Chapter II. The Gospel Preached to Abraham. His Faith and Works

The Token of the Covenant

It was fourteen years after the confirmation of the covenant, and when Abram had attained the age of ninety-and-nine, that the Lord appeared to him to repeat his promises, and to appoint the token of the covenant. On this occasion, God talked with him, and changed his name from Abram to Abraham, as an everlasting memorial that he had made him heir of the world, by constituting him, a father of a great multitude. “Behold,” said God, “my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I constituted p. 246 thee.” And besides this constitutional fatherhood, the Lord assured him that though so old, he should be prolific of multitudes which should descend from his own loins. “I will make thee,” said he, “exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee; and kings shall come out of thee.” The Lord then announced, that the covenant he had confirmed should be established between him and Abraham, and his fleshly descendants in their generations for an everlasting covenant; and that He would be a God to him and to them. He also again declared His oft-repeated promise, saying, “I will give unto thee, and to thy Seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession: and I will be their God.”^a

In the passage from which this is taken, God says, “I will make my covenant between me and thee”; and afterwards, “Behold my covenant is with thee.” The “will make” refers to a covenant subsequent to that confirmed fourteen years before. That to be made was the token of that which was already made; and “the seal of the righteousness of the faith which Abram had when it was counted to him for righteousness.”^b “This,” said God, “is my covenant which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee: every man-child among you shall be circumcised; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you Abraham.” The appointing of this token in their flesh was the establishment of the covenant with Abraham’s seed in the time of Isaac and Jacob in their generations. When, therefore, Israelites behold the mark in their flesh it reminds them, that they are “the children of the covenant which God made with their fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy Seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed;”^c that the land of Canaan, all of it, is promised to them for an everlasting possession; but that an everlasting possession in it can only be attained by belief of the things promised in the covenant being counted to them for righteousness in the way of God’s appointment. They know, or rather ought to know, that the sign of circumcision and the Mosaic law, can give them no title to the everlasting occupancy of Canaan, either as individuals, or as a nation. It is circumcision of the heart, of which circumcision of the flesh is but the sign of the circumcised heart of Abraham, that confers a title to the land and all its attributes. Before Israel can inherit the land for ever, and so be no more expelled by “the Horns of the Gentiles,” they must “circumcise the foreskin of their hearts, and be no more stiff-necked;” and “love the Lord their God with all their heart, and with all their soul, that they may live.”^d This may seem to some to put their restoration a long way off. And so it does, if the circumcision of their hearts is to be effected by the instrumentality of the Society for the Conversion of the Jews. By the well-meant endeavours of p. 247 this body, it never can be accomplished; for the Society and its agents are themselves deficient in this particular.

But “God is able to graft them in again;”^a and testifies by His prophets, saying, “A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you, O Israel; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. And ye shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; and ye shall be my people, and I will be your God. I will also save you from all your uncleanness; and I will call for the corn, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you. And I will multiply the fruit of the tree, and the increase of the field, that ye shall receive no more reproach of famine among the heathen.”^b In this testimony, while Moses exhorted them to circumcise the foreskin of their hearts, the Lord says that He will change their hearts Himself; not, however, by “the foolishness of preaching,” for that has failed even by the mouth of apostles energised by the spirit: but by means in reserve which will astonish Israel and the world, and of which He has spoken at large in the holy scriptures. I will anticipate this part of the subject so far as to say, that the Lord has left on record an illustration of the manner in which He changes the heart of a nation, and plants them in a land flowing with milk and honey, in the history of Israel’s exode from Egypt, and their settlement in the land of Canaan. This is a representation on a small scale of how He intends to graft them in again, as He has declared by the prophets.

In after times circumcision came to be performed as a mere custom, or ceremony. An institution of God, that was appointed as a memorial of His promise concerning the everlasting possession of Canaan and the world; and of that righteousness by faith of the promise which could alone entitle to it: and which was to express the faith of those who practised it—degenerated into a mere form which was observed, like infant sprinkling, by “the pious” and most ungodly characters alike. But, it is evident, that circumcision, being instituted after the covenant of promise was confirmed, and after Abraham had obtained a title to it by a righteousness of faith, could confer upon the person circumcised no right to possess the things promised for ever: and certainly none to reprobates who practised it, as Turks and wild Arabs do now, because their fathers have done it before them, time immemorial to them.

