66

ticularity with which the various departments preparatory to, and connected with sacrifice are specified may be noticed: "After, he brought me through the entry which was at the side of the gate into the holy chambers of the priests, which looked toward the north; and behold there was a place on the two sides westward. Then said he unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass-offering, and the sin-offering, where they shall bake the meat-offering, that they bear them not out into the outer court to sanctify the people." And having then been shown four courts, the prophet adds, " And there was a row of building round about in them, round about them four, and it was made with boiling places under the rows round about. Then said he unto me, These are the places of them that boil where the Ministers of the House shall boil the sacrifice of the people." (xlvi. 19-24.) "And he said unto me, Son of man, thus saith the Lord God, These are the ordinances of the altar in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt-offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon." (xliii. 18.) It is also worthy of notice that provision is made for the change of the Sabbath, from the seventh to the eighth or first day: "Seven days shall they purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves. And when these days are expired, it shall be, that, upon the eighth day, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt-offerings upon the altar, and your peace-offerings; and I will accept you, saith the Lord God." (xliii. 26, 27.) Concerning this temple we have seen it is the promise of the Lord by the prophet Haggai, "I will fill this house with glory;" "and I looked," says Ezekiel," and behold the glory of the Lord filled the house of the Lord, and I fell upon my face." (xliv. 4.)

Once more let us ask, can all this be viewed as intimation of any thing else than the re-erection of the literal Temple, and the re-institution of sacrifice? We are not unaware of the arguments which have been founded on certain expressions in the Epistles; nor do we seek to conceal the fact that these expressions, taken by themselves, do seem to countenance the opinion that the

ritual observances were only designed to continue until the introduction of Christianity. But it is to be remarked, that, in such cases, the argument is generally directed against the abuse of these ordinances; and expressions used, perhaps, concerning that abuse, may seem to bear against the continuance of the ordinances themselves. But it would not at all affect the question concerning Millennial sacrifice, even if it could be satisfactorily established that the observance of the Mosaic ritual was authoritatively discontinued after the death of Christ. The re-institution of worship by Sacrifice is, as we have seen, distinctly predicted, and the time when it will be so is not less clearly foretold. Whatever therefore has been God's will concerning the past, his purpose relative to the future at least, is here explicitly revealed. But in reality we do not find any authoritative abolition of sacrifice in the New Testament; while the known practice of believing Jews generally, and of holy apostles in particular, demonstrate that there is in sacrifice itself nothing incompatible with the nature of Christianity.* So long as the Temple stood-that is, so long as it was possible to offer sacrifice agreeably to the prescribed will of Heaven-so long did Jews converted to the faith of Jesus continue to present their of ferings according to the law. It is said of those who witnessed the Saviour's ascension, that they afterwards "returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God." Luke xxiv. 53. Do we not read, that, nearly thirty years after, James and the Elders of Jerusalem thus addressed the apostle Paul? "Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of the Jews there are which believe, and they are ALL zealous of the law." Acts xx. 21. We read also of Paul himself, shortly before this, "having shorn his head, in Cenchrea, for he had a vow." Acts xviii. 18.

The real

"These were practised by the Apostles themselves; constantly, by such as lived in Judea, and occasionally by the rest. fault (of certain Jewish zealots condemned by Paul) was the depending upon them for salvation, in opposition to the grace of Christ." History of the Church of Christ, published by London Tract Society. vol. i. p. 23.

I

And when a false rumour had been circulated, that this apostle "taught the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs," upon the suggestion of James and of the elders of Jerusalem, to evidence the falsehood of those things of which they had been informed concerning him, and that "all" might know that thou thyself also walkest orderly and keepest the law," did he not join immediately in charges with other four disciples under vow? (Acts xxi. 20-26,) and "purifying himself with them, entered into the temple to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them"--the sacrifices, in such cases, including both lambs and rams. (Numb. vi. 14, 15.) When his Christian friends at Ephesus pressed him "to tarry longer time with them, he consented not; but bade them farewell, saying, I must, by all means, keep this feast that cometh, in Jerusalem." Acts xviii. 20, 21. And when falsely accused before Felix of having, contrary to the law, introduced Gentiles into the inner court of the Temple, denied the charge, saying, "I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings, whereupon certain Jews from Asia found me purified in the Temple, neither with multitude nor with tumult." Acts xxiv. 17, 18. And when afterwards sent prisoner to Rome, he could still aver to "the chief of the Jews" there, that he had "committed nothing against the people or customs of our fathers." Acts xxviii. 17. Thus then we find that Jewish converts to Christianity, including eminent apostles, did not on their conversion deem it necessary to abandon the institutions of Moses. Nor can this be imputed to their ignorance of the spirituality of the New dispensation. Paul was not unacquainted with "the genius of the gospel," nor unskilled in its minutest requirements. But we are here met by objectors with the assertion that Paul's conduct in this respect was merely to conciliate the affection of his brethren, the Jews. And was conciliation to be purchased at the expence of an entire departure from Christian principle by "many thousands" of believers also? Or was Paul

