Genesis 22

PART THIRTY-SIX RECAPITULATION: SURVEY OF THE PATRIARCHAL AGE

From A Class-Book of Old Testament History, pp. 73-76

by G. F. Maclear, D.D. Published by Macmillan, London, 1881, now long out of print.

With the death of Joseph the Patriachal Age of Israel’s history may be said to close. The Family had now thrown out many branches and was now on the point of emerging into the Nation. At this juncture, then, it may be well to look back, and review some of the chief features of the Patriarchal Life.

1. And the first of these that claims attention is its Nomadic character. Unlike the founders of Egypt, of Babylon, of Nineveh, the Patriarchs were not the builders of cities and towns, but pilgrims and sojourners, dwellers in tents (Hebrews 11:9). But they were very different from rude hordes, like the Amalekites and other sons of the desert, abhorring any higher mode of life. Abraham was no stranger to the highest form of civilization that his age afforded. He was acquainted with Ur, with Nineveh, with Damascus, with Egypt; he had left his home in one of the chief cities of Mesopotamia, not from choice, but in consequence of a direct personal call from God. Moreover, so far from regarding his present mode of life as an ultimate end, he and Isaac and Jacob were ever looking forward to a time when it would close, when their descendants should be settled in the Land of Promise, and become a great nation, when the portable tent should give way to the city that had foundations (Hebrews 11:10; Hebrews 11:13-16; comp. Genesis 24:7; Genesis 28:4; Genesis 49:4; Genesis 50:24). Hence, from time to time, as opportunity offered, we see the wandering life freely and willingly laid aside. Lot settled in Sodom (Genesis 13:10-12); Abraham in Egypt went direct to Pharaoh’s court (Genesis 12:14); at Hebron he settled and became a prince of God in the midst of the Hittites (Genesis 23:6); Isaac not only lived near the Philistines, but occupied a house opposite the palace (Genesis 26:8), and practised agriculture (Genesis 26:12); and Joseph’s dream of the sheaves points out that this was also continued in the time of Jacob (Genesis 37:7).

2. The Family was the center of the Patriarchal commonwealth. Its head was the source of authority and jurisdiction; he possessed the power of life and death (Genesis 38:24); he united in himself the functions of chief and priest; he offered the burnt-offering; he had his armed retainers (Genesis 14:14; Genesis 48:22; Genesis 34:25; Genesis 33:1); his intercourse with his wives (for polygamy was not forbidden) was free and unrestrained; the wife’s consent was asked before wedlock (Genesis 24:57-58); love hallowed the relations of Abraham with Sarah, of Isaac with Rebekah, of Jacob with Leah and Rachel; woman, indeed, did not occupy the position since conceded to her, but her position was far from degraded, and the sanctity of the marriage-bond was defended by severe laws, which made death the punishment for adultery (Genesis 38:24). Slavery, it is true, existed, but in the tents of Abraham the slave was ever treated with consideration, and not excluded from, but made a partaker of religious privileges (Genesis 17:13). The fidelity and attachment of Eliezer the steward of Abraham’s house, the mourning for Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse (Genesis 35:8), are pleasing proofs of the peace that reigned in the Patriarchal household.

3. Civilization. The life of the Patriarchs was chiefly that of the shepherd, and their wealth consisted in their flocks and their herds. But besides practising agriculture they were not unacquainted with money and the precious metals. Abraham paid for the field of Machpelah with coin (Genesis 23:9-20), and the sons of Jacob took money with them into Egypt (Genesis 42:25; Genesis 42:35); while the gold ring and armlets presented to Rebekah by Eliezer (Genesis 24:22), the bracelet and signet ring of Judah (Genesis 38:18), the ear-rings of Rachel (Genesis 35:4), the many-coloured coat of Joseph, indicate an acquaintance with the luxuries of life.

4. Religion. While other nations were rapidly learning to deify the powers of nature, the Patriarchs believed not only in a God above and beyond nature, but in a God Personal, Omnipotent, and Holy. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was. no mere abstraction, no mere law. He could and did reveal Himself by angelic appearances, by visions, by dreams; He could console, strengthen, encourage; He could punish, rebuke, and on repentance forgive. Abraham, the Friend of God (James 2:23), intercedes with Him in behalf of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:23-33); Isaac is warned by Him against going down into Egypt (Genesis 26:2); Jacob is consoled by Him at Bethel when setting out into the land of exile (Genesis 28:13-15), and wrestles with Him by the fords of Jabbok till the break of day (Genesis 32:24); Joseph believes in His invisible but ever-present help in prison and in a strange land, and ascribes to Him all his wisdom in the interpretation of dreams (Genesis 41:16). The Divine Promise of a great future Abraham believed under circumstances of greatest trial, and his faith was counted to him for righteousness (Romans 4:3). Moreover, the God of the Patriarchs was not a mere national or household God. His sphere of operation was not restricted to the Patriarchs and their families; He is the God of all the earth (Genesis 24:3), the God of Righteousness and Holiness. He punishes the people of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:24-25); He plagues Pharaoh’s house (Genesis 12:17); He is the God of the priest-king Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18), and of the Philistine Abimelech (Genesis 20:3); He protects not only Isaac the child of promise, but the outcast Ishmael the child of the bond-woman (Genesis 21:13); He is with Joseph in prison, but He sends dreams to Pharaoh, and through Joseph He saves Egypt from famine (Genesis 50:20).

5. The Religious Worship of the Patriarchs was in keeping with the simplicity of their creed. The head of the family was also the priest of the family. Whenever Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob, reached any new spot in their pilgrimage, they invariably erected an altar, generally of stone and on a high situation (Genesis 22:9; Genesis 26:25; Genesis 35:7); there they called on the name of Jehovah, there they presented their burnt sacrifice, there they offered up their prayers. Their history also proves the existence of offering covenant-sacrifices, and celebrating covenant-feasts (Genesis 15:9-18); the making and paying of vows (Gen. 28:23); the erection of memorial pillars, and the consecration of them by pouring upon them oil and wine (Genesis 28:18); the rite of circumcision (Genesis 17:10-14); and the paying of tithes (Genesis 14:20).

6. The Character of the Patriarchs is never represented as perfect; their faults are freely exposed; theirs is no ideal history. If we compare the four most eminent amongst them, we seem to trace in (i) Abraham, the faith that can remove mountains in its power and in its fulness, revealing itself in unfaltering trust and unquestioning obedience under the most trying circumstances conceivable; in (ii) Isaac, the faith that can possess itself in patience, and discharge the ordinary duties of life in quietness and waiting; in (iii) Jacob, the violent contest of faith with the flesh, the higher with the lower nature, till by hard discipline the latter is purified, and the Sup-planter becomes the Prince, the Prevailer with God; in (iv) Joseph, the fidelity and perseverance of faith, revealed not only in the patient endurance of the most grievous trials, but in energetic action, and at length crowned with victory. He unites in himself the noble trust and resolution of Abraham, with the quiet perseverance of Isaac, and the careful prudence of Jacob. He is moreover an eminent historic type of Christ, in (1) his persecution and sale by his brethren, (2) his resisting temptation, (3) his humiliation and exaltation, and (4) his dispensing to a famine-stricken people the bread of life, and (5) in the fulness of his forgiving love.

ADDENDA [Volume 3] LANGE: ON THE ANGEL OF JEHOVAH

(CDHCG, 389-390, verbatim)

Between Abram’s connection with Hagar and the next manifestation of Jehovah there are full thirteen years. But then his faith is strengthened again, and Jehovah appears to him (Genesis 17:1). The most prominent and important theophany in the life of Abram is the appearance of the three men (ch. 17). But this appearance wears its prevailing angelic form, because it is a collective appearance for Abram and Lot, and at the same time refers to the judgement upon Sodom. Hence the two angels are related to their central point as the sun-images to the sun itself, and this central point for Abram is Jehovah himself in his manifestation, but not a commissioned Angel of the Lord. Thus also this Angel visits Sarah (Genesis 21:1; compare Genesis 18:10). But the Angel appears in the history of Hagar a second time (Genesis 21:17), and this time as the Angel of God (Maleach Elohim), not as the Maleach Jehovah, for the question is not now about a return to Abram’s house, but about the independent settlement with Ishmael in the wilderness. The person who tempts Abram (Genesis 22:1) is ElohimGod as he manifests himself to the nations and their general ideas or notions, and the revelation is effected purely through the word. Now, also, in the most critical moment for Abram, the Angel of the Lord comes forward, calling down to him from heaven since there was need of a prompt message of relief. In the rest of the narrative this Angel of the Lord identifies himself throughout with Jehovah (Genesis 22:12; Genesis 22:16). To Isaac also Jehovah appears (Genesis 26:2), and the second time in the night (Genesis 26:24). He appears to Jacob in the night in a dream (Genesis 28:12-13). Thus also he appears to him as the Angel of God in a dream (Genesis 31:11), but throughout identified with Jehovah (Genesis 31:13). Jehovah commands him to return home through the word (31:3). Laban receives the word of God in a dream (Genesis 31:24). The greatest event of revelation in the life of Jacob is the grand theophany, in the night, through the vision, but the man who wrestles with him calls himself God and man (men) at the same time. According to the theory of a created angel, Jacob is not a wrestler with God (Israel), but merely a wrestler with the Angel. It is a more purely external circumstance which God uses to warn Jacob through the word to remove from Shechem (Genesis 35:1). In the second-’ peculiar manifestation of God to Jacob after his return from Mesopotamia (Genesis 35:9), we have a clear and distinct reflection of the first (Genesis 32:24). In the night-visions of Joseph, which already appear in the life of Isaac, and occur more frequently with Jacob, the form of revelation during the patriarchal period comes less distinctly into view. But then it enters again, and with new energy, in the life of Moses. The Angel of Jehovah (Exodus 3:2) is connected with the earlier revelation, and here also is identified with Jehovah and Elohim (Exodus 3:4). But he assumes a more definite form and title, as the Angel of his face, since with the Mosaic system the rejection of any deifying of the creature comes into greater prominence, and since it is impossible that the face of God should be esteemed a creature.

The reasons which are urged for the old ecclesiastical view of the Angel of the Lord, are recapitulated by Kurtz in the following order: 1. The Maleach Jehovah identifies himself with Jehovah. 2. Those to whom he appears recognize, name, and worship him as the true God. 3. He receives sacrifice and worship without any protest. 4. The biblical writers constantly speak of him as Jehovah. We add the reasons. 1. The theory of our opponents opens a wide door in the Old Testament for the deifying of the creature, which the Old Testament everywhere condemned; and the Romish worship of angels finds in it a complete justification. 2. The Socinians also gain an important argument for their rejection of the Trinity, if, instead of self-revelation of God, and of the self-distinction included in it in the Old Testament, there is merely a pure revelation through angels. As the fully developed doctrine of the Trinity cannot be found in the Old Testament, so no one can remove from the Old Testament the beginnings of that doctrine, the self-distinction of God, without removing the very substructure on which the New Testament doctrine of the Trinity rests, and without obscuring the Old Testament theology in its very centre and glory. 3. It would break the band of the organic unity between the Old and New Testaments if it could be proved that the central point in the Old Testament revelation is a creature-angel, and that the New Testament revelation passes at one bound from this form to that of the God-man. The theory of the creature-angel in its continuation through a colossal adoration of angels, points downwards to the Rabbinic and Mohammedan doctrine of angels which has established itself in opposition to the New Testament Christology, and is bound together with that exaggerated doctrine of angels in more recent times, which ever corresponds with a veiled and obscure Christology. On the other hand, it removes from the New Testament Christology its Old Testament foundation and preparation which consists in this, that the interchange between God and men is in full operation, and must therefore prefigure itself in the images of the future God-man. 4. The doctrine of angels itself loses its very heart, its justification and interpretation, if we take away from it the symbolic angel-form, which rules it, as its royal centre, i.e. that angelic form which, as a real manifestation of God, as a typical manifestation of Christ, as a manifestation of angels, has the nature and force of a symbol. But with the obliteration of the symbolic element, all the remaining symbolic and angelic images, the cherubim and seraphim, will disappear, and with the key of biblical psychology in its representation of the development of the life of the soul, to an organ of revelation, we shall lose the key to the exposition of the Old Testament itself. 5. Augustin was consistent when, with his interpretation of the Angel of Jehovah as a creature-angel, he decidedly rejects the interpretation which regards the sons of God (ch. 6)as angel-beings; for the assumption of angels who, as such, venture to identify themselves with Jehovah, and notwithstanding they are in peril, abandon themselves to lustful pleasures and a magical transformation of their nature, combines two groundless and intolerable phantoms. We hold, therefore, that Old Testament theology, in its very heart and centre, is in serious danger from these two great prejudices, as the New Testament from the two great prejudices of a mere mechanical structure of the Gospels, and of the unapostolic and yet more than apostolic brothers of the Lord. (See the defence of the old ecclesiastical view in the Commentary by Keil, also with a reference to Kahnis, de Angelo Domini diatribe, 1858. The assertion of the opposite view held by Delitzsch in his Commentary, meets here its refutation).

