BRIEF PRELIMINARY NOTICE OF THE KINGDOM.
The Bible is the Book of the Kingdom of God, and teaches us that it has already once existed for 1024 years under Moses, Joshua, the Judges, and Kings. With the exception of the two years of Ishbosheth’s reign, it was a united kingdom for 92 years of this millennium under Saul, David, Solomon, and the first four years of Rehoboam. From the 4th of Rehoboam it was governed by two dynasties. Ten of its tribes were ruled by kings whom they set up over themselves without regard to the authority of Jehovah to whom the kingdom belonged. —Hosea 8: 4. Thus they raised the standard of rebellion, and rejected the sovereignty of the House of David, which God had chosen to be the royal house of his kingdom as long as the sun and moon should endure throughout all generations. This usurped royalty of Ephraim, or of the Ten Tribes, continued 256 years; but Judah yet ruled with God, and was faithful with the Most Holy—Hosea 11: 12, whose dynasty of the family of David they still continued to acknowledge. In the sixth year of Hezekiah, king of Judah, the Ten Tribes were “removed out of God’s sight”—2 Kings 17: 18, that is, they were driven out of his land or kingdom, and the Tribe of Judah only remained. In a few years, however, Judah became unmanageable. “The chief of the priests and the people transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the temple of the Lord which he had hallowed in Jerusalem. And the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, continually and carefully sending; because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place: but they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words and misused his prophets, until the wrath of Jehovah arose against his people, till there was no remedy. Therefore he brought upon them the king of the Chaldees.”—2 Chronicles 36: 14-17. This event happened 134 years after the removal of Ephraim out of his sight, or 390 years from the rebellion against the house of David; so that during 474 years of this millennium of the kingdom of God, David and his lineal descendants reigned over the House of Judah.
The kingdom of God thus brought to a temporary conclusion has never existed since under the sovereignty of a king or kings of the house of David. Its existence ceased even as a Commonwealth during the captivity in Babylon which lasted seventy years. At the end of this period the kingdom reappeared in Judea; but it was no longer governed by Jewish monarchs exalted to the throne either by God or the people. Jehovah permitted his kingdom to be subject to the lordship of the Gentiles, until the end of 430 years from the burning of the temple by Nebuchadnezzar. For 122 years after the interposition of the Roman Senate, God’s kingdom was ruled by Jewish princes of the tribe of Levi, that is, until the Gentile of Idumea, named Herod, became king in Jerusalem, in the 37th year of whose reign JESUS, the Son of God and of David, and the rightful heir of the throne of Jehovah’s kingdom, was born King of the Jews. From the commencement of Herod’s reign till the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, a period of 111 years, the kingdom of God was possessed by the Gentiles; in other words, Israel did not possess the kingdom. From the knowledge of this fact, the reader will be well able to appreciate the force of the question put by the apostles to Jesus after his resurrection, and as the result of their conversation for forty days upon the subject of the kingdom, saying, “Lord, wilt thou at this time RESTORE AGAIN the kingdom to Israel?”—Acts 1: 6. They knew that he was “THE RESTORER;” and believing that “all power was given unto him in heaven and earth,” they thought the time had certainly come for the Restoration of all things to Israel spoken of by all the prophets from the days of Moses. —Deuteronomy 30: 1-10. This supposition prompted the question. But they were too fast. Messiah the prince having come, the kingdom could not be “restored again to Israel” so long as the Mosaic Covenant continued in force. This must be “changed,” the kingdom must be suppressed and desolated, and Jerusalem, the city of the Great King of Israel, be trodden under foot of the Gentiles until their times be fulfilled. They had forgotten these things, and that the kingdom of God was not immediately to appear under the sovereignty of the Son of Man; but that he was first to take a journey into a far country—Luke 19: 11-12, where he was to be detained until “the times of the restitution”—Acts 3: 21, called also “the Regeneration”—Matthew 19: 28, should arrive. In the year 74 after the birth of