What obligation, then, did this sign of the covenant, and seal of Abraham’s justification by faith without circumcision, impose upon the circumcised. Let the apostle answer the question. “I testify,” says he, “to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.”^c This was a fearful obligation for a man p. 248 to be brought under, who sought to be justified, to the end that he might obtain an everlasting inheritance in the land of Canaan, which implies the acquisition of eternal life and glory. The law was weak through the flesh; and gave only the knowledge of sin. It was an unbearable yoke of bondage; and a law which no man born of the will of the flesh had been able to keep without sin. If, then, a man sought to obtain a right to an everlasting possession of the land by obedience to it, he had undertaken an impossibility; for the law, on account of human weakness, could give no one a right to live for ever; and without life eternal a man could not everlastingly possess the land; and this life no one can attain to who is not justified from all his past sins; for if in his sins he is under the sentence of death, as it is written, “the wages of sin is death.” The apostle speaks directly to the point; for he says, “If there had been a law given, which could have given (a title to) life (eternal), verily righteousness (or justification from past sins to life) should have been by the law:”^a “for if righteousness had come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.”^b He says explicitly, “By the law shall no flesh be justified.” A circumcised person is therefore bound to keep that which he cannot possibly keep; and which if he did keep could not benefit him, because justification to life is by faith in the promise, and not by conformity to the Mosaic law.

The relation of the Jews to eternal life as individuals, and to the everlasting possession of Canaan in blessedness and peace as a nation, is manifest. They are circumcised, and therefore bound to keep the whole law; by which law they seek to be justified. But, how vain and impossible is their enterprise! The law says, “Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them;”^c and so unexceptional is this sentence, that it even cursed the Lord Jesus, saying, “Cursed is every one that hangeth upon a tree;”^d and in this way he was made a curse for men.^e Now, the law teaches, that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sins, and prescribes certain sacrifices which must be offered upon an altar in Jerusalem, and there only. To say nothing of other impossible things, these offerings, which are indispensable, the Jews neither do, nor can, present. These are things, then, they do not continue in, and therefore they are cursed by the law, and condemned by Moses in whom they trust. They are under sentence of death, and of eternal exclusion from all inheritance in Canaan and the world. They may possibly believe in the promise made to Abraham, that God will give the land to him and the Christ; but they deny that Jesus is the person named in the covenant, which is tantamount to rejecting the covenant itself.

While circumcision obliged Israel to keep the whole law, in which there was an annual remembrance of national offences, it p. 249 gave them through that law only a tenant at will occupancy of the land of Canaan; and that not to the extent which pertains to its everlasting possession. This appears from the words of Moses, as it is written, “If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law, ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it.”^a The condition of their tenancy was their good behaviour. If they served God according to the law of the land He had given, He would bless them in their basket and store; but if they served other gods, He would let in the worshippers of those gods upon them, and expel them from the country. Israel has rebelled; and therefore they are in dispersion, until the time appointed shall come to remember the covenant made with the fathers; and therefore to remember the land.^b

The national tenancy of Canaan under the law being leasehold, no purchases of freehold estates could be made in the land. If Israel had been a freeholder, the case would have been different. But the land belonged to the Lord: and they had no more right to grant it away in parcels for ever, than the tenant under a twenty-one years’ lease has to cut up his holding into lots, and sell them to purchasers for ever. Israel were the Lord’s tenants; and the law said to them on the part of their Landlord, “The land shall not be sold for ever; for the land is mine, and ye are strangers and sojourners with me;” so that “in all the land of your possession ye shall grant a redemption for the land.” Hence, if poverty compelled a man to sell his farm, it was always redeemable by himself, or kin, according to certain conditions; but, if neither could raise the money to redeem, the estate was not lost to the original owner; for though it remained in the hands of the purchaser, he was obliged to return it for nothing at the year of jubilee.^c Even under the new constitution, when the nation obtains everlasting possession, the servants of the Prince will have to surrender his territorial gifts at the year of liberty; while his sons will possess them for ever.^d

