صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

tures to the two disciples on this occasion; and here we would observe, incidentally, that it was the kingdom and glory of Messiah that the thief looked for, according to Jewish expectations, when he said, "Lord remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom," (ev TMη Baσideia σov), very wonderful faith under the circumstances, and the Lord rewards it in a manner utterly beyond what he asked or thought by bringing him to Paradise that day. "Verily, I say unto thee, to-day thou shalt be with me in Paradise" (Luke xxiii. 42, 43), as much as to say, "Thou shalt not have to wait for my kingdom to have the reward of thy faith, but shalt be with me to day in the third heavens-in Paradise." O that we had more of the thief's faith that would see in the Lord, even under the most depressing circumstances, and when appearances are contrary, all that we want or need; for such was the thief's faith, and the faith of all those of whom God gives a good report. (Heb. xi.)

17. THE LORD AS A GUEST.

"And they drew nigh unto the village whither they went; and he made as though he would have gone further. But they constrained him, saying, Abide with us; for it is toward evening, and the day is far spent. And he went in to tarry with them."-Luke xxiv. 28, 29.

This beautiful scene may well find its expression in the touching language of Jeremiah, "O, Lord, the hope of Israel, the Saviour thereof in the time of trouble, why shouldest thou be as a stranger in the land, and as a wayfaring man that turneth aside to tarry for a night. Why shouldest thou be as a man astonished, as a mighty man that cannot save? Yet thou, O Lord, art in the midst of us, and we are called by thy name, leave us not." (Jer. xiv. 8, 9.)

And again in the Canticles, "My beloved put in his hand by the hole in the door, and my bowels were moved for him. I opened to my beloved, but my beloved had withdrawn himself and was gone. My soul failed when he spake, I sought him, but I could not find him. I called him, but he gave me no answer." But presently He responds, and she says, "I am my beloved's and his desire is toward me; come, my beloved, let us go forth into the field; let us lodge in the villages.' (Cant. v. 4-6, and vii. 10, 11.)

Such was the spiritual action signified in this matter of fact history, and in the prophecy. Such will be the actual experiences through which the Lord will hereafter put the remnant of Israel. They will see "Signs of the Son of Man in heaven," and go through all the exercises of the Song of Solomon ere He fully manifests Himself to them. But there is a spiritual counterpart now going on in every soul that is in communion with the Lord. There are such things as spiritual withdrawals and manifestations; and in this connection the language is so strong as to be parallel with that which speaks of His personal second coming, e.g., "I will not leave you orphans, I will come unto_you." And again, "If a man love me he will keep my words, and my Father will love him, and we will come and make our abode with him.' (John xiv.) All this refers to spiritual manifestation when the soul is in communion with God,

18.-KNOWN IN THE BREAKING OF BREAD.

Nov. 1, 1865.

"And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight."-Luke xxiv. 30, 31.

These disciples afterwards told the rest "What things were done in the way, and how he was known to them in breaking of bread." (v. 35.) Now whether the breaking of bread refers to the ordinary daily repast, or to the Lord's Supper, is a most interesting and important question. For ourselves, we lean to the latter view, and that for the following

reasons:

In the first place, the Lord reproduces the scene of the last supper and takes the president's place therein. In the second place, "the breaking of bread" is the technical term used by this Evangelist for the Lord's Supper. (Acts ii. 42-46; xx. 7.) Thirdly, it was the first day of the week; on which day we are expressly told the disciples came together to break bread; and fourthly, He was known of them in the breaking of bread.