6. The aspect of all theophanies as visions. It is a general supposition, that divine revelation is partly through visions, or through inward miraculous sights and sounds. We must, however, bring out distinctly the fundamental position, that every theophany is at the same time vision, and every vision a theophany; but that in the one case the objective theophany and in the other the subjective vision, is the prevailing feature. The subjective vision appears in the most definite form in dream-visions, of which Adam’s sleep, and Abram’s night-horror (chs. 2 and 15.), are the first striking portents. It develops itself with great power in the lives of Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph, and is of still greater importance in the lives of Samuel and Solomon, as also in the night-visions of Zechariah. We find them in the New Testament in the life of Joseph of Nazareth and in the history of Paul. It needs no proof to show that the manifestations of God or angels in dreams, are not outward manifestations to the natural senses. In the elements of the subjective dream-vision, veils itself, however, the existing divine manifestation. But what the dream introduces in the night-life, the seeing in imagesthat the ecstasy does in the day or ordinary waking life (see Lange: Apostolic Age). The ecstasy, as the removing of the mind into the condition of unconsciousness, or of a different consciousness, is the potential basis of the vision, the vision is the activity or effect of the ecstasy. But since the visions have historical permanence and results, it is evident that they are the intuitions of actual objective manifestations of God. Mere hallucinations of the mind lead into the house of error, spiritual visions build the historical house of God. But in this aspect we may distinguish peculiar dream-visions, night-visions of a higher form and power, momentary day-visions, apocalyptic groups or circles of visions, linked together in prophetic contemplation, and that habitual clear-sightedness as to visions which is the condition of inspiration. But that theophanies which are ever at the same time Angelophanies and Christophanies, and indeed as theophanies of the voice of God, or of the voice from heaven, of the simple appearance of angels, of their more enlarged and complete manifestations of the developed heavenly scenethat these are always conditioned through a disposition of fitness for visions, is clear from numerous passages in the Old and New Testaments (2 Kings 6:17, Daniel 10:7; John 12:28-29; John 20:10-12; Acts 9:8; Acts 12:7-12; Acts 22:9-14).

---

THE ABRAHAMIC PROMISE

(by H. Christopher, The Remedial System, pp. 146-150)

The promise that God would bless the whole world through him [Abraham] had reference to Christ, the son of Abraham, through whom God would fulfill his promise of blessing the whole world through the offspring of Abraham. Whilst it was the first and chief promise made to Abraham, it was the last in fulfillment. Nearly two thousand years intervened. It was ratified and covenanted by the blood of Christ, and looked to the possession of the heavenly Canaan, and to a circumcision that cut off the heart from all that is worldly and sensual, and to a seal that became the pledge of the purchased possession, and its settlement in the heavenly Canaan, by the resurrection from the dead, when the spiritual people of God cross the Jordan of death, and take possession of the land of promise, for which even Abraham looked, when he sought a city whose maker and builder is God. This promise and its blessings have no connection with the others made to Abraham. They differ as widely as flesh and spirit, and as earth and heaven. They connect or coalesce no where. The first were but preparatory and necessary to the last. When the last appeared, the first had served their chief, if not all their, purpose. The first had chief reference to man’s body, while the last has chief reference to man’s spirit. And as the spirit of man is superimposed, as it were, upon the body, and is capable of a separate and independent existence, so was the last promise superimposed upon the first, and is capable of existing, and does exist, independently of it. Hence, the promises and the covenants by which they were ratified, connect with each other only as the flesh connects with the spirit. Between them lies an impassable gulf. There is no possible passage from the first to the last. The Jew has no rights and privileges under Christ by virtue of his being the son of Abraham according to the flesh; for the promise was; In Isaac shall thy seed be called, and he was the child of promise and of faith. The Christian is the child of promise and of faith, and hence is reckoned through Isaac as a special creation of God, and is, therefore, himself a new creation. The last creation supersedes all former ones, and by this supersession abrogates them. The adoption of the children of Abraham as the special and peculiar people of God, set aside the adoption by creation, and during the time of their adoption, the natural adoption was set aside, and the rest of mankind ignored, and treated as an uncovenanted people. So when the Christian adoption came in, the Jewish was set aside, and all the rest of mankind, not embraced in the new adoption, were ignored and treated as uncovenanted. Hence, under Christianity there is neither Jew nor Greek; neither circumcision nor uncircumcision; but all the families, nations, and races of mankind are one in Christ, in perfect fulfillment of the promise: In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

All this is necessarily true. The Remedial System is developed by differentiations which mark the boundaries of the development. The patriarch had no privileges, special and peculiar, after the calling of Abraham. By that call God isolated a part from the whole, and made this part his special care. By the new creation through Christ another isolation was made, which placed Jew and Greek on the same plane before God, and abrogated all special and peculiar rights or privileges claimed by the Jews. This is necessarily true from another consideration. The claim of the Jew rested on an explicit covenant. That covenant recognized him as the chosen of God, through a means wholly different from that by which he had recognized the patriarch, and does now recognize the Christian. This consideration or means was his birth. He was the son of Abraham according to the flesh, and entitled, consequently, only to the rights and privileges guaranteed by the covenant ordained to grant and secure these. He could claim only under the stipulated grants of his covenant. Under other and different covenants, and made with other people, he could, of course, have no claim or right whatever. His circumcision effected all it was designed to effect, and meant more than the Jew was willing to accept. It cut him off from all the rest of the world, and also from all other covenants of God, but according to the flesh. His circumcision bound him down to the provisions and obligations of that covenant, and confined him within its prescribed limits. What claim, therefore can a Jew have to the grants and blessings of a covenant that has no special reference to him whatever, and that was not made with him as a Jew? The European had as well claim equal rights with the American under the constitution of the United States. The Jew was the chosen of God only according to the flesh, and entitled only to blessings of his covenant. He is not the chosen of God according to the spirit, or the seed of Isaac according to the promise, and hence he can have no right with those who are.

There are four things necessary to make a nation the peculiar and chosen people of God, and all these obtained in the case of the descendants of Abraham according to the flesh. These things are, 1. A creation. This we have in the birth of Isaac. His conception was a miracle, and hence a creation. 2. A seal. This we have in circumcision. 3. A purchase. This we have in the deliverance of this people from Egypt. And 4. A covenant. And this we have in the covenant made before Mt. Sinai. All these are peculiar and consistent, and perfectly harmonious with all that God has promised, or has done for, the Jews. They were all equally necessary, and they follow each other as necessary results one of the other. The seal came to ratify the creation, the purchase, in demonstration of the fulfillment of the promise, and the covenant, in order that the people might also pledge themselves by covenant. By this the people became cemented and organized into a nation. As such they needed laws and institutions for their government and welfare as a people; and as the people of God, religious institutions for the various purposes which God had in view with that people. It will be observed that this covenant made with Abraham’s descendants arose under that which covenanted them as the peculiar people of God, and was, consequently, entirely Jewish. The covenant of Mt. Sinai was made with that people, and the institutions subsequently given, were given to that people, and to no other. The Jewish institution, in all its entirety, was as verily circumcised as were the people for whose benefit it was ordained. It was as completely isolated from all other religions and peoples, as were that people. Hence, it had no connection with any other, nor relation, except that of opposition. The covenant stipulated and embraced no more than did the promise under which it was made. It was a ratification, or acceptance on their part, of the stipulations of the promise. It was the covenant by which God renewed his promise to be their God, and by it the people accepted the offer, and covenanted to be the people of God. This covenant bound both parties to their pledgeGod to be their God, and them to be his obedient people. It did not, and could not stipulate and grant more than did the promise; hence, all these were temporal in their nature. This completed all that God had to provide for that people. Henceforth there was naught for either party to do, but to carry out the provisions of the covenant which formulated the promise. But this covenant was not only temporary as respects the rights, privileges, and blessings which it secured to that people; but it was also temporary in its duration. The people broke that covenant: and a covenant broken on one side, is broken on both. It was faulty in that it only contemplated and provided for man’s temporal wants. Indeed, this was the fault of the whole Jewish fabric, from the inception to the close. This was foreseen; and not only foreseen, but the whole structure was but a means to an end; a measure to give time for the preparation and institution of a better. The promise of God under which the whole Jewish structure arose, was not the first and chief promise that God made to Abraham, nor his chief purpose in calling him. This chief and greatest promise was that through him he would bless the whole human family. This promise the apostle interprets as having reference to Christ, and consequently, it was sooner or later, to take precedence of all others. It could not be annulled by any subsequent promise, unless that promise annulled, at the same time, all former ones. But this the subsequent promises did not do, as is affirmed by the people. The promise which had reference to Christ, preceded the ratification of that concerning the land several years, and antedated the covenant of circumcision twenty-four years. The covenant at Mt. Sinai followed the latter four hundred and six thereafter. So that nothing which transpired under the later promises could annul the first. The first and chief promise which contemplated spiritual blessings and a spiritual offspring through Isaac, was not ratified, fulfilled, or covenanted, for nearly two thousand years. All that has grown out of this promise has no connection with what arose under the others. It differs from them in every respect. It differed from them in the beginning. It came into the world through a different line. There were two lines of descendants in Isaac, as two promises were fulfilled in his descendants. The one line was the seed of Abraham according to the flesh, and the other the seed according to the spirit, the latter of which is reckoned the true line under the covenant of the first promise. This excludes the children according to the flesh from all rights and privileges pertaining to the children according to the spirit. As respects, therefore, their nature, rights, and privileges, the Jewish and Christian institutions differ radically and entirely; to that degree as to exclude the one wholly from the other. The creation, the circumcision or seal, the purchase, and the covenant, that made the descendants of Abraham according to the flesh the people of God, have no place nor value under the Christian institution. The latter has its own creation, seal, purchase, and covenant, all of which are spiritual and eternal, and these give the Christian no rights or privileges under the former. Hence, as respects institutions differing so completely and widely, there can be no community of rights and privileges; nor can the one flow out of the other so as to establish any genetic connection between them. As the spiritual and the eternal necessarily supersede the fleshly and temporal, so does the Jewish institution, in whole and in part, give way to the Christian. Under the latter arises a people of God as distinct from the former as spirit is from flesh. The Christian is a new creation, and all that pertains to his creation is new. Before it the Jew and Gentile stand on the same ground. Both must become the subjects of this new creation before they can be regarded as belonging to the people of God. All the claim which the Jew once preferred, goes for naught under the operation of the new creation. A new birth is just as essential for the Jew as for the Gentile. Hence, the Jew’s creation, seal, purchase, and covenant are all naught when he stands before the Christian’S. His birth of the flesh avails nothing, and neither does his circumcision, Nothing is now acceptable to God but the new creation in Christ. These things being true, all that is Jewish has passed away. The Jews are no longer the people of God. Their whole religious service has perished; and what purpose God has now with that people remains to be seen. That he has no further purpose with them in regard to the fulfillment of his promise of blessing the world through them by Christ, is evident from the fact that Christianity has superseded Judaism, and that the whole religious service of that people perished with the total destruction of their temple. Christ is the end of the law, and of all that pertained to it. It was but a pedagogue to lead the Jews to Christ; so that when he came all that was Jewish was set aside, and the pedagogue was dismissed. All now become the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus, in whom there is neither Jew nor Greek; neither bond nor free; neither male nor female; but all are one in Christ Jesus. And all who are Christ’s by virtue of the new creation, the spiritual seal, the eternal purchase, and the everlasting covenant, are the seed of Abraham, and heirs according to the promise: In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed. (N. B. After hunting several years for a copy of Christopher’s book, I found it in the Dallas Christian College LibraryC. C.)

---

THE EXCELLENCE OF FAITH

(Read Romans 5:1-11).

In the study of First Principles the term which first engages our attention is faith. We shall find that it occupies a prominent place in connection not only with conversion, but also with every phase of Christian activity and growth.

Faith is one of the most far-reaching words in the vocabulary of inspiration. Without faith none of the blessings of the spiritual realm would be available to man. Contrariwise, on the ground of faith, such blessings as eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived (1 Corinthians 2:9), are within his power to appropriate and enjoy.

Faith is an oft-recurring word in the New Testament. Jesus had much to say about it, and the word is used repeatedly in the Epistles. Paul states expressly that we are justified by faith (Romans 5 :).

The excellence of faith is indicated in scripture by the following representations:

1. Faith is superior to things and circumstances of this material world.

When given full sway in the human heart it rises above the circumstances of life and controls them. The power of faith is described in such scriptures as Matthew 17:20, Mark 9:23; Mark 11:23, Luke 17:6. Christians of this materialistic age, in bondage as they are to the tyranny of things, are inclined to look on these sayings of the Master with more or less skepticism. The tragedy is that we have never really learned to walk by faith. We cannot testify that these sayings are true for the simple reason that we have never learned to stand on God’s promises. True, we claim to do so, and we sing Standing on the Promises, but always with mental reservations. It is only through the exercise of implicit faith that we can throw off the fetters of anxiety and fear which enslave us to this present evil world. We are willing to obey the Lord in confession and baptism, but we certainly fall far short of His teaching in regard to such everyday matters as fear, worry, forgiveness, humility, and the like. (See Matthew 5:3-12; Matthew 5:21-26; Matthew 5:38-42; Matthew 6:25-33; Matthew 7:1-5; Matthew 7:7-12, etc. Cf. 1 John 4:18) He might well say to us as to His disciples of old, O ye of little faith!

