|
JEWISH UNBELIEF AND GENTILE FAITH: PROPHECY
Ro 10:1-21
THE problem of Israel is still upon the Apostle’s soul. He has
explored here and there the conditions of the fact that his
brethren,
as a mass, have rejected Jesus. He has delivered his heart of its
loving human groan over the fact. He has reminded himself, and then
his readers, that the fact, however, involves no failure of the
purpose and promise of God; for God from the first had indicated
limitations within the apparent scope of the Abrahamic Promise. He
has looked in the face, once for all, the mystery of the relation
between God’s efficient will and the will of the creature, finding a
refuge, under the moral strain of that mystery, not away from it,
but
as it were behind it, in the recollection of the infinite
trustworthiness, as well as eternal rights, of man’s Maker. Then he
has recurred to the underlying main theme of the whole Epistle, the
acceptance of the sinner in God’s own One way; and we have seen how,
from Israel’s own point of view, Israel has stumbled and fallen just
by his own fault. Israel would not rest upon "the Stone of
stumbling"; he would collide with it. Divine sovereignty here or
there—the heart of Jewish man, in its responsible personality, and
wholly of itself—rebelled against a man-humbling salvation. And so
all its religiousness, its earnestness, its intensity, went for
nothing in the quest for peace and purity. They stumbled—a real
striking of real wayward feet—at the Stumbling Stone; which all the
while lay ready to be their basis and repose. He cannot leave the subject, with its sadness, its lessons, and its
hope. He must say more of his love and longing for Israel; and also
more about this aspect of Israel’s fall—this collision of man’s will
with the Lord’s Way of Peace. And he will unfold the deep witness of
the prophecies to the nature of that Way, and to the reluctance of
the Jewish heart to accept it. Moses shall come in with the Law, and
Isaiah with the Scriptures of the Prophets; and we shall see how
their Inspirer, all along from the first, indicated what should
surely happen when a salvation altogether divine should be presented
to hearts filled with themselves. Brethren, he begins, the deliberate desire of my heart, whatever
discouragements may oppose it and my petition unto God for
them, is salvationwards. He is inevitably moved to this by the
pathetic sight of their earnestness, misguided indeed, guiltily
misguided, utterly inadequate to constitute for them even a phantom
of merit; yet, to the eyes that watch it, a different thing from
indifference or hypocrisy. He cannot see their real struggles, and
not long that they may reach the shore. For I bear them witness, the witness of one who once was the type of
the class, that they have zeal of God, an honest jealousy for His
Name, His Word, His Worship, only not in the line of spiritual
knowledge. They have not seen all He is, all His Word means, all His
worship implies. They are sure, and rightly sure, of many things
about Him; but they have not "seen Him." And so they have not
"abhorred themselves". {Job 41:5,6} And thus they are not,
in their own conviction, shut up to a salvation which must be
altogether of Him; which is no contract with Him, but eternal bounty
from Him. Solemn and heart-moving scene! There are now, and were then, those
who would have surveyed it, and come away with the comfortable
reflection that so much earnestness would surely somehow work itself
right at last; nay, that it was already sufficiently good in itself
to secure these honest zealots a place in some comprehensive heaven.
If ever such thoughts had excuse, surely it was here. The "zeal"
was quite sincere. It was ready to suffer, as well as to strike. The
zealot was not afraid of a world in arms. And he felt himself on
fire
not for evil, but for God, for the God of Abraham, of Moses, of the
Prophets, of the Promise. Would not this do? Would not the
lamentable
rejection of Jesus which attended it be condoned as a tremendous but
mere accident, while the "zeal of God" remained as the substance,
the essence, of the spiritual state of the zealot? Surely a very
large allowance would be made; to put it at the lowest terms. Yet such was not the view of St. Paul, himself once the most honest
and disinterested Jewish zealot in the world. He had seen the Lord.
And so he had seen himself. The deadly mixture of motive which may
underlie what nevertheless we may have to call an honest hatred
of the Gospel had been shown to him in the white light of Christ. In
that light he had seen—what it alone can fully show—the
condemnableness of all sin, and the hopelessness of self-salvation.