The covenant of promise confers a more extensive holding of the country than the law of Moses. At no time of their occupation did Israel possess all the land from the Euphrates to the Nile, as promised in the covenant; and even if they had, such holding would not have been in the sense of the covenant, for they have not held possession according to the limits defined “for ever.” “All the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession” is the promise; but the indisputable fact is, that Israel have only possessed a part of it for a limited and turbulent period. In Solomon’s days, when the nation was at its zenith under the law, the land was jointly possessed by Israel, the Tyrians, and the remains of the Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites, &c.; but when the age of the covenant arrives, Israel under Shiloh will p. 250 possess it all; “and there shall be no more the Canaanite in the house of the Lord of Hosts.”^a

No uncircumcised person was permitted to be a member of Abraham’s family. Home-born, or purchased, slaves, as well as sons, were to be alike circumcised, or else to be cut off; for he that was uncircumcised on the eighth day after the first circumcisions when instituted, or not at all, had broken the Lord’s covenant. This was a great calamity; for none but circumcised persons can inherit the promises. This may startle; but it is strictly true. It will, however, be remembered that true circumcision is of the heart. Circumcision of the flesh is but an outward sign of Abraham’s circumcision of heart; and every one who would inherit with faithful Abraham must be circumcised of heart likewise. When he was circumcised of heart his faith in God was imputed to him for remission of sins that were past. His former idolatry, &c., was forgiven, and the body of the sins of his flesh put off. Now, a man believing what Abraham believed with the same effect on his disposition and life, is also circumcised of heart, when, in putting on Christ, he is “circumcised with the circumcision made without hands by the circumcision of Christ,” performed on the eighth day according to the law. In putting on Christ, his faith is counted to him for righteousness as Abraham’s was. “The body of the sins of his flesh” is cut off. The foreskin of his heart is circumcised, and he is the subject of “circumcision in the spirit;” and his praise, though not of men, is pronounced of God.^b

Now, I respectfully inquire, will a man who understands the signification of circumcision of the flesh, and the nature of circumcision of the heart, jeopardize his reputation for soundness of mind by saying that infant-sprinkling, even if a scriptural practice, was divinely appointed in the room of circumcision in flesh or spirit? That the immersion of a man of the same faith and disposition as Abraham’s is connected with circumcision, I have shown; to such a man, immersion into the glorious name is the token of his justification by faith, as circumcision of the flesh was to Abraham. It is, indeed, a substitute for circumcision of the flesh; but the accompaniment also for circumcision of the heart: and as all of Abraham’s faith were to be cut off from his people who were not circumcised in flesh, so all of his faith now will be cut off who are not immersed; for immersion is the appointed, and only appointed, means of putting on the circumcision of Jesus Christ by which the body of the sins of the flesh are put off.^c But this is a very different affair to infant-rhantism coming in the room of circumcision of the flesh. Suppose it did, then the law of circumcision must have become the law of the substitute—that is, of infant-sprinkling. The rhantized subject, then, is bound to keep the whole law, and in default thereof comes under its curse. The p. 251 immersion of an unbeliever amounts to nothing. To such a person it is no token. What shall we say, then, of the rhantism of an infant? Is the sprinkling, and marking it with the sign of a cross, a token to it, or to others, that it is “justified by faith, and has peace with God through the Lord Jesus Christ?” Or is it a sign of the faith of its godfathers and godmothers, or of its parents, of their being justified by faith, and circumcised of heart? Or is it a token that the clerical administrator has faith in the covenant of promise? Nay, rather, it is a token of the astounding ignorance of the letter and spirit of the gospel, and of the Judaism of all concerned; and a striking illustration of that “strong delusion” spread over the face of all people as a covering veil.^a

The Allegory

Abraham had two sons—Ishmael, the son of Hagar, an Egyptian handmaid; and Isaac, the son of Sarah. Ishmael was fourteen years old when Isaac was born. He was born in the ordinary course of things, and therefore said to be “born after the flesh;” while Isaac was born out of the usual course, Sarah being ninety and Abraham a hundred, she being also strengthened of God, according to the promise, and consequently said to be “born after the Spirit.” Hagar was a bondwoman; but Sarah was free: yet, had it been left to Abraham, he would have made Ishmael his heir as well as Isaac, for he loved them both. But Ishmael manifested an evil spirit towards Sarah and Isaac, which he had imbibed from his mother. Moses says, he mocked Isaac, or spoke contemptuously of him; which the apostle terms persecuting him, and characteristic of those of Ishmael’s class. Sarah’s indignation was fired at this; “Wherefore, she said unto Abraham, cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.” Although Abraham was exceedingly grieved at this, God approved of Sarah’s decision; and informed him that Christ should descend from Isaac, and not from Ishmael, saying, “In Isaac shall thy Seed be called:” nevertheless, because Ishmael was his son, he would make a nation of him also with twelve princes for its fathers.