Jesus the kingdom was broken up, and the Mosaic covenant trampled under foot—not finally abolished, but temporarily suppressed, that it may be “changed” in certain essential and highly important particulars. God has had no organised kingdom upon earth since its overthrow by the Roman power. The kingdom in the sense of its territory is where it always was; and its children, or subjects, “his people Israel,” are to be found in every land, still in hope that the time will come when the kingdom will be restored again to them; and “God will subdue the people under them, and the nations under their feet”—Psalm 47: 3; for they do not forget the testimony, that “the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem,” and that “the nation and kingdom that will not serve Zion shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.”—Micah 4: 7-8; Isaiah 60: 12. The Heir of the kingdom is at the right hand of the Divine Majesty; and his joint-heirs, the most of them, mouldering and sleeping in the dust, with a few surviving stragglers still existing in the protestant section of the globe, enduring reproach and tribulation in the hope of its speedy and triumphant restitution. These are the dissolved and scattered fragments of the kingdom of God. Their reunion is a matter of promise, and consequently of hope. The Gentiles must be expelled the territory; the twelve tribes must be replanted upon the land; the sleeping heirs of the government must be awaked, and the living believers in this kingdom changed: and to effect all this, God’s Heir, the Restorer of the Kingdom, must come and subdue all things to himself. When these things shall come to pass, God will have “accomplished to scatter the power of the Holy people”—Daniel 12: 7, that is, their power shall be no more scattered, but shall be restored to them: and He will have come whose right the kingdom is, and God will give it him. —Ezekiel 21: 27.
Having thus presented the reader with a few ideas concerning the kingdom that he may have something tangible and definite before his mind when we refer to it, we shall proceed now to make a few remarks in answer to the inquiry
WHAT IS A COVENANT?
The Kingdom as it was, and the kingdom as it is to be, although the same kingdom, is exhibited in the scriptures under Two Covenants, or constitutions. But before adverting more particularly to these it may be necessary to say a word or two in answer to the inquiry, “What is a Covenant?” It is a word of very frequent occurrence in scripture, and the representative in our language of the Hebrew berith. In English, covenant signifies “a mutual agreement of two or more persons to do or forbear some act or thing.” This, however, is not the sense of the word berith when used in relation to the things of the kingdom. Men’s compliance or acceptance does not constitute the berith of the kingdom a covenant. It is a covenant whether they consent or not, and is enforced as the imperious enactment of an absolute king. It points out God’s chosen, selected, and determined plan or purpose, entirely independent of any one’s consent, either asked or given, and is equivalent to a system of government fixed by the Prince, and imposed on the people without the slightest consultation between them. Accordingly, what is called the covenant in one place, is denominated the law in another. As, “he hath remembered his covenant for ever, the word which he commanded to a thousand generations; which covenant he made with Abraham and confirmed the same unto Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant.” “These are the words of the covenant which the Lord commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel. Thus saith the Lord, cursed be the man that obeyeth not the words of this covenant which I commanded your fathers.” It is evident from this that covenant and law are used as synonymous and convertible terms.
The statements of the New Testament conduct us to the same conclusion. It may be proper to remark here that a berith, or covenant, is expressed in Greek by diatheke. This is the word used in the Septuagint as the translation of berith. It signifies an appointment; not a mutual compact, but the arrangement, settled plan, or institution of one party alone; and is the term used to denote the testamentary deeds of the deceased, in which the will and pleasure of the legatees is never consulted. “For where a diatheke is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator; for a testament (diatheke, covenant or will) is of force when men are dead, otherwise it is of no force at all while the testator liveth.”—Hebrews 9: 6.
THE COVENANTS OF THE KINGDOM.