2. Faith is the ground of our justification.

Being therefore justified by faithnot by faith alone, or mere intellectual assent (the theologians have added the word alone)we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Not by faith alone, because faith apart from works (i.e., works of faith) is dead (James 2:26). The faith that is unto the saving of the soul (Hebrews 10:39) expresses itself in works of obedience, sacrifice and service (Romans 12:1-2). To walk by faith is to live by the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-25). God so loved us that He gave His only begotten Son as a propitiation for our sins (John 3:16), but we must appropriate this matchless Gift by faith. By true faith in Him we have access into this grace wherein we stand (Romans 5:2). For by grace ye have been saved through faith, and that (i.e., that salvation) not of yourselves, it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8).

3. Faith is the motivating principle of all Christian worship and service.

True worship is (1) communion of the human spirit with the Divine Spirit, (2) on the terms of the truth as revealed in scripture (John 4:24). This can be realized only through faith. Repentance is faith choosing; the confession is faith speaking; baptism is faith obeying; the Lord’s Supper is faith remembering; liberality is faith acknowledging God’s ownership; prayer is faith communing; meditation is faith pondering; and. the whole Christian life is faith serving. Therefore we are justified by faith. From the day of conversion to that of the putting, on of immortality, the actuating principle in the life of every true Christian is faith.

4. Implicit faith, along with obedience, is a necessary, condition to the answer of prayer (John 14:12-15; John 15:5-10, etc.).

(1) Acts 12:1-17. We read here that many of the early disciples were gathered together in the house of Mary, the mother of John Mark, praying for Peter’s deliverance from prison. Yet they were amazed when their prayer was answered and Peter stood in their midst. Most of our praying is of this kind; it has little conviction back of it. (Matthew 21:22).

(2) The prayer of faith, i.e., the petition offered in harmony with the teaching of God’s word, will not go unanswered.

Unanswered yet? The prayer your lips have pleaded

In agony of heart these many years?

Does faith begin to fail? is hope departing?

And thing you all in vain those falling tears?

Say not the Father hath not heard your prayer,

You shall have your desire, sometime, somewhere.

Unanswered yet? Tho-’ when you first presented

This one petition at the Father’s throne,

It seemed you could not wait the time of asking

So urgent was your heart to make it known.

Tho-’ years have passed since then, do not despair;

The Lord will answer you, sometime, somewhere.

Unanswered yet? Nay, do not say -ungranted-';

Perhaps your part is not yet wholly done;

The work began when first your prayer was uttered,

And God will finish what He has begun;

If you will keep the incense burning there,

His glory you shall see, sometime, somewhere.

Unanswered yet? Faith cannot be unanswered;

Her feet are firmly planted on the Rock;

Amid the wildest storms she stands undaunted,

Nor quails before the loudest thunder-shock.

She knows Omnipotence has heard her prayer, And cries, -It shall be done, sometime, somewhere!-’ And cries, -It shall be done, sometime, somewhere!-'

5. The blessings and rewards of the gospel are all received and realized through faith.

Among these are: (1) salvation from the guilt of sin (Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38; Acts 10:43; Acts 16:31; Acts 26:18); (2) spiritual life (John 20:31; John 6:40, John 3:16; John 3:36; 1 John 5:12); (3) spiritual light (John 1:9; John 8:12; John 12:36); (4) heavenly adoption (Galatians 3:26); (5) the indwelling Spirit (John 7:39, Ephesians 1:13, Galatians 3:14); (6) justification (Romans 5:1, Galatians 2:16): (7) true righteousness (Romans 1:16-17; Romans 10:6; Romans 3:22); (8) true worship (John 4:24, Ephesians 3:12); (9) providential oversight (1 Peter 1:5); (10) eternal rest (Hebrews 4:3). In fact the inheritance of all the promises of God is to be realized through faith (Hebrews 6:12).

Conclusion: No wonder then that faith is represented to be the foundation which supports the entire pyramid of Christian virtues that true disciples build, one stone upon the other, and upon which they climb heavenward (2 Peter 1:5-7). True Christians walk by faith, not by sight (2 Corinthians 5:7).

Faith, hope and love, according to Paul, constitute the abiding trinity of spiritual virtues (1 Corinthians 13:13). Of these three, love is greatest; because, in the home over there, faith will have given way to spiritual knowledge, and hope to fruition, leaving only love to consummate the blissful intercourse of the redeemed with their heavenly Father (Revelation 21:1-5).

THE NATURE OF FAITH

(Read Hebrews, ch. 11, esp. Hebrews 11:1.)

The eleventh chapter of Hebrews has been called Israel’s Roll of Honor. It is the great faith chapter of the Bible. It is an inspired discourse on the subject of faith. The discourse begins properly with the last three verses of ch. 10, in which the writer speaks of a faith that is unto the saving of the soul. The subject-matter which follows, in ch. 11, is an analysis of that kind of faith, what it is, whence it is obtained, and how it operates unto salvation, as exemplified in the lives of many illustrious believers of olden times. The writer proves to be an excellent sermonizer, as we might expect in view of his having been inspired by the Spirit of God. He states his text in v. 1, and then proceeds to develop it with appropriate illustrations drawn from Old Testament history. His concluding exhortation follows, in ch. 12, Genesis 12:1-2. We shall attempt here to evaluate the teaching of this great chapter on the nature (i.e., the original and essential characteristics) of faith.

Let me repeat that the kind of faith under consideration here is the faith that works unto the saving of the soul. By some this has been called saving faith. Not that faith of itself will save any one, because it will not; but that the right kind of faith will motivate the believer to such intelligent and sincere cooperation with God, on God’s terms and according to His plan, that He may consistently save the one who so believes. It is God who pardons and saves, but always through Jesus Christ (John 14:6).

What is faith? Considering the excellence of faith, it is exceedingly important that we know what faith is. I am profoundly thankful that the Holy Spirit has not left us in darkness regarding this essential matter. Nor has he left it to our finite minds to formulate a definition. We are not compelled to go either to philosophy or to theology for a definition of faithwe have it in clear, unmistakable terms, in the Christian Scriptures.

What, then, are the essential characteristics of faith? This question is fully answered in the words of our text, as follows:

1. Faith is assurance. Assurance is defined as confidence inspired or expressed, that which produces certainty. It connotes positiveness, certainty, even boldness.

2. Faith is assurance of things hoped for. That is, faith is the foundation of hope.

(1) Authorized Version: the substance of things hoped for. The word substance means in our language the stuff, material, or matter of which anything is composed. It is used here, however, in its derivative sense. It is derived from the Latin prefix, sub (under) and the Latin participle stans (standing). Substance, then is that which stands under. Faith is that which stands under hope. Cf. Living Oracles: faith is the confidence of things hoped for. Moffatt: faith means we are confident of what we hope for. Weymouth: faith is a well-grounded assurance of that for which we hope. Goodspeed: faith means the assurance of what we hope for.

(2) Faith is the foundation of hope. This is true in every department of human activity. It is true in the business world. I visited a friend on one occasion to solicit a contribution from him for a worthy cause. Having heard my case, his reply was: I believe in your proposition, and I am sorry that I am not in a position to help just at this time. But I will do something later. I have invested a considerable sum of money in an oil well in Texas, and I am expecting returns from this investment within a few months. If you will come back about a year from this date, I will give you a substantial donation. I thanked him, and departed. About a year later I called at his office a second time, and as soon as I entered he looked at me and exclaimed: I know what you have come for, but I can-’t do anything for you. What is the trouble? I asked, didn-’t the oil well turn out satisfactorily? And in extreme disgust he said: I wish I had the money back that I sank in that hole in the ground. The first time I called he was extremely hopeful, because he believed in the enterprise in which he had invested; the second time I found him with hopes blasted, because he had lost all faith in it. Where there is no faith, there is no hope.

(3) This is also true in the social realm. In the course of time a young couple will fall in love, marry, and establish a home. The success of their undertaking will depend largely on their faith in each other. On this foundation of faith they will erect a structure of dreams and plans and hopes. But let the confidence of one in the other be destroyed and this structure will fall to the ground. Both marriage and home are erected on a foundation of faith.

(4) So, in the realm of spirit, as elsewhere, hope rests upon faith. Every act of worship and service we perform is motivated by faith. Faith underlies the pyramid of Christian virtues (2 Peter 1:5-7). And all our aspirations and hopes respecting the home over there, the inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away (1 Peter 1:4) rest on faith. In everything faith is the foundation of hope.

(5) Illustrations from the chapter (Hebrews 11). (a) Abel’s hope that his offering would be acceptable to God rested on faith, Hebrews 11:4. (1 John 3:12) (b) Enoch’s walk with God was a walk of faith, Hebrews 11:5. (c) Faith was the foundation of Noah’s hope of deliverance from impending judgment, Hebrews 11:7. (d) Abraham’s hope of attaining the far country which he was to receive for an inheritance was founded on faith, Hebrews 11:8. Also, his hope of receiving Isaac back from the dead was inspired by faith, from whence he did also in a figure receive him back, Hebrews 11:17-19. (e) Sarah’s expectation of a son, the child of promise, rested on faith, Hebrews 11:11. (f) Joseph’s hope that the children of Israel would ultimately take possession of the land of promise rested upon his faith, Hebrews 11:22. (g) The aspirations, hopes and plans of Moses for his people, and his matchless efforts in their behalf, were all inspired by his faith, Hebrews 11:24-29. In every example cited, faith is presented as the foundation of hope.

3. Faith is a conviction … A conviction is defined as a strong belief, something firmly believed. The faith which operates unto the saving of the soul is something more than a passive intellectual assent. It is a conviction. It must be a conviction, one that takes hold of the soul and determines the course of one’s life. In the light of this definition, it is obvious that faith is precisely the thing that is lacking in the modern church.

4. Faith is a conviction of things not seen, i.e., a conviction with respect to things not seen.

(1) Authorized Version: the evidence of things not seen. Moffatt: Faith means. we are convicted of what we do not see. Weymouth: a conviction of the reality of things which we do not see. Goodspeed: our conviction about things we cannot see.

(2) Note that faith is a conviction with respect to things not seen. I have never seen Paris, but I have a conviction that there is a city by that name and that it is the capital of France. My conviction is the result of satisfactory evidence. Things which are seen are matters of observation and knowledge, but things that are not seen belong to the realm of faith. God who is a Spirit (John 4:24) cannot be seen, and is therefore to be apprehended only by faith. Angels, spirit, resurrection, immortality, heaven, etc., all these realities of the unseen world are matters of faith. Faith pertains not to the things that are illusive and transitory, but to the things which are abiding. For the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal (2 Corinthians 4:18).

(3) We have never seen God, but we believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of them that seek after Him (Hebrews 11:6). We were not present to see the worlds created, but our conviction is that they were framed by the word of God (Hebrews 11:3). We have never seen Christ, our Elder Brother, but we believe in Him as the One who is abundantly able to save us from sin and mortality. We have never had a glimpse of heaven, but we believe that the Spirit of Him who raised up Jesus from the dead dwelleth in us, He that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to our mortal bodies through His Spirit that dwelleth in us (Romans 8:11). Therefore we are exhorted to live by faith, to walk by faith and to die in the faith.

(4) Illustrations from the chapter (Hebrews 11). (a) Abel brought his offering to the altar with the conviction that the God whom he had never seen, but in whom he believed, would accept it, Hebrews 11:4. (b) In Noah’s heart there was an overwhelming conviction that judgment would come upon the antediluvian world because of its wickedness. Although summer and winter, and seedtime and harvest, continued to come and go as usual for one hundred and twenty years, he never faltered. Through all the trying experiences of this period of grace he retained his conviction. Because that during all these intervening years there was no evidence in nature of the impending catastrophe, it was a conviction with respect to things not seen, Hebrews 11:7. (c) Abraham left home and kindred and friends, and started on a strange journey to a land both unknown to him and unseen by him. He had no idea how far he would have to travel in order to reach it. All that moved him was a conviction with respect to the far country and a conviction that God would give it to him for an inheritance. Hebrews 11:8-12. (d) These fathers of Israel, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, all died in the faith, having never received the literal fulfilment of the promises. So far as we know they all died without possessing a single acre of the land of promise save the few square feet they had purchased for a burial ground. It seems that as they continued in their pilgrimage their faith became clearer, and they began to look beyond the literal to the spiritual fulfilment of the promise, in the city which hath foundations whose builder and maker is God, Hebrews 11:13-16. (e) Joseph’s conviction with respect to the exodus of his people from Egypt pertained to an event far in the future, an event not seen, Hebrews 11:22. (f) Moses, the man who saw an undying flame, chose to share ill treatment with the people of God, above the temporary enjoyment of the pleasures of sin, because he endured as seeing him who is invisible (Hebrews 11:23-29). In all these cases, faith was a conviction with respect to things not seen.

