words: “My Church!” When the heart is in fellowship with Christ about His Church, there will be an apprehension of His affections towards it, which we have no power of expressing. As it is, we love to linger over these two words, “My Church!” but who can speak of the measure of Christ’s heart that is therein revealed? Again, think of these other two words, “This rock.” As if He had said, “The glory of my Person, and the power of my life in resurrection, form the solid foundation of “My Church.” And again, “I will build.” Thus we see in these seven words, that everything is in Christ’s own hands, as “to the Church which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all.”
THE OPENING OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN.
The administration of the Kingdom, the Lord, in an especial manner, committed to Peter, as we see in the early chapters of the Acts. The term is taken from the Old Testament. See Dan. 2 and 7. In chapter 2 we have the kingdom; in chapter 7 we have the king. The phrase, Kingdom of Heaven, occurs only in the gospel of Matthew, where the evangelist writes chiefly for Israel.
The bringing in of the kingdom of heaven in power and glory on the earth, in the Person of the Messiah, was the natural expectation of every godly Jew. John the Baptist, as the Lord’s forerunner, came preaching. The kingdom of heaven is at hand. But in place of the Jews receiving their Messiah, they rejected and crucified Him; consequently, the kingdom, according to Jewish expectations, was set aside. Nevertheless, it was introduced in another form. When the rejected Messiah ascended to heaven, and took His place at God’s right hand, triumphant over every foe, the kingdom of heaven began. Now the king is in heaven, and as Daniel says, “the heavens do rule,” though not openly. And from the time that He ascended until He returns, it is the kingdom in mystery. (Matt. 13.) When He comes back again in power and great glory it will be the kingdom in manifestation.
Short Papers on Church History
The new economy, Peter was privileged to open both to Jew and Gentile. This he did in his address to the Jews, in Acts 2, and in his address to the Gentiles, Acts 10. But again we would draw attention to the fact, that the Church, or the assembly of God, and the kingdom of heaven, are not the same thing. Let us be clear, in starting, as to this fundamental point. The identifying the two things has produced great confusion of thought and may be viewed as the origin of puseyism, popery, and every human system in Christendom. The following remarks on “the tare field,” from a recent publication, bear directly on this subject, though they refer to a later period than the early chapters of the Acts.
The parable of the tares Matt. 13:24, 25. ‘Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way’—exactly what is become of the profession of Christ. There are two things necessary for the inroad of evil among Christians. The first is the unwatchfullness of the Christians themselves. They get into a careless state, they sleep, and the enemy comes and sows tares. This began at an early epoch in Christendom. We find the germs even in the Acts of the Apostles, and still more so in the epistles. 1 Thessalonians is the first inspired epistle that the apostle Paul wrote; and the second was written shortly after. And yet he tells them that the mystery of iniquity was already at work; that there were other things to follow, such as the apostasy and the man of sin, and that when the lawlessness should be fully manifest (instead of working secretly), then the Lord would put an end to the lawless one and all concerned. The mystery of iniquity seems akin to the sowing of the tares spoken of here. Sometime after, ‘when the blade was sprung up and brought forth fruit’—when Christianity began to make rapid strides in the earth—‘then appeared the tares also.’ But it is evident the tares wore sown almost immediately after the good seed. No matter what the work of God is, Satan is always close upon its heels. When man was made, he listened to the serpent, and fell. When God gave the law, it was broken even before it was committed into the hands of Israel. Such is always the history of human nature.
“So the mischief is clone in the field, and never repaired. The tares are not for the present taken out of the field: there is no judgment of them. Does this mean that we are to have tares in the Church? If the kingdom of heaven meant the Church, there ought to be no discipline at all: you ought to allow uncleanness of flesh or spirit there. Here is the importance of seeing the distinction between the Church and the kingdom. The Lord forbids the tares to be taken out of the kingdom of heaven: ‘Let both grow together until the harvest’ (ver. 30), that is, till the Lord comes in judgment. Were the kingdom of heaven the same as the Church, it would, I repeat, amount to no less than this: that no evil, let it be ever so flagrant or plain, is to be put out of the Church till the day of judgment. We see, then, the importance of making these distinctions, which too many despise. They are all-important for truth and holiness. Nor is there a single word of God that we can do without.
“What then is the meaning of this parable? It has nothing to do with the question of church communion. It is the ‘kingdom of heaven’ that is spoken of—the scene of the confession of Christ, whether true or false. Thus Greeks, Copts, Nestorians, Roman Catholics, as well as Protestants, are in the kingdom of heaven; not believers only, but also bad people professing the name of Christ. A man, who is not a Jew nor a Pagan, and who outwardly professes Christ’s Name, is in the kingdom of heaven. He may be ever so immoral or heretical, hut he is not to be put out of the kingdom of heaven. But would it be right to receive him at the table of the Lord? God forbid! If a person falling into open sin were in the Church, he ought to be put out of it; but you ought not to put him out of the kingdom of heaven. In fact this could only be done by taking away his life: for that is meant by the rooting up of the tares. And this is what worldly Christianity did fall into, in no very long space of time after the apostles were departed from the earth. Temporal punishments were brought in for discipline: laws were made for the purpose of handing over the refractory to the subservient civil power. If they did not honor the so-called Church they were not to be suffered to live. In this way, the very evil our Lord had been guarding the disciples against came to pass; and the emperor Constantine used the sword to repress ecclesiastical offenders. He and his successors introduced temporal punishments to deal with the tares, to try and root them up. Take the Church of Rome, where you have so thoroughly the confusion of the Church with the kingdom of heaven: they claim, if a man is a heretic, to hand him over to the courts of the world to be burnt, and they never confess or correct the wrong, because they pretend to be infallible. Supposing that their victims even were tares, this is to put them out of the kingdom. If you root a tare from the field, you kill it. There may be men outside profaning the name of God; but we must leave them for God to deal with.
“This does not destroy christian responsibility towards those who surround the Lord’s table. You will find instructions as to all this in what is written about the Church. ‘The field is the world;’ the Church only embraces those believed to be members of Christ’s body. Take 1 Corinthians, where we have the Holy Ghost showing the true nature of ecclesiastical discipline. Supposing there are professing Christians, guilty of any sin you please; such persons are not to be owned, while they are going on in that sin, as members of Christ’s body. A. real saint might fall into open sin, but the Church, knowing it, is bound to intervene for the purpose of expressing God’s judgment about the sin. Were they deliberately to allow such a one to come to the Lord’s table they would in effect make the Lord a party to that sin. The question is not whether the person be converted or not. If unconverted, men have no business in the Church; if converted, sin is not to be winked at. The guilty are not to be put out of the kingdom of heaven, they are to be put out of the Church. So that the teaching of the word of God is most plain as to both these truths. It is wrong to use worldly punishments to deal with a hypocrite, even when he is detected. I may seek the good of his soul, but this is no reason for punishing him thus. But if a Christian is guilty of sin, the Church, though called to be patient in judgment, is never to suffer it; but we are to leave guilty people, who are unconverted, to be judged by the Lord at His appearing.
“This is the teaching of the parable of the tares; and it gives a very solemn view of Christianity. As sure as the Son of man sowed good seed, His enemy would sow bad, which would spring up along with the rest; and this evil cannot for the present be got rid of. There is a remedy for evil which enters the Church, but not yet for evil in the world.”
It is perfectly clear, both from scripture and history, that the great mistake into which the professing body fell was the confounding of these two things—tares with wheat; or, those who were admitted by the administration of baptism to all the official and temporal privileges of the professing Church, with those who were truly converted and taught of God. But the vast difference between what we may call the sacramental and the vital systems, must be clearly understood and carefully distinguished, if we would study church history aright.
Another mistake, equally serious, followed as a consequence. The great, outward, professing body became, in the eyes and in the language of men—the Church. Godly men were drawn into this snare, so that the distinction between the Church and the kingdom was early lost sight of. All the most sacred places and privileges, in the professing body, were thus held in common by godly and ungodly men. The Reformation utterly failed to clear the Church of this sad mixture. It has been handed down to us in the Anglican, Lutheran, and Presbyterian systems, as the form of baptism and admission clearly shows. In our own day, the sacramental system prevails to an alarming extent; and is rapidly on the increase. The real and the formal, the living and the dead, are undistinguished in the various forms of Protestantism. But, alas! most solemn reflection! there are many in the professing Church—in the kingdom of heaven—who will never be in heaven itself. Here we find tares as well as wheat—evil servants as well as faithful ones, and foolish virgins as well as wise ones. Though all who have been baptized are reckoned in the kingdom of heaven; only those who are quickened and sealed with the Holy Ghost belong to the Church of God.
But there is another thing connected with the professing Church which demands a brief notice here. We refer to
THE DIVINE PRINCIPLE OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT.
Not only did the Lord give the keys to Peter that he might open the doors of the new dispensation, but He entrusted to him its internal administration. This principle is all-important in its bearing on the Church of God. The words of the commission are these, “And whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” The question is, What do they mean? Clearly, we believe, authority and power from the Lord, to be exercised in and by the Church, but limited, in result, to this world. There is no thought in the Lord’s words about the Church deciding anything as to heaven. This is the false interpretation, and the deceiving power of the apostasy. The Church on earth can have nothing to say, or do, with what is done in heaven as to binding or loosing. The sphere of its action is within its own limits, and when it so acts, according to the commission of Christ, it has the promise of ratification in heaven.
Neither is there any thought here, we may add, of the Church, or of any of its officials, coming in between the soul and God, as to eternal forgiveness or eternal judgment. This is the daring blasphemy of Rome. “Who can forgive sins but God only?” He reserves this power to Himself alone. Besides, the subjects of church government are pardoned, or, at least, are on that ground. “Do not ye judge them that are within?” It will only apply to them that are within the pale of the Church. “But them that are without God judgeth.” Of every believer in the wide field of Christendom it is said, “ For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.” (Heb. 10) Hence, the retaining or the remission of sins by the Church is only for the present time, and strictly administrative in its character. It is the divine principle of receiving persons into the assembly of God, on the ground of adequate testimony to their conversion, soundness in doctrine, and holiness of life; and also of putting away impenitent offenders until restored by true repentance.
But some of our readers may have the common impression, that this power was only given to Peter and the rest of the apostles, and consequently, ceased with them. This is a mistake. True, it was given to Peter only in the first instance, as we have seen; and no doubt greater power was exercised during the days of the apostles than has been since; but not greater authority. The Church has the same authority now as then, as to discipline in the assembly, though it lacks the power. The word of the Lord remains unchanged. Only an apostle, we believe, could speak as Paul does in 1 Cor. 5 “In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” This was spiritual power in an individual, not the judgment of the Church. The same apostle, in reference to the same case, says to the assembly, “Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” The act of putting away was the act, not merely of the apostle, but of the whole assembly. In this case, and in this way, the excommunicated person’s sins were retained, though evidently a converted man. In the second epistle chapter 2 we find him fully restored. His repentance is accepted by the assembly—his sins are remitted. The overflowing of the apostle’s heart on tins occasion, and his exhortations to the Church, are valuable lessons for all who have to do with church government, and are intended to remove that cold suspicion with which an erring brother is too often received back to the privileges of the assembly. “Sufficient to such a man is this punishment (or censure) which was inflicted of many. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should he swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore, I beseech you, that ye would confirm your love toward him.” Here we have a case in point, illustrative of the government of the assembly according to the will of Christ. “Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
Short Papers on Church History
But “how can these principles be carried out now?” is still the question and difficulty with many. Well, we must just go back to the word of God. We ought to be able and willing to say, “We can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.” 2 Cor. 13:8.
The administrative authority and power of which we speak was not only given to Peter and the other apostles, but also to the Church. In Matt. 18 we have the working out of the principle laid down in chapter 16. “Tell it to the Church: but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto you as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven......For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.” Thus we learn that the acts of the two or three, gathered together in Christ’s name, have the same divine sanction as the administration of Peter. And again, in John 20, the Lord delivers the same principle of government to the disciples, not merely to the apostles, and that too on resurrection ground, where the assembly is livingly united to Christ as the risen Man. This is all important. The spirit of life in Christ Jesus makes the disciples free—every disciple free—from the law of sin and death. The Church is built upon “this rock”—Christ in resurrection, and the gates of hades shall not prevail against it. “Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he showed unto them his hands and his side: then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.” Here the Lord sets up, we may say, and fairly starts, the New Creation. The disciples are tilled and clothed with peace, and with the spirit of life in Christ Jesus. They are to go forth as His messengers, from the resurrection side of His empty grave, bearing the blessed message of peace and eternal life to a world bowed down with sin, sorrow, and death. The principle of their own internal government is also clearly laid down: and its due administration will always give to the christian assembly a distinctive and heavenly character, in the presence of both God and man.
THE PRINCIPLE OF RECEPTION AT THE BEGINNING.
But as this principle is the proper basis of all christian congregations, it may be well to look for a moment at its operation in the days of the apostles. Surely they understood its meaning and how to apply it.
