The Lord's Coming Part 2

THE CALL OF G.o.d

GEN CHAPTER XII

In a day of such widely extended profession as the present, it is specially important that Christians should be deeply impressed with the necessity of realizing _personally the call of G.o.d_, without which there can be no permanency or steadiness in the Christian course.

It is a comparatively easy thing to make a profession at a time when profession prevails; but it is never easy to walk by faith--it is never easy to give up present things, in the hope of "good things to come." Nothing but that mighty principle which the apostle denominates "_the substance_ of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen"

(Heb. xi. 1), can ever enable a man to persevere in a course which in a world where all is wrong--all out of order, must be th.o.r.n.y and difficult. We must feel "_persuaded_" of something yet to come--something worth waiting for--something that will reward all the toil of a pilgrim's protracted course, ere we rise up out of the circ.u.mstances of nature and the world, to "run with patience the race that is set before us." (Heb. xii. 1.)

All this is fully exemplified in Abraham, and the exemplification receives additional force from the contrast exhibited in the character of Lot and others who are introduced in the course of the narrative.

In the seventh of Acts, we have the following words which bear directly upon the subject before us. "The G.o.d of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran, and said unto him, Get thee out of thy country and from thy kindred, and come into the land that _I shall show thee_." (Vers. 1, 2.) Here then we are presented with the first dawning of that light which attracted Abraham out of the darkness of "Ur, of the Chaldees,"

and which s.h.i.+ning in upon his wearisome path, from time to time, gave fresh vigor to his soul, as he journeyed in quest of "that city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is G.o.d." "The G.o.d of glory"

caused Abraham to see, in the light of His character, the true condition of things in Ur, and further, to believe, as some one has observed, _a report concerning future glory and inheritance_, and he therefore hesitates not, but instantly girds himself up for the journey.

However, upon a close comparison of the opening of the seventh of Acts, with the first verse of this twelfth chapter of Genesis, we get an important principle. From the time that G.o.d appeared unto Abraham, until he finally gets up into the land of Canaan, an event occurs involving much deep instruction to us. I allude to the death of Abraham's father, as we read in Acts vii. "From thence, _when his father_ was dead, He removed him into this land wherein ye now dwell."

(Ver. 4.) This will enable us to understand the force of the expression in Gen. xii., "The Lord _had_ said unto Abram," etc. (Ver.

1.) From both these pa.s.sages, it would plainly appear the movement made by Terah and his family, recorded in Gen. x. 31, was the result of a revelation made by "the G.o.d of glory" to Abram, but it would not appear that _Terah_ had received any such revelation from G.o.d. He is presented to us rather as a hindrance to Abram than any thing else, for until he died, Abram did not come into the land of Canaan--his divinely appointed destination.

Now, this circ.u.mstance, trivial as it may seem to a cursory reader, confirms in the strongest manner the statement already advanced, namely, that unless the call of G.o.d--the revelation from "the G.o.d of glory" be _personally realized_, there can be no permanency or steadiness in the Christian course. Had Terah realized that call, he would neither have been a clog to Abram in his path of faith, nor yet would he have dropped off, like a mere child of nature, ere reaching the future land of promise. We get the same principle ill.u.s.trated in Laban afterward in Gen. xxiv. Laban, as some one has well observed, was fully alive to the value of the gold and silver jewels which the servant of Abraham had brought with him, but he had no heart to value _the report_ concerning future things, which dropped from his lips. In other words, he did not receive a revelation from "the G.o.d of glory,"

and as a consequence, he remained, as the same writer has observed, "_a thorough man of the world_."

In the conversion of Saul of Tarsus, we are taught the same truth.