(5) As in the various cases cited from Old Testament history, so it is with respect to faith in the present dispensation and under the new covenant: (a) our faith must be something more than mere assent; (b) it must be genuine conviction in order to work unto the saving of the soul; (c) it must be conviction with respect to things not seen, viz., God, the Son of God, the Spirit of God, the future life, heaven, etc.; (d) this faith undergirds all our spiritual blessings, aspirations and hopes (1 Corinthians 2:6-10).

Conclusion: 1. This inspired definition of faith is perfect and complete. Nothing can be taken from it without weakening its import. Nothing can be added to it that would give it greater force.

2. Christian faith takes in all those convictions with respect to God, the Son of God, the Word of God, the Spirit of God, immortality, heaven, and the like; all of which are eternal realities above and beyond the realm of time and space. Like Moses, we endure as seeing him who is invisible, looking unto Jesus the author and perfecter of our faith (Hebrews 12:2). Like Abraham, we realize that we are pilgrims and strangers upon this earth, that our present dwelling places are but the tabernacles of a night-time; and, like him, we anticipate a more glorious fulfilment of the promises than would be possible in this world of places and things (1 Corinthians 2:9-10). Our ultimate goal is that heavenly country towards which he made his pilgrimage. In the words of Emily Dickinson:

I never saw a moor, I never saw the sea, Yet know I how the heather looks, And what a wave must be. I never spoke with God, Nor visited in heaven; Yet certain am I of the spot As if the chart were given.

---

THE SOURCE OF FAITH

(Read Romans 10:1-17).

Having ascertained the essential nature of faith (1) the assurance of things hoped for, and (2) a conviction with respect to things not seen, we shall now turn our attention to the source of faith. Whence is the faith obtained that is unto the saving of the soul? We may find the answer to this important question by turning again to the cases cited in the eleventh chapter of Hebrews:

1. Abel, Hebrews 11:4. Whence did Abel obtain his conviction that the offering of a sacrifice of blood would be pleasing to God and would bring him God’s blessing? Evidently from the word of God. It seems obvious that God laid down the law of sacrifice as soon as man fell, in order to establish the principle that apart from shedding of blood there is no remission (Hebrews 9:22). Abel, in bringing an offering in which blood was shed, obeyed the law; Cain, in bringing the fruit of the ground, disobeyed it (1 John 3:12). This explains why Abel’s offering was accepted and Cain’s rejected.

That this institution was of divine origin is evident from several considerations: I. We learn from Hebrews 11:4, that Abel offered his sacrifice in faith. But in Romans 10:17, we are told that -faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.-’ And hence it follows that Abel could not have offered in faith without a command from God. II. It could not have been a human invention, because Reason can perceive no connection between the means and the end. It is evidently a positive and not a moral or natural institution. III. Its universality is another proof of its divine origin. Mr. Faber says that -throughout the whole world there is a notion prevalent that the gods can be appeased only by bloody sacrifices. There is no heathen people,-’ he adds, -that can specify a time when they were without sacrifice. All have had it from a time which is not reached by their genuine records. Tradition alone can be brought forward to account for its origin.-’ IV. The distinction between clean and unclean beasts even in the time of Noah (Genesis 7:2) proves also the divine origin of sacrifice. This is a distinction which is altogether positive, and which has no foundation in either reason or philosophy (Milligan, SR, 67).

2. Enoch, Hebrews 11:5.Enoch’s walk of faith was evidently inspired and directed by the word of God (Genesis 5:24).

3. Noah, Hebrews 11:7. How did Noah obtain his conviction that an overwhelming deluge would come upon the antediluvian world? How did he obtain the conviction that in the building of the ark a means of deliverance would be provided him and his family? Evidently from the word of God. God told him the flood would come in due time. God told him to build the ark and how to build it. God gave him the plans for it. God promised him deliverance through the instrumentality of the ark. And Noah believed God. His conviction was inspired not by any manifestation in nature, but solely by the word of God. See Genesis 6:13-22; Genesis 7:1-5; Genesis 8:15-17.

4. Abraham, Hebrews 11:8-19. Whence did Abraham obtain his conviction regarding the land to which he journeyed? Whence did he obtain his belief that this land would be given him for an inheritance? From the word of God. See Genesis 12:1-4; Genesis 13:14-18, etc. It was God who told him about the far country and promised it to him for an inheritance. Whence did Abraham and Sarah obtain their conviction regarding the birth of the child of promise? From the word of God (Genesis 17:15-21). Whence did Abraham obtain his conviction that God would not allow Isaac to suffer an untimely end (Hebrews 11:19)? From the word of God. Had not Isaac been miraculously conceived and born? Were not the details of the Abrahamic promise to be worked out through him? (Genesis 12:3; Genesis 13:16; Genesis 17:19, Hebrews 11:18). Cf. Genesis 15:6, Romans 4:3, Galatians 3:6, James 2:23.

5. Joseph, Hebrews 11:22. Whence did Joseph obtain his conviction that his people would leave Egypt and repossess Canaan? Evidently from God’s promise to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 12:1-4; Genesis 13:14-18; Genesis 17:15-21; Genesis 26:2-5; Genesis 28:12-17).

6. Moses, Hebrews 11:22-29. From whom did Moses receive his commission to lead his people out of bondage? From whom did he receive the Law ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator (Galatians 3:19)? From God Himself. See Exodus 3:1 to Exodus 4:17, Exodus 20:1-26, Deuteronomy 5:1-33, etc. Who was his constant Guide and Protector through all those terrible marches in the wilderness? Who rained manna from heaven upon the starving people? Who guided them by means of a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night? Moses constantly endured, as seeing him who is invisible.

7. Joshua, Hebrews 11:29. Whence did Joshua obtain his confidence that the walls of Jericho would fall? From Jehovah’s word. He went to God for a war program, in his extremity, and God supplied it (Joshua 6:1-20).

8. Rahab, Hebrews 11:30. Whence did Rahab obtain her belief that she should give aid and succor to the men of Joshua’s army? Evidently from her knowledge of God’s promises and judgments (John 2:9-21; John 6:22-25, James 2:25).

9. The creation, Hebrews 11:3. Whence do we obtain our belief that our physical universe was the materialization of God’s word? Our conviction that what is seen hath not been made out of things which appear (i.e., that this universe was not fashioned out of pre-existing materials, as the evolutionists and materialists contend)? From the word of God. (See Psalms 33:6; Psalms 33:9; Psalms 148:5, etc. Note that the expression, God said, is found ten consecutive times in Genesis 1. Cf. also John 1:1-3, Hebrews 1:1-3, 2 Peter 3:5-8, etc.).

10. Other great heroes and heroines of faith, Hebrews 11:32-39. All received their inspiration to deeds of heroism from the attractions and impulsions of God’s word. So, then, belief cometh of hearing the divine word, as our text says. Believers in all ages endure as seeing Him who is invisible.

Conclusion: So much for the examples from Old Testament history. But what about the faith that operates unto the salvation of the soul, in the present dispensation, under the new covenant?

1. From what source do we obtain our belief that God is, and that He is a rewarder of them that seek after Him (Hebrews 11:6)? From the testimony about Him as revealed and recorded in Scripture. From the complete and perfect revelation of Him afforded us in the person and work of Jesus Christ, whom to know aright is eternal life. John 15:9-11, 1 Corinthians 2:6-16, Hebrews 1:1-3, 1 Peter 1:3-12, etc.

2. From what source do we obtain our conviction that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God? From the testimony presented in the Scriptures, particularly that of the gospel records. This is our only source of accurate information about Him, See John 17:20, John 20:30-31, Acts 15:7, Acts 17:11-12, etc. Why should me reject the testimony of these competent eye-witnesses, these men who walked and talked and supped with Him, and listen to the quibblings of half-baked professors removed from Him by a span of twenty centuries?

3. Whence do we obtain our convictions respecting the future life and its rewards and retributions? From the testimony of Scripture? From the great and exceeding precious promises of God.

4. Romans 10:17. Hear the conclusion of the whole matter. Faith does not come by feeling, nor by a direct operation of the Spirit, nor in answer to prayer, but faith does come by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:6-8, 1 Thessalonians 2:13).

---

THE PILGRIMAGE OF FAITH

(Hebrews 11:1-19, esp. Hebrews 11:13)

One of the most illustrious characters of ancient times to whom our attention is called by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, is Abraham, the father of the Hebrew people.

Abraham’s life and walk were so eminently motivated by faith, that his name has gone down in sacred history as the Father of the Faithful, and as the Friend of God (Romans 4:17, Galatians 3:29, Isaiah 41:8, 2 Chronicles 20:7, James 2:23).

1. Note, in the first place, that Abraham’s whole life was a pilgrimage of faith.

(1) It was by faith that he first went out from his native home, Ur of the Chaldees. As faith comes from hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17), so he went out in response to God’s command (cf. Genesis 12:1-3). He did not go out in consequence of any urge within himself, but solely in obedience to God. By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out unto a place which he was to receive for an inheritance (Hebrews 11:8).

(2)* By faith he made his initial pilgrimage from Ur of Chaldea to the land of promise.* As faith is a conviction with respect to things not seen (Hebrews 11:1), he therefore went out not knowing whither he went (Hebrews 11:8). Commenting on this verse, Milligan says: Here we have given the fact that Abraham received a call from God; that by his call he was required to leave his home and kindred in Ur of Chaldea, and go out into a strange land; that this land, though promised to his posterity, was wholly unknown to him at the time; and that he nevertheless obeyed God, and went out of his own country, not knowing whither he went (Milligan, NTCH, in loco.)

(3) By faith he became a sojourner in the land of promise, as in a land not his own, etc. It would seem from this that Abraham never regarded Canaan as his home. He knew of course, by faith, that when the Canaanites should have filled up the cup of their iniquity to the full, in the fourth generation, the land would be given to his posterity for an everlasting possession, as indeed it was in the time of Joshua (Genesis 15:12-21). But until that time neither he nor his seed, he realized, had any rights or privileges there beyond what might have been accorded other strangers under like circumstances. (Cf. Acts 7:5). Hence Abraham died without owning a foot of the land other than the cave of Machpelah, which he purchased from Ephron the Hittite for a burying-ground (Genesis 23:3-20); and hence, also, neither he, nor Isaac, nor Jacob, ever established a permanent residence in the country. They were satisfied to live in movable tents, feeling assured that according to the promise, they were to fall heir to a better inheritance than any that is to be found on this earth.

(4) By faith he looked beyond the literal to the spiritual fulfilment of the promise. For he looked for the city which hath the foundations, etc. (Hebrews 11:9-10). From this and other like passages we are constrained to think that God had given the patriarchs information with regard to the heavenly country, far beyond what is now recorded in Genesis or any other part of the Old Testament. What we find there at present was written for our instruction, as well as for the benefit of the ancients (Romans 15:4). But much may have been said to them which would in no way benefit us; and which was, therefore, excluded from the Canon by Moses, Ezra and other inspired writers. The origin of sacrifice, for instance, is nowhere expressly mentioned in the Old Testament; nor is there anything said in it respecting the origin of the Patriarchal priesthood. Information, clear, full, and explicit, on all such matters, was of course needed by the ancients; but for us the more general instructions of the Bible are quite sufficient. And so, also, we think it was with respect to the heavenly country. The Patriarchs seem to have received revelations concerning it which have never been transmitted to us; for it is obvious that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, lived in constant expectation of entering it at the close of their earthly pilgrimage. They were satisfied to live here as strangers and pilgrims, knowing that they had in heaven a city having permanent foundations whose Architect and Framer is God. This city is manifestly the heavenly Jerusalem (Galatians 4:28, Hebrews 12:22; Hebrews 13:14), which for the present is located in heaven, but which will hereafter descend to the earth after the latter shall have been renovated by fire (Revelation 21). Then will be fulfilled in its full and proper sense the promise made to Abraham, that he and his seed should be the heirs of the world (Romans 4:13) (Milligan, ibid.).

In the land of fadeless day,

Lies -the city four-square-';

It shall never pass away,

And there is -no night there.-'

God shall -wipe away all tears,-'

There’s no death, no pain nor fears,

And they count not time by years,

For there is -no night there.-'

(5) By faith he anticipated the birth of the child of promise (Hebrews 11:11-12, Galatians 4:23, Genesis 17:15-21; Genesis 18:9-15; Genesis 21:1-7). The miraculous conception and birth of Isaac, typical in respect to its supernaturalness of that of Jesus, were direct fulfilments of the promise of Jehovah which Abraham believed. In this respect Abraham’s faith was even greater than Sarah’S, who, on being told, at ninety years of age and long after she had passed the age of child-bearing, that she should give birth to a son, received the announcement at first with considerable incredulity (Genesis 18:9-15).

(6) By faith he offered up Isaac on Mount Moriah, accounting that God is able to raise up, even from the dead; from whence he did also in a figure receive him back (Hebrews 11:17-19). Abraham’s faith was such that he knew that the promise of God (Genesis 17:21; Genesis 21:12) could not and would not fail, and as he could not anticipate that God would interfere, as He did, so as to prevent the immolation of his son, there was really left for him no alternative other than simply to conclude that God would restore Isaac to life. This conviction seems to be implied in the remark which he made to his servants, -Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again.-’ The word rendered come again (we will return) is in the plural number, and seems to indicate a belief on the part of Abraham, that God would immediately raise Isaac up again from the dead (Milligan, ibid.) The account of this, the severest trial and consequently the supreme manifestation of Abraham’s faith, is related in Genesis 22:1-14).

