ISRAEL—HOW THE GATES OF HIS ENEMIES ARE TO BE GIVEN HIM—BY THIS SIGN LOST ISRAEL MAY BE KNOWN—THE GIVING WILL CORRESPOND TO THE MULTIPLYING—THE PROMISE, IN THIS DAY, IS RAPIDLY FULFILLING—ENGLAND, DISRAELI AND “TANCRED,” AND RUSSIA.

“That in blessing I will bless thee; and in multiplying, I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies.”—Gen. xxii. 17.

Under a Divine oath was this prophetic promise made to Abraham. At the time it was given Abraham had, by command, offered his only son Isaac, which offering, to all human appearance, would leave the old patriarch again childless; but his faith staggered not, for human incompetence does not circumscribe the bounds of Divine sufficience. The God who commanded Abraham to offer, recalled the command at a certain stage of the fulfilment, counting the faith of Abraham for righteousness. In Abraham’s faith Isaac was really sacrificed; hence the Divine approval: “By Myself have I sworn, saith the Lord; for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, that in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies.” An oath with men in this day does not mean much in the way of confirmation, but not so with God’s oath. An oath ought to be sacred, and should be the end of doubt and strife. God made a promise to Abraham, and because He could swear by no greater, He sware by Himself. And Abraham lived to see the promise begin to fulfil, and to-day the heirs of Abraham may look and see the same promise fulfilling, for, as Paul says in Heb. vi. 17: “Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath.”

Who are the heirs of promise? For to them belong many and precious promises, both spiritual and temporal. Spiritually, they are to lead and be responsible for the evangelisation of the world. Temporally, they are to be a numerous seed, a powerful people. They are to occupy the ends of the earth, the uttermost parts of the earth, the coasts of the earth, the waste and the desolate places of the earth, the isles of the sea, the heathen, as an inheritance. They are to inherit the Gentiles, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited; they are to be the chief of nations; they are to be a company of nations; they are to be a great people; they are to possess the gates of their enemies. Surely such a people should be found, for all these things make it impossible for them to be hid in a corner. One cannot help saying with the Psalmist: “Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord; and the people whom He hath chosen for His own inheritance.”

In the English Court of Chancery are vast sums of money, large fortunes waiting for heirs. The court frequently advertises for them, and many in every land respond and are eager to prove their claims; they are anxious to be known and accepted as the descendants and lawful heirs of certain testators. It is oftentimes difficult to establish their claims and prove satisfactorily their identity. The court demands that the evidences of heirship be very definite. In this they are right. But we venture to say that even the English Court of Chancery would not turn away a claimant who had all the distinct marks and abounding evidence of identity that mark and characterise the children of Abraham, especially so in the latter day, for then these characteristics are to be clearer and fuller.

The Jews are known; they have been known all down the centuries; they have not been able to hide themselves. In keeping with the Word of God they have fulfilled up to the present time the prophecies attaching to them. In all the world they are estimated to number some nine millions. The Jews include the children of Judah and Levi; these Two Tribes only. The Jews themselves consent to this statement, and allow that the descendants of Reuben, Simeon, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Joseph, and Benjamin, are lost, but not extinct. They are in the world, for God has not cast away His people for ever. If the Two Tribes give us nine millions, how many should we expect the Ten Tribes to furnish? Most certainly not less than forty-five millions. To the Ten Tribes the special promises of fruitfulness were given. To the Ten Tribes belong a greater portion of prophecy; and in the history of the world more is allotted to Israel than to Judah. Indeed, the world’s history pivots on the Ten Lost Tribes.

I believe you know the God-revealed distinction between the words Israel and Judah. You know that they have a distinct history. Their place and work, promises and blessings, chastisements and rebukes, are as distinct and different as silver and gold.

The spiritual heirs of Abraham are all who are embraced in the saving and atoning covenant of grace in Christ. I do not say all who believe, for there will be more in heaven without faith than those with—namely, all those who have died before the years of responsibility, with many of the Pagan world who, never having heard of a Saviour, have therefore never denied Him. In a spiritual sense, they are children. I believe in this matter with Paul, who says, when writing to the Romans, chap. ii.: “There is no respect of persons with God; for as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves; which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing, or else excusing one another.” Thus, under the law which governs the Pagan, I presume many will be saved and many lost, just as under the law of the Gospel. In Abraham all nations were to be blessed, spiritually. In this sense Abraham’s seed embraces persons of every age, clime, and race.