The beriths, diathekes, or covenants of the kingdom of God are absolute decrees, which make, or constitute things what they were, and what they shall be. Hence “ the Builder and Maker (or constitutor) of all things is God,” “for whose pleasure they are and were created.” But though these covenants are absolute, and the necessity to observe them imperative on all who are placed under them, they are replete with blessings to Israel and the nations, being founded upon “exceeding great and precious promises.” Hence they are styled “the covenants of promise.”—Ephesians 2: 12. One of them is styled “the Covenant from Mount Sinai;” and the other, the Covenant from Jerusalem which is above and free—he ano Jerousalem. —Galatians 4: 24-27. The Sinai Covenant is synonymous with the Jerusalem Covenant which now is, that is, as it existed in Paul’s day; while the other covenant is the Jerusalem Covenant which is to be; and because Jerusalem, which is now “desolate,” will then be “free,” and “above” Jerusalem in her greatest glory under the Sinai Covenant, she is styles “ano,” that is, above, higher, or more exalted: and is “the mother of all” who believe the things of the kingdom of God, which will come, or be restored, to her, when as “the city of the Great King,” she shall have awaked from her present non-vinous inebriation, and have put on “her beautiful garments.”—Isaiah 51: 21; 52: 1.
Strictly speaking, the Sinai Covenant, although based on promises, is not one of “the covenants of promise” Paul refers to in Ephesians. These are the Covenant of promise to Abraham, and the Covenant of promise to David; both of which are elemental principles of the Covenant of the Free Jerusalem, which is to “go forth from Zion in the latter days.” —Isaiah 2: 3. The Sinai covenant is styled “the first;” the one to be hereafter proclaimed to Israel, “the second,” although the latter is more ancient than the Sinai law in promise by 430 years, yet as a national berith constituting the kingdom of God in its civil and ecclesiastical appurtenances under Messiah the prince and the saints, it is second in the order of proclamation to the Twelve Tribes. The promises of the first covenant, which was added—(Galatians 3: 19)—to the ancient covenant, were the blessings of Mount Gerizzim consequent upon their hearkening to the voice of Jehovah their God. —Deuteronomy 28: 1-14. In these there was no promise of eternal glory, and life; of an everlasting, individual and national inheritance of the land; of universal dominion under Abraham’s Seed; of everlasting righteousness from one atonement; and of no possible evil coming upon them as a nation. On the contrary, the promises were accompanied with terrible threatenings, which have resulted in all the curses Jehovah pronounced upon them for not observing to do all his commandments and statutes.
But the Second Covenant of the kingdom of Israel is established, or ordained for a law (nomothetein,) upon better promises; and is therefore styled “a better covenant.”—Hebrews 8: 6. It abolishes the remembrance of national offences every year. Under the Sinai covenant these accumulated notwithstanding the yearly atonement, until the magnitude of its guilt crushed the nation, and caused its dispersion into all the kingdoms of the earth, as at this day. The better covenant, however, promises to Israel a great and everlasting amnesty for all past national transgression—Jeremiah 31: 31-34, not by virtue of the sacrifice of bulls and goats, which cannot take away sins, offered up by a sinful priest of the order of Aaron; but by a purification that shall be vouchsafed to the repentant tribes, issuing forth from “a fountain opened to the House of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and uncleanness”—Zechariah 13: 1; the blood of which has been carried into the presence of Jehovah himself by Jesus—Hebrews 9: 24, a High Priest of the tribe of Judah, consecrated after the power of an endless life—Hebrews 7: 16, who will then have appeared the second time—Hebrews 9: 28, having returned from the Most Holy to proclaim to his nation that God has been merciful to their unrighteousness, and will henceforth remember their sins and iniquities no more. This great national reconciliation being consummated, and the Twelve Tribes grafted into their own Olive again, they will then enjoy the better promises of the Second Covenant. A new heart, and a new spirit they will then possess. They will be God’s reconciled people, and he will be their God. He will call for the corn and increase it, and lay no famine upon them; and they shall receive no more reproach among the nations. Their land that was desolate will then be as the garden of Eden. —Ezekiel 36: 25-38.