From himself he reasons, and rightly, to his brethren. He knows,
with
a solemn sympathy, how much they are in earnest. But his sympathy
conceals no false liberalism; it is not cheaply generous of the
claims of God. He does not think that because they are in earnest
they are saved. Their earnestness drives his heart to a deeper
prayer
for their salvation. For knowing not the righteousness of our God, His way of being just,
yet the Justifier, and seeking to set up their own righteousness, to
construct for themselves a claim which should "stand in judgment,"
they did not submit to the righteousness of our God, when it
appeared
before them, embodied in "the Lord our Righteousness." They
aspired to acceptance. God bade them submit to it. In their
view, it was a matter of attainment; an ascent to a difficult
height,
where the climber might exult in his success. As He presented it, it
was a matter of surrender, as when a patient, given over, places
himself helpless in a master-healer’s hands, for a recovery which is
to be due to those hands alone, and to be celebrated only to their
praise. Alas for such "ignorance" in these earnest souls; for such a
failure in Israel to strike the true line of "knowledge"! For it
was a guilty failure. The Law had been indicating all the while that
their Dispensation was not its own end, but one vast complex means
to
shut man up to a Redeemer who was at once to satisfy every type, and
every oracle, and to supply "the impossible of the Law," {Ro
8:3} by giving Himself to be the believer’s vicarious Merit. For
the Law’s end, its Goal, its Final Cause in the plan of redemption,
is—Christ, unto righteousness, to effect and secure this wonderful
acceptance, for everyone who believes. Yes, He is no arbitrary
sequel
to the Law; He stands organically related to it. And to this the Law
itself is witness, both by presenting an inexorable and condemning
standard as its only possible code of acceptance, and by
mysteriously
pointing the soul away from that code, in its quest for mercy, to
something altogether different, at once accessible and divine. For
Moses writes down thus the righteousness got from the Law, "The man
who does them, shall live in them"; {Le 18:5} it is a matter of
personal action and personal meriting alone. Thus the code, feasible
and beneficent indeed on the plane of national and social life,
which
is its lower field of action, is necessarily fatal to fallen man
when
the question lies between his conscience and the eternal Judge. But
the righteousness got from faith, the acceptance received by
surrendering trust, thus speaks {De 30:12-14} -in Moses’ words
indeed (and this is one main point in the reasoning, that he is
witness), yet as it were with a personal voice of its own, deep and
tender; "Say not in thy heart, Who shall ascend to the heaven?"
that is, to bring down Christ, by human efforts, by a climbing
merit;
"or, Who shall descend into the abyss? that is, to bring up Christ
from the dead," as if His victorious Sacrifice needed your
supplement in
order to its resurrection-triumph. But what does it say? "Near thee
is the utterance, the explicit account of the Lord’s willingness to
bless the soul which casts itself on Him, in thy mouth, to
recite it, and in thy heart," to welcome it. And this message is the
utterance of faith, the creed of acceptance by faith alone, which we
proclaim; that if you shall confess in your mouth Jesus as
Lord, as divine King and Master, and shall believe in your
heart that God raised Him from the dead, owning in the soul the
glory
of the Resurrection, as revealing and sealing the triumph of the
Atonement, you shall be saved. For with the heart faith is
exercised,
unto righteousness, with acceptance for its resultant; while with
the
mouth confession is made, unto salvation, with present deliverance
and final glory for its resultant, the moral sequel of a life which
owns its Lord as all in all. For the Scripture, {Isa 28:16}
"Everyone who believes on Him shall not beashamed," shall
never be disappointed; shall be "kept, through faith, unto the
salvation ready to be revealed in the last time". {1Pe 1:5} We have traversed here a tract pregnant of questions and mystery. We
have to remember here also, as in previous places, that the
Scripture
is "not a sun, but a lamp." Much, very much, which this passage
suggests as problem finds in its words no answer. This citation from
Deuteronomy, with its vision of ascents and descents, its thoughts
of
the heaven and the abyss, what did it mean when aged Moses spoke it
in the plains of Moab? What did it mean to him? Did he see, did
he feel, Messiah in every clause? Had he conscious foreviews, then
and there, of what was to be done ages later beyond that stern ridge
of hills, westward of "the narrow stream"? Did he knowingly
"testify beforehand" that God was to be born Man at Bethlehem, and
to die Man at Jerusalem? We do not know; we cannot possibly know,
until the eternal day finds Moses and ourselves together in the City
of God, and we better understand the mysterious Word, at last, in
that great light. If our Master’s utterances are to be taken as
final, it is quite certain that "Moses wrote of Him". {Joh
5:46} But it is not certain that he always knew be was so writing
when he so wrote; nor is it certain how far his consciousness
went when it was most awake that way. In the passage here cited by
St. Paul the great Prophet may have been aware only of a reference
of
his words to the seen, the temporal, the national, to the blessings
of loyalty to Israel’s God-given polity, and of a return to it after
times of revolt and decline. But then, St. Paul neither affirms this
nor denies it. As if on purpose, he almost drops the personality of
Moses out of sight, and personifies Justification as the speaker.