On the day of Pentecost, and for some time after, it does not appear that the young converts were subjected to any examination as to the reality of their faith, either by the apostles or others. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized, and the same day there were added to them about three thousand souls.” Gladly receiving the word was the ground of baptism, and fellowship; but the work was then entirely in Christ’s own hands. “And the Lord added to the Church daily such as should be saved.” The attempt to deceive by Ananias and Sapphira was at once detected. Peter acts in his right place, but the Holy Ghost was there in ungrieved majesty and power, and Peter owns it. Hence he says to Ananias, “Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost?” But this virgin state of things soon passed away. Failure set in—the Holy Ghost was grieved, and it became necessary to examine the applicants, as to whether their motives, objects, and state of soul were according to the mind of Christ. We are now in the condition of things described in 2 Tim. 2 We are only to have fellowship “with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.”
After the Church became so mixed with merely nominal professors, great care was necessary in receiving persons to communion. It was not enough that a person said he was converted and claimed admission into the Church on the ground of his own statements. He must submit to be examined by experienced Christians. When one professes to be awakened to a sense of sin, and to be brought to repentance before God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, his confession must be examined by those who have gone through the same kind of experience themselves. And even where conversion is manifestly genuine, godly care, with tenderness, must be exercised in reception; something dishonoring to Christ, injurious to themselves, weakening to the assembly, may be entertained, even unconsciously. Herein spiritual discernment is needed. And this is the truest kindness to the applicant, and nothing more than a necessary care for the honor of Christ and the purity of communion. Christian fellowship would be at an end, if persons were received on the sole ground of their own opinion of themselves.
In Acts 9 we see the practical working of this principle in the case of the great apostle himself. And surely, if he could not be accredited without adequate testimony, who need complain? True, his case was peculiar, still it may be taken as a practical illustration of our subject.
We find both Ananias at Damascus, and the Church at Jerusalem questioning the reality of Saul’s conversion, though it was a miraculous one. Of course he had been an open enemy to the name of Christ, and this would make the disciples still more careful. Ananias hesitates to baptize him until fully satisfied of his conversion. He consults the Lord on the subject; but after hearing His mind, he goes directly to Saul; assures him that he has been sent by the same Jesus that appeared to him on his way to Damascus; and confirms the truth of what had taken place. Saul is greatly comforted; he receives his sight, and is baptized.
Then as to the action of the church at Jerusalem, we read, “And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple. But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus.” Paul is a model man to the Church in many things, and in this also. He is received into the assembly—as all applicants should be received—on the ground of adequate testimony to the genuineness of his Christianity. But while all godly care must be taken that the Simon Maguses may be detected, all tenderness and patience must be exercised with the timid and doubting ones. Still, life in Christ and consistency therewith must be looked for. (See Rom. 14; 15, and 1 Cor. 5, and 2 Cor. 2) The Church’s path is always a narrow one.
Popery has shown its desperate wickedness in the evil use it has made of the Church’s prerogative to retain or remit sins, hence all the abominations of priestly absolution. Protestantism has gone to the other extreme—probably fearing the very appearance of popery—and has well-nigh set aside discipline altogether. The path of faith is to follow the word of the Lord.
The ground being thus cleared as to the great fundamental principles of the Church and kingdom, we come to the day of Pentecost—the first moment of the Church’s history on earth. Unless we understand the principles of Christianity, we can never understand its history.
CHAPTER 2.
THE DAY OF PENTECOST FULLY COME.
The Jewish feast of Pentecost may be called the birthday of the christian Church. It was also the anniversary of the giving of the law on Mount Sinai, though it does not appear that a day was observed by the Jews, in commemoration of the event. Fifty days after our Lord’s resurrection, the Church was formed—its history commenced. The Old Testament saints form no part of the New Testament Church. It had no existence in fact until the day of Pentecost.
All saints, from the beginning, have the same eternal life, the are the children of the same God and Father, and the same heaven will be their home forever; but the Old Testament saints belong to another dispensation, or to the different dispensations which ran their course before Christ came. Each dispensation has its own rise, progress, decline, and fall, in scripture; and will have its own reflection in heaven. Neither persons nor dispensations will be undistinguished there. Hence the apostle in Heb. 11, when speaking of the ancient worthies, says, “And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise. God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.” Surely if God has provided a better thing for us, it must also be a different thing. Let us not object to God’s own word. Besides, our Lord, in Matt. 16, says, “On this rock I will build my Church.” And at the same time, He gave the keys to Peter to open the doors of the now dispensation. Then, He had not begun to build His Church, and the doors of the kingdom were not opened. But the difference between the old and the new will be more distinctly seen when we speak of the great events of the day of Pentecost. We begin with the types of Leviticus, chapter 23.
The children of Israel were commanded to bring a sheaf of the first-fruits of their harvest to the priest, that he might wave it before the Lord, to be accepted for them. This rite, we believe, shadowed forth our Lord’s resurrection on the morning after the Jewish sabbath, and the Christian’s acceptance before God in the risen Christ. “Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the first-fruits of your harvest unto the priest; and he shall wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.” Compare Matt. 28 and Mark 16.
Seven full weeks after the waving of the sheaf, the feast of Pentecost was celebrated. The former was reckoned to be the first day of the harvest in Judea; the latter supposed the corn to be fully gathered in. Then they had a solemn festival of thanksgiving for “harvest home.” Two loaves of bread, baken with the flour of the new harvest, characterized this festival. They were to be baken with leaven, and brought out of then habitations. Some have thought that the two loaves prefigured the out-calling of the Church as composed of Jew and Gentile. Be this as it may, the number is significant. Two witnesses were necessary for a testimony in Israel. The leaven indicates, we doubt not, indwelling sin in the believer, and, of course, in the Church, viewed in its time condition.
With the wave sheaf—beautiful type of the risen Christ, pure and holy—sacrifices of a Sweet savor were offered; but no sacrifice for sin. With the two wave loaves—type of those who are Christ’s—a sin-offering was presented.
Sin being there, a sin-offering was needed to cover it. Though the one perfect sacrifice of Christ answered to God for both indwelling sin, and the many actual sins of the life; still, as a matter of fact and experience, sin dwells in us: and will do so as long as we are in this world. All acknowledge this, though all may not see the completeness of the work of Christ. “The Christian has by one offering been perfected forever, though he may humble himself and make confession to God for every failure.”
The typical significance of Pentecost was remarkably fulfilled in the descent of the Holy Ghost. He came down to gather together the children of God that were scattered abroad. (John 11:52.) By this great event, the system of Judaism was set aside, and the new vessel of testimony—the Church of God—was introduced. And now, observe, the order of events. First, the resurrection and ascension of Christ.
Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection, are the great foundation truths, or facts, of the Church—of Christianity. Incarnation was necessary to crucifixion, and both to resurrection. It is blessedly true that Christ died on the cross for our sins; but it is equally true, that the believer died in His death. (See Rom. 6, Col. 2) The Christian’s fife is life in resurrection. The Church is built on the risen Christ. No truths can be more blessed and wonderful than incarnation and crucifixion; but the Church is associated with Him who is risen and glorified.
In the first chapter of the Acts, we have that which is connected with the Lord’s resurrection and ascension; and also with the actions of the apostles before the descent of the Holy Ghost. The blessed Lord, though in resurrection, still speaks and acts by the Holy Ghost. It was “through the Holy Ghost” that He gave commandments unto the apostles whom He had chosen. This is worthy of special note as teaching us two things. 1. The character of our union with Christ; the Holy Ghost in the Christian, and in the risen Lord, joins them together. “He that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.” By the “one spirit” they are united. 2. This important fact points out the blessed truth of the Holy Ghost dwelling and acting in the Christian also, after he is actually in resurrection. Then He will not—as He has now—have the flesh in us to contend against, but will, ungrieved and unhindered, lead us on to the full joys of heaven—the happy worship, the blessed service, and the whole will of God.
The risen Lord next exhorts the apostles to wait in Jerusalem for “the promise of the Father,” which, saith He, ye have heard of Me. “For John truly baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” It is no longer a question of temporal promises to Israel; that field must be left till a future day. The Father’s promise of the Holy Ghost was an entirely different thing, and widely different in its results.
Several things “pertaining to the kingdom of God” having been spoken of between the Lord and His apostles, He ascends to heaven, and a cloud receives Him out of their sight. The Lord’s return is also most plainly and distinctly taught at the same time. “And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven, as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” It is quite evident from these words, that He ascended personally, visibly, bodily, and that He shall so come again in like manner—that He will again appear beneath the heavens, and be manifested to people on the earth, personally, visibly, and bodily, but then it will be in power and great glory.
The apostles and disciples had now learned two things.
1. That Jesus was taken up out of tins world into heaven.
2. That He was coming back again into this world. On these two great facts their testimony was founded. But Jerusalem was to be the starting-point of their ministry, and they were to wait for power from above. We now come to the second great event, important beyond all others, with respect to man’s condition in this world—the gift of the Holy Ghost. Now, it is to be, not only God for us, but God in us. This took place on the day of Pentecost.

Short Papers on Church History
The time was now fully come. Redemption was finished—God was glorified—Christ at His right hand in heaven, and the Holy Ghost come down to earth. God inaugurates the Church; and this He does in a way suitable to His own wisdom, power, and glory. A mighty miracle is wrought, an outward sign is given. The great event is thus recorded.
Acts 2 “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.” It may be well here to pause for a moment, and note a few things connected with the descent of the Holy Ghost and the display of His power on this important day.
There was, in the first place, the accomplishment of the Father’s promise; the Holy Ghost Himself was sent down from heaven. This was the great truth of Pentecost. He came from above to dwell in the Church—the place prepared for Him, by the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ. There was also the fulfillment of the word of the Lord to the apostles, “Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.” Not that the disciples then knew the meaning of this word, but the fact was now accomplished. The full revelation of the doctrine of the “ one body” awaited the ministrations of Paul; as he elsewhere says, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” 1 Cor. 12
But further, besides the various gifts dispensed for the work of the Lord, we have something most blessedly personal, and quite new on the earth. The Holy Ghost Himself came down to dwell, not in the Church only, but also in each individual who believed in the Lord Jesus. And, thank the Lord, this most blessed fact is as true today as it was then. He dwells now in every believer who rests on the finished work of Christ. The Lord had said, looking forward to this day, “For he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.” These two grand aspects of the Spirit’s presence were fully accomplished on the day of Pentecost. He came to dwell in each Christian and in the Church. And now, blessed truth, we know that God is not only for us, but in us, and with us.
When “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power,” He appeared in the form of a dove—beautiful emblem of the immaculate purity—the meekness and lowliness of Jesus. He was not to make His voice heard in the streets, nor break the bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax. But in the case of the disciples who were waiting at Jerusalem, it was altogether different. He descended on them in cloven tongues—tongues of fire, and sat upon each of them. This was characteristic. It was the power of God in testimony—a testimony that was to go forth, not only to all Israel, but to all the nations of the earth. The word of God was also to judge all that came before it—it was as tongues of fire. God’s judgment on man because of sin had been judicially expressed in the cross, and now the solemn fact is to be made known, far and wide, by the power of the Holy Ghost. Nevertheless, grace reigns—reigns through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Christ Jesus. Pardon is proclaimed to the guilty, salvation to the lost, peace to the troubled, and rest to the weary. All that believe are, and ever shall be, blessed in and with a risen and glorified Christ.
The astonishment and consternation of the Sanhedrim and the Jewish people must have been great indeed, at the re-appearance, in such power, of the followers of the crucified Jesus. They had doubtless concluded, that as the Master was now gone, the disciples could do nothing of themselves. For the most part, they were plain, uneducated men. But what must have been their amazement, —when they heard that these plain men were preaching boldly in the streets of Jerusalem, and making converts by thousands to the religion of Jesus. Even historically viewed, the scene is full of the most thrilling interest, and has no parallel in the annals of time.
Jesus had been crucified; His claims to be the Messiah, in popular estimation, had been buried in His grave. The soldiers, who guarded His sepulcher, had been bribed to spread a false report as to His resurrection; the popular excitement had no doubt passed away, and the city, and temple worship, had returned to their former course, as if no great event had taken place. But on God’s part, things were not to be thus quietly passed over. He was awaiting the appointed time to vindicate His Son, and to vindicate Him in the very scene of His humiliation. This took place early in the morning on the day of Pentecost. Suddenly, and unexpectedly, His scattered followers reappeared in miraculous power. They boldly charged the rulers and the people with the guilt of His apprehension, trial, an crucifixion—that they had killed their own Messiah; but that God had raised Him up, to be a Prince and a Savior and to set Him at His own right hand in heaven. “Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”
The sentence of Babel, we may also say, was reversed on that wonderful day. In the different languages to which man had been doomed, in God’s just displeasure, salvation is proclaimed. This mighty, marvelous work of God attracts the multitude. They are amazed, and speculate, as to this strange thing. Each one, in the language of the country from whence he came, hears from the lips of poor Galileans, the wonderful works of God. The Jews who dwelt at Jerusalem, not understanding these foreign languages, mocked. Then Peter stood up, and declared to them in their own tongue, and proved from their own scriptures, the true character of what had taken place.