one of those who would sacrifice the truth to a false principle of expediency? No, no. Willing as he was, for the good of others, to yield up his own convenience, his comfort, his liberty, his life itself, he deprecated as unlawful the principle of doing "evil that good may come," and charged with "slander" those who imputed it unto him. (Rom. iii. 8.) Had the apostle's only reason for following the law of Moses been a desire to yield to the prejudices of the Jews, on what principle are we to understand his refusal to bring Gentile converts under a similar obligation? No less strenuously was this insisted for, by Jewish converts, than their being allowed themselves to adhere unto the law. But Paul and all the other apostles peremptorily rejected this demand. (Acts xv. 24.) So also while Paul, in compliance with the desire of the Jews, "took and circumcised" Timothy, "the son of a certain woman which was a Jewess, and believed;" when it was demanded that Titus should submit to the same rite, to those who required this, the Apostle "gave place by subjection, no. not for an hour," Titus "being a Greek." Acts xvi. 1. Gal. ii. 3-5. The apostle must therefore have been influenced by another principle besides that of pleasing the Jews-a principle which led him to distinguish between the Jew and the Greek, exempting the one from an ordinance he imposed on the other. And where then is the evidence of the entire and authoritative abolition of sacrifice, and its incompatibility with the Gospel of Christ? And if believing Jews, under the gospel, thus adhered to the law of Moses so long as the Temple stood, on what ground do we reject the testimony of God" by His prophets, of the future re-erection of the Temple and the re-institution of its ordinances?

66

In the 51st Psalm we have a prediction, not only of a time when sacrifice would not be demanded, but also of the time of its re-institution. While Jerusalem is trodden down of the Gentiles, and the Temple is laid low, Jewish believers are deprived of all opportunity of thus adhering to the law; but when they shall be restored to their own land, and the Temple is re-erected, it shall be otherwise. Israel in their captivity say, "O

Lord, open thou my lips; and my mouth shall show forth thy praise. For thou [at present] desirest not sacrifice, else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt-offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Do good in thy good pleasure unto Zion: build thou the walls of Jerusalem. THEN shalt thou be pleased with the sacrifices of righteousness; with burntoffering, and whole burnt-offering: THEN shall they offer BULLOCKS upon thine altar." Ps. li. 15-19.

66

The last circumstance we here notice concerning this future Temple is, that in it a New River is to have its source: Afterwards he brought me again unto the door of the House," says the prophet," and behold waters issued out from under the threshold of the House, Eastward, (for the fore front of the House [its proper front] stood toward the east,) and the waters came down from under, from the right side of the House, at the south side of the altar. Then brought he me out of the way of the gate northward, and led me about the way without unto the outer gate by the way that looketh eastward; and behold there ran out waters on the right side. And when the man that had the line in his hand went forth eastward, he measured a thousand cubits, [fully one-third of a mile,] and he brought me through the waters; the waters were to the ancles. Again he measured a [second] thousand, and brought me through the waters; the waters were to the knees. Again he measured a [third] thousand, and brought me through; the waters were to the loins. Afterwards he measured a [fourth] thousand; and it was a river that I could not pass over; for the waters were risen, waters to swim in, a river that could not be passed over. And he said unto me, Son of man, hast thou seen this? Then he brought me and caused me to return to the brink of the river. Now when I had returned, behold at the bank of the river were very many trees, on the one side and on the other. Then said he unto me, These waters issue out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, [of Tekoah, apparently,] and go into the Sea; [the Dead