His
concern is less with the Prophet than with his Inspirer, the
ultimate
Author behind the immediate author. And his own prophet insight is
guided to see that in the thought of that Author, as He wielded
Moses’ mind and diction at His will, Christ was the inmost purport
of
the words. We may ask again what are the laws by which the Apostle modifes here
the Prophet’s phrases, "Who shall descend into the abyss?" The
Hebrew reads, "Who shall go over (or on) the sea?" The
Septuagint reads, "Who shall go to the other side of the sea?" Here
too "we know in part." Assuredly the change of terms was neither
unconsciously made, nor arbitrarily; and it was made for readers who
could challenge it, if so it seemed to them to be done. But we
should
need to know the whole relation of the One inspiring Master to the
minds of both His Prophet and His Apostle to answer the question
completely. However, we can see that Prophet and Apostle both have
in
their thought here the antithesis of depth to height; that the sea
is, to Moses here, the antithesis to the sky, not to the land; and
that St. Paul intensifies the imagery in its true direction
accordingly when he writes, "into the abyss." Again, he finds Justification by Faith in the Prophet’s oracle about
the subjective "nearness" of "the utterance" of mercy. Once more
we own our ignorance of the conscious purport of the words, as
Moses’
words. We shall quite decline, if we are reverently cautious, to say
that for certain Moses was not aware of such an inmost reference in
what he said: it is very much easier to assert than to know what the
limitations of the consciousness of the Prophets were. But here also
we rest in the fact that behind both Moses and Paul, in their free
and mighty personalities, stood their one Lord, building His
Scripture slowly into its manifold oneness through them both. He was
in the thought and word of Moses; and meantime already to Him the
thought and word of Paul were present, and were in His plan. And the
earlier utterance had this at least to do with the later, that it
drew the mind of the pondering and worshipping Israel to the idea of
a contact with God in His Promises which was not external and
mechanical but deep within the individual himself, and manifested in
the individual’s free and living avowal of it. As we quit the passage, let us mark and cherish its insistence upon
"confession," "confession with the mouth that Jesus is Lord."
This specially he connects with "salvation," with the believer’s
preservation to eternal glory. "Faith" is "unto righteousness";
"confession" is "unto salvation." Why is this? Is faith after all
not enough for our union with the Lord. and for our safety in Him?
Must we bring in something else, to be a more or less meritorious
makeweight in the scale? If this is what he means, he is gainsaying
the whole argument of the Epistle on its main theme. No; it is
eternally true that we are justified, that we are accepted, that we
are incorporated, that we are kept, through faith only; that is,
that
Christ is all for all things in our salvation, and our part and work
in the matter are to receive and hold Him in an empty hand. But
then this empty hand, holding Him, receives life and power from Him.