(7) Having walked in faith, he likewise died in faith, not having received the promises but having seen them and greeted them from afar, etc. What were the promises? (a) That Abraham should have a, numerous offspring (Genesis 13:16; Genesis 15:3-5; Genesis 17:2-4; Genesis 22:16); (b) that God would be a God to him and to his seed after him (Genesis 17:1-8); (c) that He would give to him and his seed an everlasting inheritance (Genesis 12:7; Genesis 13:15; Genesis 15:18-21; Genesis 17:8); (d) that through him and his seed, all the nations of the earth should be blessed (Genesis 2:3; Genesis 22:18). With respect to these four details, Abraham looked beyond their literal to their spiritual fulfilment. To each of these God attached a double significance.. They each consisted, so to speak, of two elements, one of which had reference to the carnal side of the covenant, and the other to the spiritual side; one to the type, and the other to the antitype. Thus Abraham was made the honored father of two families: to each of which an inheritance was promised, and through each of which the world was to be blessed (Milligan, ibid.). Abraham, it would seem, understood all this, understood by faith that the spiritual side of the promise would be realized through his seed, the Messiah, and consequently rejoiced to see his day, and he saw it, and was glad (John 8:56). (Cf. Galatians 4:21-31; Galatians 3:6-13, etc.) Hence, he died in faith, knowing that the promise in its various details would be worked out according to God’s eternal purpose and plan. Hence, too, by his constant life and walk of faith, he admitted that he did not seek a home on this earth, that here he considered himself merely a stranger and sojourner, that he did not expect to enter into possession of his true home until he should have reached the end of his pilgrimage and been received into a better country than this, i.e., heaven itself. Wherefore God approved and rewarded the faith of Abraham, and of Isaac and Jacob as well, by preparing for their inhabitation, and for all the redeemed of all ages, a city whose foundations had, even in their day, been laid prospectively in the blood of Jesus Christ (cf. Hebrews 12:22-24).

2. Note, in the second place, that Abraham’s pilgrimage of faith was designed to be typical of the believer’s journey.

(1) A voyage to a distant landsuch is the life of every Christian believer.

Our life is like the hurrying on the eve Before we start on some long journey bound, When fit preparing to the last we leave, Then run to every room the dwelling round, And sigh that nothing needed can be found; Yet go we must, and soon as day shall break; We snatch an hour’s repose; when loud the sound For our departure calls; we rise and take A quick and sad farewell, and go ere well awake.

(2) Here we walk by faith, and not by sight, if we are true Christians. Though in the world, we are not of the world. The worldly spirit deals with things present, but the spirit of faith anticipates the more glorious things to come. The worldly spirit is neither far-reaching nor far-sighted. Its range is bounded by the horizon of time and sense. It has no wings with which to soar into realms invisible. It is of the earth, earthly. Whence comes the manna? why gushes the water from the rock? whither guides the pillar of cloud and fire?these are questions it never asks. It knows not how to soar, how to anticipate and trust and wait, how to endure as seeing Him who is invisible, how to repose under the shadow of His wings, unmindful of the dangers of the wilderness and unalarmed by foes. But the heavenly-minded man walks by faiththat faith which is the substance of things hoped for, and a conviction with respect to things not seen. And, among all the great verities which possess his soul there is none greater, none nobler, none surer, than his conviction with respect to the saints-’ everlasting home. All the circumstances of his present journey, all the remembrances, all his reasonings, all his aspirations, point to a Better Land. By faith he sings:

There is a land of pure delight,

Where saints immortal reign,

Infinite day excludes the night,

And pleasures banish pain.

There everlasting spring abides

And never-withering flowers;

Death, like a narrow sea, divides

This heavenly land from ours.

(3) We realize that as far as this present life is concerned we are but strangers and sojourners on the earth. We dwell in tents, as did Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; in the tabernacles of a night-time. We are here today, and gone tomorrow. There is nothing that we possess here that we can really call our own. All that we shall have in the end is a few square feet of earth in which our mortal remains will be laid away to mingle with the dust. This is not sentimentaityit is plain fact. We can-’t take anything material with us into the next world, for the simple reason that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. No matter how diligently we may toil and strive to accumulate houses and lands and worldly goods, of what value will these things be when we reach the end of the road? We are pilgrims, nothing more, walking by faith in the direction of the heavenly country which we expect to reach beyond the swelling of the Jordan, the country that will truly be, Home, Sweet Home. The true Christian philosophy is expressed by Phoebe Carey in these lines:

One sweetly solemn thought

Comes to me o-’er and o-’er:

I am nearer my home today

Than I have ever been before.

Nearer my Father’s house

Where the many mansions be;

Nearer the great white throne,

Nearer the crystal sea.

Nearer the bound of life,

Where we lay our burdens down;

Nearer leaving the cross,

Nearer gaining the crown.

(4) Observation teaches us that much in this life is inequality and injustice. As far as this world alone is concerned, honesty is not always the best policy, Judas fares about as well as John, and Nero quaffs more of the wine of living than Paul. The voice of experience speaks to us that if this life is all, it is scarcely worth the living. In the words of Robert Browning:

Truly there needs be another life to come! If this be all And another life await us not for one, I say, -Tis a poor cheat, a stupid bungle, A wretched failure, I for one protest Against, and I hurl it back with scorn.

(5) Life as we live it here is largely illusion. (See F. W. Robertson, Sermons, The Illusiveness of Life). Our senses deceive us. They deceive us with respect to distance, shape, and color. That which, afar off, seems to be oval, turns out to be circular when modified by the perspective of distance; that which appears to be a speck, becomes a vast body, on nearer approach. Stand in the middle of a railroad track, and look in either direction, and the rails appear to converge; but they do not actually do so. Look at what we call the horizon and it seems that the earth and sky meet, but they do not actually, meet. The beautiful berry turns out to be bitter and poisonous; that which apparently moves is in reality at rest; that which seems to be stationary is in perpetual motion; the earth moves, but the sun, which appears to be moving, stands still. All experience here is but a correction of life’s illusionsa modification or reversal of the judgment of the senses. Our natural anticipations deceive us. Every human life starts out bright with hopes that will never be realized. These hopes may be different in nature: finer spirits may look on life as an arena for good deeds, while the more selfish regard it as a place only for personal enjoyment; but the results are usually the same. Regardless of the nature of these hopes, the majority will fail of fruition. It would seem almost a satire on life to compare the youth in the outset of his career, flushed and sanguine, with the aspect of the same man when he is nearly done, worn, sobered, covered with the dust of life, confessing that its days have been few and evil. Where is the land flowing with milk and honey? Not on this earth. With our affections it is even worse. Man’s affections are but tabernacles of Canaan, the tents of a nighttime, never the same, always changing. Where are the charms of character, the perfection and purity and truthfulness which seemed so resplendent in our friend? Association has rendered them sordid. They were only our conceptions and they proved false; hence we outgrow friendships. Life as we live it here is an unenjoyable Canaan with nothing real or substantial about it. Our expectations, resting on divine revelation, deceive us. For example, the attitude of the church with respect to the second coming of Christ. The apostles expected Him to return while they were yet here, and the early churches were vitalized by this hope of seeing the great and notable day of the Lord. John, in penning the last words of the New Testament, expressed this hope, Come, Lord Jesus. The church, throughout the centuries of the Christian era, has revived and revitalized this hope many times; in fact it has never died away. And even today, if it should turn out that we who are alive shall remain unto the coming of the Lord, we would consider ourselves fortunate indeed. However, He has not come. He will comebut not as yet. The promise, This Jesus shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven, remains unfulfilled. What is the meaning of all this illusiveness of earthly life? Faith replies that it is not delusion, but illusion; that the non-fulfilment of the promises literally, is a pledge of their spiritual fulfilment later; that God, by their very non-realization, lures us onward and upward to nobler things. Suppose, for instance, that the spiritual side of the Abrahamic promise had been revealed to ancient Israel at first; suppose they had been informed at the outset that God’s rest is inward, that the land of promise is to be found only in the Jerusalem which is above; not material, but immaterial; not visible, but invisible. That rude, gross people, yearning after the flesh-pots of Egypt, willing to go back into slavery so only they might have enough to eat and drinkwould they have quitted Egypt on such terms? Would they have taken one step on that pilgrimage which was to find its meaning in the discipline of the ages? Nothey had to be lured on by something visible, something tangible. So we are lured on through life as upon a journey. Could man see the route before hima flat, straight road, unbroken by tree or eminence, with the sun’s heat burning down upon it, stretching out in dreamy monotonyhe could scarcely find either the inclination or the energy with which to begin his journey. It is the very uncertainty of that which is not seen, that which lies just around the bend, that keeps expectation alive. The view we think we may get from yonder summit, the landscape that may be glimpsed as the road winds around yonder knoll, hopes like these beguile the weary traveler on. So our heavenly Father leads us on, educating us day by day, and hour by hour, to walk in faith, ever holding up the seen as an incentive to the unseen. So He deals with us, luring us on by means of life’s unsatisfactory and illusive rewards, ever schooling us in the art of waiting, of enduring as seeing Him who is invisible. Canaan first; then the hope of a Redeemer; and finally the Better Land. It was in this manner that the ancient saints interpreted this mystery of the illusiveness of life. They did not regard life as a dream, nor as a bubble, nor as a delusion. Though they no doubt felt as keenly as any moralist could feel; the brokenness of its promises, yet by faith they pressed on, confessing that they were pilgrims and strangers here, that they had no continuing city, never mournfully moralizing about it, but admitting it cheerfully and even rejoicing that it was so. They felt that all was right; they knew that the promise had a deeper than material significance; so they looked for the city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. They even died in faith, not having received the promises, not expecting to receive them here, but hereafter. Now observe the glorious result that comes from the indestructible power of believing and continuing on, in spite of apparent failure. The primitive Christians, for instance, believed in their day that the millennium was at hand. They had heard the apostolic warning, brief and clear, to watch. Now suppose, instead of this, they had been able to look into the future and see all the dreary pages of church history unfolded, with its heresies, its apostasy and divisions; suppose they could have known that even after two thousand years the world would scarcely know the alphabet of the Christian religion; knowing all these things, what would have become of their gigantic and heroic efforts, their sacrifices, their persecutions and their martyrdoms? With such knowledge of the future, do you suppose there ever would have been what we consider the heroism, the sacrifice, the passionate zeal of primitive Christianity? It is in this way that God leads His children on, on to realization and achievement through the illusiveness of the past; as a father educates his child, holding up the seen, all the while nurturing the thought of the unseen. Thus we shall continue to the endto that day when the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of our God and His Christ. Thus the non-fulfilment of God’s promises becomes to the man of faith an earnest of their deeper and nobler fulfilment.

(6) Finally, as in Abraham’s case, heaven is the goal of our pilgrimage. We expect to find illusion here, and we expect to find reality hereafter. We know that things here are seen and temporal, and we know, too, that the things we shall enjoy hereafter, the things that are now unseen, will be eternal. Interpreted, then, in the light of faith, life’s illusions are not disappointing; in fact nothing is disappointment if spiritually discerned. Wherefore God is not ashamed to be called our God; for he hath prepared for us a city (Hebrews 11:16).

There’s a land that is fairer than day,

And by faith we can see it afar,

For the Father waits over the way,

To prepare us a dwelling-place there.

Just recently Dr. F. B. Meyer, one of England’s greatest preachers, entered into rest. Writing to a friend just three days before his death, this is what he said: Dear Friend: I have just been told, to my surprise, that my days on earth are numbered. It may be that before you receive this letter, I shall have passed within the Palace of the King. Do not trouble to write. I will meet you in the morning. Yours, with much love, F. B. Meyer. I will meet you in the morningwithin the palace of the King. This is Christian faith. This is conviction. Death isn-’t the end, it is the beginning, the beginning of greater growth, greater progress, greater service, and greater joy. As Louise Chandler Moulton has written:

At the end of Love, at the end of Life, At the end of Hope, at the end of Strife, At the end of all that we cling to so The sun is settingmust we go?

At dawn of Love, at Dawn of Life, At dawn of Peace that follows Strife, At dawn of all we long for so The sun is rising*let us go!

Conclusion:* Wherefore God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God; for he hath prepared for them a city. This is the promise! And God keeps His promises!

How beautiful to be with God,

When earth is fading like a dream,

And from this mist-encircled shore

To launch upon the unknown stream!

No doubt, no fear, no anxious care,

But, comforted by staff and rod,

In the faith-brightened hour of death,

How beautiful to be with God.

Beyond the partings and the pains,

Beyond the sighing and the tears,

Oh, beautiful to be with God

Through all the endless, blessed years

To see His face, to hear His voice,

To know Him better day by day,

And love Him as the flowers love light,

And serve Him as immortals may.

My sinner friend, will you not turn now, and start upon your pilgrimage of faith?

