the publication of your conclusions on this subject marked a turning point for me, for

which you are partly responsible.

According to your view of the Word, Satan's great attack was against the

manifestation of the One Body, in other words, the assembly position as recorded in the

Acts and I Corinthians. You have had the church on earth so much in your mind that

the heavenly reality has become dim (pardon any appearance of rudeness I seek grace to

exercise true meekness*) and you would in other points condemn the method of

interpretation you have adopted in this.

Paul's conflict was related to the heavenlies, which cannot be interpreted of the

assembly on earth. Satanic power was leveled against the saints who like Paul were

constrained to leave Judaizing Christians, even though they were Apostles, and who

boldly proclaimed the truth of the One Body and the heavenly calling. Here the article

referred to assumes in my estimation its significant and awful position. Satan saw that

we were beginning to appreciate these blessed truths. Ephesians was being studied and

he must seek at all costs to prevent that long buried truth, the teaching that is summed up

in the words `In the heavenlies in Christ' from being proclaimed--and so you suddenly

framed the proposition `A Body is something visible', logic then compelled you to

continue `No visible Body is on earth now, therefore the Body does not exist'. You faced

the problem, came to the conclusion, brought the study of Ephesians to a close, and since

then your teaching and exhortation has been based upon Acts 2, &100:, the typical

character of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah as applied to church conditions, and the

special teaching for the present period has been allowed to fall into the background, the

Apostle's great argument `See what you are in Christ, and walk accordingly' has given

place to precepts and commandments, a tendency to look within, and so Satan's object

was attained. You have of late insisted upon Matt. 5-7; bear with me when I draw your

attention to the fact that whereas Matt. 6 says `forgive us, as we forgive' Ephesians says

`forgive because you are forgiven'. My own dear father has voiced something of this

same feeling. Walking to the meeting he said to me: `I sometimes feel in the week with

its worry and distress, that I yearn to hear something of what the Lord has done for me. I

hear much of what I ought to do, but how empty it all seems!'  II Cor. 3 says:

`Beholding the glory of the Lord we are transfigured' the Lord's people being in Christ,

there is a new creature. Seeing things through other men's spectacles I have in time past

used the epithets `Jewish' or `Ultra-dispensational' when speaking of the work of others.

Upon more careful study I feel that we can see Satan at work again. In the movement of

1840, the blessed truth of the standing and calling of the Church was re-discovered, and

for a time J.N.D. and those with him saw the distinction and emphasized it, but made

some unwise and far-fetched statements. B.W.N. saw the tendency and went to the other

extreme and practically denied the peculiar element that characterizes the epistle of

Paul*. What do we really find. Malachi is not the end of inspired Jewish history, neither

is Matthew. Inspired Jewish history reaches to the last chapter of the Acts, there the

nation of Israel is recognized as such, blessing is promised to them upon repentance, and

Gentiles blessed through them. Rom. 15 opened my eyes to this, and if we perceive the

truth of Rom. 15:8, why should we use the epithet `ultra' of those who apply this

teaching to the gospel that contains it? That gospel teaches that Christ came as the

Messiah. His opening proclamation is concerning the kingdom. He gave its laws, and

He was, as king, rejected. After His ascension the final testimony was given to Israel

accompanied by signs and wonders. Every accompaniment of Pentecost was Millennial,

the preaching was purposely addressed to Israel, and the promise was made of the return