PETER’S FIRST APPEAL TO THE JEWS.
Thus we read: “And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine. But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day:” or, as we would reckon, nine in the morning—the hour of prayer in the temple.
Thus Peter takes the lead, and explains to the Jews, that the wonderful things they had seen and heard that morning, were not the result of excitement, but rather that which ought to have been looked for according to their own prophetic scriptures. “This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel.” But mark the ground on which Peter stands and preaches with such boldness. He stands on the ground of the resurrection and exaltation of Christ. This is carefully to be noted, as showing the foundation on which the Church rests, and when and where her history commences. This was the first day of her existence, the first page of her history, and the first triumphs of God’s ineffable gift to man. “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
We quote the words of another, on the blessed effects of Peter’s first sermon, and of the presence of the Holy Ghost on the earth.
“It was not merely a moral change, but a power which set aside all the motives which individualized those who had received it, by uniting them as one soul, and in one mind. They continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine, they were in communion with each other, they broke bread, they spent their time in prayer, the sense of God’s presence was powerful among them; and many signs and wonders were wrought by the hands of the apostles. They were united in the closest bonds; no man calling anything his own, but all divided their possessions with those that needed. They were daily in the temple, the public resort of Israel for religious exercises, whilst having their own apart, breaking bread at home daily. They ate with joy and gladness of heart, praising God, and having favor with all the people around them. Thus the assembly was formed, and the Lord added daily to it the remnant of Israel, who were to be saved from the judgments which should fall on a nation which had rejected the Son of God, their Messiah. God brought into the assembly—thus owed of Him by the presence of the Holy Ghost—those whom He spared in Israel. A new order of things had commenced, marked by the presence of the Holy Ghost. Here was found the presence and the house of God, although the old order of things still existed unto the execution of the judgment.
“The assembly was formed, therefore, by the power of the Holy Ghost come down from heaven, on the testimony that Jesus, who had been rejected, was raised up to heaven; being made of God both Lord and Christ. It was composed of the Jewish remnant who were to be spared, with the reserve of bringing in Gentiles whenever God should call them.”
This, then, is the Church of God; a gathering together of those whom God has called to the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God. Love rules and characterizes the newly formed assembly. The mighty victories which grace achieved on that memorable day fully attested the power of the exalted Lord, and the presence of the Holy Ghost on earth. Three thousand souls were converted through one sermon. Those who had been the avowed enemies of the Lord, and who had participated in the guilt of His murder, agonized under the power of Peter’s word. Alarmed at the awful thought of having killed their own Messiah, and that God, in whose presence they now were, had exalted Him to His own right hand in heaven, they cry out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” The Lord, in a certain sense, had sent the rod of His strength out of Zion, He was ruling in the midst of His enemies, and His people were made willing in the day of His power. Psalm 110.
Peter now seeks to deepen the good work in their souls—He seeks to humble the once proud and scornful Jews. “Repent,” he says, “and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” He does not say simply, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved.” Though, of course, faith and repentance must go together wherever the work is genuine. But Peter, in this case, presses repentance. Their guilt had been great, and a deep moral work in the conscience was needful for their humbling. They must see then guilt in the sight of God, and receive the remission of their sins at the feet of Him whom they had rejected and crucified. Nevertheless, all was grace. Their hearts were touched. They sided with God against themselves—they truly repented, were pardoned, and received the gift of the Holy Ghost. Now they are the children of God and have eternal life: the Holy Ghost dwelt in them. The reality of the change was made manifest by a complete change of character. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they con-tinned steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.”
Baptism, on the confession of faith; reception into the assembly; the Lord’s supper; the fellowship of saints, and prayer; were their distinguishing observances. For the moment, the Lord’s prayer, “that they all may be one,” was answered, as we read in the fourth chapter, “And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common.” We will now turn, for the sake of connection, to the tenth chapter.
THE CALLING IN OF THE GENTILES.
Cornelius, the centurion, a devout man, and those that were with him, are now received into the assembly of God. Peter had proclaimed their call in his first discourse. He is now summoned of God in a special way, and with special indications of His purpose, to open the door to those God-fearing Gentiles. Up to this time, the assembly consisted chiefly, if not solely, of Jews. But God dealt tenderly with His ancient people, considering their national prejudices. “Cornelius was a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.” They could have no objection, personally, to receive such an one. Thus God is gracious, tender, and merciful. But no doubt was left on Peter’s mind as to the divine will. God graciously silenced his reasonings, and overcame his unwillingness, with the mild reproof, “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.”
Peter now proceeds, though slowly; it was a new kind of work for him. But nothing seems more surprising to Peter, than that the Gentiles should be brought into blessing, without either becoming Jews, or submitting to any Jewish ordinances. This, to Peter, to the Gentiles, and in itself, was an immense step. It strikes at the very root of Popery, Puseyism, Apostolic Succession, and every system of ordinances. In this fact a flood of light is shed on the character of the present dispensation. “Then Peter opened his mouth and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of him.” Clearly, it was no longer necessary to become a Jew, or submit to external rites and ceremonies, in order to enjoy the richest blessings of heaven. Without the imposition of apostolic hands—though Peter himself, in divine power and authority was present—and before being baptized with water, they were baptized with the Holy Ghost. While the word of God was falling from Peter’s lips, the Holy Ghost fell on all who heard it. Before this, however, a blessed work, through God’s grace, had been going on in the heart of Cornelius: he was a divinely quickened soul.
The quickening operations of the Spirit are quite distinct from being sealed with the Spirit. Before the Holy Ghost can seal, there must be something for Him to seal. He cannot seal our old nature; there must be a new nature for Him to seal—so that there must be a moment in every Christian’s history, when he is quickened and not sealed; but sooner or later the work will be completed. (Eph. 1:13.) For example, the prodigal son was quickened, or converted, when he left the far country, but he was a stranger to the Father’s love and grace; and, consequently, had not yet the faith that calmly rests in Him as the source of all blessing. He was legal and unbelieving, though quickened. Certainly, he was not sealed, or at rest, as to his pardon and acceptance, until he received the kiss of reconciliation, or, as some would say, the ring. The gospel idea of believing is more than concern for the soul, however real. Christ-dishonoring unbelief may accompany, for a while, a genuine work of God’s Spirit in the soul. The prodigal had a certain belief, that there was something good in his Father’s heart, therefore he ventures to draw near. But surely this is short of the gospel idea of faith. “He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.” This is faith; and wherever there is this faith, there is the seal of God. Paul himself was at least three days in the deepest exercise of soul, without the peace and rest which the sealing of the Holy Spirit gives. “And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.” (Acts 9) But we return to the main point before us.
Short Papers on Church History
Notice, then, this important fact connected with the bringing in of the Gentiles—they receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, simply through the preaching of the word. At Jerusalem, the Jews were baptized before they received the Holy Ghost. At Samaria, the Samaritans were not only baptized, but had the apostles’ hands laid on them, with prayer, before they received the Holy Ghost. But at Caesarea, without baptism, without the laying on of hands, without prayer, the richest christian blessing was given to the Gentiles; though the doctrine of the Church as the body of Christ was not yet revealed.
The grace of God, thus shown to the Gentiles, at the commencement of the dispensation, has characterized it ever since. We are Gentiles; we are neither Jews nor Samaritans. Therefore, God’s ways in grace, and His order of things with the Gentiles, have a special application to us. There is no instance recorded by the inspired historians of one being baptized without professing faith in Christ; but if we are to follow the pattern of things at Caesarea, we must look for sealing as well as quickening—for peace with God as well as faith in Christ before baptism. The case of Cornelius stands at the very head of our dispensation; it was the first direct expression of grace to the Gentiles; and surely it ought to be a model for Gentile preachers and disciples. When the word of God that was then preached to Cornelius is now believed, the same effects, as to peace with God, we may rest assured, will follow.
Preaching, believing, sealing, baptizing, is the divine order of things here. God and His word never change; though “times change,” as men say, and human opinions change, and religious observances change, but the word of God—never. Jews, Gentiles, and Samaritans professed faith in Christ before they were baptized. Indeed baptism supposed eternal life possessed through faith, not communicated by its observance, as Anglican Catholics teach. “Grace is communicated, life is communicated, by sacraments,” they say, “and is only effected through these means; irrespective of any exercise of the intellect on the part of the person brought into union. Holy baptism is the means of conferring on the recipient a new and spiritual life.” Such notions, we need scarcely say, are utterly opposed to scripture. Baptism, we affirm, confers nothing. Life is conferred by other means, as the scriptures plainly teach. Conversion, or “being born again, “is affected, in all cases without exception, by the Holy Spirit. As we read in 1 Peter 1:22, “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.” Here, the truth of the gospel is viewed as the means, and the Holy Spirit as the power, in conversion. Christ, or God in Christ, is the new object of the soul. It is by the Spirit and truth of God that this blessed change is affected. Those who trust to water baptism as the means of effecting it, trust, alas, to a great delusion—a fatal delusion.
(The following brief statements from the fathers of the fourth century, on the subject of baptism, will show our readers the sources, or the authorities, of much that is said and done in the present day by the ritualists. The authority of scripture is entirely set aside. “At Easter, and at Pentecost, and in some places at the Epiphany, the rite of baptism was administered publicly—that is, in the presence of the faithful—to all the converts of the year, excepting those few instances in which it had been expedient to perform the ceremony without delay, or where the timid Christian put it off till the close of life, after the example of Constantine: a practice for a long time condemned in vain by the Clergy. But the fact of the delay shows how deeply the importance and efficacy of the rite were rooted in the christian mind. It was a complete lustration [purifying] of the soul. The Neophyte [new convert] emerged from the waters of baptism in a state of perfect innocence. The Dove—the Holy Spirit—was constantly hovering over the font, and sanctifying the waters to the mysterious ablution of all the sins of the past life. If the soul suffered no subsequent taint, it passed at once to the realms of purity and bliss; that is, the heart was purified the understanding illuminated; the spirit was clothed with immortality.
“Robed in white, emblematic of spotless purity, the candidate approached the baptistery, in the larger churches a separate building. There he uttered the solemn vows which pledged him to his religion. The symbolizing genius of the East added some significant ceremonies. The Catechumen [one in the first stages of christian instruction] turned to the West, the realm of Satan, and thrice renounced his power; he turned to the East, to adore the Sun of Righteousness, and to proclaim his compact with the Lord of life. The mystic trinal number prevailed throughout; the vow was threefold, and thrice pronounced. The baptism was usually by immersion; the stripping off the clothes was emblematic of ‘putting off the old man;’ but baptism by sprinkling was allowed, according to the exigency of the case. The water itself became, in the vivid language of the Church, the blood of Christ: it was compared, by a fanciful analogy, to the Red Sea: the daring metaphors of some of the fathers might seem, to assert a transmutation of its color.
“Almost all the fathers of this age, Basil, the two Gregories, Ambrose, &c, &c, have treatises on baptism; and vie, as it were, with each other in their praises of its importance and efficacy. Gregory of Nazianzen almost exhausts the copiousness of the Greek language in speaking of baptism.” Milman’s History of Christianity, vol. 3.)
In the ease of the Gentiles, now under consideration, even more than life was possessed before baptism was administered. They had the seal of God. Baptism is the sign of full deliverance and salvation as secured for the believer by the death and resurrection of Christ. Cornelius had life, was a devout man, but he must send for Peter, and hear words whereby he would be saved—fully delivered. The Old as well as the New Testament teaches this blessed truth most plainly. Israel, as a typical people, after being brought to God and sheltered by the blood of the lamb in Egypt, were baptized to Moses in the cloud and in the sea. Thus they were delivered out of Egypt, and saw the salvation of Jehovah. Again, Noah and his family were saved through the flood—not by it. They left the old world, passed through the waters of death, and landed in a new condition of things altogether. The like figure, or antitype, whereunto even baptism doth also now save us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Exod. 14 Pet. 3:21.
But what was the word, some may inquire, that Peter preached, which was accompanied with such remarkable blessing? He preached peace by Jesus Christ, as Lord of all. Christ risen, exalted, and glorified, was the grand object of his testimony. He sums up with these words: “To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” The blessing follows. The Jews present were astonished; but they bow, and own God’s goodness to the Gentiles. “While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then Peter answered, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded that they should be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.”
We now retrace our steps a little way, and notice some of the leading events, which, the order, precede chapter 10 the first christian martyr. Stephen, the deacon and evangelist, is the first to receive the crown of martyrdom for the name of Jesus. He stands at the head of “the noble army of martyrs.” He is perfect as a type—as the proto-martyr. Firm and unwavering in his faith; bold and undaunted before his accusers; pointed and faithful in his defense before the Sanhedrim; free from malice in his strongest statements; full of charity towards ah men, he seals his testimony with his blood, and falls asleep in Jesus.