The man is vivified by his Rescuer. He is rescued that he may live,
and that he may serve as living. He cannot truly serve without
loyalty to his Lord. He cannot be truly loyal while he hides his
relation to Him. In some articulate way he must "confess Him"; or
he is not treading the path where the Shepherd walks before the
sheep. The "confession with the mouth" here in view is, surely, nothing
less than the believer’s open loyalty to Christ. It is no mere
recitation of even the sacred catholic Creed; which may be recited
as
by an automaton. It is the witness of the whole man to Christ, as
his
own discovered Life and Lord. And thus it means in effect the path
of
faithfulness along which the Saviour actually leads to glory those
who are justified by faith. That no slackened emphasis on faith is to be felt here is clear
from Ro 10:11. There, in the summary and close of the passage,
nothing but faith is named; "whosoever believeth on Him." It is
as if he would correct even the slightest disquieting surmise that
our repose upon the Lord has to be secured by something other than
Himself, through some means more complex than taking Him at His
word. Here, as much as anywhere in the Epistle, this is the
message; "from faith to faith." The "confession with the mouth" is
not a different something added to this faith; it is its issue, its
manifestation, its embodiment. "I believed; therefore have I
spoken." {Ps 116:10} This recurrence to his great theme gives the Apostle’s thought a
direction once again towards the truth of the worldwide scope of the
Gospel of Acceptance. In the midst of this philo-judean section
of the Epistle, on his way to say glorious things about abiding
mercy
and coming blessing for the Jews, he must pause again to assert the
equal welcome of "the Greeks" to the Righteousness of God, and the
foreshadow of this welcome in the Prophets. For there is no
distinction between Jew and Greek wonderful antithesis to the "no
distinction" of Ro 3:23. For the same Lord is Lord of all,
wealthy to all who call upon Him, who invoke Him, who appeal to Him,
in the name of His own mercies in His redeeming Son. For we have the
prophecies with us here again. Joel, in a passage {Joe 2:32}
full of Messiah, the passage with which the Spirit of Pentecost
filled Peter’s lips, speaks thus without a limit; "Everyone, whoever
shall call upon the Lord’s Name, shall be saved." As he cites the
words, and the thought rises upon him of this immense welcome to the
sinful world, he feels afresh all the need of the heathen, and all
the cruel narrowness of the Pharisaism which would shut them out
from
such an amplitude of blessing. How then can they call on Him on whom
they never believed? But how can they believe on Him whom they never
heard? But how can they hear Him apart from a proclaimer? But how
can
they proclaim unless they are sent, unless the Church which holds
the
sacred light sends her messengers out into the darkness? And in this
again the Prophets are with the Christian Apostle, and against the
loveless Judaist: As it stands written, {Isa 52:7} "How fair the
feet of the gospellers of peace, of the gospellers of good." Here, as an incident in this profound discussion, is given forever
to
the Church of Christ one of the most distinct and stringent of her
missionary "marching orders." Let us recollect this, and lay it on
our own souls, forgetting awhile, for we may, the problem of Israel
and the exclusiveness of ancient Pharisaism. What is there here for
us? What motive facts are here, ready to energise and direct the
will
of the Christian, and of the Church, in the matter of the
"gospelling" of the world? We take note first of what is written last, the moral beauty and
glory of the enterprise. "How fair the feet!" From the viewpoint of
heaven there is nothing on the earth more lovely than the bearing of
the name of Jesus Christ into the needing world, when the bearer is
one "who loves and knows." The work may have, and probably will
have,
very little of the rainbow of romance about it. It will often lead
the worker into the most uncouth and forbidding circumstances. It
will often demand of him the patient expenditure of days and months
upon humiliating and circuitous preparations; as he learns a
barbarous unwitten tongue, or a tongue ancient and elaborate, in a
stifling climate; or finds that he must build his own hut, and dress
his own food, if he is to live at all among "the Gentiles." It may
lay on him the exquisite—and prosaic—trial of finding the tribes
around him entirely unaware of their need of his message;
unconscious
of sin, of guilt, of holiness, of God. Nay, they may not only not
care for his message: they may suspect or deride his motives, and
roundly tell him that he is a political spy, or an adventurer come
to
make his private gains, or a barbarian tired of his own Thule and
