appeared, and hence the expectation that it would appear. It is recorded in the narrative of the crucifixion of Jesus that "Joseph of Arimathea, an honorable counsellor, . . . . also waited for the kingdom of God" (Mark 15:43). Hence the kingdom of God had not appeared at that time; and since Joseph "also waited for the kingdom" it is clear that Joseph was only one of a number who were in this waiting attitude. Why did they expect it and wait for it? Because the preaching of Jesus had awakened these expectations. And not only this, but when Jesus was in Galilee, and had performed a miracle, some attempted to "take Him by force and make Him a King" (John 6:15); from which we see that they not only understood that the kingdom of God was to be established, but also the relation of Jesus to that kingdom.

After the death and resurrection of Jesus, when the Lord conversed with His disciples on "the things pertaining to the kingdom of God," and He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, "they asked Him, saying, Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:3-6). From this we know that Israel had had a kingdom; that it was not then in the condition in which it once had been; that its restoration was in prospect, and that the Lord Jesus was the one to effect this restoration. The question of the disciples related solely to the time of this restoration, which is borne out by the Lord's reply, "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in His own power" (vs. 7).

After the apostles had entered upon their mission of "preaching the gospel to every creature" (Mark 16:16), and gathered many disciples, who were subject to much persecution from their contemporaries, they "confirmed the souls of the disciples, exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22). Those persons were disciples, because they were "in the faith," and hence the propriety of the apostle's exhortation to "continue in the faith." But they were not yet in the kingdom; they enter that after they pass "through much tribulation." The apostle Paul said to Timothy, and through him to "believing men" (II Tim. 2:2), "If we suffer, we shall also reign with Him" (vs. 12). Thus Paul, and Timothy, and faithful men shall reign with Christ, upon condition that they suffer. The sufferings pertain

to "the present time" (Rom. 8:18). The reign will be after the sufferings are ended.

There is one other passage, among many, to which I would call special attention, viz., II Peter, chap. 1, where the apostle, writing to the "brethren" who had "obtained the like precious faith" with himself and the other apostles, exhorted the brethren to "add to their faith virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, and charity," assuring them that if they did these things, they should never fall; "for so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ" (vss. 5-11). They had been "called by the gospel" (II Thess. 2:14) for God's kingdom and glory (I Thess. 2:12), and having been thus called, they were to "make their calling and election sure" by walking worthy of their calling; and upon due fulfilment of these conditions they should be permitted to enter the kingdom of Christ. Had they already been in the kingdom the apostle would have congratulated them upon their successful entrance into it; and in that case there would have been no need to exhort them to "do" certain things in order to secure such an entrance. Since those brethren were not yet in the kingdom the question arises, When shall the kingdom come, and when shall they enter into it? Here, too, we have a definite and conclusive answer in the words of Jesus and the apostles. Jesus had told the apostles that they who had followed Him, in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of His glory, they should sit upon thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel (Matt. 19:28). Let us notice particularly the time when they should thus sit upon thrones. It is to be "in the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of His glory." When shall He sit upon this throne? Before or after His coming? Hear His own words: "When the Son of Man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory" (Matt. 25:31). Thus we see that before He will occupy that throne of glory He must first come in His glory, and "then (and not until then) shall He sit upon the throne of His glory." And since this shall be "in the regeneration," we know that the apostles will not sit upon thrones until He Himself shall Not only did the Lord assure the original apostles of this fact, but Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles, likewise informs us

come.

that the appearing and kingdom are inseparably united. In writing to Timothy, his "dearly beloved son," he said, "I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom, preach the word" (II Tim. 4:1-2). Hence there will be no judgment before the appearing and kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ. The parable of the nobleman (Luke, chap. 19) likewise proves very clearly that the faithful shall reign with Christ after His return; and that He Himself will not assume the reins of government until His return from heaven. From the foregoing testimony we see:

I.

2.

That Jesus will be the King in the kingdom of God.

That the apostles and faithful brethren shall be associated with him in that kingdom.

3. That the twelve tribes of Israel will be the immediate subjects of this kingdom. Other Scripture testimony goes to show that while the land of Canaan will be the immediate territory of this kingdom, its dominion will extend to the uttermost parts of the earth, and that it will embrace the entire population of the earth.