Genesis 22:1-24

PART THIRTY-FOUR THE STORY OF ABRAHAM: CONFIRMATION OF THE COVENANT

Genesis 22:1-24

The Sacrifice of Isaac (1-24)

1 And it came to pass after these things, that God did prove Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham; and he said, Here am I. 2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son, whom thou lovest, even Isaac, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of. 3 *And Abraham rose early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son; and he clave the wood for the burnt-offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him. 4 On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off. 5 And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the lad will go yonder; and we will worship, and come again to you. 6 And Abraham took the wood of the burnt-offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took in his hand the fire and the knife; and they went both of them together. 7 And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold, the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering? 8 And Abraham said, God will provide himself the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son: so they went both of them together.

9 And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built the altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar, upon the wood. 10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. 11 And the angel of Jehovah called unto him out of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. 12 And he said, Lay not thy hand upon the lad, neither do thou anything unto him; for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from me. 13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and, behold, behind him a ram caught in the thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt-offering in the stead of his son. 14 And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovah-jireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of Jehovah it shall be provided. 15 And the angel of Jehovah called unto Abraham a second time out of heaven, 16 and said, By myself have I sworn, saith Jehovah, because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, 17 that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heavens, and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; 18 and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice. 19 So Abraham returned unto his young men, and they rose up and went together to Beer-sheba; and Abraham dwelt at Beer-sheba. 20 And it came to pass after these things, that it was told Abraham, saying, Behold, Milcah, she also hath borne children unto thy brother Nahor: 21 Uz his first-born, and Buz his brother, and Kemuel the father of Aram, 22 and Chesed, and Hazo, and Pildash, and Jidlaph, and Bethuel. 23 And Bethuel begat Rebekah: these eight did Milcah bear to Nahor, Abraham’s brother. 24 And his concubine, whose name was Reumah, she also bare Tebah, and Gaham, and Tahash, and Maacah.*

1. The Divine Command, Genesis 22:1-2

Skinner (ICCG, 327-328): The only incident in Abraham’s life expressly characterized as a -trial-’ of his faith is the one here narrated, where the patriarch proves his readiness to offer up his only son as a sacrifice at the command of God. The story, which is the literary masterpiece of the Elohistic collection, is told with exquisite simplicity; every sentence vibrates with restrained emotion, which shows how fully the author realizes the tragic horror of the situation. For many years had Abraham waited for the promised seed, in which the divine promise was to be fulfilled. At length the Lord had given him the desired heir of his body by his wife Sarah, and directed him to send away the son of the maid. And now that this son had grown into a young man, the word of God had come to Abraham to offer up this very son, who had been given to him as the heir of the promise, for a burnt-offering, upon one of the mountains which should be shown him. The word did not come from his own heartwas not a thought suggested by the sight of the human sacrifices of the Canaanites, that he would offer a similar sacrifice to his God; nor did it originate with the tempter to evil. The word came from Ha-Elohim, the personal, true God, who tried him, i.e., demanded the sacrifice of the only, beloved son, as a proof and attestation of his faith. The issue shows, that God did not desire the sacrifice of Isaac by slaying and burning him upon the altar, but his complete surrender, and a willingness to offer him up to God even by death. Nevertheless the divine command was given in such a form, that Abraham could not understand it in any other way than as requiring an outward burnt-offering, because there was no other way in which Abraham could accomplish the complete surrender of Isaac, than by an actual preparation for really offering the desired sacrifice. This constituted the trial, which necessarily produced a severe internal conflict in his mind.. But Abraham brought his reason into captivity to the obedience of Faith (BCOTP, 248).

Genesis 22:1. Speiser puts it: God put Abraham to the test (ABG, 161). God tempts no man by enticing him to sin (James 1:13). Nor does the word here signify any such thing, but to try exquisitely; nor doth God try men in order to promote or to confirm his own knowledge of them, but to manifest what they are, to themselves and to the world, that his rewarding or punishing them may appear the more wise and equal, or his blessing them the more gracious (Deuteronomy 3:2; Deuteronomy 13:3; Judges 2:22; 2 Chronicles 32:31; Psalms 139:23-24; 1 Corinthians 10:13; Exodus 15:25; Exodus 16:4; James 1:12; 1 Samuel 3:4; 1 Samuel 3:6). By this command God tried the faith of Abraham with respect to his believing that in Isaac his seed should be called; and that through the death of the Messiah he and other believers should obtain everlasting salvation; and tried his obedience in the most tender point; that could be conceivedhis deliberate slaying of his own darling, his only son by his wife, his only son now left in his own house, ch. Genesis 21:1; Genesis 21:12; Genesis 21:14 (SIBG, 247-248). -God put Abraham to the test-’the effect is heightened by the definite article with Elohim. The idea is thus conveyed that this was no ordinary procedure, but that God had a particularly important objective in mind (ABG, 162).

Rashi notes how God bore down on Abraham’s heart more poignantly with each successive explanatory phrase (SC, 108): Thy son. -But I have two sons,-’ Abraham said. -Thine only one,-’ was the reply. -But each is the only one of his mother!-’ -Whom thou lovest,-’ he was told. -But I love both!-’ and the answer came, -Even Isaac.-’ Why did not God name Isaac at once? Lest Abraham’s mind should reel under the sudden shock. Further, to make His command more precious to him. And finally, that he might receive a reward for every word spoken.

The ARV gives the most satisfactory rendering: God did prove Abraham. That is to say, God proved Abraham (his faith, his righteousness) to himself, to his posterity, and to all humanity, as the Father of the Faithful. Surely God knows whether a man’s faith will be strong enough to enable him to emerge triumphantly from such an ordeal (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:13). Cf. James 1:12-15: the real temptation, that of Satan, occurs when one is drawn away by his own lust, and enticed, even as Eveat Satan’s suggestionwas enticed by her lust for illicit knowledge (Genesis 3:6). James gives us here the true pedigree of sin: Satan, lust, sin, death.

Note that God said to Abraham, etc., Genesis 22:1, possibly in a dream-vision, but surely in an audible voice which previous experience had taught him to recognize. Note the patriarch’s simple response, Here am I, a response that combined both humility and readiness: so do the righteous always respond to God’s calls (cf. Acts 22:10, Isaiah 6:8).

Into the land of Moriah, i.e., Jerusalem. The Rabbis explained that it was so named because from thence -teaching-’ (horaah) went forth to the world. It was the land of the Amorite. the land where myrrh grew abundantly (cf. Song of S. Genesis 4:6); it was the site of the Temple, cf. 2 Chronicles 3:1 (S.C., 109). 2 Chron. Genesis 3:1 identifies Moriah with the hill on which the Jerusalem temple was later built. Subsequent tradition accepted the identification (JB, 39). As in all such cases involving the support of tradition only, modern criticism is inclined to be skeptical about this identification. It has been objected that the region of Beersheba (from which Abraham and Isaac set out) is not sufficiently distant from Jerusalem to have required a journey of three days to get there, and that a topographical feature of the city of Jerusalem is that the Temple hill is not visible until the traveler is quite close. However, the distance from S. Philistia to Jerusalem is about 50 miles, which might well have required three days to traverse, and in Genesis the place in question is not a -mount Moriah-’ but one of the several mountains in a land of that name, and the hills on which Jerusalem stands are visible at a distance. There is no need to doubt therefore that Abraham’s sacrifice took place in the site of the later Jerusalem, if not on the Temple hill (NBD, 842). Moriah signifies -the vision-’ or -manifestation of Jehovah.-’ The name is here given to -the land-’ on one of whose mountains the sacrifice was to be offered up; it is also given to the mountain on which the temple was built. The common belief is that these two places were identical, and we see no reason to doubt or question it. Mount Moriah is an oblong-shaped hill, or rather point of a ridge, having the deep glen of the Tyropoeon on the west, and the Kidron on the east. The glens unite at the foot of the hill on the south. The elevation of the summit above the bottom of the glens is about 350 feet. Moriah is now crowned by the Great Mosque, and is one of the most venerated sanctuaries of the Mohammedans (SIBG, 248).

2. The Journey, Genesis 22:1-8. The accumulation of brief, sententious clauses here admirably represents the calm deliberation and unflinching heroism with which the patriarch proceeded to execute the Divine command (PCG, 283). Note the preparations: these were begun early in the morning (cf. Genesis 19:27, Genesis 20:8, Genesis 21:14). The patriarch saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with himthe ass for the wood, the young men for the ass; and Isaac his son (probably explaining to him as yet only his intention to offer sacrifice on a distant mountain). Nothing is indicated here but sublime innocence on Isaac’s part and unflinching resoluteness and obedience on the part of Abraham. (Did Abraham say anything to Sarah about this journey, especially the purpose of it? We doubt it. From previous attitudes on her part we can hardly believe that she would have accepted this apparently tragic commission with the same unflinching obedience of faith that characterized Abraham’s response). While the outward preparations are graphically described, no word is spared for the conflict in Abraham’s breasta striking illustration of the reticence of the legends with regard to mental states (Skinner, ICCG, 329). How old was Isaac at this time? Josephus (Antiq., I, 13, 2) follows the tradition which puts his age at twenty-five; other commentators would have him to be some eighteen years old at the time. (He was thirteen, it will be recalled, when he was circumcised, Genesis 17:25). At any rate he was intelligent enough to be a willing party to the sacrifice of his life at God’s command (once the purpose of the journey was revealed to him), and strong enough to carry up the mountain the split wood for the offering.

Without taking counsel with anyone, the solemn procession set out from the Beersheba areathe patriarch, with his son, his two servants, and the ass that bore the woodand on the third day they arrived within sight of the place of sacrifice. (Glueck has called attention to the fact that it would have been odd for Abraham to have carried wood from Beersheba to the wooded country around Jerusalem where he could easily have found all the wood that he needed. He suggests that the land of Moriah of this text might have been in the treeless ranges of Sinai down near Kadesh. However, the three days-’ journey certainly is in accord with the distance of some fifty miles from Beersheba to the region around Jerusalem. At any rate, Abraham on the third day saw the place afar off. It is evident from this statement that by this time the place had been specifically indicated by divine authority (cf. Genesis 22:2). We can hardly imagine the intensity of the pang that shot through the patriarch’s heart ordering the two servants to abide where they were with the ass (it seems quite probable that what was about to take place would have been repugnant to them: at any rate they could hardly have thought of it as worship), Abraham said, I and the lad will go yonder, and we will worship, and come again to you (Genesis 22:5). Note the we in this promise: Abraham firmly believed that God would restore his son to life from the ashes into which he expected him to be burned, and cause him to came back with him, Hebrews 11:19 (SIBG, 248). So they went both of them together up the mountain, Isaac carrying the heavier load, the wood for the offering. The aged Abraham could hardly have carried this load, but with resoluteness of faith he bears the two means of destruction: a container, like a censer, filled with live coals, and the fatal knife (EG, 625). (It is curious that we do not find any allusion in the Old Testament to the method of producing fire). Genesis 22:7-8: The narrative gives free play to our imagination as it pictures father and son proceeding step by step up the hill. Isaac cannot but sense that some unwonted burden depresses his father past anything that the son had ever observed in the father before. This attitude on the father’s part causes some restraint between the two, and a strange perplexity falls upon Isaac (EG, 625). The pathos of this dialogue is inimitable: the artless curiosity of the child, the irrepressible affection of the father, and the stern ambiguity of his reply, can hardly be read without tears (ICCG, 330). Undoubtedly Abraham now made it clear to his son what was about to take place and why. Isaac, though able to resist, yielded up himself, as typical of Christ’s voluntary oblation of himself for us, Philippians 2:8, Ephesians 5:2, Acts 8:32 (SIBG, 248). Cf. also Hebrews 12:2note, for the joy that was set before him, i.e., the ineffable joy of redeeming lost souls, he endured the cross, etc. God will provide the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son. The father devises an answer which is a marvelous compound of considerate love and anticipative faith. He spares Isaac undue pain and leaves the issues entirely with God, where in his own heart he left them throughout the journey. In the light of what follows, Abraham’s answer is well-nigh prophetic, -God will provide.-’ It marks the high point of the chapter, the one thing about God’s dealings with His own that here receives emphatic statement (EG, 62). On Genesis 22:8: God will provide the lamb; and if not, then you, my son, will be the offering. And although Isaac was aware that he might be sacrificed, yet they went both of them together, with one mind (SC, 110).

3. The Sacrifice Averted. Genesis 22:9-13. The preliminary ritual is now carried out: the altar is built, and the wood laid in order. Isaac is then bound and laid upon the altar, and Abraham lifts the deadly knife to kill. But the sacrifice is averted as again we meet the Angel of Jehovah, speaking from heaven, to stay the patriarch’s hand. V: 12Now I know, etc. (Now I can give a reason to all intelligent beings for my love for thee; now I have proved that thou art a Godfearing man, etc. Now I can record in Scripture for all generations to know that you are truly my Friend.) Genesis 22:13The substitution of the ram caught in the thicket for the human victim evidently takes place without express command, the patriarch recognizing by its mysterious presence at the moment of crisis that it was -provided.-’ After lying under a sentence of death three days, Isaac was released by the orders of Heaven, as a figure of Christ’s resurrection on the third day, 1 Corinthians 15:3-4; Matthew 16:21; Matthew 17:23; Matthew 20:19; Luke 13:32) (SIBG, 248). This ram was directed hither by divine providence, as a figure of Christ appointed of God, and engaged to make atonement for our sins, 1 Peter 1:19, Job 33:24 (ibid.) In the extremities of distress God interposes as a helper and deliverer, Deuteronomy 32:36, Micah 4:10, Matthew 15:32. And on Mount Moriah in the temple God was long manifested in the symbols of his presence, 2 Chronicles 3:1, Psalms 76:2; and there Jesus often appeared while in the flesh, Haggai 2:7; John, chs. 2, 5, 7, 10 (ibid.).