There were other persons with him when he was struck to the ground by the l.u.s.tre of the glory of the Lord Jesus; these persons "saw indeed the light"--they witnessed many of the external circ.u.mstances which had arrested the furious zealot; but as he himself states, "_they heard not the voice of Him that spake_ TO ME." (Acts xxii. 9.) Here is the grand point. The voice must speak "_to me_"--"the G.o.d of glory"

must appear "to me," ere I can take the place of a pilgrim and stranger in the world, and perseveringly, "run the race that is set before me." It is not _national faith_, nor _family faith_, but _personal faith_ that will const.i.tute us real witnesses for G.o.d in the world.

But when Abram was released from the clog which he had experienced in the person of his father, he was enabled to enter with vigor and decision upon the path of faith--a path which "flesh and blood" can never tread--a th.o.r.n.y path beset with difficulties from first to last, in which G.o.d alone can sustain the soul. "And Abram pa.s.sed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh. _And the Canaanite was then in the land._ And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: _and there builded he an altar unto the Lord who appeared unto him_." (Gen. xii. 6, 7.) Here Abram at once takes his stand as _a wors.h.i.+per_, in the face of "the Canaanite." The altar marks him as one who, having been delivered from the idols of Ur of the Chaldees, had been taught to bow before the altar of the one true G.o.d, "who made heaven and earth." In the following verse, we get the second grand feature in the character of the man of faith, namely, "_the tent_," denoting strangers.h.i.+p in the world. "By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a _strange_ _country, dwelling in tabernacles_ with Isaac and Jacob, _the heirs_ with him of the same _promise_." (Heb. xi. 9.)

We shall have occasion to notice more fully, as we proceed, these two important points in the life of Abraham, and shall therefore rest satisfied for the present with establis.h.i.+ng the fact that the tent and the altar do most clearly present him to us as a _stranger_ and a _wors.h.i.+per_, and that as such, he was a man entirely separated from the course of this evil world.

Scarcely had Abram entered upon his course, when he had to encounter one of those difficulties which have a special tendency to test the genuineness of faith, both as to its quality and its object. "And there was a famine in the land." The difficulty meets him in the very place into which the Lord had called him. Now, it is no easy matter when we perceive trial and sorrow, privation and difficulty awaiting us, while walking in "the strait and narrow way," still to persevere--still to pursue the onward path, and especially if we observe within our reach, as Abram did, an entire exemption from the particular trial under which we may be smarting. The men of this world "are not in trouble as other men, neither are they plagued as other men." This feeling is still further increased by the entire absence of every thing, as far as sight is concerned, which could act as a confirmation of our hope. Abram had not so much as to set his foot upon--famine was raging around him on every side, _save in Egypt_.

Could he only find himself _there_, he would be able to live in ease and abundance.

Here, however, the man of faith must pursue the path of simple obedience. G.o.d had said, "Get thee out of thy country ... unto a land that I will show thee." Abram may, it is true, afterward discover that obedience to this command will involve his abiding in a land where nothing but starvation, apparently, awaits him. But even though it should be so, G.o.d had not in any way qualified the command. No, the word was simple and definite: "Into a land that _I_ will show thee."

This should have been as true and as binding upon Abram when famine reigned around him, as when peace and abundance prevailed. Famine should not, therefore, have induced him to leave the land, neither should abundance have induced him to remain. The influential words were, "I will show thee."

But Abram leaves this land--he succ.u.mbs, for the moment, to the heavy trial, and bends his footsteps down to Egypt, leaving behind him his tent and altar. There he obtained ease and luxury; he escaped, no doubt, the formidable trial under which he had suffered in the land of promise; but he lost, for the time being, his wors.h.i.+p and strangers.h.i.+p,--things which should ever be dearest to the heart of a pilgrim.

There is nothing in Egypt for Abram to feed upon as a spiritual man; it might, and doubtless did, afford abundance for him as a natural man, but that was all. Egypt would give nothing to Abram unless he sacrificed his character both as a stranger and as a wors.h.i.+per of G.o.d.

It is needless to observe that it is exactly so at this very hour.

There is plenty in the world upon which our old nature could feed most luxuriously. There are the rich delights "of the flesh and of the mind," and abundant means of gratifying the desires of the heart, but what of all these, if the enjoyment thereof leads, as it must necessarily do, right out of the path of faith--the path of simple obedience.