This fragment of Abraham’s history has a signification beyond what appears on the face of it. The apostle informs us that the incidents are allegorical. That is, that the two women and their characteristics, represent two covenants; and the two sons of Abraham by them, two seeds, or classes of persons. The covenants are, “the one from Mount Sinai in Arabia,” and the other, the covenant confirmed of God 430 years before that of Sinai was promulgated; and which, being a matter of promise, the subject of which is Christ as the inheritor of Canaan, and its future king in Jerusalem, now at the right hand of God, is said to be “Jerusalem p. 252 which is above.” The apostle says, that Jerusalem is the subject of both these covenants; but in different periods of her history. During her existence as the metropolis of the Hebrew commonwealth under its Sinaitic constitution, she was represented by Hagar the bondwoman; because the covenant from Sinai “gendered to bondage;” and in consequence the citizens of the commonwealth were in bondage with the mother city. They were “entangled with the yoke of bondage,” “under the rudiments of the world.” They were bound to keep the whole law, by which they sought to be justified; and as they could not do it owing to the weakness of the flesh, they came under the curse.

But this state of things was only provisional. God did not intend the Hebrew commonwealth to exist perpetually under the Sinaitic constitution. Israel was not always to be in bondage to the law of Moses. A great revolution was predetermined of God, which should result in the abolition of the Arabian covenant, and the dispersion of Israel among the nations. This is allegorically styled “casting out the bondwoman and her son;” which was necessary for the good and all-sufficient reason, that the Sinaitic constitution of the commonwealth of Israel, was not adapted for the people and State when Christ should sit upon the throne of his father David, and the saints should possess the kingdom. The law of Moses enjoined ordinances concerning the flesh, such as “the water of separation,”^a which would be quite incompatible with the realities of the Age to Come. Under the law there was “a remembrance again of sins every year;”^b but under the New Constitution from heaven, “the sins and iniquities of the people will be remembered no more.”^c The Sinaitic constitution was faulty; it was therefore necessary that it should give place to a better, which shall be established on better promises.^d Hence, the bondwoman was to be cast out, to make room for a more perfect arrangement of the commonwealth.

Since the expulsion of Israel by the Romans, Jerusalem and her children are in the situation of Hagar and her son, while wandering in the wilderness of Beer-sheba. She is divorced from the Lord as Hagar was from Abraham, and “being desolate she sits upon the ground,”^e and bewails her widowhood.^f But, there is to be “a restitution of all things.” Jerusalem is to become a free woman as Sarah was; and to take her stand in the midst of the earth, as “the city whose architect and builder is God.” She will then “remember the reproach of her widowhood no more. For her Maker will be her husband; the Lord of Hosts is his name; and her Redeemer the Holy One of Israel (even Jesus) the God of the whole earth shall he be called.” She will then be the metropolis of the world; and her citizens, or children, will be more numerous than those she rejoiced in under the law, as a married wife. The period p. 253 of her glory will have arrived; the twelve tribes be again the united, peaceful, and joyous inhabitants of the land; the “greater than Solomon,” their king; and his city, “the heavenly Jerusalem,” which “is free, and the mother of us all.”