4. That this kingdom will be established at the appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ from heaven, and the approved will then enter into it, that is, have eternal life bestowed upon them and their respective positions in the kingdom assigned to them. In short, the gospel promises to men and women who believe, joint heirship with Jesus in the kingdom of God in the age to come, which will be ushered in by the coming of Christ.

The second item of the gospel relates to the circumstances connected with the putting away of sin by the sacrificial death of Christ. The apostle Paul had occasion to correct a doctrinal error with reference to the resurrection which had gained an entrance and some currency in the ecclesia at Corinth, and in introducing the matter he said to the brethren, "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand: by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you, first of all, that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures" (I Cor. 15:1-4). It is

evident from this language that the apostle included the death of Christ as a sin offering, His burial and His resurrection, in the term "the gospel." Our authorized version of the Bible makes the apostle say that he had preached these matters "first of all." But the force of the original is that he preached these matters "among first things," or among the first principles. However, it matters not whether the apostle preached the death, burial and resurrection of Christ "among the first things" or "first of all." Though they do not constitute the entire gospel as preached by Paul, they form an essential part of it. And he who would be saved must believe this item as an integral element of the gospel.

The language of the apostle relative to the death of Christ is very clear and definite, "that Christ died for our sins." If "Christ died" He was related to the law of sin and death, as the entire race is related to that law. For it would be unjust for one who is not related to the law of sin to die; and we know that God does not demand that which is contrary to His justice. He could neither have been God nor the possessor of the divine nature. God is neither mortal nor can He die. He says, "I live forever” (Deut. 32:40). He is "immortal" (I Tim. 1:17); yea, He "alone hath immortality" (I Tim. 6:16). If, therefore, Jesus had been God-a third part of the "trinity"-He could not die, neither ought he to have died; and therefore He must have been a partaker of the same nature with those for whose sins He died. But we are fortunately not left to inference in deciding this important point; for we are told in the Scriptures: "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same; that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil" (Heb. 2:14). Let us consider, first, the "flesh and blood" of which Jesus took part. He Himself taught that "that which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3:6). And the apostle Paul bore testimony to the nature of the flesh when he said, "For I know that in me (that is in my flesh) there dwelleth no good thing" (Rom. 7:20). What was it that was dwelling in him? Hear his own words: "Sin dwelleth in me" (vss. 17, 20). How came sin to dwell in him? By being "born of the flesh." Is sin in the flesh? It certainly is, for the apostle says, "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God send

ing his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8:3). How came sin to be in the flesh? Was man created with "no good thing," with "evil," with "sin in the flesh"? By no means. What God created was "very good" (Gen. 1:31). Hence the "evil" came into man's flesh subsequent to man's creation. If sin was in Paul's flesh we are led to inquire, When did sin enter the flesh? It was not in man when he came from the hands of the Creator, and hence it came in later. When did this come about? It was when Adam transgressed the law, and thus became a sinner, when sin became an element of the flesh. And inasmuch as all flesh (of mankind) was in Adam when he sinned, therefore, as the apostle says, "by one man's disobedience many were made sinners" (Rom. 5:19). And because the "many" were in Adam when he sinned, therefore it may very properly be said "in whom all sinned" (Rom. 5:12, marg.). Hence when a son was born to Adam that son was but an extension of Adam himself, and sin was in his flesh. And the same is true of every "son of Adam" (Deut. 32:8), whether he was born in Adam's days or thousands of years since then. It was with this thought in view that the Psalmist said, "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Ps. 51:5). Now the question arises, Did Jesus partake of the same flesh of which these things are affirmed? Truly, "He also Himself likewise took part of the same” (Heb. 2:14). How? By being "made of a woman" (Gal. 4:4). Why? "That through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." According to this statement the devil had the power of death, and Jesus, through death, destroyed him. All of which was possible because Jesus took part of flesh and blood as the children are partakers of these. Did Jesus, through death, destroy the personal devil of theology? Not so, for he is believed to be deathless and therefore indestructible. Had the Lord destroyed such a devil it would have been useless for the apostles afterward to call upon the brethren to "resist the devil, and he will flee from you" (Jas. 4:7). A devil who is destroyed in the proper sense of the word can offer no opposition, and hence requires no resistance. But who had "the power of death"? Had this power been delegated to a personal wicked angel? This cannot be, for we have no record in the Scriptures on such transaction. But we do know, from the explicit

of