 |  |
gathered as described. Yet in each case the meaning is nothing more than `want'. Did
the Lord, many a time, merely express a wish to gather Jerusalem's children, while the
inhabitants deliberately WILLED not? Or suppose that we read it thus, `How many times
do I WILL to assemble your children . . . . .' (Matt. 23: 37). If the Lord did so WILL,
did He fail? Was He frustrated?
But how could the Lord have willed to gather together these children at that time, in
view of the facts He made known just about that time contained in ch.21 of Luke? In that
chapter He details certain events which even now are still in the future (verses 10 & 11).
Then, from verse 12 to verse 24 are many events which were to come `before all these'
things stated in verses 10 and 11. We might say, Yes, 1900 years before them at least.
All the events from verse 12 to the middle of verse 24 pertain to the first century, and
have been fulfilled. Then in verse 24 (middle) we have the period between the
destruction of the city and the present. `And Jerusalem will be (a City) trodden by (hupo,
UNDER-by) Gentiles until what time may be fulfilled seasons of Gentiles'. This cuts out
any hope of a Hebrew Kingdom in the first century. We cannot place the events of
verses 12 to 24 anywhere but in the first century, and these events were impending,
inevitably, over the Nation during the whole period of the Acts of the Apostles.
Therefore the Lord never willed to gather Israel at that time. But the time is coming
when He shall will to accomplish what He has always wanted to do. And Israel shall
then both will and want to be His true children, for they shall enter upon the life of the
ages.
Could we say that the Scribes and Pharisees willed to see a sign, or merely wanted to
see one? (Matt. 12: 38). Mark helps us by telling us that they were seeking a sign
(Mark 8: 11).
When the disciples were being tortured by a hurricane, while trying to row across the
lake (John 6: 21), Jesus approached them, and according to the A.V. `they willingly
received Him into the ship'. The R.V. says `they were willing therefore to receive Him
into the boat'. These statements, however, might almost imply that the disciples were
conceding something, or obliging the Lord. There was more than mere willingness. The
C.5: shews the proper sense. `They wanted, then, to take Him into the ship'. Perhaps
they felt that with a Man on board who could walk on the lake during such a storm, they
would be safe.
Both the A.V. and C.5: say that Pilate was willing to release Jesus (Luke 23: 20).
The R.V. says he was desiring to do so. But the proper sense is that Pilate was wanting to
release Him. Pilate, however, was overruled by the mob.
The wind bloweth where it listeth (John 3: 8), but did you ever know that the wind
had a will of its own? And a will that is very erratic and fickle? But why not render
literally, `The Spirit--just where He is wanting (thelei) is blowing (for spiriting), and
His voice thou art hearing'. It would be very strange if the wind had almost unlimited
free-will, while human beings had next to none. Was there not a time when God's spirit
blew strangely upon us, for the first time, and we heard His voice? And does He not still
blow upon us daily and stir us?
We now approach the noun form (thelema, will), so often used of God, occurring over
60 times in the N.T. Strange to say, just as the Hebrew word olam, when used of God,
was always rendered by a word expressive of eternity, but when used of human beings,
was translated by a term expressing very limited duration, so this noun is almost
invariably rendered by `will'. No one hitherto, it would appear, has had the temerity to
suggest that the real meaning is merely what God wants. We have been trained to regard
God's will as a fiat, fixed and firm and final; something inevitable and inflexible,
ineludible and ineluctable.
And there are some who would tell us that everything which happens is God's will,
even things which God does not want.
Let us, then, test this doctrine, as the matter is of vast importance.