But, while Hagar represents Jerusalem under the law; and Sarah, Jerusalem under the new constitution of the Hebrew commonwealth; Ishmael represents Israel, glorying in their fleshly descent from Abraham, and boasting in the law; and Isaac, those of Israel and the Gentiles, who regard the flesh as profiting nothing, and who are the sons of Abraham by believing the promises made to him and to his seed. Hence, Ishmael and Isaac represent two seeds, or classes of mankind, who shall not be heirs together of the promise. Indeed, their natures are so opposite, that it would be impossible for them to fulfil in concert the destiny marked out for those who are to inherit the promises. The Ishmaelite-seed are wild men; whose hands are against all who believe the truth. They are mockers; for as Ishmael mocked Isaac, so Israel mocked Jesus, and spoke reproachfully of him and his brethren, who are one. The kingdom to be established is a righteous dominion, and requires righteous men for its administration; as it is written, “He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of the Lord.”^a It is impossible, therefore, that the Ishmaelite-seed can be heirs of the promise. All the honour, glory, and power, of the state, were in their hands under the Arabian covenant; and cruel and unjust was the use they made of their position. They put Jesus to death; and persecuted those to whom “he gave power to become the sons of God,” believing on his name; and were “contrary to all men; forbidding the apostles to speak to the Gentiles, that they might be saved.”^b They were then “first;” but power was destined to change hands, when they who were “the first shall be last.” They had killed the heir that the inheritance might be theirs; but they have been destroyed, and the vineyard now remains to be bestowed upon others, who shall render its Lord the fruits in their seasons.^c Thus, as in the case of Ishmael and Isaac, “he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the spirit, even so,” says the apostle, “it is now:” and, we may add, ever will be, until the times of the restitution of the State when “the last shall be first,” and beyond the reach of evil.

No one but God had the right, or the power, to appoint “the heir of all things.” Abraham could not appoint him, neither could he be self-appointed. Abraham wished that Ishmael might be the heir; or, as he expressed it, “O that Ishmael might live before thee.” But God would not consent to this. He therefore promised to give him one for the heir, whom he should call Isaac; and of whom He said, “I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his seed after him.”^d But Isaac p. 254 was not only born of promise; he believed the promises likewise: for the scripture saith, “By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come.” Now, it is written, “In Isaac shall thy seed be called”—that is, Christ shall descend from him, and all who believe the promises, and put on Christ, shall be considered as “in Isaac;” and, being thus “the children of the promise,” shall be “counted for the seed,”^a who shall inherit the land and the world for ever. “The seed,” then, is a phrase that must be understood in a two-fold sense—first, as referring to Christ; and secondly, to all who are constitutionally in him. Isaac is representative of both: for Christ was in his loins, and all “in him” must be constitutionally in Isaac also.

For want of understanding the scripture doctrine of the two seeds, some very fatal mistakes have been made by many well-meaning persons. They have gone so far as to deny that the seed of Abraham after the flesh will ever be restored to the land of Canaan, which is in effect to deny the fulfilment of a vast proportion of “the testimony of God.” The seed of the serpent, and the seed of the woman, indicated before the Flood, were afterwards distinguished in the seed of Ishmael, and the seed of Isaac. “The children of the flesh are not the children of God; neither are they all Israel, who are of Israel.”^b This is true; but it does not therefore follow that there is nothing more to be done with “the children of the flesh” than to burn them up. To carry out the allegory, God has yet to make of the Ishmael-seed a great nation; for though Ishmael was an outcast and a wanderer in the wilderness, God promised that he should be great, and dwell in the presence of his brethren.^c The children of Abraham according to the flesh are “the children of the kingdom”^d as well as the children of the promise; only these two classes of children stand in a different relation to the government and glory of the commonwealth, and to the dominion of the nations in the age to come. The Ishmael-children were cast out of the government by the Romans; but the children in Isaac will “shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father,” when the kingdom is restored again to Israel.^e

“In the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his glory,” the children in Isaac will reign as “sons;” while the children of the flesh will be the king’s subjects, or “servants.” This distinction is apparent from the following testimony: “Instead of thy fathers shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make princes throughout all the earth;”^f of whom it is said, “If the Prince give a gift unto any of his sons, the inheritance thereof shall be his sons’; it shall be their possession by inheritance. But if he give a gift of his inheritance to one of his servants, then it shall be his to the year of liberty; and after it shall return p. 255 to the prince: but his inheritance shall be his sons’ for them.”^a The sons of the prince are joint-heirs with him; but the servants of the prince are only leaseholders for a certain number of years. If the natural Israel are not restored to Canaan, the spiritual Israel, that is to say, the prince and his sons, would inherit a kingdom without subjects to serve them. This would be like the Royal family reigning in Windsor Castle over the realm of Britain after all its inhabitants had expatriated themselves to the United States. It requires more than a staff to make a regiment; so also it requires a multitude of people as well as princes, priests, and kings, to constitute a Kingdom in Canaan, or in any country.