We believe if this were better understood it would settle some difficulties with many Christians as to what Church they should join, for they are already joined to the Church, and the head of that Church is in heaven. There is no other. And on earth those who belong to that Church can find comfort, blessing, and communion with two or three gathered to the name (as To Ovoμa) of the Lord at any time, let it be in ever so desultory and informal a manner, even as at Emmaus; for where the Lord is there is the Church (ubi Christus ibi ecclesia); and He is at all times in the midst of two or three so gathered, but they must gather naturally, and for communion with Himself---not forced, nor for a testimony, as some say. The moment that takes place Christ is made the head of a party as such, and is reduced from being in heaven the head of His whole body to be the head of a mere party on earth. To this St. Paul alludes in writing to the Corinthians: "Now this I say, that every one of you saith I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ. Is Christ divided ?" How early the sectarian and denominational divisions began, the Lord's own name even becoming the badge of a mere party! All this is foreign to the communion of the Spirit in saints. That the Lord reproduces the scene of the last supper is evident from the language. There is nothing in the original for the word "meat;" it is the posture that is referred to, as we say, "sitting at table :" "And it came to pass whilst he sat at table with them He took bread, and blessed it, and brake and gave to them." He sat at table with them when instituting the supper; so that in resurrection he acts out with these two disciples the same thing. He gives St. Paul the revelation of it afterwards-one is action, the other communication, but both in his resurrection state (1 Cor. xi. 23-26). He teaches St. Paul by precept, the two disciples by example.

In the next place, "the breaking of bread" is the technical expression for the supper in The Acts of the Apostles, as it is said, "and they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in prayers." (Acts ii. 42.) And again, "cou

Nov. 1, 1865.

[ocr errors]

tinuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house; or, as in the margin, "at home (κατ οικον). Acts ii. 46.) And again, "Upon the first day of the week when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow." (Acts xx. 7.)

The primitive Church, like the Israelites at first with the Passover, celebrated the Lord's Supper in the house. The law in Israel was that every household should kill a lamb, "a lamb for an house," but if the household were too little for the lamb, "let him and his neighbours next unto his house take it according to the number of souls. xii. 3, 4.)

(Ex.

Accordingly, when we look at the New Testament, we find that there were little groups of Christians in every city, each group in itself constituting a church or household assembly, and a whole Christ for each, on the same principle as in Israel, “a lamb for an house." Hence, we read in Romans of Aquila and Priscilla, in the city of Rome, of whom the apostle says, "Likewise greet the church that is in their house." Again, "Salute them which are of Aristobulus' household." "Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus;" that is, the group of saints in company with them. Likewise, “Patrobas, Hermes, and the brethren which are with them." Also, "Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them." "The Churches of Christ salute you." (Rom. xvi. 5, 10, 11-16.) And where Paul is said to have gone into "every house," to deliver them to prison, and afterwards, when converted, to have taught them publicly, and from house to house" (Acts viii. 2 and 20), it means that he sought those groups of Christians assembled in this manner "for fellowship, breaking of bread, and prayers.' And we may say of it as Dean Alford says on Matt. xviii. 20, that it was "a generalization of the term Church (EKKλŋσia) and the powers conferred on it, which renders it independent of particular forms of government or ceremonies, and establishes at once a canon against pseudo-catholicism in all its forms." So says Dean Alford on the famous passage of the two or three gathered unto the Lord's name, and the Lord in the midst, a remark in which many Christians will heartily concur. The scene, therefore, at Emmaus soon became the type for those who everywhere called on the Lord and thought upon His name, and this Emmaitic type, informal and desultory in itself, may be verified at any time, even in the most naked or most complicated circumstances of the Church's history.

[ocr errors]

But the Lord, at the institution of the Supper, did not prescribe any fixed time for its celebration, but says, "This do as oft as ye do it in remembrance of me." On this occasion it was the first day of the week, and from thence a precedent was found in the primitive Church for celebrating the Supper collectively on that day.

Lastly, "He was known of them in the breaking of bread." It seems to us impossible to deny instrumentality to these words; that is, that the breaking of bread was the instrument by which the Lord was discerned by them at the time, and if He was known of them through that instrumentality, can it be imagined for a moment that the Evangelist alludes to any ordinary meal or repast? Indeed, the very fact of discerning the Lord's body used afterwards by St. Paul to show

Nov, 1, 1865.

the marked distinction between the Supper of the Lord and any common meal (1 Cor. xi.), is clear, inasmuch as discerning the Lord's body is peculiar to the feast. We know also the close analogy which outward things often bear to inward in the Scriptures. Therefore, from this fact alone, of being known of them in the breaking of bread, one may conclude most certainly that the household scene at Emmaus was eucharistic; and you and I, dear reader, may still remember our Lord's death in a most desultory and informal way if need be. If we are occupied with himself, He will be known of us therein, even as of old. It must be remembered also that these disciples, at this time, were not thinking of setting up a party or "a sect," but simply of Himself.