irresistibly attracted to the region of the sun. He will often be
tempted to think "the journey too great for him," and long to let
his
tired and heavy feet rest forever. But his Lord is saying of him,
all
the while, "How fair the feet!" He is doing a work whose inmost
conditions even now are full of moral glory, and whose eternal
issues, perhaps where, he thinks there has been most failure, shall
be, by grace, worthy of "the King in His beauty." It is the
continuation of what the King Himself "began to do," {Ac 1:1}
when He was His own first Missionary to a world which needed Him
immeasurably, yet did not know Him when He came. Then, this paragraph asserts the necessity of the missionary’s work
still more urgently than its beauty. True, it suggests many
questions
(what great Scripture does not do so?) which we cannot answer yet at
all:—"Why has He left the Gentiles thus? Why is so much, for their
salvation, suspended (in our view) upon the too precarious and too
lingering diligence of the Church? What will the King say at last to
those who never could, by the Church’s fault, even hear the blessed
Name, that they might believe in It, and call upon It?" He knoweth
the whole answer to such questions; not we. Yet here meanwhile
stands
out this "thing revealed." {De 29:29} In the Lord’s normal
order, which is for certain the order of eternal spiritual right and
love, however little we can see all the conditions of the case, man
is to be saved through a personal "calling upon His Name." And for
that "calling" there is need of personal believing. And for that
believing there is need of personal hearing. And in order to that
hearing, God does not speak in articulate thunder from the sky, nor
send visible angels up and down the earth, but bids His Church, His
children, go and tell. Nothing can be stronger and surer than the practical logic of this
passage. The need of the world, it says to us, is not only
amelioration, elevation, evolution. It is salvation. It is pardon,
acceptance, holiness, and heaven. It is God; it is Christ. And that
need is to be met not by subtle expansions of polity and society. No
"unconscious cerebration" of the human race will regenerate fallen
man. Nor will his awful wound be healed by any drawing on the
shadowy
resources of a post-mortal hope. The work is to be done now, in the
Name of Jesus Christ, and by His Name. And His Name, in order to
be known, has to be announced and explained. And that work is to be
done by those who already know it, or it will not be done at all.
"There is none other Name." There is no other method of
evangelisation. Why is not the Name already, at least externally, known and
reverenced in every place of human dwelling? It would have been so,
for a long time now, if the Church of Christ had followed better the
precept and also the example of St. Paul. Had the apostolic missions
been sustained more adequately throughout Christian history, and had
the apostolic Gospel been better maintained in the Church in all the
energy of its divine simplicity and fulness, the globe would have
been covered—not indeed in a hurry, yet ages ago now—with the
knowledge of Jesus Christ as Fact, as Truth, as Life. We are told
even now by some of the best informed advocates of missionary
enterprise that if Protestant Christendom (to speak of it alone)
were
really to respond to the missionary call, and "send" its messengers
out not by tens but by thousands (no chimerical number), it would be
soberly possible within thirty years so to distribute the message
that no given inhabited spot should be, at furthest, one day’s walk
from a centre of evangelisation. This programme is not fanaticism,
surely. It is a proposal for possible action, too long deferred, in
the line of St. Paul’s precept and example. It is not meant to
discredit any present form of well-considered operation. And it does
not for a moment ignore the futility of all enterprise where the
sovereign power of the Eternal Spirit is not present. Nor does it
forget the permanent call to the Church to sustain amply the
pastoral
work at home, in "the flock of God which is among us." {1Pe 5:2}
But it sees and emphasises the fact that the Lord has laid it upon
His Church to be His messenger to the whole world, and to be in holy
earnest about it, and that the work, as to its human side, is quite
feasible to a Church awake. "Stir up, we beseech Thee, O Lord, the
wills of Thy faithful people" to both the glory and the necessity of
this labour of labours for Thee, "that they, plenteously bringing
forth the fruit of it, may of Thee be plenteously rewarded," in Thy
divine use of their obedience, for the salvation of the world. But the great missionary anticipates an objection from facts to his
burning plea for the rightness of an unrestrained evangelism. The
proclamation might be universal: but were not the results partial?