Jerusalem will be a rejoicing, and Israel a joy. Their lives shall endure as the days of a tree, and they shall wear out the works of their hands. —Isaiah 65: 17-25. These are a few incidents of the national blessedness that awaits Israel, when the kingdom of God shall be restored to them, and established in the second millennium of its independence under the New and Better covenant.
THE MOSAIC CONSTITUTION OF THE KINGDOM IMPERFECT.
The kingdom of God is the Twelve Tribes of Israel existing in the land promised to Abraham and Christ. When it existed of old time, the Mosaic Covenant was its civil and ecclesiastical code, which appointed and defined all things. But since the appearance of Jesus in Israel, certain things have come to pass in connexion with him, which necessitate a change or amendment of the covenant, or constitution, that provision may be made, or scope afforded, for the exercise of his functions as High Priest and king in Israel; and for the carrying out of the principles which emane from the dedication or purification of the New Covenant by his blood. This is the necessity which existed for a change of the law; “for the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.”—Hebrews 7: 12. The Sinai Constitution of the Kingdom established a changeable priesthood of the tribe of Levi, the chief of which was an hereditary prince of the family of Aaron, called the High Priest. The high-priesthood is an office divinely created; and no man of Israel was allowed to assume it unless he was called of God as Aaron. It was appointed for the offering for men both gifts to God, and sacrifices for sins; so that the officiating party becomes a mediator between God and men. But the priesthood of Levi and Aaron was imperfect, and therefore could not impart perfection, so as that he who did the service, or the worshippers should have no more conscience of sins, and thereby become heirs of eternal life. This being the nature of the priesthood under which Israel received the Law, or Covenant, the Mosaic institution was weak and unprofitable, and could make nothing perfect. —Hebrews 7: 11, 18-19; 9: 9; 10: 1. This imperfection resulted from the nature of the consecration, or blood of the covenant. Aaron and his sons, the altar, and nearly all the things of the law were purified by the blood of bulls and goats, &c.; which, however, could not sanctify to the purifying of the heart, or the flesh from the evil within it which makes it mortal. It was necessary to perfection that sin should be condemned in the flesh of the High Priest, which could not be effected by condemning sin in the flesh of the animals sacrificed under the Law. This necessity would have required the death of a High Priest at the celebration of every annual atonement at least, being themselves sinners; but as this was incompatible with the nature of things, animal sacrifices were substituted. So that Aaron and his successors could not under penalty of immediate death enter into the Most Holy without this substitutionary blood. But then this blood was deficient of the necessary sin remitting qualities. The blood required was that of the peccant nature—the human; for it was man, and not the creatures, that had sinned. But even human blood would have been unprofitable if it were the blood of one who was himself an actual transgressor, and a victim that even if an innocent person had not come to life again. The Messiah in prophecy asks the question, “What profit is there in my blood, if I go down to the pit? Can the dust praise thee? Can it declare thy truth?”—Psalm 30: 9. The answer is none. For if the Christ had died, and not risen again, he would not have been a living sacrifice, and could not have imparted vitality to the things professedly sanctified by it. The blood of the Mosaic sacrifices was weak and unprofitable because it was not human; because it was not innocent human blood; and because it was not the blood of one innocent of the great transgression, who had come to life again through the power of the Eternal Spirit. For these three important reasons, the blood of the Mosaic covenant could not take away sins, and therefore the High Priest and the nation, individually and collectively, were all left under the curse of the Law, which was death; for “the wages of sin is death.”—Romans 6: 23. The law could not give them life who were under it—Galatians 3: 21, being weak through the flesh—Romans 8: 3, and deriving no vitality from the blood peculiar to it; if it could have conferred a title to eternal life, and consequently to the promises made to Abraham and Christ, then righteousness, justification, or remission of sins would have been by the Covenant of Sinai.