19.-THE LORD'S APPEARANCE TO SIMON-THE APOSTOLIC Circle.

"And they arose the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them, saying, the Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in the breaking of bread."-Luke xxiv. 33, 34.

Simon was the first of the apostles to whom the Lord appeared after the resurrection, Paul the last (1 Cor. 15), and the only two apostles to whom he appeared alone. His appearance to St. Paul, however, does not come under the head of "the forty days," it was after, as we know. Both appearances to these two apostles were, so to speak, official, representing the two great elements, or the two great classes, of which the Christian church was to be composed-Jews and Gentiles. The gospel was sent "to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile ;" one was the apostle of the circumcision, and the other was sent to the Gentiles; whereas Mary Magdalene was the first saint, whether of apostles or disciples, to whom the Lord appears, and He reveals to her first, unofficially, those family relations which belong to the Father, to the Son, and to the brethren. (John xx.) To her was this honour given, which afterwards is bestowed on St. Paul, that he might disclose in an official and doctrinal manner those relations which are peculiar to Christ and the Church, in his Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians. But as we before found that Peter was singled out by name in the message given by the angel at the sepulchre, so we here find that he was the first of the apostles to whom the Lord appeared after his resurrection. O the exhaustless and unwearied grace and patience of the Lord! But Peter, we know, was slow to believe that the Lord was raised-so was John, so was Thomas, so were all the apostles. With this slowness and hardness of heart the Lord afterwards upbraids them. (Mark xvi. 14.)

The apparent discrepancy between the passage in Mark and the passage under consideration, arises from supposing that their unbelief and hardness of heart was only removed then and there by his reproof. This is not the case. He reproved them, Peter and all, for not believing when they first heard; but after that Peter told them, they did believe, and they now tell the two brethren that "the Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon." It is after this that the Lord comes and upbraids them with their past unbelief and hardness of

Nov. 1, 1865.

heart; all of which was most natural, inasmuch as they could then much better appreciate the reproof, having their sin before their eyes. It seems to us also, that the text favours this view. St. Mark says, that the Lord " upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed (eñɩσrevσav) not them which had seen him after he was risen." The aorist tense refers to the single fact of their not believing when they at first heard those that saw him (@eaoraμevois avrov). Had their unbelief continued up to the time and moment when the Lord upbraided them, the imperfect tense (ETUOTEVOV) would have no doubt been used, and not the aorist or historic tense. The discrepancy therefore between these passages is apparent, not real. He upbraids them now because they had not believed those that saw him at early dawn; but Thomas was the only one amongst the apostles who cherished unbelief beyond that point, and he was not present on this

occasion.

There are some who question the last fragment of St. Mark's Gospel, saying, that in some manuscripts it is not found, and that the style is not that of St. Mark. To us it matters not what hand indited it, provided it be the dictation of the Spirit of God; that is the chief thing, and of this there can be little doubt, if unity of design be any proof-for the miracles, wonders, and signs coming from Him who is at the right hand of God, the injunction upon baptism, &c., are all characteristic of the Son of God in office, and still in office, though exalted. For it is the Son of God in office, Jehovah's "righteous servant," that is presented throughout. Moreover, St. Peter is believed to have supplied the matter for St. Mark's Gospel, and the truths contained in this latter part are precisely those found in his sermons and in his epistles (Acts ii. 10; 1 Pet. iii. 22, &c.); we bless the Lord for the precious fragment, by what hand soever He has given it.

SCRIPTURE DATES OF THE TIME OF THE END.

BY W. FARRAR, M.A., CASTLESIDE.

"Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world."-Matt. xxiv. 3.

"How long shall it be to the end of these wonders ?"-Dan. xii. 6.

"But of that day and hour knoweth no man: no, not the angels of heaven, but the Father only.”—Matt. xxiv. 36.

"So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom."Psalm xc. 12.

THROUGHOUT the Scriptures there are scattered certain dates of greater or less distinctness; arresting the attention of the careful reader, and bringing us down to these very times as "the time of the end." Like so many streams, having their rise in regions so far apart, these long periods of years flow along, and empty themselves at length into the

« السابقةمتابعة »