But who are the seed of Abraham according to the flesh? We answer, the descendants of the Twelve Tribes. Now to the natural seed the Bible assigns a distinct work and place. This natural seed is divided in the Bible, the word Israel standing generally for the Ten Tribes, and Judah for Two Tribes. These divisions have separate paths appointed them to walk in through the centuries. “All the House of Israel wholly,” “the whole House of Israel,” “all the House of Israel,” have a special work. The Ten Tribes are especially called in the Scriptures the seed of Abraham. Sometimes “My chosen,” again “Mine inheritance,” and “My servant.” God, in referring to them in their scattered state, and of His gathering them together, says (Isa. xli. 8): “But thou, Israel, art My servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen; the seed of Abraham My friend—thou whom I have taken from the ends of the earth, and called thee from the chief men thereof, and said unto thee, Thou art My servant; I have chosen thee and not cast thee away.” The Ten Tribes are sometimes designated by the word Jacob. If we once get a clear idea who the seed are, then we can search among the people of the earth to find them, because in the latter day they were to be so different from other people, and distinctly marked, we will have no great difficulty in finding them. Of the special marks, one was they were to possess the gates of their enemies. The multitudinous seed and other characteristics we will pass by for the present.

This seed were to possess the gates of their enemies; of this we are assured by the oath of God. The word gate here, you will admit, is used in a generic sense. It means a place of prominence, a position of strength, a strategetic point, as the entrance into a city. Remembering that in olden times the cities were walled around, the gate was an important point of defence; or, as the narrow entrance into a bay, like the entrance into New York Bay or port, the Narrows we call them. Here the cities of New York and Brooklyn could best and first be defended. Again, a gate in the general vernacular means any stronghold: a tower, an island, a mountain pass. Now, of this seed it is plainly stated that they shall possess the gates of their enemies.

The text would be very finely illustrated if we supposed that Mexico held Governor’s Island, in the middle of our bay, and defiantly dictated to us doctrines of trade, politics, and religion. As arrogant and as impudent as this would seem, yet such is the case with this seed of Abraham and other nations. Believing that the Saxon race are the Ten Lost Tribes, it then follows that the English nation is the chief representative of these Tribes, and that they should be in possession of the gates of their enemies. Are they? We answer, yes. And every year confirms and makes more clear the answer. This you say is a theory. Grant it. You know that in science a theory is formed and then applied. If you form a theory about the tides or formation of the planets, or this world, your theory with others is applied to known facts to see if it will fit them, to see if it will account for them, and to see if it is in harmony with the same. Now science accepts that theory which applies best, that which accounts for facts the most reasonably, and harmonises the most naturally. Such theory is then the science of the day, and will be so accepted and so taught until it is supplanted by a better. Try, then, the theory I have advanced by these rules.

Take the Islands of Jersey and Guernsey in the English Channel, between England and France, nearer to the French shore than England; the inhabitants, being a majority of them French, speaking French. Yet when France was England’s greatest and most dangerous enemy, England held then, as now, the gates of her enemies. Properly speaking, and adjudged by any human rule, they belong to France—as naturally as the island of Heligoland, at the month of the Elbe, belongs to Germany. Gibraltar, Malta, Cyprus, Suez Canal, Island of Perim in the Straits of Babelmandeb in the Red Sea, and Socotra, in the same sea; also Aden in the Red Sea, covering Arabia; Peshawur, the very entrance of or from India into Afghanistan. In and around the vast empire of India you have Bombay, Calcutta, Madras, with many similar strongholds; Rangoon, on the Irawady river, commanding and even menacing Burmah. The vast empire of China is carefully guarded and held in check by such gates as Singapore, Malacca, Penang, Hong Kong and Cowloon. Sarawak in Borneo, and Labuan off the coasts, are such gates. Africa is being gradually gobbled up; her strongholds and vast areas of country are falling into the hands of England; the coasts are fast coming under British rule. Recently England has come into possession of three gates—namely, the island of Socotra, near the Red Sea, the island of Cyprus in the Mediterranean, and the Sublime Porte, the lofty gateway, Constantinople. And it is now rumoured that England is negotiating with Portugal for Delogoa Bay in South-eastern Africa; price, three million dollars. But this people are not satisfied with all these gates. They want—and they will get what they want in a very short time, thank Heaven; not what they deserve!—they want the famous Khyber Pass. This pass is a narrow road between mountain rocks that rise over two thousand feet at the lowest point. It is some twenty-eight miles long, while for twenty-two miles the average width is only 150 feet. The Eastern end the English already hold, called the Peshawur Pass.