Genesis 22:11Here am I. Abraham heard God call him; he was quick to respond. Had he not been listening he could not have responded; had he been disobedient he would not have answered yes (HSB, 36). Genesis 22:13The ram caught in the thicket was a revelatory event of God to Abraham. When Abraham prepared to offer his only son Isaac in obedience to God’s command, his dilemma was this: how could he reconcile the command of God to slay his son with God’s previous promise that through this son should come a great posterity? He did not solve the problem by deciding to disobey God’s command to offer up Isaac. Rather by faith he concluded that God Himself would raise Isaac from the dead after he had been offered. Spiritually there is a deeper lesson. God, like Abraham, did not spare His own Son (Romans 8:32). And, as Abraham received back Isaac as though he had been raised from the dead, so Christ has been raised by the Father from the dead (ibid.)

4. Genesis 22:14. Jehovah-jireh, i.e., Jehovah will see, or provide. The plain meaning is: -the Lord will see-’ and choose this place for the dwelling of the Divine Presence, i.e., the Temple (Rashi, SC, 111). (Is there contradiction between the Name used here and the statement in Exodus 6:3, where God is represented as telling Moses that He was known to the patriarchs as El Shaddai, but by His Name Yahwe He was not known to them?) Certainly this is not to be taken to mean that the patriarchs were altogether ignorant of the name Jehovah. It was in His attribute as El Shaddai that God had revealed His nature to the patriarchs; but now [at the beginning of the Mosaic ministry] He was about to reveal Himself to Israel as Jehovah, as the absolute Being working with unbounded freedom in the performance of His promises. For not only had He established His covenants with the fathers, but He had also heard the groaning of the children of Israel.. On the ground of the erection of His covenant on the one hand, and, what was irreconcilable with that covenant, the bondage of Israel on the other, Jehovah was now about to redeem Israel from its sufferings and make it His own nation (KD, BCOTP, 468). In a word, under the mediatorship of Moses He would reveal Himself fully as the Covenant-God, Yahwe.

Genesis 22:15-19. When God made promise to Abraham, since he could swear by none greater, he sware by himself, saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, etc. Note that the promisethe Abrahamic promiseis now confirmed (by the Angel of Jehovah calling unto Abraham a second time out of heaven) by two immutable things, his word and oath, in which it is impossible for God to lie, etc. The promises here solemnly confirmed by oath are almost wholly related to Abraham’s Hebrew and spiritual seed. To possess the gates of their enemies is to obtain their country, or to have dominion over them, and rule among them: Genesis 21:12; Genesis 24:60; Deuteronomy 21:19; Deuteronomy 22:24. The Jews had temporal dominion over their enemies in the time of Joshua, David, etc., cf. Joshua, chs. 6-19; 2 Sam., chs. 8, 10. And Christ and His people have a spiritual dominion over them, Psalms 2:8-9; Psalms 22:27-30; Daniel 4:34-35; Romans 8:37, 1 Corinthians 15:25-28, Colossians 2:15. What a quiet, poignantly meaningful ending, to an experience unparalleled in the history of man. How striking the final word from heaven: because thou hast obeyed my voice. Now, Abraham, his son, his two servants, and the beast of burden return to Beersheba, and Abraham dwelt at Beersheba.

5. The Progeny of Nahor, Genesis 22:20-24, a list of the Aramaean tribes. Note the division here between legitimate (Genesis 22:23-24) and illegitimate (Genesis 22:24) sons. Concubines were women of a middle state, between wives and harlots; a kind of half-wives, sharing in bed and board, but not in the government of the family, Genesis 25:1-6; Genesis 30:4; Genesis 35:22; Judges 19:1, 1 Kings 11:3, 1 Chronicles 1:32. They served under the lawful wives, if alive, Genesis 16:6-7; Genesis 32:22; and their children had no title to the inheritance, Genesis 25:5-6 (SIBG, 248). The genealogy inserted here is designed, of course, to introduce the family from which Rebekah is to make her appearance in the sacred history.

6. The Significance of Abraham’s Sacrificial Act. One most important truth to be derived from it is that the essence of sacrifice is the moral disposition of the suppliant. Moreover, as the essential property of music is harmony, and that of art is beauty, so the essential property of love is sacrifice. This particular episode, however, has significance along other lines. We might well ask whether God’s design in this particular case was in any way related to the pagan practice of human sacrifice, Some authorities think so. For example, from one exegete we read that presumably the intent of the tale was to teach that human sacrifice has no place in the worship of the Lord the God of Israel, cf. Micah 6:6-8 (IBG, 645). Again (JB, 39, n.): It is the basis of the ritual prescription for the redemption of the first-born of Israel: like all -first-fruits-’ these belong to God; they are not, however, to be sacrificed but bought back, -redeemed,-’ Exodus 13:11. Lying behind the story, therefore, is the condemnation of child-sacrifice, see Leviticus 18:21 ff., so often denounced by the prophets. In this incident Abraham’s faith reaches its climaxthe story’s second lesson, more profound than the first. In the sacrifice of Isaac, the Fathers saw a prefiguring of the Passion of Jesus, the only-begotten Son. Cf. Speiser (ABG, 165): Was it, then, the aim of the story to extol obedience to God as a general principle? Abraham had already proved himself on that count by heeding the call to leave Mesopotamia and make a fresh start in an unknown land (Genesis 12:1 ff.) The meaning of the present narrative, therefore, would have to become something more specific. And we can hardly go too far afield if we seek the significance of Abraham’s supreme trial in the very quest on which he was embarked. The involvement of Isaac tends to bear this out, since the sole heir to the spiritual heritage concerned cannot but focus attention on the future. The process that Abraham set in motion was not to be accomplished in a single generation. It sprang from a vision that would have to be tested and validated over an incalculable span of time, a vision that could be pursued only with singlemindedness of purpose and absolute faithan ideal that could not be perpetuated unless one was ready to die for it, or had the strength to see it snuffed out. The object of the ordeal, then, was to discover how firm was the patriarch’s faith in the ultimate divine purpose. It was one thing to start out resolutely for the Promised Land, but it was a very different thing to maintain confidence in the promise when all appeared lost. The fact is that short of such unswerving faith, the biblical process could not have survived the many trials that lay ahead. May we not conclude, just at this point, that one basic aspect of the Divine intention is very simply stated in the recorded affirmation, namely, that God did prove Abraham? But there was another aspect of God’s purpose that cannot be omitted without vitiating the significance of the thing commanded. This is exquisitely stated, as follows (SIBG, 248): While I admire the faith and obedience of Abraham, and the cheerful submission of Isaacwhile I place these bright examples before memy faith directs me to more glorious objects: let me with astonishment think of Jehovah bringing His only begotten Son into the world, permitting him to be laid on the altar, and through his sacrifice forgiving our sins! Let me behold Jesus caught, seasonably caught, in the thickets of men’s wilful transgressions of his own compassion, and of our transgressions resting on him, and borne in our stead! Let me listen to the new testament in his blood, in which Jehovah swears that men shall be blessed in him, and all nations shall call him blessed. Thus we see again that the incidents of the Old Testament record are fully clarified only in the light of New Testament fulfilment.

FOR MEDITATION AND SERMONIZING

The Ultimate Degree of Faith

Genesis 22:1And it came to pass after these things, that God did prove Abraham, etc.

By ultimate we mean the highest, that degree of faith beyond which one cannot go. This implies, of course, that there are lesser degrees of faith. Note that faith is defined scripturally as the assurance of things hoped for, a conviction with respect to things not seen, Hebrews 11:1; cf. 2 Corinthians 4:16-18.

A moral command of God requires that a thing be done because it is right in respect to the very nature of things. The Decalogue is a code of moral law: to identify it as such one needs only to follow the principle of universalization, namely, that a man in contemplating a certain action, by asking himself what the effect would be if every person would do the same thing under the same circumstances, can surely see for himself whether his contemplated action is right and good or wrong and bad. Tested by this principle, it becomes obvious that idolatry (of whatever kind), false swearing (blasphemy, perjury), disrespect for parents, murder, adultery, theft, false witness (slander, libel), covetousness, etc., if universalized would destroy social order, and in all likelihood the human race itself. (Recall the venerable doctrine of the Seven Deadly Sins: pride, covetousness (avarice), lust, anger, gluttony, envy, and sloth.) The only exception, of course, is the law of the Jewish Sabbath: this was a positive institution, and was superseded, with the establishment of the church, by the Christian Lord’s Day, the first day of the week (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:1-2, Mark 16:9, Revelation 1:10).

A positive command, in Scripture, requires a thing to be done because Divine authority orders it. The chief characteristic of this kind of command is that there is no necessary logical connection between the thing commanded and the end in view. The primary reason for such a command is simply that God has ordained it, for a specific purpose; and He is to be obeyed if the divine purpose is to be actualized. Unbelief will ask, Why, and Wherefore, when confronted with a positive command, but faith obeys without asking questions. (Of course, such a command has always the moral virtue (excellence) of obedience inherent in its fulfilment). One who obeys a positive command does so solely out of faith in God and love for God; the obedience is a manifestation of the faith and love which motivate it. Positive commands are designed to prove the faith of the professing believer. (Cf. Matthew 7:24-27; John 15:14; John 14:15; John 8:31-32, Hebrews 5:9, etc.). There are three degrees, we might well say, in obedience to a positive command in attaining the supreme (ultimate) manifestation of faith: (1) To obey when one can see clearly that there is no logical connection between the thing commanded and the end in view; (2) to obey a divine command when one can see clearly that the thing commanded cannot do any good in itself; (3) to obey when one can see clearly that the thing commanded is in itself wrong, that is, in relation to the structure of the moral life. Now for some examples:

1. Exodus 12:1-14. Can one see any logical connection between the sprinkling of the blood of a lamb on the side-posts and lintel of every Israelite habitation in Egypt and the preservation from death of the firstborn in all those households? What was there in the blood of a lamb to save anyone? Why did it have to be the blood of a male lamb, one without blemish, a male a year old? Why did the blood have to be sprinkled on the side-posts and lintels of all the habitations of the Israelites? Could not God have discerned where His own people were dwelling without all this unnecessary irrelevant claptrap? What an opening here for fulminations about nonessentials, mere forms, mere outward acts, etc.! Had our modern clergy been present, no doubt they would have started an argument with God right on the spot. But how did it all turn out? Precisely as God had said it would: those Israelites were not so unbelieving as to refuse to take God at His word, especially in the exigencies under which they were suffering, and the next morning it was discovered that in every house where the blood was present as God had commanded there was salvation, there was life; and that in every house where the blood was not present as God had ordered, there was death, lamentation, suffering, on account of the death of the firstborn.

2. 2 Samuel 6:6-7: Note the statute in the Mosaic Law that forbade anyone who was not a Levite to touch the Ark of the Covenant: Num. 15:51; Numbers 3:10; Numbers 3:38; Numbers 4:15; Numbers 4:19-20. The penalty for the violation of this law was death. But why should it hurt for anyone to touch the Ark, whether of the tribe of Reuben, Gad, Judah, Benjamin, or any of the other tribes, anymore than for a Levite to do it? Surely, the mere touching the ark in itself could not have harmed anyone! But what did happen when a non-Levite did put out his hand, as he thought, to prevent the Ark from falling off the new cart on which David was having it transported to Jerusalem? He fell dead on the spot, 2 Samuel 6:7.Does this mean that the Ark was a fetish, that it had magical power of some kind? Of course not. The tragic death which Uzzah suffered was for disobedience to God. Even his good intentions in doing what God had forbidden did not protect him from the infliction of the penalty! Uzzah followed his own wisdom (which should have told him that God Himself would have protected the Ark from any kind of hurt) and not the wisdom of God, as multiplied thousands have done in all ages and are doing today in greater numbers than ever before in the history of the race. What a warning this incident is against trifling with God’s Will and Word!

3. Numbers 21:4-9. The story of the brazen serpent. One can see at a glance here, that there was no efficacy in the thing commanded, that is, in itself. What was there in a piece of brass to heal a human being of disease? Did it have magical power of some kind? Of course not. The efficacy was in the willingness of the people to take God at His word; when their faith became active, God kept His promise. It was God who did the healing, not the serpent of brass; the latter was only the means of eliciting their obedience of faith. It will be recalled that this brazen serpent became in itself an object of worship to the Israelites in a later age: they burned incense to it, we are told (2 Kings 18:4-5). Whereupon King Hezekiah, calling it Nehushtan, a piece of brass, ordered it broken into pieces and utterly destroyed.