Here then is the question for the Christian: which shall I have, the gold and silver, the flocks and herds--the present ease and affluence of Egypt, or the tent and altar of "the land of promise"? Which shall I have: the carnal ease and delight of the world, or a peaceful holy walk with G.o.d _here_, and eternal blessedness and glory hereafter? We cannot have both, for, "if _any man_ love the world, the love of the Father is not in him."

But, we may ask, why was it that Abram had to experience famine and trial in the land of promise? Why did he not find a home and plenty there? Simply because "the Canaanite and Perizzite dwelt then in the land." (Chap. xiii. 7.) The land had not as yet been fitted up to be the residence of G.o.d's redeemed ones. Abram's faith might have enabled him to penetrate through the long and dreary period which should intervene ere the promise could be consummated; but that very principle of faith it was that made him "a pilgrim and a stranger." He could wait for G.o.d's time, and until then remain without "so much as to set his foot on." (Acts vii. 5.) So should it be now.

CHAPTER XIII.

This beautiful chapter shows us the man of faith recovering himself, through the faithfulness and loving-kindness of G.o.d, who never allows such to wander far, or tarry long away. The gold and silver, the flocks and herds of Egypt, could not long prove a satisfying portion for Abram, while deprived of his tent and his altar, and he therefore once more, in the renewed energy of faith rises, as it were, from the dust of Egypt, and retraces his steps to the land of promise. Happy recovery! Certain evidence of a fixed and honest purpose to serve the Lord. "The s.h.i.+p may be tossed by the waves and the winds, but _the magnet still points to the north_."

But some expressions in the opening of this chapter confirm most fully a thought already expressed, namely, that Abram gained nothing, "as before G.o.d," by his visit to Egypt. Thus, for example, "Abram went on his journeys ... unto the place where his tent had been _at the beginning_, unto the place of the altar which he had made there _at the first_." (Vers. 3, 4.) The words "beginning," and "at the first,"

prove that Abram had made no progress while in Egypt, but that, while there, all his time was, as it were, lost. No doubt he learnt a wholesome lesson, and it is well when by our failures we learn to distrust our own hearts, and dread the pernicious influence of the world. Abram learnt that there could be no tent or altar in Egypt. It is only faith that can enable a man to raise an altar or erect a tent, but in Egypt all is sight and not faith, and hence, the moment Abram set his foot there he ceased to show forth the genuine fruits of faith--yea, the very principle which led him to leave the land of promise, led him, at the same time, to relinquish his character as a stranger and a wors.h.i.+per.

How forcibly are we here reminded of a proposal made long after this, by a king of Egypt, to Abraham's seed. "And Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron, and said: Go ye, sacrifice to your G.o.d in the land." (Ex.

viii. 25.) Thus, it would seem ever to have been the design of the enemy to get the people of G.o.d, the holy seed, to defile themselves by wors.h.i.+ping or sacrificing to G.o.d, _in the world_; i. e., to make their character, as wors.h.i.+pers of G.o.d, accord with that of men of the world--men holding a place in society where Christ is an outcast; thus, of course, declaring that there is no difference between the religion of the world and the religion of G.o.d--a truly fearful delusion, calculated to lead many souls out of the way of truth and holiness.

It is most sad to hear, at times, those who surely ought to know better, in order, as they say, to manifest a _liberal spirit_, speaking of the religion of the world in all its multiplied forms, as if it were all right; or, as if it were a matter of total indifference whether we remained in communion with error or not. Oh, let us not be deceived! G.o.d's principle of separation is as strong and as binding to-day as it was in the days of Abram or Moses. "Come out from among them, and be ye separate, and touch not the unclean thing," must hold good as long as the "unclean thing" exists; nor can any outward form alter the character--the true essential character of "the unclean thing" so as to make it "a clean thing."