Afghanistan is a country in Asia. It is about the size of England, 460 miles from North to South, and 430 from East to West. On the North it is bounded by Turkestan, East by India, South by Beloochistan, and West by Persia. The population numbers about 7,000,000. They are as wild as the country is broken and irregular. They are chiefly agriculturists. The country is rich in minerals and timber. In time past they have seldom been at peace, being very generally at war among themselves. Afghan is a Persian word, and means that which is wrapped around—no doubt having reference to the mountain chain that hems in the whole land. The people themselves, however, name their country Vilayet, which means the land of our ancestors. They claim that in their country lived Adam and his children, also Noah and his. They say they had in their possession once the ark of the covenant, but they have lost it. While it was with them, if they took it into battle, victory was sure to be theirs. At the present time they have Noah’s ark. It is embedded in the ground, with a portion protruding out, which pilgrims to the top of Dera Ismael Khan—that is, the sacred mountain of Israel—are permitted to see and touch. Many have supposed the Afghans to be the Ten Lost Tribes. It has been the folly of many of the learned, in time past, to hunt for, and actually expect to find, the chosen of God in some out-of-the-way place; to find them few, poor, and deluded—the poorer, the fewer, and the more wretched, the better. Hence, the wild Indians of the continent, the bushmen of Africa, the aborigines of Australia, the Laplanders of the North, and many such have been chosen of men—though not of God.

The Afghan country, no doubt, once had intercourse with Palestine. During Solomon’s reign many Jews left the land as merchants. Solomon built store cities in Hamath, Tadmor in the wilderness, and many others. These store cities were on the great highway which he made through the desert, so as to bring the trade of Dedan and Sheba to Jerusalem. That Hebrew names are given to the mountains, places, rivers, and persons, no one can deny; but such does not prove them to be the Lost Tribes—it shows away back Jewish influence and intercourse. They do not speak the Hebrew, but two languages called the Pukhtu and Pushtu. In either language there are few, if any, traces of the Hebrew. No doubt the Lost Tribes, after being scattered into Central Asia, when taken captive about 725 b.c., wandered, some of them into Afghan, and probably for a time settled there, and gave names to the country. The Afghans themselves went into the country from India, and as the Tribes moved Westward they left the Afghans in possession.

The Afghan country comes now into great importance because it is on the highway of the march of Israelitish civilisation and progress. England wants it; and I predict she shall get it. Russia wants it, and at present seems to have the upper hand; but Russia or England, or the world, can avail nothing against the purposes of Jehovah. The gates are promised to Israel, therefore she will get them. The English have already an army of 35,000 men in the Peshawur Valley. Russia is gathering a force, and ere long the two countries will be brought face to face. The end of the whole muddle will be that England will take charge of Afghan. Thirty-three years ago Disraeli wrote his novel called “Tancred.” In this novel he makes the Queen of England the Empress of India, and one of her favourite officers is made Earl Beaconsfield; so far fancy has become fact. But in that same novel the future of the present strife has been set forth. It has been very finely put by the London Spectator:—