In some respects, Stephen resembles the blessed Lord Himself. “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,” is like “Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit;” and again, “Lord, lay not this sin to their charge,” resembles “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do:” only Stephen does not plead their ignorance.
Already we see that troubles both within and without assail the young assembly. True, the word of God increased, multitudes were converted, and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. But the Grecians, or Hellenists (Jews of Greek origin), murmured against the Hebrews (natives of Judea), because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. This led to the appointment of seven deacons. (Acts 6) From their names here given it would appear that the seven chosen were “Grecians’—all from the side of the murmurers; thus the Spirit of God ruled in grace. Stephen was one of the number; and in his case the word of the apostle was exemplified: “Those who have used the office of a deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.” He was full of faith and power, and did great wonders and miracles among the people. The energy of the Holy Spirit was especially manifested in Stephen.
There were different synagogues in Jerusalem, appropriated to the different races of Jews. It was the synagogue of the Libertines, Cyrenians, &c, that opposed Stephen. But “they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake.” Then followed that which has usually been the case with the confessors of Jesus of all ages; unable to answer him, they accuse him before the council. False witnesses arc suborned, who swear that they had “heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God; and that Jesus of Nazareth would destroy this place, and change the customs delivered to them by Moses.” The case was now before the Sanhedrim—the trial commences. But what must his judges have thought when they saw his face radiant, as the face of an angel?
We have the noble address of Stephen to the heads of the nation before us. To them, it was convincing, perplexing, overwhelming. Doubtless, it was the testimony of the Holy Ghost to the Jews, from the mouth of Stephen; and all the more humbling to the proud Jews, to hear their doom from the lips of a Hellenist. But the Spirit of God, when unhindered by man’s arrangements, works by whomsoever He will.
Stephen recapitulates in bold language the chief points in their national history. He refers especially to the history of Joseph and of Moses. The former, their fathers sold to the Gentiles; the latter, they despised as a ruler and a judge. He also charges them with always resisting the Holy Ghost—with always disobeying the law; and now with having been the betrayers and murderers of the Just One. Here Christ’s faithful witness was interrupted, he was not allowed to finish his address. A picture, too true, of the treatment of martyrs, from that day even until now. The murmurs, the indignation, the fury of the Sanhedrim, were beyond control. “When they heard these things, they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth.” But in place of pursuing his discourse, he turns in ecstasy of heart to the Lord, and fixes his eyes on heaven—the home and center of gathering for all his people.
“I see,” said Stephen, “the heavens opened.” He was full of the Holy Ghost—heaven opens to him, and he sees the Son of man standing there, ready to receive his spirit. “Such, then,” as another has said, “is the position of the true believer—heavenly upon the earth—in presence of the world that rejected Christ, the murderous world; the believer, alive in death, sees by the power of the Holy Ghost into heaven, and the Son of man at the right hand of God. Stephen does not say, ‘Jesus.’ The Spirit characterizes Him as ‘the Son of man.’ Precious testimony to man! It is not to the glory that he testifies, but to the Son of man in the glory; heaven being open to him..... As to the object of faith and the position of the believer, this scene is definitively characteristic.”
We have now gone over, with some care, the first section of the Church’s history. And we have been the more careful, as church histories, in general, commence at a later period. Most of them begin where scripture ends; at least as to details. None that we have yet seen refer to the sixteenth of Matthew, and few attempt a critical examination of the Acts of the Apostles, which, after all, is the only part of her history which commands our faith, and has an absolute claim upon our obedience.
In the eighth chapter, we find the Holy Ghost in Samaria working by Philip. He has, as it wore, left Jerusalem. This marks a distinct epoch in the history of the Church; and especially in her connection with Jerusalem. We leave, for the present, the enraged and persecuting Jews, and follow the path of the Spirit to the city of Samaria. But we must glance for a moment at what some have called the third persecution.
“Foremost and nearest to His throne,
By perfect robes of triumph known,
And likest Him in lock and tone,
The holy Stephen kneels,
With steadfast gaze, as when the sky
Flew open to his fainting eye,
Which like a fading lamp flashed high,
Seeing what death conceals.

He, though he seem on earth to move,
Must glide in air like gentle dove,
From you unclouded depths above
Must draw his purer breath:
Till men behold his angel face
All radiant with celestial grace,
Martyr all o’er, and meet to trace
The lines of Jesus’ death.”

Short Papers on Church History
The Disciples Persecuted and Scattered.
After the death of Stephen, a great persecution broke out. (Acts 8) The Jewish leaders appeared to have gained a victory over the disciples, and they determined to pursue their apparent triumph with the utmost violence. But God, who is above all, and who knows how to restrain the rising passions of men, overruled their opposition for the accomplishment of His own will.
Man had not yet learned the truth of the proverb, that “The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.” In the case of the first and the noblest of martyrs, the proverb was fully verified. But all these eighteen hundred years, men have been slow to learn, or believe, this plain historical fact. Persecution, generally speaking, has advanced the cause which it sought to repress. This will be found true in the main, under every form of opposition and persecution. Resistance, decision, and firmness are created by such treatment. True, timid minds may be driven to apostasy for a time, by persecution; but how often have such, with the deepest repentance, and in order to regain their former position, endured with cheerfulness the greatest sufferings, and displayed in their last moments the greatest fortitude. But persecution, in one form or another, is to be expected by the followers of Jesus. They are exhorted to take up their cross daily and follow Him. It tests the sincerity of our faith—the purity of our motives—the strength of our affection for Christ, and the measure of our confidence in Him.
Those who are not true in heart for Christ will be sure to fall away in a time of sharp persecution. But love can endure for its object, when it can do nothing else. We see this perfectly in the blessed Lord Himself. He endured the cross—that was of God: He despised the shame—that was of man. It was amidst the shame and sufferings of the cross that the full strength of His love appeared, and that He triumphed over everything. Nothing could turn His love aside from its object; it was stronger than death. In this, as in all things, He has left us an example, that we should walk in His steps. May we ever be found following hard after Him!
From the history of the Church in the Acts, we learn, that the effect of the martyrdom of Stephen was the immediate spread of the truth, which his persecutors were seeking to hinder. The impressions produced by such a witness, and such a death, must have been overwhelming to his enemies, and convincing to the unprejudiced and the thoughtful. The last resort of human cruelty is death; but, wonderful to say, christian faith, in its first trial, was proved to be stronger than death, and that in its most frightful form. This the enemy witnessed, and would ever after remember. Stephen was on the Rock, and the gates of hell could not prevail against Him.
The whole Church at Jerusalem, on this occasion, were scattered abroad; but they went everywhere preaching the word. Like the cloud that flies before the wind, bearing its refreshing rain to thirsty lands, so the disciples were driven from Jerusalem by the storm of persecution, bearing the living waters to thirsty souls in distant lands. “And at that time there was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles.” Some historians have thought, that the fact of the apostles remaining in Jerusalem, when the disciples fled, proves their greater firmness and faithfulness in the cause of Christ; but we are disposed to judge differently, and to consider it failure rather than faithfulness. The Lord’s commission to them was, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” And they were also told, “When they persecute you in one city, flee into another.” As far as scripture history informs us, the commission was never carried out by the twelve. Nevertheless, God was mighty in Paul towards the Gentiles, and in Peter towards the Jews.
The Holy Spirit now leaves Jerusalem, as to outward manifest power—most solemn truth! But that guilty city preferred the patronage of Rome to the resurrection-power of their own Messiah. “What do we?” said the Jews, “for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.” They rejected the Messiah of His humiliation, and now they reject the testimony of the Holy Spirit to His exaltation. Their iniquity was full, and wrath was coming on them to the uttermost. But, for the present, our happier place, in tracing the history of the Church, is to follow the Holy Spirit on His way to Samaria. His path is the silver line of saving grace in precious souls the triumphs of the gospel in Samaria.
Philip, the deacon, evidently next to Stephen in zeal and energy, goes down to Samaria. The Holy Spirit works with him. In the wisdom of the Lord’s ways, despised Samaria is the first place, outside of Judea, where the gospel was preached by His chosen witnesses. “Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. And there was great joy in that city.” A great many believed and were baptized, both men and women. Even Simon Magus, the sorcerer, owned the presence of a power far above his own, and bowed to the force and current of the Spirit’s work in others, though the truth had not penetrated his own heart or conscience. But as we have now traveled to another part of the country, this may be the fitting place to say a word as to its history.
The Holy Land, interesting beyond all other nations of the earth, both morally and historically, is in size very small. “It is but a strip of country, about the size of Wales, less than 140 miles in length, and barely 40 in average breadth.” The northern portion is Galilee; the center, Samaria; the south, Judea. But though physically so small, it has been the theater of the most momentous events in the world’s history. There the Savior was born, lived, and was crucified—and there He was buried and rose again. And there, too, His apostles and martyrs lived, testified, and suffered; and there the first gospel sermon was preached, and there the first Church was planted.
The land originally occupied by Israel, lay between the ancient empires of Assyria and Egypt. Hence the frequent reference in the Old Testament to “the king of the North,” and “the king of the South.” Owing to this position, it was often the battle field of these mighty empires; and we know it will yet be the scene of their last and deadly conflict. (Dan. 11) So superstitious have men been about the Holy Land, that it has been the object of national ambition, and the occasion of religious wars, almost ever since the days of the apostles. Who could estimate the blood that has been shed, and the treasure that has been wasted, on these sacred plains? —and all, we may add, under the fair name of religious zeal, or rather, under the banners of the cross and the crescent. It has also been the great attraction for travelers of all characters and of all nations. The Christian, the historian, and the antiquarian have searched it diligently, and made known their discoveries. Ever since the days of Abraham, it has been the most interesting and attractive spot on the earth’s surface. And to the student of prophecy, its future history is even more interesting than its past. He knows that the day is coming, when the whole land shall be peopled by the twelve tribes of Israel, and filled with the glory and majesty of their Messiah. Then shall they be owned as the metropolitan people of the earth. We now return to Samaria, with its new life and joy.
The Samaritans, through God’s blessing, readily believed the gospel, as preached by Philip. The effects of the truth, thus received in simplicity, were immediate and of the most blessed character. “There was great joy in that city,” and many were baptized. Such must ever be the effects of the gospel, when believed, unless there be some hindrance in connection with ourselves. Where there is genuine simplicity of faith, there must be genuine peace and joy, and happy obedience. The power of the gospel, over a people who had for ages resisted the claims of Judaism, was thus displayed. What the law could not do, in this respect, the gospel accomplished. “Samaria was a ‘conquest’” as one has said, “which all the energy of Judaism had never been able to make. It was a new and splendid triumph of the gospel. The spiritual subjugation of the world appertained to the Church.”
JERUSALEM AND SAMARIA UNITED BY THE GOSPEL.
The bitter jealousy that existed between Jews and Samaritans, had long been proverbial; hence we read “The Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans.” But now, in connection with the gospel of peace, this root of bitterness disappears. Nevertheless, in the wisdom of God’s ways, the Samaritans must wait for the highest blessing of the gospel, until the Jewish believers—the apostles from the Church at Jerusalem—lay their hands on them, and offer up prayer for them. Nothing can be more deeply interesting than this fact, when we take into consideration the religious rivalry that had been so long manifested by both. Had not Samaria received this timely lesson of humility, she might have been disposed, once more, to maintain her proud independency of Jerusalem. But the Lord would not have it so. The Samaritans had believed, rejoiced, and were baptized, but they had not received the Holy Ghost. “Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received, the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John; who, when they were come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost. Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.”
Identification is the great idea of the laying on of hands, and unity is the great idea of the gift of the Holy Ghost. These are immense facts in connection with the progress of the Church. Samaria is thus brought into happy association with her ancient rival, and made one with the Church at Jerusalem. There is no thought in God’s mind of the one assembly being independent of the other. Had they been each blessed separately and independently, their rivalry might have been greater than ever. But it was to be no longer: “Neither on this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem,” but one Head in heaven, one body on earth, one Spirit, one redeemed family, worshipping God in Spirit and in truth, for the Father seeketh such to worship Him.
For the origin of the mixed people and worship of Samaria, see 2 Kings 17. They were but half Jews, though they boasted of their relation to Jacob. They received the five books of Moses as sacred, but undervalued the rest of the Bible. They were circumcised, kept the law after a sort, and were expecting a Messiah to come. The personal visit of the blessed Lord to Samaria is of the deepest and most touching interest. (John 4) The well at which He rested, it is said, “lay in a valley between the two famous mountains, Ebal and Gerizim, on which the law was read. On the latter height stood the rival temple of the Samaritans, which had so long afflicted the more zealous Jews by its daring opposition to the one chosen sanctuary on Mount Moriah.”
THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH RECEIVES THE GOSPEL.
Philip is now called to leave his happy and interesting work at Samaria, and go down to Gaza—a wilderness; and preach the gospel there to a single person. Surely there is a lesson for the evangelist in this fact, of the deepest importance, and one that must not be passed over without a brief notice.
The preacher, in such a scene of awakening and conversion as there was at Samaria, necessarily becomes greatly interested in the work. God is setting His seal on the ministry of the word, and sanctioning the meetings with His presence. The work of the Lord prospers. The evangelist is surrounded with respect and affection, and his children in the faith naturally look up to him for further light and instruction as to their path. How can he leave such a field of labor? many will inquire—would it be right to leave it? Only, we reply, if the Lord called His servant to do so, as he did in the case of Philip. But how is he to know now, seeing that angels and the Spirit do not speak to him as they did to Philip? Though not spoken to in this way, he ought to look for and expect divine guidance. Faith must be his guide. Circumstances are unsafe as a guide; they may rebuke and correct us in our path, but the eye of God must be our guide. “I will guide thee with mine eye,” is the promise; “I will instruct thee, and teach thee in the way which thou shalt go.” Psalm 32
The Lord only knows what is best for His servant and for His work. The evangelist in such a scene would be in danger of feeling his own personal importance. Hence the necessity of changing the place of service.
“Arise,” said the angel of the Lord to Philip, “and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. And he arose and went; and, behold a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet. Then the Spirit said to Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.” Acts 8:26-40.
The immediate and unquestioning obedience of Philip at this time is beautiful. He raises no question as to the difference between Samaria and Gaza—between leaving a wide field of labor, and going away to a desert place, to speak to one person about salvation. But the Spirit of God was with Philip. And the one desire of the evangelist should ever be, to follow the leading of the Spirit. From the want of spiritual discernment, a preacher may remain in a place after the Spirit has ceased to work in it, and so labor in vain.
God, in His providence, takes care of His servant; He sends an angel to direct him as to the road he is to take. But when it is a question of the gospel and dealing with souls, the Spirit takes the direction. “Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.” We know of nothing, in the whole history of the Church, more interesting than this scene on the way to Gaza. The angel and the Spirit of God accompany the evangelist: the former representing the providence of God in marking out the very road he is to take; the latter representing spiritual power in direct dealing with souls. As it was then, so is it now; though we are more in the habit of thinking of the guidance of the Spirit, than of the direction of providence. May we trust God for everything! He changes not.
The gospel now finds its way, in the person of the queen’s treasurer, to the center of Abyssinia. The eunuch believes, is baptized, and goes on his way rejoicing. What he sought for in vain in Jerusalem, and had taken a long journey to seek there, he finds in the desert. Beautiful instance of the grace of the gospel! The lost sheep is found in the wilderness, and living waters spring up in the desert. He is also a beautiful instance of an anxious soul. When alone and unemployed, he reads the prophet Isaiah. He muses on the prophecy of the suffering, unresisting Lamb of God. But the moment of light and deliverance had come. Philip explains the prophet—the eunuch is taught of God—he believes—immediately desires baptism, and returns to his home, filled with the new joys of salvation. Would he be silent there, as to what he had found? Certainly not; a man of such character and influence would have many opportunities of spreading the truth. But as both scripture and history are silent, as to the results of his mission, we venture not further.
The Spirit is still seen in company with Philip. He carries Him far away. He is found at Azotus. He evangelizes all the cities unto Caesarea.
A new era in the Church’s history begins to dawn. A new workman enters the scene, and the most remarkable in many ways that ever served the Lord and His Church.
Short Papers on Church History
No event in the “progress of the Church, so deeply, or so blessedly, affects her after history, as the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. From being the chief of sinners, he became the chief of saints—from being the most violent opposer of Christ, he became the most zealous defender of the faith. As a hater and persecutor of the name of Jesus on the earth, he was “chief;” all others, compared with him. were subordinate. Acts 9:1 Tim. 1.
It is quite evident, from what he says of himself, that he believed Judaism, not only to be divine, but to be God’s perpetual and unchangeable religion to man. It would be difficult to account for the strength of his Jewish prejudices on any other principle. Therefore all attempts to set aside the Jews’ religion, and to introduce another, he considered to be of the enemy, and to be strenuously opposed. He had heard the noble speech of Stephen—he had witnessed his triumphant death; but his subsequent persecution of the Christians showed that the moral glory of that scene had made no serious impression on his mind. He was blinded by zeal, but zeal for Judaism now, was zeal against the Lord. At this very time, he was “breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord.”
Hearing that some of the persecuted saints had found a shelter in Damascus, an ancient city of Syria, he was determined to go there, and bring them back to Jerusalem, as criminals. For this purpose, he received letters from the high priest and the estate of the elders, that he might bring them bound to Jerusalem to be punished. (Acts 22; 26) He thus became the very apostle of Jewish malice against the disciples of Jesus. Ignorantly, no doubt, but he made himself their willing missionary.
With his mind wrought up to the most violent pitch of persecuting zeal, he sets forth on his memorable journey. Unshaken in his ardent attachment to the religion of Moses, and determined to punish the converts to Christianity, as apostates from the faith of their ancestors, he approaches Damascus. But there, in the full energy of his mad career, the Lord Jesus stops him. A light from heaven, above the light of the sun, shines around him, and overwhelms him in its dazzling brightness. He falls to the earth—broken in will, subdued in mind, humbled in spirit, and altogether changed. His heart is now subject to the voice that speaks to him; he owns its power and authority. Reasoning, extenuation, self-justification, have no place in the presence of the Lord.
A voice from the excellent glory had said unto him, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.” Thus, the Lord Jesus, though in heaven, declares Himself to be still identified with His disciples on the earth. The oneness of the Church with Jesus, its Head in heaven, the germ of the blessed truth of the “one body,” is folded up in these few words, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?......I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.” To be at war with the saints, is to be at war with the Lord Himself. Blessed truth for the believer, awfully solemn for the persecutor!
The vision Saul had seen, and the terrible discovery he had made, completely engross him. He is blind for three days, and can neither eat nor drink. Thus he enters Damascus! blind, broken, humbled, beneath the solemn judgment of the Lord! How different to what he had intended! He now joins himself to the company which he had resolved to exterminate. Nevertheless, he enters in by the door, and humbly takes his place with the disciples of the Lord. Ananias, a godly disciple, is sent to comfort him. He receives his sight, he is filled with the Holy Ghost, he is baptized, he receives meat and is strengthened.
It is the thought of some, that the Lord gives in the conversion of Saul, not only a sample of His long-suffering, as in every sinner that is saved, but as a sign of the future restoration of Israel. Paul tells us himself, that he obtained mercy because he did it ignorantly in unbelief; and this is the very ground of mercy for Israel in the latter day. As our Lord Himself prayed for them:—“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Peter also says, “And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.” Acts 3:17.
But as the apostleship of Paul differs in many respects from that of the twelve, it will be necessary to notice it briefly. Unless this difference is understood, the true character of the present dispensation will be but feebly apprehended the apostleship of Paul.
The Law and the Prophets were until John; after John the Lord Himself, in His own Person, offers the kingdom to Israel; but “his own received Him not.” They crucified the Prince of life, but God raised him from the dead, and seated Him at His own right hand in heavenly places. We have next The Twelve Apostles. They are endued with the Holy Ghost, and bear witness to the resurrection of Christ. But the testimony of the twelve is despised, the Holy Ghost is resisted, Stephen is martyred, the final offer of mercy is rejected, and now the Lord’s dealings with Israel as a people, close for a season. The scenes of Shiloh are enacted over again, Ichabod is written on Jerusalem, and a new witness is called out, as in the days of Samuel.
The Great Apostle of the Gentiles now comes before us. He is as one born out of due time and out of due place. His apostleship had nothing to do with Jerusalem, or with the twelve. It was outside of both. His call was extraordinary and direct from the Lord in heaven. He is privileged to bring out the new thing, the heavenly character of the Church—that Christ and the Church are one, and that heaven is then common home. (Eph. 2) So long as God was dealing with Israel these blessed truths were kept a secret in His own mind. “Unto me,” says Paul, “who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.” Eph. 3
There could be no doubt, from the character of the Apostle’s call, as to its divine authority. “Not of men, neither by man,” as he says in his Epistle to the Galatians, “but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead.” That is—it was “not of men,” as to its source—not of any synod of official men. “Neither by man” was it, as to the medium through which his commission came. He was not only a saint, but an apostle, by calling: and that call was by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead. In some respects, his apostleship was even of a higher order than that of the twelve. They had been called by Jesus when on the earth, he had been called by the risen and glorified Christ in heaven. And, his call being thus from heaven, he wanted neither the sanction nor the recognition of the other apostles. “But when it pleased God to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen, immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.” Gal. 1:15, 16.
The manner of Saul’s call to be an apostle is worthy of special note, as it struck at the root of Jewish pride, and may also be viewed as the deathblow to the vain notion of apostolic succession. The apostles, whom the Lord had chosen and appointed when He was on the earth, were neither the source nor the channel, in any way, of Saul’s appointment. They did not cast lots for him, as they did in the case of Matthias. Then, they were scarcely off Jewish ground, which may account for their deciding by lot. It was an ancient form in Israel of discovering the divine will in such matters. But these emphatic words, “Paul, an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ,” completely exclude the intervention of man in every shape and form. Apostolic succession is set aside. We are saints by calling and servants by calling. And that call must come from heaven. Paul stands before us, as the true pattern for all preachers of the gospel, and for all ministers of the word. Nothing can be more simple than the ground he takes as a preacher, great apostle though he was. “We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak.” 2 Cor. 4:13.
Immediately after he was baptized and strengthened, he began to confess his faith in the Lord Jesus, and to preach in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God. This is a new thing. Peter preached that He had been exalted to the right hand of God—that He had been made both Lord and Christ; but Paul preaches the higher doctrine of His personal glory—“that he is the Son of God.” In Matt. 16, Christ is revealed by the Father to the disciples, as “the Son of the living God.” But now He is revealed, not only to Paul, but in Paul. “It pleased God to reveal his Son in me,” he says. But who is sufficient to speak of the privileges and blessings of those to whom the Son of God is thus revealed? The dignity and security of the Church rest on this blessed truth; and also, the gospel of the glory, which was especially entrusted to Paul, and which he calls “my gospel.”
“On the Son thus revealed within,” as one has sweetly said, “hangs everything that is peculiar to the calling and glory of the Church—her holy prerogatives—acceptance in the Beloved, with forgiveness of sins through His blood—entrance into the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, so as to have made known to us the mystery of the will of God—future inheritance in and with Him in whom all things in heaven and earth are to be gathered—and the present seal and earnest of this inheritance is the Holy Ghost. Tins bright roll of privileges is inscribed by the apostle, thus— “spiritual blessings in the heavenlies; and so they are; blessings through the Spirit flowing from and linking us with Him who is the Lord in the heavens.” Eph. 1:3-14.
But the doctrine of the Church—this mystery of love, and grace, and privilege, was not revealed until Paul declared it. The Lord had spoken of it as that which the presence of the Comforter was to effect, saying, “At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.” And again, when He said to the disciples after the resurrection, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, unto my God and your God.” Of this “bright roll” of blessing Paul was especially and characteristically the apostle.
We must now leave the history of Saul for a little, and turn to Peter, who occupies the field until Saul commences his public ministry in Acts 13.
CHAPTER 4. In place of going over consecutively the remaining chapters of the Acts, we think it may be more interesting, and equally instructive to our readers, to consider them in connection with the history of the apostles, especially with the history of the two great apostles. The book of the Acts is almost entirely occupied with the acts of Peter and of Paul—though, of course, under the guidance of the Holy Ghost—the one, as the great apostle of the Jews; the other, as the great apostle of the Gentiles. But we would also embrace the present opportunity, to record the names, in our short history, and briefly to notice, the first personally chosen companions and missionaries of our blessed Lord—the twelve apostles.
But before attempting an outline of these interesting lives, it may be well to state the object we have in view in doing so. We are stepping a little out of the usual course. In none of the Church Histories that we know, are the lives of the apostles presented in a regular form: and the books in which such lives appear are beyond the reach of many of the readers of “Things New and Old.” Our object, therefore, so far, is to meet that need, and place them within their reach.
But we must ever bear in mind, that beyond the sacred narrative, there is very little known of the apostles that can be relied upon. The traditional and the scriptural, the certain and the uncertain, are almost hopelessly blended together in the writings of the Fathers. Every distinct ray of historical light we greatly value, but it is only to the scriptures that we can turn with certainty. Still, the few scattered notices which we have there, of some of the apostles, with what may be gathered elsewhere, when brought together may give the reader a view of the person and individuality of the apostle, which he never had before. Others, of note, besides the apostles, will come before us in connection with them, especially with Paul; so that our readers will have, in a convenient form, a brief outline of nearly all the noble preachers, teachers, confessors, and martyrs of the Lord Jesus spoken of in the New Testament.