Moses, then, was not liberal, in the above acceptation of the word, for he at once refused to countenance the religion of the world. "It is not meet so to do." Memorable words! Would that there were more amongst us who, when invited to countenance the religion of the world, would reply, "It is not meet so to do." Abram could not wors.h.i.+p in Egypt, neither could his seed.

But Abram had more difficulties than one to encounter in his course.

The path which every man of faith is called to tread lies between two dangerous extremes. One is the temptation to return to the world; the other, to strive with brethren by the way. Abram had just recovered himself from the effects of the former, and we have now to behold him buffeting the latter.

The moment Abram emerged from Egypt, he appeared in a special manner to move under a new responsibility, namely, responsibility to his brother to walk with him in harmony. While in Egypt, this responsibility stood quite in the shade. The inst.i.tutions--laws-- habits--luxury and ease of Egypt, would in an eminent degree tend to do away with every such feeling. All these things would have had the effect of erecting barriers around each individual tending to prevent him from recognizing the fact that he was his "brother's keeper." Nor is it otherwise now. So long as we continue in the world--the religious world, as it is termed--we shall find ourselves completely relieved from the difficult task of being our "brother's keeper."

Those who advocate a continuance therein may deny this fact, but it is all in vain, for Scripture and experience alike demonstrate it. Abram and Lot _did not strive in Egypt_, and a religious establishment presents this attraction at least--and it is by no means a feeble one--it effectually prevents _brotherly collision_; and, of course, where there is no collision there can be no strife--no dispute; where collision takes place, there must be either grace to enable us to walk in unity of mind, or strife and contention. But Egypt saps the very springs of grace by leading us out of a place of simple dependence upon the Lord, (for dependence ever genders grace and forbearance) and because she does so, she, at the same time, teaches us, or attempts at least to teach us, that we do not need grace, by leading us into a sphere in which responsibility to brethren is never realized, thus the need is not felt; weakness is mistaken for strength, folly for wisdom.

When the Christian at first starts on his course, he fondly dreams of nothing but perfection in his fellow Christians; but in this he soon finds himself mistaken, for we have all our infirmities, and as the apostle states, "In many things we offend all." But why, we may ask, was there such a speedy development of infirmity upon their coming up out of Egypt? Because they were now called to walk in the power of a naked principle, without any of the props or barriers of Egypt. They were called to walk by faith, and "faith worketh by love."

Now "the Canaanite," etc., "was then in the land." This should have acted as a hindrance to any strife between "_brethren_," for the Canaanite cannot understand anything about the infirmities of believers, and he therefore puts all their failure down to some defect in the principle professed.

But in every strife between brethren, there must be fault somewhere.

In the contention between Paul and Barnabas there was fault somewhere.

Nor can we be at any loss to decide where it lay. Barnabas wished to take _his relative_ with him, but this relative had before proved himself unfit, or at least unwilling, to "endure hardness," therefore it could not have been with a single eye to the Lord's work that Barnabas desired his company. The Lord Himself, too, at once takes Paul's side of the question by providing him with a dear son and fellow-laborer, in the person of Timothy, with whom he had "none like-minded."

So it is exactly in the case before us. We can have no hesitation in a.s.serting that Lot was the man in error here. Lot does not appear to have fully got rid of the spirit of the world, and where there is this spirit predominating in any one he will ever find the path of faith too strait for him to walk in, and so it was, "They could not dwell together."

If, then, it be asked on what grounds one would p.r.o.nounce Lot to have been in the wrong? The answer is, first, Lot's subsequent conduct; and, second, the Lord's dealings with Abram, "after that Lot was separated from him."

What then did Lot do? "_He lifted up his eyes._" This is ever our mode of acting when not under the direct power of faith. Whenever we lift up our eyes without divine direction, we are sure to go wrong. I say, without divine direction, for we find the Lord afterwards directing Abram to lift up his eyes, but then that was totally different from Lot's act, which was simply the suggestion of mere human wisdom and foresight. Human wisdom and foresight, however, can never a.s.sist our progress as men of faith--no, quite the reverse; human wisdom will ever suggest things which, if acted upon, will lead us right athwart the path of a man of faith. Therefore Lot, in lifting up his eyes, could not penetrate beyond the "things that are seen and temporal."

