Moriah. BY REV. THOMAS HENSON, OF LONG BUCKBY. ONCE more Abraham receives a strange command, and one which stands alone in human history. "Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah, and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of "-Gen. xxii. 2. And once more the father of the faithful obeyed, "and went out, not knowing whither he went." As we traverse any mountain, two objects may claim our attentionthe things which grow on its surface, and those which are hid in its bosom. So is it on this Moriah. There are surface lessons, and also internal truths, which penetrate to the deepest woes of man, and offer some sweet response to the sad heart wail of the fallen race. Our business in this paper will be with the former, rather than with the latter. It may seem strange, that while we have certainty as to the facts which occured on these mountains, we are left in uncertainty as to some of the spots. We have certainty as to the facts for our spiritual benefit, but the Bible does not cater for curiosity; and perhaps the concealing of the exact sites may save the faithful from the snare which proves too strong and subtle for the formal. The facts, not the spots, give us our lessons. Still there is much interest in the question, Which is the mountain of Moriah to which "The Lord led Abraham?" Dr. Ferguson says, "Moriah was the mount which God had chosen for the subsequent erection of the Temple, and from its sunlit summit were to go up the flame and the fume of sacrifice till He should come who was to put away all sin by the one offering of Himself."* Dr. Angust and Kurtz‡ appear to be of the same opinion, while some of the German critics, in whose wake Dean Stanley follows, support the claims of the Samaritans in favour of their mount Gerizim as the site of Abraham's trial. But Dr. Kitto suspects the Samaritans of altering the text to bring the spot within their territory, and he says, "The Mahommedans contend that the site of the transaction is the spot on which their famous temple at Mecca (The Kaaba) was afterwards built. . . . It seems singular that the Jews, the Samaritans, and the Mahommedans, should all wish to fix this event to the site of their respective temples."§ We give the Jews the benefit of any doubt upon the subject. ... "God tempted Abraham." Commonly to tempt, is to incite and allure to evil doing. But can God tempt men to evil? Nay, "let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God cannot be tempted of evil, neither tempteth He any man." But in biblical usage, "to tempt" has a double meaning. Satan tempted Eve to unbelief and transgression; but all his work is to deceive men, and allure or goad them to evil thinking and evil doing; but when God tempts it is to prove and test the heart, not to lead it into * Consecrated Heights. + Bible Hand Book. History of the Old Covenant. evil; it is to show to man himself what good or evil there is in his own nature. But was not Abraham tempted to destroy a human life, a deed forbidden by divine law? Certainly he was commanded to offer his son for a burnt offering; and this was not a snare to lead him to do evil, but a test to prove his faith. God, as the friend of Abraham, subjected him to a trial which pierced him through, and put his faith to the severest proof. Something of the same process all believers are enjoined to do for themselves, 2 Cor. xiii. 5. "Examine yourselves." Often when they fail to do this for themselves by self-examination, God will do it for them by "divine temptation" or trial. The result of this proving, in the formation and building up of Christly character, is too precious for Him to allow it to be neglected. Some severe blow is permitted to fall upon them, sometimes personally, sometimes in those most dearly loved, sometimes in that which may be threatening a danger-commercial prosperity, and sometimes to the devout the blow may fall within the church itself; but it comes, and often falls where least desired, and it proves them whether or not they are as ready to trust Him, lovingly and obediently, as in their prayers and praises they so often profess to be. Bridges, spanning great rivers, are often tested with enormous weights and pressure; and faith, which bridges all the unseen between time and eternity, which loves and obeys Him whom no man hath seen, being in itself more precious than gold which perisheth, must be assayed by fire. The "divers temptations" of James i. 2; the "manifold temptations" of 1 Peter i. 6; the "fiery trial," 1 Peter iv. 12, are somewhat akin to the fiery temptation by which God proved Abraham. Instead of wondering we ought to admire the wisdom of God in so trying His jewels. In the kingdom of God Abraham was to be the great human lighthouse of faith; and the strongest billow of fiery tribulation was let loose against him to test the strength of the foundation. Self-renunciation, unquestioning trust, and implicit obedience, are essential to perfect character; and here God assays the man, and proves whether his faith can sustain such heart-works. But why should the Searcher of all hearts, who knows the entire history from its birth to