Short Papers on Church History
Simon Peter, Andrew, James and John (sons of Zebedee), Philip, Thomas, Bartholomew, Matthew, James (the son of Alpheus), Thaddeus, Simon Zelotes, Matthias, who was chosen in place of Judas Iscariot. See Matt. 10; Luke 6; Mark 3.
Paul was also an apostle by the Lord’s direct call, and that in the highest sense, as we have seen. There were others who were called apostles, but they were more especially the apostles of the churches. The twelve, and Paul, were pre-eminently the apostles of the Lord. Compare 2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25; Rom. 16:7.
The official name, “apostle,” signifies “one sent forth.” “These twelve Jesus sent forth.” This name was given to the twelve by the Lord Himself. “He called unto him his disciples; and of them he chose twelve, whom also he called apostles.” A personal acquaintance with the whole ministerial course of the Lord, was the original and a necessary qualification of an apostle. This was stated by Peter before the election of a successor to the traitor Judas. “Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection.” By this close personal intercourse with the Lord, they were particularly suited to be the witnesses of His earthly path. He describes them Himself as “they which have continued with me in my temptations.” Luke 22:28.
The number twelve, we believe, distinctly marks their relation to the twelve tribes of Israel. The fancies of the Fathers, as to the meaning of the number here chosen, show how little their minds were governed by the immediate context. St. Augustine “thinks our Lord herein had respect to the four quarters of the world, which were to be called by the preaching of the gospel, and which, being multiplied by three, as denoting the Trinity, make twelve.” From not seeing the distinction between Israel and the Church, there is no end of confusion in such writers.
The number twelve in scripture, we understand to mean, administrative completeness in man. Hence the twelve tribes, and the twelve apostles, and the promise to the latter, that they should sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Matt. 19:28.) But here, in plainest terms, the Lord limits the mission of the twelve to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. They were not even to visit the Samaritans, nor to go in the way of the Gentiles. The mission was strictly Jewish. “These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Surely nothing could possibly be plainer. The calling out of the Church is not here referred to. That took place after, when another and an extraordinary apostle was chosen, and with a special view to the Gentiles. Then the twelve would have their own place in the Church, but Paul was its divinely called and qualified minister.
The general notion that the twelve were altogether illiterate, we cannot agree with. The expression “unlearned and ignorant men,” as used by the council in Acts 4:13, we understand as simply denoting persons in private stations of life, who had not been taught in the rabbinical learning and traditions of the Jews. Our term “laymen” would convey the same idea; that is, men of ordinary education, as contrasted with those who have been specially trained in the schools of the learned; or, men not in “holy orders.” But Peter and John may have been thoroughly acquainted with the holy scriptures, and with the history of their country and people, and yet be considered by the council as “unlearned and ignorant men.” James and John at least had all the advantages of a godly and devoted mother’s training, which has often done great things for the Church of God.
We will now glance briefly at the twelve, and first in order is the apostle Peter. There can be no doubt that Peter held the first place among the twelve. The Lord gave him this place. He is first named in every list of the apostles. This precedence, we know, did not arise from his having known the Lord first. He was neither first nor last in this respect. Andrew, and probably John, knew the Lord before Peter. Let us here note, with deepest interest, the first meeting of those friends who were to be united forever. See John 1:29-51.
John the Baptist bears testimony to Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to take away the sin of the world. Two of John’s disciples leave him and go with Jesus. “One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, ‘We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus.’” This was Peter’s first introduction to the Lord—to one who was to be the source of his happiness forever. And how significant their first interview! “And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, a stone.” Naturally impulsive—quick by seizing an object, but too ready to relinquish it by the force of another impression—the Lord in grace gives him firmness; though every now and then his natural character shines out.
The first thing that brings Peter into great prominence is his noble confession of Christ, as the Son of the living God. (Matt. 16.) The Lord then honored him with the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and gave him the chief place among his brethren. But this part of Peter’s history, with some of the early chapters of the Acts, we have already considered; therefore we will only refer to what has not been touched upon.
The fourth chapter of the Acts we have not yet alluded to; and we are disposed to think that it presents the brightest day in the apostle’s history, as the baptism of Cornelius presents the crowning day of his ministry. As there is often displayed in the great apostle a mixture of strength and weakness, of excellencies and defects; it is deeply interesting to trace his path through the first storms which assailed the infant Church. But we must not forget that the grand secret of the boldness, wisdom, and power of the apostles, was not owing to their natural character, but to the presence of the Holy Ghost. He was with them and in them, and working by them. The Holy Ghost was the strength of their testimony.
Notice in particular the blessed effects of His presence in four distinct aspects. 1. In the courage displayed by Peter and the others. “Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people and elders of Israel; if we this day be examined of the good deed done to the impotent man, by what means he is made whole, be it known unto you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone which was set at naught of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” The great and solemn question between God and the rulers of Israel is here formally stated. Nothing can be plainer. The testimony of God is no longer with the rulers of the temple, but with the apostles of the exalted Messiah.
2. In His presence with the disciples as an assembly “And when they had prayed the place was shaken where they were assembled together, and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word with boldness.” This verse clearly teaches what has been so often said, as to the Spirit being with the disciples and in them. The place was shaken where they were assembled together; this proves His presence with them. But they were also filled with the Holy Ghost—so filled, we believe, that, for the time being, there was no room for the flesh to act.
3. In great power as to service. “And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus; and great grace was upon them all.” Readiness and energy now characterize the apostles.
4. In whole-hearted devotedness. “As many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles’ feet.” In the second chapter, the rich gave to the poor themselves: a thing which can scarcely be done without adding importance to the giver. But in the fourth chapter, the rich laid their money at the apostles’ feet. This fact we would accept as a sure sign of increased humility, and of greater devotedness.
It is also in this full and instructive chapter that we have the famous answer of Peter and John to the council. “Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye.” From that day until now, the true confessors of the name of Jesus have found in these words a suitable answer to their inquisitors and oppressors. What a difference, we may exclaim, between the man who sat by the fire in the hall of the high priest, and the man who takes the lead in the fourth of the Acts—between the man who fell before the assault of a maid, and the man who makes a nation tremble with his appeals! But how is the difference to be accounted for? some may ask. The presence and power of an ungrieved, unquenched Holy Spirit explains it fully. And the weakness or power of many in our clay, is to be accounted for on the same principle. The Spirit of God alone is power in the Christian. May we know the blessedness of living, walking, working, in the saving and sanctifying power of the Holy Spirit! “And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.” Eph. 4:30.
We are now come to the last section in the sacred narrative of the history of Peter. From verse 32 of chapter 9 to verse 18 of chapter 11, we have an account of his preaching, and working miracles. There we see him once more in full apostolic authority, and the Holy Ghost working with him. His mission at this time was greatly blessed, both in the towns of Israel, and at Caesarea. The whole town of Lydda and the district of Saron appear to have been awakened. The miracles which Peter wrought, and the gospel which he preached, were used of God for the conversion of many. Thus we read, “And all that dwelt at Lydda and Saron turned to the Lord.” The blessing was general. “Turning to the Lord,” is the scriptural idea of conversion. And at Joppa also, through the raising of Dorcas, there was a great stir and great blessing. “Many believed in the Lord throughout all Joppa.”
In the tenth chapter—which we have already considered—the Gentiles are brought into the Church. And now, Peter having finished his mission in these quarters, be returns to Jerusalem. After the account of his deliverance from the power of Herod in the twelfth chapter, we have no continuous history of the apostle of the circumcision.
As Herod Agrippa, the Idumean King, comes so prominently before us here, it may be well to notice the part he takes. He professed great zeal for the law of Moses, and maintained a certain respect towards its outward observance. He was therefore ready with a pretended pious zeal to side with the Jews against the disciples of Christ. This was his policy. He was a type of the adversary king.
It was about A.D. 44 that Herod sought to ingratiate himself with his Jewish subjects, by persecuting the unoffending Christians. Not that there was any love between Herod and the Jews, for they hated each other heartily; but here they united, as both hating the heavenly testimony. Herod killed James with the sword and cast Peter into prison. It was his wicked intention to keep Him there till after the Passover, and then, when a great many Jews from all parts would be in Jerusalem, to make a public spectacle of his execution. But God preserved and delivered his servant, in answer to the prayers of the saints. They have weapons of warfare which the governments of this world know nothing of. God allowed James to seal his testimony with his blood; but Peter He preserved for further testimony on the earth. Thus our God rules over all. He is the Governor among the nations, whatever the pride and will of man may be. Power belongeth unto Him. Feeble indeed is the power of every enemy when He interferes. Herod being baffled and confounded by the manifestation of a power which he could not understand, he condemns the keepers of the prison to death, and leaves Jerusalem. But he little thought that his own death was to precede that of his prisoner’s.
At Caesarea, the Gentile seat of his authority, he ordered a splendid festival in honor of the Emperor Claudius. Multitudes, we are informed, of the highest rank flocked from all quarters. On the second morning of the festivities the king appeared in a silver robe of great splendor, which glittered with the rays of the sun, so as to dazzle the eyes of the whole assembly, and excite general admiration. “When making an oration to the people from his throne some of his flatterers raised a shout, “It is the voice of a god!” In place of repressing this impious adulation, which spread through the theater, Herod accepted it. But a sense of God’s judgment at that very moment seems to have pierced the heart of the king. In tones of deep melancholy, he said, “Your god will soon suffer the common lot of mortality.” In the forcible language of scripture, it is said, “And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.” He was then seized with violent internal pains, and carried from the theater to his palace. There he lingered five days, and died in the greatest agony, and in the most humiliating and loathsome state of body.
As it may not be out of place here, or uninteresting to our readers, we would notice for a moment, the Herodian line of kings. They frequently come before us, both in the life of our Lord, and in the early history of the Church. We have associated in our minds, from early youth, the massacre of the infants of Bethlehem and Herod, king of Judea: though it is somewhat remarkable that Josephus, the principal historian of Herod, takes no notice of this event. It is generally thought, that the murder of a few children, in an obscure village, compared with Herod’s other deeds of blood, was too unimportant in the eyes of Josephus to be recorded. But not so in the mind of God. Both the deceit and cruelty of the treacherous heart of the king are recorded in the sacred narrative. The eye of God watched over the “Child born” unto Israel—the only source of hope for all nations. The cruel design of Herod was thus defeated.
Herod the Great, the first Idumean king over Israel, received the kingdom from the senate of Borne through the influence of Mark Antony. This took place about thirty-five years before the birth of Christ, and about thirty-seven before his own death. These Idumeans were a branch of the ancient Edomites, who, while the Jews were in the Babylonish captivity, and their land lay desolate, took possession of as much of the southern part of it, as contained what had been the whole inheritance of the tribe of Simeon, and also half of that which had been the inheritance of the tribe of Judah; and there they dwelt ever after. In course of time, the Idumeans were conquered by John Hyrcanus, and brought over to Judaism. After their conversion, they received circumcision, submitted to the Jewish laws, and became incorporated with the Jewish nation. In this way they became Jews, though not of the ancient stock of Israel. This happened about one hundred and twenty-nine years before Christ. They were bold, crafty, and cruel as princes: they had great political foresight, courted the favor of Rome, and cared only for the establishment of their own dynasty. But, as God would have it, with the destruction of Jerusalem, the Idumean dynasty passed away, and even the very name of Herod seems to have perished from among the nations.
Besides the slaughter of the children in Bethlehem, which took place shortly before Herod’s death, he had deeply imbrued his hands in the blood of his own family, and in the blood of many noble persons of the Asmonean line. His cruel jealousy towards that heroic family never slumbered. But one of his last acts was to sign the death-warrant of his own son. When dying under the signal judgment of God, like his grandson, Herod. Agrippa, he raised himself up in his bed, gave the mandate for the execution of Antipater, named Archelaus as his successor to the throne, fell back, and expired.
Thus, alas, have monarchs often died: dispensing death on the one hand, and kingdoms on the other. But, what then? In the naked reality of their own moral condition they must stand before the tribunal of God. The purple can no longer shield them. Inflexible righteousness rules on that throne. Judged according to the deeds done in the body, they must be banished beyond the “gulf” which God’s judgment has “fixed” forever. But, oh! there to remember, in torment, every moment of their past history—the privileges they have abused, the opportunities they have lost, and all the evil they have done. May the Lord save every soul that glances at these pages, from the awful weight of these words—remember—tormented—fixed. They describe and characterize the future state of impenitent souls. Luke 16.
The sect of the Herodians may have been the partisans of Herod, and chiefly political in their character; their main object being the maintenance of the national independence of the Jews, in the face of Roman power and ambition. They may have thought to use Herod for the accomplishing of this end. In the gospel history they are represented as acting craftily towards the blessed Lord, and in concert with the Pharisees. Matt. 22:15, 16. Mark 12:13, 14.