Such was the utmost bound of his range of vision. The things on which his eyes rested were those with which he had been conversant while in Egypt, as we read, "He beheld all the plain of Jordan that it was well watered every where ... _like the land of Egypt_." (10.) Here we observe that Lot had never been really detached in heart and affection from Egypt--he had never learnt the vanity and unsatisfactoriness of all her resources in the light of a better order of things--he had never contrasted her with that "_city which hath foundations_, whose builder and maker is G.o.d"--in a word, he "having put his hand to the plow," was now beginning "to look back," and thus to prove himself "unfit for the kingdom of heaven."

There is a striking notice of all this afforded in the opening verse of this chapter, "Abram went up out of Egypt and _Lot with him_." Here we get the secret of Lot's after instability. He appears to have gone up rather _with Abram_ than _with G.o.d_, and the consequence was that, when he parted with Abram, he had nothing to lean upon. He had been hitherto moving under Abram's protection and guidance instead of being directly before the Lord, and therefore when he lost Abram he went astray.

Now then is the moment for Abram to "lift up his eyes," at the Lord's command, and oh, what a different range of vision was his! While Lot could not penetrate beyond the narrow limits of the present scene, Abram was enabled to survey the length and breadth of G.o.d's inheritance. He soars on the strong and rapid pinion of faith, and is, as it were, lost in the unbounded beneficence of G.o.d; while Lot, the man walking by sight, is well-nigh lost in the deep gulf of Sodom's corruption.

Let us then, ere we enter upon the next chapter, take a view of the different circ.u.mstances of these two men who had started together.

"Lot lifted up his eyes," and the prospect on which they rested was, as might be expected, such as suited his natural desires, "well-watered plains," which, however fair in man's view, were nevertheless, in the sight of the Lord, filled with exceeding wickedness. (Comp. vers. 10 and 14.) Abram, on the contrary, had allowed his eye to wander over the length and breadth of the _promised_ inheritance--uninfluenced by all else, he viewed the portion which G.o.d was _reserving_ for him and his seed, and took up his position accordingly.

Thus do we find Lot in the unhallowed region of Sodom; and Abram--the pilgrim and stranger, with his tent and altar--"in the plain of Mamre, which is in Hebron."

CHAPTER XIV.

Here we have a very minute account of a battle fought by "four kings with five," and we may ask, What connection had this strife between "the potsherds of the earth," with the history of the people of G.o.d?

With Abram indeed none, in one sense, for _he_ was outside it all.

_His tent_ marked him as a stranger to all these things--it marked him as one to whom the battle of "four kings with five" would be a matter of very trivial moment. And then his altar marked him as one whose pursuits were quite of another character, even a heavenly. His tent showed him to be a stranger on earth--his altar showed him to be at home in heaven. Happy man! Happy pilgrim! who could thus from his high elevation, even the lofty watch-tower of faith, look down, as a pa.s.ser-by, upon the battle fields of an evil world. It mattered not to Abram whether the laurel of victory were about to wreath the brow of the king of Sodom, or of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam; his portion was not in danger through their strife, because he had it in that place "where thieves _do not_ break through and steal."

But, though it was the happy lot of Abram to have his being and his portion in a place where wars could have no influence, yet such was not the case with his more worldly-minded brother. His position was such as to place him in the midst of the strife, and consequently the issue of this battle could not fail to be of the deepest moment to him. If the child of G.o.d will stoop so low as to mix himself up with the world, he must calculate upon being made a partic.i.p.ator in its convulsions, and woe be to that man who shall have his portion in the world in that day (now fast approaching) when all things shall be shaken by the mighty hand of G.o.d in judgment.