But it may be enquired, if the Mosaic institution could not perfect the conscience, nor give a title to eternal life and the inheritance, but left its subjects dead in trespasses and in sins, by what means will the prophets and those of Israel who died before Christ came, obtain salvation in the kingdom of God? The answer is, that what the Law could not do, the bringing in of a better hope accomplished. —Hebrews 7: 19. The Mosaic sacrifices were provisional, substitutionary, and representative. They pointed to the sacrifice of Christ, which in its retrospective influence was to redeem from death, who then living had not only been circumcised, but had walked also in the steps of that faith of their father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised. For the promise that he should be THE HEIR OF THE WORLD was not to Abraham, nor to his Seed—Galatians 3: 29, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith. —Romans 4: 12-13. One object of Christ’s death is plainly declared to have been, “for the transgressions under the first testament;” or as elsewhere expressed, “to redeem them who were under the law.”—Hebrews 9: 15; Galatians 4: 5. “By his stripes,” says Isaiah, “we are healed. Jehovah hath laid upon him the iniquities of us all. For the transgression of his people was he stricken.” The “we,” the “us,” and the “people” in these texts, are the ancient worthies before and under the Law, as well as those who have believed the gospel, and after his second appearing shall offer “sin offerings, and meat offerings, and burnt offerings, and peace offerings for reconciliation” under the New Covenant consecrated by his most precious blood.
Under the first or Mosaic Covenant, the priests were said to “make reconciliation with the blood of the sacrifices upon the altar, to make atonement for all Israel”—Chronicles 29: 24; so under the second, or New Covenant of the kingdom, Ezekiel speaks of “one lamb to make reconciliation for them.”—Ezekiel 45: 15. But withdraw from the premises the death and resurrection of Christ, and faith in them and the promises, and the reconciliation under both covenants is imperfect and vain. Animal sacrifices are necessary to the service as types or patterns, and memorials. The Mosaic reconciliation was typical; the Ezekiel reconciliation, memorial or commemorative. The typical Mosaic could not perfect the conscience of the worshippers, because Christ had not then died and risen again; nor could they when he had risen again; nor could they when he had risen, because they were offered by High Priests, whose functions before God were superseded by a High Priest of the tribe of Judah after another order than that of Aaron, then in the presence of Jehovah himself. The Ezekiel reconciliation, however, will perfect the conscience, because Christ has died and lives forevermore; which death and resurrection connected with the reconciliatory offerings by faith in the worshipper, and offered to God through the Prince of Israel, the High Priest upon his throne after the order of Melchizedec, will constitute sacrifices of a character such as have not been offered on the earth before.
THE PRIESTHOOD OF THE KINGDOM UNDER THE NEW COVENANT.
We demur to our beloved sister’s declaration, that “Paul distinctly states that the Levitical service was ‘imposed until the time of reformation,’ thereby intimating its discontinuance then.” The sectarian idea of “the time of reformation” in this text is, until John, and Jesus proclaimed repentance, after which there would be no temple service performed by Levites that God would accept. But this is contrary to the sure word of prophecy, which testifies that “the Messenger of the Covenant shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver: and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto Jehovah an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the Lord, as in the days of old, and as in former years.”—Malachi 3: 3-4. And again the prophet records Jehovah’s declaration, that “David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel: neither shall the priests, the Levites, want a man before him to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually. Thus saith the Lord, if ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, that there shall not be day and night in their season; (then and not before) may also my covenant be broken with David my servant, that he should not have a son to reign upon his throne; and with the Levites the priests my ministers.” From this it is manifest, that the perpetuity of David’s throne, and the perpetuity of the Levitical ministrations, are parallel. Some say that David’s throne is now occupied in heaven; will these same visionaries affirm that the Levites are offering sacrifices there, for the testimony says, “they shall do sacrifice continually?!” The truth is that this testimony has regard to the time when the kingdom shall be restored again to Israel. At the time the prophecy was delivered there were unbelievers who, like the Millerites of our day, declared that the Lord had cast off the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Therefore said Jehovah to the prophet, “Considerest thou not what this people have spoken, saying, the two families which the Lord hath chosen he hath even cast them off? Thus they have despised my people, that they should be no more a nation before them. But, if my covenant be not with the day and night, and if I have not appointed the ordinances of heaven and earth: then will I cast away the seed of Jacob, and David my servant, so that I will not take any of his seed to be rulers over the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: for I will cause their captivity to return, and have mercy on them.”—Jeremiah 33: 17-26. It is from the time of this return, then, that the perpetuity begins in relation to David’s son, and the Levites. Both houses of Israel are still in captivity; therefore the return is yet future. When that return is accomplished, then henceforth even to “the end” appointed, shall these gracious promises obtain as notable realities in the land of Israel.