Now, the children in Isaac become the children of the heavenly Jerusalem by believing “the exceeding great and precious promises” set forth in “the manifold wisdom of God.” They hope to see Canaan and Jerusalem under the new covenant, which will constitute them both heavenly. They are even now said to have “come to Mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God, and to the heavenly Jerusalem;”^b but it is as yet only in spirit, that is, by faith and hope: and as the city and land will be made heavenly by the Lord from heaven, their glorious attributes are in truth “above;” to believe, then, in what will be brought down to the city from above, is for the children of the promise in Isaac to stand related to “Jerusalem which is above, the mother of them all.”^c Hence, the apostle exhorts them, saying, “If then ye be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth at the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead (to earthly things) and your life is hid with Christ in God. When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.”^d

Parable of the Seed

Abraham was ninety-nine years old, and Ishmael thirteen, when they were circumcised.^e Isaac was born when Abraham was one hundred. Between the circumcision of his household and the birth of Isaac, while he was yet living “in the plain of Mamre which is Hebron,” the Lord appeared to him, and again promised Sarah a son. At this crisis Sodom and Gomorrha were destroyed, and the Dead Sea formed. After this catastrophe, Abraham journeyed from Hebron towards the south country, and dwelled between Kadesh and Shur, and sojourned in Gerar of the Philistines.^f On his arrival there, he entered into an agreement with the king of the country, which they confirmed by an oath, by which he was permitted to dwell in any part of Philistia he pleased, and a certain well of water was restored to him, called p. 256 Beer-sheba, which had been violently taken away by the king’s servants.^a

After this arrangement Isaac was born according to promise. On the day he was weaned, Abraham made a great feast. It was then Ishmael was detected mocking at Isaac, which caused his and Hagar’s expulsion from the family. These being cast out, Abraham planted a grove in Beer-sheba, and there “called on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God.” Having thus settled himself, “he sojourned in the Philistines’ land many days.”^b How long he continued there may be learned from the following considerations. In his speech before the Sanhedrim, Stephen says, “When Abraham’s father was dead, he removed him into this land wherein ye dwell;”^c that is, he returned from Philistia to “Hebron in the land of Canaan.”^d Now Terah, Abraham’s father, was seventy years old when Abraham was born; so that when Isaac was born at Beer-sheba, Terah was a hundred and seventy. But Terah lived two hundred and five years, and then died at Haran; and it was after his death that Abraham removed to Hebron where Sarah died aged one hundred and twenty-seven. Now she died two years after Terah; so that it was in this two years that Abraham left Philistia. But Stephen says, it was when Terah died he moved to Canaan, which makes the “many days” he sojourned in the Philistines’ land, thirty-five years from the birth of Isaac. This simple statement of facts removes a difficulty which has puzzled chronologists exceedingly. Moses says Terah died in Haran aged two hundred and five;^e and Stephen is made to say that Abraham removed from Haran to Canaan when Terah died, thereby making Sarah a resident of the country only two years! This is the fault of the English version, which renders κακειθεν, “from thence,” instead of afterwards, as it ought to be.^f “Abraham,” said Stephen, “dwelt in Haran; and afterwards”—How long after?—“When his father was dead, he removed him”—Where from? From Beer-sheba of the Philistines. Where to? To Hebron “in this land wherein ye dwell.” Thus Moses and Stephen agree.

Now, at some time while Abraham was sojourning in the land of the Philistines, God appeared to him for the purpose of putting his faith to the proof; and of giving him in the person of Isaac, a lively representation of what was to befall his seed, the Christ, then in the loins of Isaac, before he should be exalted to inherit Canaan and the world. The trial was a very severe one. He was commanded to take Isaac, his only son whom he loved,” into the land of Moriah; and “offer him there for a burnt-offering upon one of the mountains,” which God should point out. Moriah was p. 257 itself a mountain upon which Solomon afterwards built the temple;^a and the land, or region, around, is celebrated by the mounts, afterwards called Zion, Olivet, and Calvary. The mountain chosen of God is not named; I can only therefore express my opinion that it was Calvary. It took him till “the third day” to arrive at the place, a distance of forty miles in a straight line from Beersheba. This will not be surprising when it is remembered, that he rode upon an ass, accompanied by two young men, beside Isaac, who conveyed the wood, and other necessaries for the journey. Their progress was therefore slow. “On the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.” He then caused the party to halt. He told the young men to stay there with the ass; “and I and the lad,” said he, “will go yonder and worship, and come again to you.” But if he were going to slay Isaac, how could Isaac and he come again to them? The apostle explains this, saying, “By faith Abraham when he was tried offered up Isaac; and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten” of Sarah. “Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy Seed be called: accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a parable”—εν παραβολη.^b Abraham fully intended to slay Isaac; but he firmly believed that God would raise him from the dead again; because all the promises God had made him were to be accomplished in Isaac’s Seed; as it is written, “My covenant will I establish with Isaac and with his seed after him:” therefore, said Abraham to the young men, “we will come again to you.”