“There is a story going about, founded, we believe, on good authority, that when some one quoted ‘Tancred,’ two or three months ago, in Lord Beaconsfield’s presence, the Prime Minister remarked: ‘Ah! I perceive you have been reading “Tancred.” That is a work to which I refer more and more every year—not for amusement, but for instruction.’ And if anyone will take the trouble just now to refresh his memory of ‘Tancred,’ he will see how much Lord Beaconsfield has borrowed from it in relation to his policy. Turn, for instance, to this passage: ‘If I were an Arab in race as well as in religion,’ said Tancred, ‘I would not pass my life in schemes to govern mere mountain tribes.’ ‘I’ll tell you,’ said the Emir, springing from his divan, and flinging the tube of his nargileh to the other end of the tent, ‘the game is in our own hands if we have energy. There is a combination which would entirely change the whole face of the world and bring back empire to the East. Though you are not the brother to the Queen of the English, you are, nevertheless, a great English prince, and the Queen will listen to what you say, especially if you talk to her as you talk to me, and say such fine things in such a beautiful voice. Nobody ever opened my mind like you. You will magnetise the Queen as you have magnetised me. Go back to England and arrange this. You see, gloss over it as they may, one thing is clear, it is finished with England . . . Let the Queen of the English collect a great fleet, let her stow away all her treasure, bullion, plate, and precious arms; be accompanied by all her court and chief people, and transfer the seat of her empire from London to Delhi. There she will find an immense empire ready-made, a first-rate army, and a large revenue. In the meantime I will arrange with Mehemet Ali. He shall have Bagdad and Mesopotamia, and pour the Bedouin cavalry into Persia. I will take care of Syria and Asia Minor. The only way to manage the Afghans is by Persia and by the Arabs. We will acknowledge the Empress of India as our suzerain, and secure for her the Levantine coast. If she like, she shall have Alexandria, as she now has Malta. It could be arranged. Your Queen is young. She has an avenir. Aberdeen and Sir Robert Peel will never give her this advice; their habits are formed. They are too old, two ruses. But you see! the greatest empire that ever existed; besides which she gets rid of the embarrassment of her chambers! and quite practicable! For the only difficult part, the conquest of India, which baffled Alexander, is all done.’ Who can avoid seeing that Lord Beaconsfield has been quite recently referring to this passage—‘not,’ as he said, ‘for amusement, but for instruction?’ These are all the ideas of his recent policy in germ—especially the treatment of the British Empire as having its centre of gravity in the far East—the use of the Indian Army for conquest to be made in Western Asia—the acquisition of the Levantine coast for Great Britain—the active alliance between the British power and the Mohammedan power—and last, not least, the getting rid, to a great extent at least, by the help of Indian leverage, of ‘the embarrassment of the chambers.’ For the last eight months, at least, English policy has evidently been borrowed from ‘Tancred.’ The monarch, for anything we know, has been ‘magnetised.’ The Cabinet assuredly have. Lord Derby and Lord Carnarvon have been treated much as the Emir in ‘Tancred’ would have treated ‘Aberdeen and Sir Robert Peel’—thrown aside as two ‘ruses.’”

England has indeed adopted an Oriental policy, and forward she must go to execute Jehovah’s purpose. Russia is preparing on a gigantic scale. In Prussia the most flourishing branch of trade among the Germans at present is the manufacturing of arms for Russia. Though the late war be over, still Russia is buying ships, and fitting them out in this country. She feels bitterly her defeat through English diplomacy: England taking Cyprus, assuming protection over Asiatic Turkey, and making Russia yield back to Turkey 30,700 geographical miles which was contained in the original Treaty of San Stefano. The following from the Government organ of Russia will give you some idea of her chagrin.

The St. Petersburg Golos says that the Treaty of Berlin has produced an almost crushing impression on the Russian public. “It is felt that Russia has not attained her object; that she has been deceived by her friends, and that she has foolishly helped her enemies with her victories . . . What is the reason of our failure? One-half per cent. of our population have perished in the war, hundreds of millions have been expended, and yet the Eastern Question is not solved and the Treaty of Berlin is merely a truce. The last war has clearly shown all our national peculiarities as well as our moral and material strength . . . All the military requirements which depended on the inbred qualities of the Russian soldier were brilliantly carried out; but where knowledge and preparation were demanded we were not equal to the task. It was probably for this reason that we felt so much hurt on reading of the boldness of Lord Beaconsfield, who doubtless reckoned on the superior culture of Englishmen to that of Russians. All classes of Russian society are responsible for this. We do not estimate culture and knowledge at their true value. Most of us say that mental work does not bring money, and that culture is a means of corruption . . . In Western Europe, on the other hand, people have arrived by hard experience at the conviction that intelligence, capacity, culture, and energy, bring men to the front, and give them peace at home and power abroad. It is the knowledge of how to make the best possible use of their energy and abilities that has enabled the English to derive success from our victories and sacrifices. May this be a lesson to us.”

But enough; one knows the end ere they begin, for the Word of God is true. We do not argue that the English are so much smarter than other people; no, but we account for their success because they are the executive nation of Divine Providence. It falls to the lot of those who do not believe this theory to account for their success without allowing them to be smarter.