Short Papers on Church History
We now come to what we may call the second group of four apostles; and, just as Peter heads the first group, the second is headed by the apostle Philip. In the first three gospels he is placed in this order. He is mentioned as being of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. (John 1:44.) It is more than probable that he was among the Galileans of that district who docked to hear the preaching of John the Baptist. Though no part of Palestine was spoken of in such terms of reproach as Galilee, it was from these despised, but simple, earnest, and devoted Galileans that our Lord chose His apostles. “Search, and look,” said the Pharisees, “for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.” But sweeping statements, generally speaking, are untrue. “Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?” is a sample of their character.
Nothing is said in the gospel history of Philip’s parents Dr occupation. Most likely he was a fisherman, the general trade of that place. From the similarity of language used by Philip and Andrew, and their being repeatedly mentioned together, we may conclude that our apostle, and the sons of Jonas and Zebedee, were intimate friends, and that they were all looking and waiting for the expected Messiah. But in the whole circle of our Lord’s disciples, Philip has the honor of being first called. The first three had come to Christ, and conversed with Mm before Philip, but afterward they returned to their occupation, and were not called to follow the Lord for about a year after. But Philip was called at once. “The day following,” we read, “Jesus would go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow me.” These words, so full of meaning and rich blessing to the soul, “Follow me,” we believe were first said to Philip. When the twelve were specially set apart for their office, he was numbered among them.
Immediately after his call, he finds Nathanael and leads him to Jesus. It is evident, from the glad surprise which breathes in his information, that they had spoken together of these things before. His heart was now well assured of their truth; hence the joy expressed in these words, “We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” There is an evident earnest-heartedness about Philip, though little is said of him in the gospels. Our last interview with him, like the first, is deeply interesting. Having heard the Lord repeatedly refer to His Father in John 12; 13; 14, he manifested a strong desire to know more of the Father. The pathetic words of our Lord about His Father appear to have made a deep impression on his heart; and little wonder. “Father, save me from this hour”— “Father, glorify thy name”—“In my Father’s house are many mansions:” are sayings which, we doubt not, sank deep into all the disciples’ hearts. But there is a beautiful simplicity about Philip, though lacking in intelligence. “Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.” There is evident reproof, if not reproach, in the Lord’s reply to Philip. “Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father? Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me; or else believe me for the very works’ sake.” There had been the revelation of the Father to His own Person, and he ought to have known Him. He had now been a long time with His disciples, and they ought to have seen that He was in the Father, and the Father in Him, and thus have known where He was going, for He was going to the Father. They had both the “word” and the “works” of the Son, to convince them that the Father dwelt in Him. They had heard His words, they had seen His works, they had witnessed His character, and these things were fitted and intended to bring the Father before them. His own Person was the answer to every question. “I am the way, the truth, and the life.” He was the way—the only way to the Father. He was the truth—the truth as to everyone and everything as they are, is only known by Him. He is the life— “that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us.” But it is only by the teaching and power of the Spirit that He who is “the way, the truth, and the life,” is known and enjoyed. And there must be subjection of heart to Christ, if we would know the teaching of the Spirit.
After this deeply interesting and instructive conversation with the Lord, all is uncertain as to Philip’s history—his name disappears from the gospel narrative. He has his own place in the catalog, Acts 1:13. Tradition has so frequently confounded Philip the evangelist with Philip the apostle, that all is uncertain. No doubt his remaining years were spent in devoted service to his Lord and Savior, but where, it is difficult to say. Some think that Upper Asia was the scene of his early labors, and that in the latter period of his life he came to Hierapolis in Phrygia, where he suffered a cruel martyrdom.
Bartholomew. It has been very generally believed both by ancients and moderns, that the history of Bartholomew lies concealed under another name. That he was one of the twelve apostles, is perfectly clear from the gospel narrative, though nothing more is said of him than the bare mention of his name. In the first three gospels, Philip and Bartholomew are mentioned together; in John’s gospel, it is Philip and Nathanael. This circumstance has given rise to a very common conjecture, that these are but different names for the same person. Nothing was more common ban tins among the Jews. For example, Simon Peter is called “Bar-jona,” which simply means—the son of Jona. “Bartimaeus” again, means the son of Timaeus; and “Bartholomew” is a name of the same class. These are merely relative, not proper names. From this custom being so general among the Jews, it is often extremely difficult to identify persons in the gospel history.
Assuming, then, that the Nathanael of John is the Bartholomew of the synoptical gospels, we proceed with what we know of his history. Like the rest of the apostles, he was a Galilean—he was “of Cana in Galilee.” We have seen in a former paper, that he was first conducted by Philip to Christ. On his approach, he was greeted by the Lord, with the most honorable distinction—“Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile.” He was, no doubt, a man of true simplicity and integrity of character; and one that “waited for redemption in Israel.” Surprised at our Lord’s most gracious salutation, and wondering how He could know him at first sight, “Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, “Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig-tree, I saw thee.” Solemn, yet blessed thought! he stood before one—a man—in this world, who knew the secrets of his heart and ways. Nathanael was now fully convinced of the absolute deity of the Messiah, and owns Him in His higher glories as “the Son of God” as well as “the king of Israel.”
The character of Nathanael and his call are considered by many as typical of the remnant of Israel, without guile, in the latter day. The allusion to the fig tree—the well-known symbol of Israel—confirms this view of the passage; and so does his beautiful testimony. “Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the king of Israel.” The spared remnant, seen and known by the Lord, will thus confess their faith in Him, as the prophets most fully show. And all those who thus own the Messiah, shall see His universal glory as the Son of man, according to Psalm 8 That coming day of wide spread glory is anticipated by our Lord in His concluding remarks to Nathanael: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man.” Then will the heavens and the earth be joined together, as if by Jacob’s ladder. But we must now return to the direct history of our apostle.
The most distinct and conclusive passage as to his apostleship is John 21. There we find him in company with the other apostles, to whom our Lord appeared at the sea of Tiberias after His resurrection. “There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples,” who probably were Andrew and Philip.
There is a generally received tradition, that Bartholomew traveled as far as India, preaching the gospel. Probably to that part of India which lies nearest to Asia. After traveling in different places, seeking to spread Christianity, he at last reached Albanople, in Armenia the Great, a place overgrown with idolatry. There he was arrested in the midst of his labors by the governor of the place, and condemned to be crucified. The date is not certainly known.
Matthew—called also Levi, the son of Alpheus; but not the same person, we believe, as Alpheus the father of James. (Matt. 10:3; Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27-29.) Though a Roman officer, he was “an Hebrew of the Hebrews,” and probably a Galilean, but of what city or tribe we are not informed. Before his call to follow the Messiah, he was a publican, or tax gatherer, under the Romans. He seems to have been stationed at Capernaum, a maritime town on the Sea of Galilee. He was what we should call a custom-house officer. It was in this capacity that Jesus found him. When He passed by, He saw him “sitting at the receipt of custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.” But before proceeding with the history of Matthew, we would say a few words on the character of his occupation, as it is so frequently mentioned in the New Testament, and is really a symbolic term.
Publicans, properly so called, were persons who farmed the Roman taxes or revenue. They were, usually, persons of wealth and credit. It was considered among the Romans an honorable position, and generally conferred on Roman knights. Sabinus, it is said, father of the Emperor Vespasian, was the publican of the Asiatic provinces. They employed under them inferior officers, and these, generally, were natives of the provinces where the taxes were collected; to this class Matthew no doubt belonged.
These petty officers were everywhere notorious for their fraudulent exactions; but to the Jews they were especially odious. They looked upon themselves as a freeborn people, and that they had this privilege direct from God Himself. “We be Abraham’s seed,” was their boast, “and were never in bondage to any man.” Consequently, the Roman tax gatherers were the visible proofs of their slavery, and of the degraded state of their nation. This was the chain that galled them, and betrayed them into many acts of rebellion against the Romans. Hence it was that publicans were abhorred by the Jews. They looked upon them as traitors and apostates, and as the ready tools of the oppressor. Besides, they were most arbitrary and unjust in their taxations; and having the law on their side, they could enforce payment. It was in their power to examine each case of goods exported or imported, and to assess the alleged value in the most vexatious way. We may gather, from what John said to them, that they overcharged whenever they had an opportunity. “And he said unto them, Exact no more than is appointed you.” Luke 3:13. See also the case of Zacchaeus. Luke 19:9.
Surely these things were more than enough to bring the whole class into the greatest detestation everywhere. But we will confine ourselves to what we learn of them in the New Testament. The Spirit of truth never exaggerates. Then we find them classed with sinners (Matt. 9:11; 11:19); with harlots (Matt. 21:31, 32); with heathen. (Matt. 18:17.) As a class, they were excommunicated, not only from the privileges of the sanctuary, but from the privileges of civil society. And yet, notwithstanding all these disadvantages, their ranks furnished some of the earliest disciples both of John and of our Lord. They had less hypocrisy than those who were esteemed better, they had no conventional morality; and they had no false religion to unlearn. These things may be fairly argued from the parable of the Pharisee and publican. (Luke 18) Conventional goodness is a mighty hindrance to the soul’s salvation. It is difficult for such to take the place of a lost, ruined sinner, that grace may have a free course and do her blessed, saving, gracious work. He who would be justified of God, must take the publican’s place, and offer up the publican’s prayer, “God be merciful to me a sinner.” We now return to the history of our apostle.
With great readiness Matthew obeyed the call of Jesus. His lucrative situation was at once given up; and his conversion, so thorough and manifest, was accompanied with much blessing to others. There was a great awakening and interest amongst his own class. “And Levi made a great feast in his own house; and there was a great company of publicans and others that sat down with them.” A feast is the symbol of joy and rejoicing—the immediate effect of a hearty surrender to Christ. It is worthy of note that in his own gospel he refers to what he was, but neither of the other evangelists speaks of “Matthew the publican.” Along with the others he was chosen one of the twelve. From that time he continued with the Lord, like the rest of the apostles. Blessed privilege!—“a familiar attendant on His person, a spectator of His public and private life, a bearer of His sayings and discourses, a beholder of His miracles, a witness of His resurrection and ascension to glory.” Matthew was with the other apostles on the day of Pentecost, and received the gift of the Holy Ghost. How long he continued in Judea after that event, we are not informed. His gospel is supposed to be the first that was written, and has a special reference to Israel.
Ethiopia is generally assigned as the scene of his apostolic labors. There, some say, by preaching and miracles, he mightily triumphed over error and idolatry, was the means of the conversion of many, appointed spiritual guides and pastors to confirm and build them up, and to bring over others to the faith; and there finished his course. But the sources of information on these points cannot be trusted.
Short Papers on Church History
The apostle Thomas was duly called by our Lord to the apostleship, and he is duly mentioned in the various apostolic lists. Of his birthplace or parents we are not informed in scripture; but tradition says he was born at Antioch. All that we know of him with certainty is related by John. But though our knowledge of Thomas be thus limited, there is no character among the apostles more distinctly marked than his. In fact, his name has become, both in the Church and in the world, a synonym for doubting and unbelieving. It is said of a famous artist, when asked to produce a portrait of the apostle Thomas, that he placed a rule in his hand for the due measuring of evidence and argument. His mind was thoughtful, meditative, slow to believe. He looked at all the difficulties of a question, and inclined to take the dark side of things. But we will glance for a moment at the portrait which the pen of inspiration has drawn of him in the three following passages.
1. In John 11 his true character distinctly appears. He evidently viewed the proposed journey of our Lord into Judea with the darkest forebodings. “Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus, unto his fellow-disciples, Let us also go that we may die with him.” In place of believing that Lazarus would be raised from the dead, he feared that both the Lord and His disciples would meet their own death in Judea. He could see nothing arising from such a journey but complete disaster. Nevertheless, he does not seek to hinder the Lord from going, like the other disciples. This too, is characteristic. He had deep affection for the Lord, and such was his devotedness that though the journey should cost all of them their lives, he was willing to go.
2. The second time referred to, was the Last Supper. (John 14) Our Lord had been speaking of going away, and of the home he would prepare for them in heaven; and that He would come again and receive them unto Himself, so that where He was they should be also. “And whither I go ye know,” He added, “and the way ye know.” But to our apostle’s mind, these beautiful promises only awakened dark thoughts of the unseen, unknown future. “Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?” Evidently he was eager to go, and earnest in his inquiries, but he wanted to be sure of the way before taking the first step. “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me.” So long as the eye is fixed on Christ, we never make a false step. It is the single eye that receives the light of heaven, and sheds its radiance over the whole path.