its death, and even through eternity of the yet unborn, why should He need thus to prove His people? For His own great name's sake He will have mercy on them; but it is for their sakes first that He tries them, and then for the sake of others. Abraham and Job suffered not for themselves only, but for all ages. Besides God brings to light much of good and of evil in His children by means of trial. It is in this school that patience gets her perfect work; in such soil only can resignation fragrantly bloom. No faith is perfect which cannot sacrifice its best to God without a murmur. No more precious gift did any father ever receive from God than that Isaac, and by nothing else could any father make such proof of his perfect trust, perfect love, and perfect submission, as by this unhesitating surrender. What a lesson here for all Christian parents when called to bury their beloved children. "The Lord gave, and the Lord taketh away, blessed be the name of the Lord." "Heaven gives us friends to bless the present scene, A difficulty attends the divine command; how could God command the sacrifice of Isaac, when He Himself has proclaimed the sacredness of human life? Besides would not such a command stand in favour of human sacrifice? Some seek a way out of the difficulty by assuming that Abraham was somewhat bewildered in his own mind whether or not he might offer human life in sacrifice, and that he mistook the meaning of the divine command. But if we receive Gen. xxii. 2 as correct, and there is no reason why we should not, the words are too plain and simple for Abraham to mistake their meaning, and such a view dwarfs the terrible solemnity of the case into a trivial matter. But we are told, "By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead." No, whatever may be the solution of the difficulty in Abraham's mind, by his action everything was terribly and sublimely real, even to the lifting up of the knife to slay the fettered lad. "He offered him up" completely, so far as his faith, obedience, and resignation were concerned. That which the soul reverently, with solemn determination intends to do for God, He often accepts as already done. What, then, shall we say of the divine command? Let it be enough just now to say that the Judge of all the earth cannot but do right; though the reasons of His procedure are often too deep and too high for human penetration, yet "All the divine conduct is equitable, regulated by rectitude, and everything is directed by a judgment that cannot err.' The whole work of faith is as vast as the kingdoms of providence and grace in which God works, and so is immensely greater than that one act of faith which unites the soul to Christ for salvation. Faith trusts because it cannot trace; to know and understand all the secrets and reasons of God's ways, would destroy its province altogether. "Where reason fails with all her powers, The spirit of Abraham's action on Moriah was self-sacrifice. The doctrine of self-sacrifice to God underlies the sacrifice of Christ for us. He died that they who live should live unto Him who died for them, and "present themselves a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, a reasonable service." God justly claims the whole of our being; but this is what sin and selfishness in man refuse to render. Even redeemed souls learn slowly that "they are not their own, being bought with a price." Now how can this sacrifice of self be made? Its deepest, most absolute accomplishment, is in the complete surrender of the will at the feet of God. Self is completely crucified when the will is fully blended with God's will. Time, talents, health, money, children, friends, are all surrendered when the soul can take its stand with Jesus under the shadow of Moriah and say, "Father, not my will, but Thine be done." Thus did Abraham illustrate by an act of self-sacrifice that faith which was to be a beacon for all the ages. Let no one think that the father in offering the lad spared himself, far from it. The calmness of his spirit was not stoical indifference. To have died for the lad might have been easier than to slay him. For many years he had lived *Robert Hall. upon the promise of him; now that he has him he looks for the fulfilment of another and greater promise through him-for Him by whom salvation should come, in whom all people should be blessed. Not only natural parental affection is to be burnt in sacrifice upon the altar, but all his great spiritual but undefined hopes also; for if dimly, yet certainly, he saw more than natural blessings in Isaac. Was it the memory of Moriah which suggested the beautiful lines of Charlotte Elliott? "If Thou should'st call me to resign It would be well could we always remember this when pensively we tread the way to Moriah ourselves. This is both a money making and a money giving age. Never perhaps was so much given for religious and benevolent purposes; yet once, in Pentecostal days, the spirit of sacrifice in giving was much greater. Then estates were sold that the price might be cast into the "Lord's Treasury." Now estates are purchased, and collossal fortunes are piled up. There