The parable, or representation, of what was afterwards to happen to Isaac’s Seed, the Christ, now began. “Abraham took the wood of the burnt-offering, and laid it upon Isaac, his son;” while he carried the fire and the knife. Isaac went on with great readiness, not in the least suspecting that he was the proposed victim. “My father!” said he, as they jogged along; and he said, “Here am I, my son.” “Behold,” said Isaac, “the fire and the wood; but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering?” And Abraham said, “My son, God will provide himself a lamb for a burnt-offering.”

Having arrived at the place, built an altar, and laid the wood in order, he bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. He then stretched forth his hand, and took the knife, to slay his son. At this crisis, when Isaac was expecting instant death at the hand of his father, who loved him as his only son, the angel of the Lord called to him out of heaven, and commanded him to do the lad no harm. A ram caught in a thicket by the horns was appointed as a substitute for Isaac, who was therefore substitutionally slain; but by his personal deliverance from death, restored to Abraham as by a resurrection. Abraham called the p. 258 place of this memorable and instructive transaction, Jehovah-jireh; and upwards of 400 years afterwards, it was known by the name of “the Mount of the Lord.”^a

But before we dismiss the parable of the Seed, it is to be remarked, that it was not completed in the figurative resurrection of Isaac. The sacrificial death and resurrection of Christ had been represented; but then, after these events, what was to be his destiny? The answer to this question is found in the closing incident of the parable. Moses testifies that “the angel of the Lord called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time.” The first time he announced from heaven the acceptance of the son’s sacrifice; but the second time the Lord spoke from heaven, he had reference to Christ’s triumph over his enemies, and his possession of the world, as preached to Abraham in the gospel at the beginning. “By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore: and thy Seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy Seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.” Thus, the parabolic representation was finished, “and Abraham returned to his young men; and they rose up, and went together to Beer-sheba; and Abraham dwelt there.”

Summary of Abraham’s Faith

Abraham is the father of all them who believe, and who walk in the steps of that faith which he had while yet uncircumcised. This is the apostle’s testimony. I think I need scarcely say, yet it may be useful to do so, that no one can walk in the steps of Abraham’s faith who does not believe the same things. This is self-evident. It is to be to Abraham according to his faith; and this is the rule for every one else. We shall inherit what we have faith in. If we have an understanding faith in the truth, we shall inherit the truth; but if we believe in what is not true, and therefore visionary, we shall inherit nothing but the whirlwind. Now, if it be asked, “What is the truth?—the answer is, the things which Abraham believed, with the acknowledgment that Jesus is the Seed spoken of in the promises made to him. It is, therefore, essential to our salvation that we be familiar with the matters of his faith. To make this as easy as possible, then, I shall here, subjoin a summary of the faith which was counted to him for righteousness. I would just remind the reader here, that Abraham was justified because he believed on God. This does not mean because he believed in the existence of God. This is implied. To believe on God in the scripture sense is the “being fully persuaded p. 259 that what he has promised, he is also able to perform;” and because this was the case with Abraham, “therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.” Furthermore, this persuasion does not consist in saying, “Whatever it is God has promised I know not, but of this I am persuaded, He will perform it. This is not the sort of persuasion God accepts. He requires men to acquaint themselves first with what He has promised, and then to consult the testimony He has given until they are fully persuaded, as Abraham was. “Now,” says the apostle, “it was not written for Abraham’s sake alone, that his full persuasion of the divine promise was counted to him for righteousness; but for us also to whom it shall be imputed if we believe on God.”^a

