The Great Commission. Miscellaneous Writings of C. H. Mackintosh, vol. IV

by Charles Henry Mackintosh

[4] We have no record of Peter's first meeting with his Lord, after the resurrection.

[5] In many of the Old Testament narratives, however, the instruction is so manifestly typical that even the most cautious reader, if at all familiar with Scripture, cannot refuse to look at it in that point of view.

[6] The reader will, of course, bear in mind that what is stated about Levi in this paper is to be regarded as typical of that which the believer now knows in reality through the Holy Ghost.

[7] It may be well just to observe here that in considering the offerings above referred to I have merely looked at them with reference to the question of Levi's history.

[8] We may also observe, in the act of cutting the offering into his pieces, this important truth, that in whatever relationship of life we contemplate the Lord Jesus, we find the same unsullied perfection; whether we consider Him as a public or as a private character, in one position or another, all is alike. Not so with man—here there must be failure in one way or another. If a man is a good public character, he may be the very plague of the family circle, and vice versa. And, surely, in all this we learn the glorious truth which shall shortly be owned by all created intelligences, that "He alone is worthy."

[9] I would observe here that in speaking of "the imputation of righteousness," I by no means desire to be understood as giving any countenance to the prevailing theory of "the imputed righteousness of Christ." Of this expression, so much in use in the theology of the present day, it would be sufficient to say that it is nowhere to be found in the oracles of God. I read of "the righteousness of God" (Rom. iii. passim), and, moreover, of the imputation of righteousness (Rom. iv. 11), but never of "the righteousness of Christ." It is true, we read of the Lord Jesus being "made of God unto us righteousness" (Jer. xxiii. 6), but these passages do not support the above theory. I would further add that the moral effect of this idea will be found to be decidedly pernicious, because it of necessity supposes the believer as standing apart from the Lord Jesus, whereas the doctrine of Scripture is that the believer is "made the righteousness of God in Him" (2 Cor. v. 21). And again, "we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ" (1 Jno. v. 20).

[10] It is worthy the serious attention of the Christian reader who may desire the unity of the Church, that the tribe of Levi in the desert was a truly striking example of what may be termed "unity in diversity." Gershon was in one sense totally different from Merari, and Merari was totally different from Kohath; and yet Gershon, Merari and Kohath were one: they should not, therefore, contend about their service, because they were one; nor yet would it have been right to confound their services, because they were totally different. Thus, attention to unity would have saved them from contention, and attention to diversity would have saved them from confusion. In a word, all things could only be "done decently and in order" by a due attention to the fact of there being "unity in diversity."

[11] I say "one of the ends," for we should ever remember that the grand object before the divine mind in redemption is to show in the ages to come His kindness towards us through Christ Jesus; and this object will be secured even though our poor puny services had never been heard of.

[12] It would surely be of all importance in this day, when so many are declining from the narrow path of obedience to the written Word, and entering upon the wide and bewildering field of human tradition, to bear in mind that the Levite, when carrying the tabernacle through the desert, found no support nor guide from beneath; no, the grace in which he stood was his sole support, and the pillar above his sole guide. It would have been miserable indeed had he been left to find a guide in the footmarks on the sand, which would change at every wind that blew. But all the sand did for him was to add to his labor and toil while he endeavored to follow the heavenly guide above his head.

[13] It has been well observed that in the tabernacle God was seen bringing all His glory into immediate connection with the sand of the desert: and when the high priest went into the holy place, he found himself in the very presence of that glory, with his feet upon the sand of the desert likewise. In the temple, however, this was not the case, for the floor of the house was overlaid with gold (1 Kings vi. 30).