may be no divine precept that the Pentecostal example should be literally followed through the ages, but put money in the place of Isaac, and every accumulator in the place of Abraham, and think what would be the effect in the work of self-sacrifice on every money thrifter if God were to "tempt" him, saying, Take now thy money, thy hoarded money which thou lovest, and get thee into the land of consecration, among the mountains of sin, of helpless sorrow, of soul desolating heathenism, of gospel activity, and offer it there for a love-offering, and an expression of self-sacrifice at the cross. How many hearts would be broken? not in submission and trustful obedience, but in agonizing passion! To ask some professors for money in the name of the Lord is like bleeding them at the heart. How unlike to Abraham as he surrendered his beloved child! Covetousness is not confined to the rich; in all classes each may be the victim of its baleful bite; and each will only obtain perfect victory over it as he comes to some Moriah, and in complete self-sacrifice, lays himself and all he has upon the altar, and inscribes "Jehovah Jireh" upon his banner. With the disciples we need to say, "Lord, increase our faith." The children of Ananias and Sapphira, seeking the honour, but keeping back half the price may yet be frequently met with; and there are also many who imitate the Abraham at Moriah-but the number of such is small compared with obligations resting upon us. If the spirit of Abraham were common in the churches, would the President of the Baptist Union have read that paper at Leeds, calling on wealthy sons. to consecrate themselves to the ministry? Would Mr. Baynes have needed to read his paper of sad suggestive statistics on mission work? Or the Editor of this "Magazine" to have written that earnest appeal on Mission Finances in the Nov. No., 1879, p. 457? Perhaps not! Puritanism in the Eighteenth Century. OUR excellent contemporary, the Freeman, has conferred upon our Magazine the double honour of a brief quotation and a most interesting criticism. The quotation consists of a portion of a sentence from the article on "Sunday Schools and Modern England." The entire sentence runs thus: "No doubt, England, as we see it to-day, is the product of all the past, of the England of Alfred, and Elizabeth, and William of Orange, as well as of the Georges; for the life of a nation is a grand unity in spite of all its breaks and changes; [but the evidence is complete that the England of 1880 owes its characteristic qualities and forces to a large influx of new power within the first sixty or seventy years of the last century.] Modern England is, in short, the result of a Regeneration; it is a new creature,' born again, not of the flesh, but by the Spirit of a Great Evangelical Revival." The Freeman gives its readers that portion of the above which we have placed within brackets: that is to say, omits the qualifying portions of the statement, and then says, as it stands, and without the needful qualifications, we feel it incumbent upon us to question this statement." Exactly. Remove a man's hat from his head, and his coat from his back; strip him of his "qualifying" garments, and then object to him that he has violated good manners in appearing in the streets without them! 66 But let that pass. The more important considerations spring out of the criticism. The Freeman maintains that "modern England had its origin in a richer soil than that of the eighteenth century. The root is to be found in the same epoch of our national history which witnessed the sailing of the Pilgrims for New England. The grand initial movement of modern society is pictured in such books as Carlyle's 'Cromwell' and Masson's 'Milton,' in the writings of the great leaders of the Scottish Reformation, such as Knox, Buchanan, and Guthrie, and in the story of the Scottish Covenanters. . . . . This was the Age of Faith which set in motion the new forces which are blessing our country and the world to-day." On this we submit two or three considerations. (1.) Is it not clear that "the characteristic qualities and forces" of the England of 1880 are not of the same type as those of the noble Puritan era? Puritanism was a grand soul-inspiring enthusiasm for divinity. Nineteenth century England is sharply marked off from preceding eras by a deep and intense enthusiasm for humanity. Puritanism was an open vision of God in His glory and majesty and indefeasible authority. It is the lament of many in our day that the divine authority is obscured by a gospel of "universal indulgence" and of weak sentimentalism. Then, God was a sovereign King; now He is a "convenience." For these severe and self-denying heroes the Bible was all in all, the judge that ends every strife, holding within its covers all the wisdom and help men need. Are not we perpetually decrying our age because it lacks this very confidence, and only believes in the Bible when it is backed by other authorities? The activities of 1580-1660 were intensely religious and theological. "The whole nation became a church." Those of 1760-1880 are predominantly social and humanitarian. |