In studying the life of Abraham, his biography presents him—

1. As an idolator under condemnation with the world;

2. As a believer of the gospel preached by the angel of the Lord;

3. As justified from all past sins by faith in its promises; and

4. As justified by works unto eternal life.

These four particulars are affirmable of all Abraham’s spiritual children. Born of the flesh, they are denizens of the world, and heirs of condemnation; then they believe the gospel; afterwards they are justified by faith from past sins; and subjected to a subsequent probation by which their faith is tried and made perfect. It is worthy of remark here, that Abraham believed the gospel ten years before his faith was counted to him for righteousness. This appears from the fact that the gospel was preached to him at Haran; and it was not until the occasion of the confirmation of the covenant at Hebron, that the Lord vouchsafed him an acquittal from all his past sins; which is implied in the testimony that “he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness.” This fact ought to teach the reader, that it is not at the instant a man believes that he is justified. A man may believe the truth for many years, and yet not be the subject of the righteousness of God. If so, it may then be asked, “When, or at what point of time, and how, is a man’s faith in the truth counted to him for remission of sins?” As to the manner of its imputation, this must necessarily differ from the case of Abraham. The angel of the Lord announced to Abraham his justification by word of mouth; but under the present arrangement of things, this is not to be expected. The angel sent to Cornelius did not pronounce his justification; but simply put him in the way of attaining it. I trust the reader has not forgotten the use of the key in his case.

The scriptures say that through Jesus is now preached the remission of sins to those who believe the gospel of the kingdom; and that justification by faith is through his Name. That is, God has appointed an institution through which remission of sins is p. 260 communicated to believers of the things of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus: so that instead of sending an angel to announce to each individual that his faith is counted to him for righteousness, as in the case of Abraham; He has caused a general proclamation to be made, that “through Christ’s name” believers may obtain the remission of sins. Now, there is but one way for a believer of the gospel to get at this name, to wit, by being “baptised into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” The answer to the question, then, is this, that a man’s faith in the gospel is counted to him for righteousness in the act of being baptised into the name. There is no other way than this, and even a believer of the truth will die in his sins unless he submit to it.

The “articles,” then, of Abraham’s faith were these—

1. That God would multiply his descendants as the stars of heaven for multitude, and make them a great and mighty nation;

2. That at that time his own name would be great;

3. That out of his posterity should arise ONE, in whom and in himself all the nations of the earth should be blessed;

4. That he together with this personage should have actual possession of the land of Canaan for ever;

5. That they two, with all his adopted seed, should possess the world;

6. That the seed, or Christ, would be an only begotten and beloved son, even the seed of the woman only, and therefore of God; that he would fall a victim to his enemies; and in his death be accepted as an offering by being raised from the dead, after the example in the case of Isaac;

7. That after resurrection, or at “a second time,” Christ would possess the gate of his enemies in triumph, and obtain the land of Canaan, and the dominion of the world according to the promise; and,

8. That, at that time, he and his adopted seed, would be made perfect, receive the promises, and “enter into the joy of their Lord.”

Such was the faith of Abraham in outline, and such must be the faith of all who would inherit with him. In conclusion, I would direct the reader’s attention to the fact, that Abraham was the subject of a twofold justification, as it were; first, of a justification by faith; and secondly, of a justification by works. Paul says, he was justified by faith; and James, that he was “justified by works.” They are both right. As a sinner he was justified from his past sins when his faith was counted to him for righteousness; and as a saint, he was justified by works when he offered up Isaac. Of his justification as a saint, James writes, “Abraham our father was justified by works, when he offered. p. 261 Isaac his son upon the altar. Faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect. And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and NOT by faith only.”^a

I have termed it a twofold justification by way of illustration; but it is in fact, only one. The two stand related as cause and effect; faith being the motive principle it is a justification which begins with the remission of sins that are past, and is perfected in obedience unto death. The idea may be simplified thus. No exaltation without probation. If a man believe and obey the gospel his past sins are forgiven him in Christ; but, if after this he walk in the course of the world, his faith is proved to be dead, and he forfeits his title to eternal life. But if on the other hand, a man become an adopted son of Abraham, and “by a patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory, honour, and incorruptibility,”^b he will find everlasting life in the Paradise of God.