3. The third time was after the resurrection. (John 20) He was absent when the Lord appeared the first time to the disciples. When they told him that they had seen the Lord, he obstinately refused to believe what they said. From what he says, we may fairly gather, that he had seen the Lord on the cross, and that the overwhelming sight had produced a deep impression on his mind. “Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.” The following Lord’s day, when the disciples were assembled, Jesus appeared, and stood in the midst of them—His own place as the center of the assembly. He again saluted them in the same words of peace— “O Peace be unto you.” But He at once turned to Thomas, as if he had been the main object of His appearing that day. “Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be not faithless, but believing.” The effect on Thomas was immediate, all his doubts were removed, and in true orthodox faith he exclaimed “My Lord and my God.” “Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”
Some have thought that the faith of Thomas in this instance rises far above all the other disciples, and that nothing higher in testimony ever dropped from apostolic lips. This opinion, though a common one, cannot be founded on the general context. Christ, in reply to Thomas, pronounces those more blessed who saw not, and yet believed. It can scarcely be called even christian faith, as our Lord evidently hints. Christian faith is believing in Him whom we have not seen—walking by faith, not by sight.
Thomas, we have no doubt, represents the slow, unbelieving mind of the Jews in the last days, who will believe when they see. (Zech. 12) He was not present at the first gathering of the saints after the resurrection. The reason why we are not told. But who can estimate the blessing that may be lost because of absence from the sanctioned meetings of the saints? He lost the blessed revelations of Christ as to relationship. “My Father, and your Father; my God, and your God.” His faith is not connected with the position of sonship. “He has not the communications of the efficacy of the Lord’s work,” as one has said, “and of the relationship with his Father into which Jesus brings His own, the Church. He has peace, perhaps, but he has missed all the revelation of the Church’s position. How many souls—saved souls, even—are there in these two conditions.”
The future apostolic labors of Thomas, and the end of his life, are so filled with traditions or legends, that we know nothing certainly. Some say he labored in India and some in Persia. His martyrdom, it is said, was occasioned by a lance, and is still commemorated by the Latin Church on December 21, by the Greek Church on October 6, and by the Indians on July 1.
James—the son of Alpheus. The identification of the Jameses, the Marys, and the Lord’s brethren, has long been a difficult point with critics. This would not be the place even to refer to their theories and arguments. But after looking at different sides of the question, we still believe that our apostle is the James who was a principal man in the Church at Jerusalem—who is the author of “The General Epistle of James”—who is also called the Lord’s brother, and surnamed “the just,” and “the less,” probably because he was low in stature. Identification of persons is extremely difficult in such histories, from the habit, so common among the Jews, of calling near relations, brothers and sisters, and from nearly all of them having two or more names.
In the four lists of the apostles, James holds the same place. He heads the third class. They appear to be in fours. Peter heads the first, Philip the second, and James the third. Very little is known of James until after the resurrection. From what Paul says in 1 Cor. 15:7, it is evident that the Lord, before His ascension, honored James with a personal interview. This was before the day of Pentecost, and may have been for the special encouragement, guidance, and strengthening of the apostle. We will now notice the principal passages, from which we gain our knowledge of James.
In the first chapter of the Acts, we find him with the others, waiting for the promise of the Father, the gift of the Holy Ghost. After this we lose sight of him, until he is visited by Paul (Gal. 1:18, 19), which would be about the year A.D. 39. Now we find him equal with Peter as an apostle. He was at this time the overseer of the Church at Jerusalem, and on a level with the very chiefest apostles. The place he held in Peter’s estimation, appears from the fact, that when he was delivered from prison, he desires that information of his escape may be sent to “James and to the brethren.” Acts 12:17.
In A.D. 50, we find him in the apostolic council, where he seems to deliver the judgment of the assembly. “Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God.” (Acts 15) None of the other apostles speak in this manner. It would appear that he had risen greatly in apostolic position and authority. About the year 51, when Paul paid another visit to Jerusalem, he recognizes James as one of the “pillars” of the Church, and places his name before both Cephas and John. (Gal. 2:9.) Again, about the year 58, Paul paid a special visit to James, in the presence of all the elders. “And the day following Paul went in with us to James; and all the elders were present.” (Acts 21:18.) It is easily seen from these few notices, that James was held in the very highest esteem by the other apostles, and that he filled a most important position in the Church at Jerusalem. His attachment to Judaism was deep and earnest, and his advancement in Christianity appears to have been slow and gradual. He was a perfect contrast to Paul; Peter forms a link between them.
The martyrdom of James is placed at about 62, close upon thirty years after Pentecost. The testimony of antiquity is universal, as to his distinguished piety and sanctity. His humility, too, appears great, though he was the Lord’s brother, or near relation, he styles himself the servant of Jesus Christ, and does not so much as give himself the title of an apostle. For the reputation of his holy and righteous life, he was universally styled, “James the Just.” And as he conformed to Jewish customs with a measure of regularity, he was by no means so offensive in the eyes of his unbelieving countrymen, as the apostle of the Gentiles. But notwithstanding the high opinion that was entertained of his character, his life was prematurely ended by martyrdom.
For an account of the life, character, and death of James, we are chiefly indebted to Hegesippus, a Christian of Jewish origin, who lived in the middle of the second century. He is generally received as a credible historian. His narrative of the martyrdom of James is given fully, and in his own words, in Smith’s “Dictionary of the Bible.” We can only give it in substance.
As many of the rulers and people of the Jews became believers in Jesus, through the labors of James, the scribes and Pharisees were greatly stirred up against him. The whole of the people, they said, will believe in Christ. Therefore they came together to James, and said, “We pray thee, stop the people, for they have gone astray after Jesus as though he were the Christ. We pray thee to persuade all that come to the passover concerning Jesus. Persuade the people not to go astray about Jesus, for the whole people, and all of us, give heed unto thee. Stand, therefore, on a pinnacle of the temple that thou mayest be visible, and that thy words may be heard by all the people; for all the tribes and even the Gentiles are come together for the passover.” But in place of saying what he was told, he proclaimed with a loud voice in the ears of all the people that Jesus was the true Messiah—that he firmly believed in Him, and that Jesus was now in heaven at God’s right hand, and that He would come again in power and great glory. Many were convinced through the preaching of James and gave glory to God, crying, “Hosannah to the Son of David.”
When the scribes and Pharisees heard this, they said to each other, “We have done wrong in bringing forward such a witness to Jesus; let us go up and throw him down, that the people may be terrified and not believe in him.” And they cried out, saying, Even James the Just has gone astray, and they threw Him down. But as he was not killed with the fall, they began to stone him. Then one of them who was a fuller, took the club with which he pressed the clothes, and brought it down on the head of James. Thus the apostle died, and, like the proto-martyr Stephen, he died praying for them in a kneeling posture. It was almost immediately after this that Vespasian commenced the siege of Jerusalem, and the Roman army turned the whole scene into desolation, blood, and ruin.
Simon Zelotes—also called “Simon the Canaanite.” He seems to be a different person to Simon, the brother of James. We have no account of him in the gospel history. He is duly named in the Gospels and in the Acts, and then disappears from the sacred page.
It is generally supposed, that before his call to be an apostle, he belonged to a sect among the Jews called “The Zealots.” They were conspicuous for their fierce advocacy of the Mosaic ritual. They looked upon themselves as the successors of Phinehas, who, in zeal for the honor of God, slew Zimri and Cozbi. (Num. 25) In pretending to follow the zeal of the priest of old, they assumed to themselves the right of putting to death a blasphemer, an adulterer, or any notorious offender, without the ordinary formalities of the law. They maintained that God had made an everlasting covenant with Phinehas, and with his seed after him, “because he was zealous for his God, and made atonement for Israel.” These high sounding claims and pretensions deceived both rulers and people for a time. Besides, their fury and zeal for the law of Moses, and for the deliverance of the people from the Roman yoke, gave them favor in the eyes of all the nation. But, as must ever be the case under similar circumstances, their zeal soon degenerated into all manner of licentiousness and wild extravagance. They became the pests of every class of society.
Under a pretended zeal for the honor of God, they charged whom they would with being guilty of blasphemy, or of some other grievous sin, and immediately slew them and seized their property. Josephus tells us that they faded not to accuse some of the “prime nobility,” and when they had succeeded in turning everything into confusion, they, meantime, “fished in the troubled waters.” He bewails them as the great plagues of the nation. Attempts were made at different times to suppress the society, but it does not appear that they were ever much reduced until, with the unbelieving nation, they were swept away in the fatal siege.
Simon is frequently styled “Simon the Zealot,” and is supposed to have belonged to this troublesome faction. There may have been true and sincere men among them, but good and bad alike passed under the odious name of “Zealots.” Nothing is certainly known of the future labors of our apostle. Some say that, after traveling for a while in the East, he turned to the West, and penetrated as far as Britain, where he preached, wrought miracles, endured many trials, and at last suffered martyrdom.
Judas—the brother of James. This apostle is also called Jude, Thaddeus, and Lebbaeus. These different names have different shades of meaning, but the examination of such niceties come not within the range of our “Short Papers.” Judas was the son of Alpheus, and one of our Lord’s kindred, as we read in Matt. 13:55, “Is not his mother called Mary, and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?”
When, or how, he was called to the apostleship we are not informed; and there is scarcely any mention of him in the New Testament, except in the different catalogs of the twelve apostles. His name only occurs once in the gospel narrative, and that is when he asks the following question, “Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?” (John 14:22.) It is quite evident from this question, that he was still entertaining, like his fellow-disciples, the idea of a temporal kingdom, or the manifestation of Christ’s power, on the earth, such as the world could perceive. But they understood not yet the dignity of their own Messiah. They were strangers to the greatness of His power, the glory of His Person, and the spirituality of His kingdom. His subjects are delivered, not only from this present evil world, but from the power of Satan, and from the realm of death and the grave. “Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son.” (Col. 1:13.) The answer of Christ to the question of Judas is all-important. He speaks of the blessings of obedience. The truly obedient disciple shall surely know the sweetness of fellowship with the Father and the Son, in the light and power of the Holy Ghost. “It is not here a question of the love of God in sovereign grace to a sinner, but of the Father’s dealings with His children. Therefore it is in the path of obedience that the manifestation of the Father’s love and the love of Christ are found.” Ver. 23-20.
But we must bear in mind, when remarking on the questions or sayings of the apostles, that the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified. The thoughts, feelings, and expectations of the apostles after that event, were altogether changed. Hence we find our apostle, like his brother James, styling himself, “Jude the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James.” He neither calls himself an apostle, nor the Lord’s brother. This was true humility, and founded on a true sense of the altered relations between them and the exalted Lord. On the day of Pentecost it was proclaimed, “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
Nothing is certainly known of the later history of our apostle. Some say that he first preached in Judea and Galilee, then through Samaria, into Idumea, and to the cities of Arabia. But towards the end of his course, Persia was the field of his labors, and the scene of his martyrdom.
From 1 Cor. 9:5, it may be fairly inferred that he was one of the married apostles. “Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?” There is a tradition about two of his grandsons, which is both interesting and apparently true. It has been handed down by Eusebius from Hegesippus, a converted Jew. Domitian the Emperor, having heard that there were some of the line of David, and kindred of Christ, still alive, moved with jealousy, ordered them to be seized and brought to Borne. Two grandsons of Jude were brought before him. They frankly confessed that they were of the line of David, and kindred of Christ. He asked them about their possessions and estates. They told him they had but a few acres of land, out of the fruits of which they paid him tribute and maintained themselves. Their hands were examined, and were found rough and callous with labor. He then inquired of them concerning the kingdom of Christ, and when and where it would come. To this they replied, that it was a heavenly and spiritual, not a temporal kingdom; and that it would not be manifested till the end of the world. The Emperor, being satisfied that they were poor men and harmless, dismissed them unbound, and ceased from his general persecution of the Church. When they returned to Palestine, they were received by the Church with great affection, as being nearly allied to the Lord, and as having nobly confessed His name—His kingdom, power, and glory.
Matthias—the apostle elected to fill the place of the traitor Judas. He was not an apostle of the first election—immediately called and chosen by the Lord Himself. It is more than probable that he was one of the seventy disciples, and had been a constant attendant upon the Lord Jesus, during the whole course of His ministry. This was a necessary qualification, as declared by Peter, of one who was to be a witness of the resurrection. So far as we know, the name of Matthias occurs in no other place in the New Testament.
According to some ancient traditions, he preached the gospel and suffered martyrdom in Ethiopia; others believe that it was rather in Cappadocia. Thus the great founders of the Church were allowed to pass away from earth to heaven without a reliable pen to chronicle their labors—their last days—their last sayings, or even the resting place of the body. But all are chronicled in heaven, and will be held in everlasting remembrance. How marvelous are the ways of God, and how unlike they are to the ways of men!
The manner of this apostle’s election was by lot—an ancient Jewish custom. The lots were put into the urn, Matthias’ name was drawn out, and thereby he was the divinely chosen apostle. “And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two thou hast chosen.....And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.” The solemn mode of casting lots was regarded as a way of referring the decision to God. “And Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat”—“The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord.” (Lev. 16:8; Pro. 16:33.) The apostles, it will be remembered, had not yet received the gift of the Holy Ghost. The lot was never repeated after the day of Pentecost.