4. 2 Kings 5:1-14. What an array of details having no power in themselves to effect the healing of Naaman, of his leprosy! What possible connections between the things commanded and the end in view? Was there some special cleansing power in the water of the Jordan River? Why should Naaman have to dip himself seven times: Could not God have healed him without all this fol-de-rol? Certainly., that is, had He chosen to do so? But God could not have proved Naaman’s willingness to take Him at His word without some sort of procedure such as He ordered. How did things turn out for the Syrian chieftain? Precisely as God said that it would: when Naaman had fully completed the required details, arising from the Jordan after the seventh dipping, his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

5. Joshua 6:1-21. What a war strategy this was, that Yahwe gave to Joshua to capture the city of Jericho! What an array of mere forms, mere outward acts, which apparently had no necessary connection with the end in view! What was there in all this marching to bring down walls that withstood battering rams and other engines of destruction? What special kind of power was generated by the marching of Joshua’s army, with the Ark at the center of the procession, once each day for six successive days and seven times on the seventh day? What could the people inside Jericho have been thinking about these repeated military parades? Why the final blowing of trumpets and shouting by Joshua’s soldiers on the seventh day? We have heard in recent years of pious and praying and Bible-reading generals, but we doubt very much that any of them would have had the faith to carry out the war program that Joshua executed which brought about the fall of Jericho. Joshua took God at His word. He carried out the Divine strategy to the very letter, not expecting that what he and his army were doing would bring down the walls, but fully believing that if he did his part in faith, God would do the rest. And his faith was rewarded: the wall came tumbling down.

What an array of non-essentials in all these instances of positive law! Think what the response would have been if our theologians-’ -had been on the ground when these orders were given by the Ruler of the universe! Why would God authorize all this nonsense? Why all these mere forms, mere outward acts, mere external performances, etc., etc. What is all this but blind obedience to ordinations that are without rhyme or reason? Oh yes, the theologians, the clergy, the princes of the church, all would have had a field day had they been recipients of the Divine instructions in these various instances of the operation of positive divine law.

6. We now come to the ultimate of all proofs, surely the noblest manifestation of the obedience of faith that is recorded in Scripture. This occurred when God did prove Abraham by commanding him to offer up Isaac for a burnt-offering (Genesis 22:1-3). Here was a thing commanded which by the universal judgment of mankind was wrong: no nation has ever been known to have been without a distinction between justifiable and unjustifiable killing, and the kind of killing that is always reckoned to be unjustifiable is murder, the taking of another man’s life by one’s own authority with malice aforethought. (Of course, in this instance no malice aforethought was involved; nevertheless, by all human standards the act was wrong.) Moreover, it was surely wrong to deliberately kill a son, and the only son at that. And it was doubly wrong, in this instance, to kill the one who had been born out of due season as the Child of Promise. What an argument Abraham might have offered against obedience to this command! How could such an order proceed from the God who is infinite goodness? Was not this ordination a complete disavowal by God Himself of all the promises He had made respecting Abraham and his seed? No such unbelieving talk, however, fell from Abraham’s lips. With him there was no occasion for argument: Yahwe had spoken and it was his portion simply to obey. We know the rest of the story, up to the very point of the patriarch’s poising the deadly knife above his son, lying bound and helpless on the altar. No doubt he would have carried out the divine order fully, even to the killing itself, because, we are told, his faith was such that he accounted God able to raise Isaac up, even from the dead, from whence he did also in a figure receive him back (Hebrews 11:19). It was in this manner that God did actually prove Abraham and the depth of his faith, not only to himself, but to all mankind.

What is the application? In consequence of this incident, the name of Abraham has gone down in sacred history as the Father of the Faithful and the Friend of God (John 15:14, 2 Chronicles 20:7, James 2:23, Romans 4:11; Romans 4:16). Moreover, Our salvation under the New Covenant is contingent not on our having the blood of Abraham coursing through our veins, but on having the faith of Abraham in our hearts (John 3:1-8, Romans 4:13-17, Galatians 3:23-29, James 2:20-26).

Unbelief will call this obedience of Abraham an act of blind faith. It is blind faith, of course, to obey another man implicitly without question. It is never blind faith to obey God, for the reason that God never commands men to do anything simply to benefit Him. His commands are always, ultimately, for our good. Therefore, anything that God commands is made right by the fact that He commands it.

In the process of becoming a Christian on the terms laid down by apostolic authority, the penitent believer is confronted with one basically positive institution. That institution is baptism, as ordained by the Great Commission. It is the only positive institution the Holy Spirit has seen fit to associate with conversion under the New Covenant. That baptism is essentially a positive institution (although it does carry with it the moral excellence of obedience to God) is evident from the following considerations. One can readily see that belief in Christ, repentance from sin, confession of Christall these are necessary to becoming a Christian. Belief is necessary to change the heart; repentance is necessary to change the will, the disposition, the course of life. Confession is necessary as a public commitment and testimonial in the presence of, and for the benefit of, all those who themselves need divine redemption without which they are lost, both in this world and in the world to come. Confession is a public commitment to the new life which the penitent believer has espoused.

But why be baptized? What moral change is effected in baptism, other than the moral benefit that always follows obedience to God? We reply that baptism effects no basic moral change: that change comes in faith and repentance in order that the baptism may be efficacious. Baptism is essentially transitional (1 Peter 3:20-21). It is the abandonment of the old man and the putting on of the new (Romans 6:1-11). It is the relinquishing of the old life of alienation, and the assumption of the new life of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit (Romans 14:17, Titus 3:5). It is the transitional act in which the believing penitent renounces allegiance to the world, the flesh and the devil, and accepts the authority of the Prince of righteousness. It is the formal act of obedience in which the one who was formerly an alien, is adopted into the family of God and thus made an heir of God and joint heir with Jesus Christ (Romans 8:16-17) of that inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away (1 Peter 1:4; 1 Peter 2:22-25; Acts 26:18). Hence, baptism is administered in the name of Christ (i.e., by His authority), according to the formula, into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). It is the divine appointment wherein the repentant believer receives pardon of his sins (in the mind of God) and is formally inducted into Christ (Acts 2:38, Colossians 2:11-12) and sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise (Ephesians 1:13, 2 Corinthians 1:21-22; cf. discussions of spiritual circumcision, in foregoing sections herein).

It is evident that the dipping of a person in water could not per se have efficacy unto salvation. It is equally evident that there is no power in water per se to take away the guilt of sin. And it is quite evident that God could pardon a believer without baptism as easily as with it, had He chosen to do so. The fact remains, however, that in the light of New Testament teaching, we have no indication that He has chosen to do so. Baptism is said to be for remission of sins (Acts 2:38), for induction into Christ (Galatians 3:27) and is therefore a prerequisite of pardon (Acts 10:47-48). This is sufficient for the man of faith. Unbelief will persist, however, in speaking of baptism as a non-essential, a mere outward act, a mere external performance, etc. The Apostle Paul, on the contrary, writes of it as an act of obedience from the heart (Romans 6:17), hence an act of faith; and the Apostle Peter describes it as the appeal of a good conscience toward God (1 Peter 3:21).

Here, then, at the very entrance into the Kingdom, at the door to the Fold, the issue is placed squarely before each alien sinner, as to whether he has sufficient faith to obey a positive command which he can see clearly has no logical connection, in itself (i.e., as an immersion in water) with the end in view. Here he must make a choice whether he will do, or not do, what the Lord commands. Here he must decide whether he will yield to the authority of the Head of the Church. The tragedy today is that there are so many to whom religion is little more than a ritual, a sort of insurance policy against hell-fire; so many who follow the line of least resistance in everything they do, who have so little conviction and courage, so little love for God and so little faith in the Lord Jesus, that when they reach the baptismal pool, they will stop and argue the case, and in so many instances will turn aside to accept a meaningless substitute which human theology has provided for the sake of convenience. What a tragedy! Oh ye of little faith! Jesus was willing to go all the way from Nazareth in Galilee to the Jordan River, some seventy to eighty miles, to submit to this divine institution and thus do the Father’s will to the full (Matthew 3:15). This He did, He who was without sin, to please the Heavenly Father and to set the right example for all who would follow in His steps. If we expect to be called His disciples, we certainly will not start an argument at the baptismal pool! If we do hesitate, or turn aside, we not only fall short of that obedience which is necessary for justification, but we also lose the rich spiritual experience which always accompanies the walk of faith such as Enoch walked, such as Noah walked, such as Abraham walked, such as Moses walked, such as all the faithful have walked. Preachers fulminate so glibly about faith, justification by faith, etc. But faith is precisely the thing that is lacking in the professing church of this day and age. We simply cannot be the spiritual children of Abraham unless we have the faith of Abraham in our hearts, the faith that prompts us to realize that we are strangers and pilgrims here, that this world has no rest for us, that we journey to a better country, that is, a heavenly country, where there remaineth eternal rest for the people of God (Hebrews 4:9).

Note that the life of Abraham is the story of the continuous expansion and intensification of the covenant and the covenant-promise. There was the initial promise to which Abraham responded in complete obedience (Genesis 12:1-3). As God enlarged the promise, Abraham responded in faith which was reckoned to him for righteousness (Genesis 15:6):at this communication the land of Canaan was specifically pledged to the patriarch’s fleshly seed. With the promise of the son, God appointed fleshly circumcision to be the sign of the covenant (ch. 17). Both the promise and the covenant were officially sealed as a result of Abraham’s obedience of faith in which he proved his faith by his willingness to sacrifice his only son Isaac, the Child of Promise, accounting that God would raise him from the dead (ch. 22; cf. Hebrews 11:9-19).

Any one who has faith deep enough to prompt him to meet the appointments ordered by Divine grace can be absolutely sure of receiving the blessings which that Grace has connected with the specific appointment. We can be absolutely sure that our God, the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, will actualize His precious and exceeding great promises (2 Peter 1:4) if and when we, both as sinners and as saints, meet the conditions, by our obedience of faith, which Divine Grace has stipulated. The firm foundation of God standeth always (2 Timothy 2:19, Isaiah 46:9-11).

REVIEW QUESTIONS ON PART THIRTY-FOUR

In what way, according to Chapter 22, did God prove Abraham? What does the verb prove signify in this connection?

Show how each successive phrase in the Divine command here intensified the significance of the command (according to Rashi).

What indicates that God had a particularly important objective in this instance.

What was the patriarch’s response to what God said to him?

Where is the land of Moriah traditionally? What facts seem to justify this tradition?

What reason does Glueck give for questioning this tradition?

What preparations did Abraham make for the journey?

Do you suppose that Abraham said anything to Sarah about the purpose of the journey? Explain your answer.

How old probably was Isaac when this incident occurred?

From what place did they start on their journey? How far was it from this place to Jerusalem?

How much time did the journey require? Is this in harmony with the distance traveled, that is, if the place of sacrifice was near Jerusalem?

On reaching the place of sacrifice, what did Abraham and Isaac do? Why did the two go alone to the place of sacrifice?

What did Isaac carry to the place of sacrifice? To what New Testament fact does this point directly?

When, probably, did Abraham explain to Isaac what was to be done? How did Isaac respond? What does this suggest as to Christ’s Sacrifice on the Cross?

Did Abraham show that he was prepared to make the actual sacrifice of his son? What does the writer of Hebrews tell us about what Abraham thought actually would happen? What is meant by the statement that this did happen in a figure?

How did Abraham reconcile God’s command to sacrifice Isaac, with His promise that through Isaac there should come to Abraham a great posterity?

What did the Angel of the Lord do to avert the sacrifice?

What did the name Jehovah-jireh mean? How can this name be harmonized with what is revealed in Exodus 6:3?

How and in what ways did God renew His divine promises with respect to Abraham and his seed? Explain the twofold significance of the Promise.

What reason did God give for His renewal of the Promise at this time?

Why was the record of Nahor’s progeny introduced at this point?

What was the basic significance of Abraham’s sacrificial act?

Is it reasonable to conclude that this incident was for the purpose of showing God’s disapproval of human sacrifice?

In what ways did the Sacrifice of Isaac prefigure the Sacrifice of God’s Only Begotten?

What is Speiser’s explanation of the significance of Abraham’s supreme trial?

What is meant by the ultimate degree of faith?

Distinguish between God’s moral and His positive commands?

What are the ascending degrees of faith manifested in obedience to a positive divine command?

What is the essential character of the ultimate or highest degree?

Give examples of positive commands which involve the lesser degrees of faith?

What great lesson is derived from the history of the Brazen Serpent?

Why cannot what is called blind faith be involved in obedience to God’s commands?

Explain how Christian baptism, that which is authorized by the Great Commission, is basically a positive command.

What is the distinctly spiritual reason for obedience to Christ in baptism?

Explain what is meant by the transitional significance of baptism?

Why, according to His own statement, was Jesus baptized in the Jordan?

In there any ground on which one can rightly assume that our Lord ever ordained a non-essential act? Would not such a claim be in itself blasphemy?

Review at this point what is meant in Scripture by spiritual circumcision.