"Here a little, and there a little"; was not this the story of
missionary results even when a Paul, a Barnabas, a Peter, was the
missionary? Everywhere some faith; but everywhere more hostility and
still more indifference! Could this, after all, be the main track of
the divine purposes—these often ineffectual excursions of the "fair
feet" of the messengers of an eternal peace? Ah, that objection must
have offered no mere logical difficulty to St. Paul; it must have
pierced his heart. For while His Master was his first motive, his
fellow men themselves were his second. He loved their souls; he
longed to see them blessed in Christ, saved in Him from "the death
that cannot die," filed in Him with "life indeed" η οντως ζωη. {1Ti 6:19} The man who shed tears over his converts as he
warned them {Ac 20:31} had tears also, we may be sure, for those
who would not be converted; nay, we know he had: "I tell you, even
weeping (καί κλαων), that they are the enemies of the Cross of
Christ." {Php 3:18} But here too he leans back on the solemn
comfort, the answer from within a veil, -that Prophecy had taken
account of this beforehand. Moses, and Isaiah, and David had
foretold
on the one hand a universal message of good, but on the other hand a
sorrowfully limited response from man, and notably from Israel. So
he
proceeds: But not all obeyed the good tidings, when "the word"
reached them; for—we were prepared for such a mystery, such a
grief—for Isaiah says, {Isa 53:1} in his great Oracle of the
Crucified, "Lord, who believed our hearing," the message they heard
of us, about One "on whom were laid the iniquities of us all?" And
as
he dictates that word "hearing," it emphasises to him the fact that
not mystic intuitions born out of the depths of man are the means of
revelation, but articulate messages given from the depths of God,
and
spoken by men to men. And he throws the thought into a brief
sentence, such as would lie in a footnote in a modern book: So we
gather that faith comes from hearing; but the hearing comes through
Christ’s utterance; the messenger has it because it was first given
to him by the Master who proclaimed Himself the Way, Truth, Life,
Light, Bread, Shepherd, Ransom, Lord. All is revelation, not
reverie;
utterance, not insight. Then the swift thought turns, and returns again. The prophecies
have foretold an evangelical utterance to the whole human world.
Not only in explicit prediction do they do so, but in the "mystic
glory" of their more remote allusions. But I say, Did they not hear?
Was this failure of belief due to a limitation of the messenger’s
range in the plan of God? Nay, rather, "Unto all the earth went out
their tone, and to the ends of man’s world their utterances." {Ps
19:4} The words are the voice of that Psalm where the glories of
the visible heavens are collocated with the glories of the Word of
God. The Apostle hears more than Nature in the Sunrise Hymn of
David;
he hears grace and the Gospel in the deep harmony which carries the
immortal melody along. The God who meant the skies, with their
"silent voices," to preach a Creator not to one race but to all,
meant also His Word to have no narrower scope, preaching a Redeemer.
Yes, and there were articulate predictions that it should be so, as
well as starry parables; predictions, too, that showed the prospect
not only of a world evangelised, but of an Israel put to shame by
the
faith of pagans. But I say (his rapid phrase meets with an
anticipating answer the cavil yet unspoken) did not Israel know? Had
they no distinct forewarning of what we see today? First comes
Moses,
saying, in his prophetic Song, sung at the foot of Pisgah, {De
32:21} "I [the ‘I’ is emphatic; the Person is the Lord, and the
action shall be nothing less than His] I will take a no-nation to
move your jealousy; to move your anger I will take a nation
non-intelligent"; a race not only not informed by a previous
revelation, but not trained by thought upon it to an insight into
new
truth. And what Moses indicates, Isaiah, standing later in the
history, indignantly explains: But Isaiah dares anything and
says, {Isa 65:1} "I was found by those who sought not Me;
manifest I became to those who consulted not Me." But as to Israel
he
says, in the words next in order in the place, {Isa 65:2} "All
the day long I spread my hands open, to beckon and to embrace,
towards a people disobeying and contradicting." So the servant brings his sorrows for consolation to—may we write
the words in reverence?—the sorrows of His Master. He mourns over an
Athens, an Ephesus, and above all a Jerusalem, that "will not come
to
the Son of God, that they might have life." {Joh 5:40} And his
grief is not only inevitable; it is profoundly right, wise, holy.
But
he need not bear it unrelieved. He grasps the Scripture which tells
him that his Lord has called those who would not come, and opened
the
eternal arms for an embrace—to be met only with a contradiction. He
weeps, but it is as on the breast of Jesus as He wept over the City.
And in the double certainty that the Lord has felt such grief, and
that He is the Lord, he yields, he rests, he is still. "The King of
the Ages" {1Ti 1:17} and "the Man of Sorrows" are One. To know
Him is to he at peace, even under the griefs of the mystery of sin.
|