It is therefore a principle of the kingdom of God that the Levites shall be priests in that kingdom under the New Covenant, or constitution, as well as under the Old. As it is written, “Thus saith the Lord, They shall be ministers in my temple, having charge of the gates of the house; they shall slay the burnt offering and the sacrifice for the people, and they shall stand before them to minister unto them. They shall not come near unto me, to do the office of a priest unto me, nor to come near to any of my holy things in the most holy place. But I will make them keepers of the charge of the house, for all the service thereof, and for all that shall be done therein.” The reason given why they shall not do the office of a priest before God, but shall act as menials in the service, and in relation only to the people, is because under the Mosaic Covenant “they ministered to the people before their idols, and caused the house of Israel to fall into iniquity.”—Ezekiel 44: 9-14. This is the ground of their future degradation from their former rank, to that of the lowest class of the priesthood under the New Covenant.
The next class of priests above them is to consist of the Levites, the sons of Zadoc. —Ezekiel 44: 15. These will have no immediate communication with the people in performing the service, but will officiate intermediately between the people’s priests and “the Prince,” who is then High Priest, and Jehovah’s anointed for ever. It is probable that “the sons of Zadok,” are the sons of the Just One, Zadok signifying just or justified. Zadok, who was contemporary with David and Solomon, is their representative father in the priesthood, as David is their representative father in the royalty, and Abraham their representative father in the faith. Hence in the priesthood, the saints are “the sons of Zadok,” in the royalty, “the sons of the Prince,”—Ezekiel 46: 16 and in the faith, “the seed or sons of Abraham.” Eli and his sons were rejected as representative sacerdotal men, because the sons were wicked, and Eli honoured them above Jehovah. Therefore Jehovah said to him, “I will raise me up a faithful priest, who shall do according to that which is in my heart and in my mind; and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine ANOINTED for ever.”—1 Samuel 2: 29, 35. He must therefore become immortal. Now under the Mosaic Covenant this “faithful priest” was Zadok, who walked before David and Solomon. When Absalom and Israel rebelled against the Lord’s anointed, Zadok and Abiathar remained faithful with Jehovah and his king. But when David was about to die, Abiathar, who was descended from Eli, conspired to make Adonijah king instead of Solomon; while Zadok continued faithful to David. Solomon, however, being established on the throne “he thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the Lord; that he might fulfil the word of the Lord, which he spake concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.” He told him he was worthy of death, but he would spare his life for his father’s sake, because he suffered with him in Absalom’s rebellion: he therefore exiled him to Anathoth, and promoted Zadok to the high-priesthood in his room. —1 Kings 1: 7, 39; 2: 22, 26-27, 35. Now these were representative events. Jehovah will raise up the faithful of the house of Levi, even Zadok and his sons, and they shall walk before the “greater than Solomon” when, in “the city of the Great King,” he sits and rules upon his throne as a priest, bearing the glory—Zechariah 6: 12-13, as Prince of Israel for ever. This superior class of Levites “shall come near to me,” saith the Lord, “to minister unto me, and they shall stand before me to offer unto me the fat and the blood: they shall enter into my holy place, and they shall come near to my table, to minister unto me, and they shall keep my charge.” From the seventeenth verse to the end of this chapter are the ordinances for the lowest class of Levitical priests.
