 |  |
and "deliver" (Heb. 2: 14, 15). Finally, the Apostle does not say in verse sixteen that in
passing by the angels He took on Him the seed of ADAM, but that He took on Him the
seed of ABRAHAM (Heb. 2: 16).
If the Saviour took not on Him the seed of Adam, then we Gentiles have no
Redeemer, but we know that this is not so. Why then does the writer of this epistle limit
the seed to that of Abraham? The same answer that we give to the apparent limitation in
the genealogy of Matt. 1: 1, will suffice here also. The presence of the genealogy of
Luke 3: which goes beyond Abraham to Adam, prevents any real limitation being read
into Matt. 1: 1, the answer to the problem being that the purpose of Matthew was fully
served by establishing the fact that the Saviour was the "Son of Abraham", but that this
did not deny or exclude the fact that He was also the Son of Man in the fullest sense, even
as he is "the Second Man" and "the last Adam". This limitation in Heb. 2: 16, however,
is of extreme importance in this sense, it suggests that what happens of Israel may be
looked upon as an epitome, a miniature, of that which befalls the race, and we discover
that where sometimes the teaching of Scripture concerning the race may not be very
explicit, it becomes so when the analogy of faith realizes the place that Israel occupy in
the revelation of truth.
The rule and dominion of angels as related to Israel is limited to Sinai in Heb. 2: 1-3,
but it points back to a dominion that angels exercised before the "foundation (or
overthrow) of the world". This principle of interpretation can be seen at work in the
epistle to the Romans. In Rom. 5: 12 the Apostle goes back to Adam and the
eighth chapter which speaks not of Israel, but of creation itself that shall be delivered
(Rom. 8: 20, 21), continues the theme. With the opening of Rom. 9:, however, Israel
dominate the argument to the end of chapter 11: It may not be possible to put one's
finger on any one text and say "that verse defines who are in Adam", but the analogy of
Israel's calling makes it very clear who are meant by "all in Adam".
For example, we can quote Rom. 11:, and maintain that "ALL" Israel shall be saved,
and if no reference is made to the teaching of Rom. 9:, we may feel convinced that "all
means all" and that this passage is universal in its embrace. The eleventh chapter
however is preceded by the ninth, and there we are left in no doubt as to the extent of "all
Israel".
(1)
They are not all Israel who are of Israel.
(2)
Merely to prove descent from Abraham is not sufficient.
(3)
The seed are called only in Isaac.
(4)
That is to say, the children of the flesh are not the children of God, but the children of the
promise, these are "counted from the seed" (Rom. 9: 6-9).
Therefore when we read "all Israel shall be saved", it does not refer to the mere
physical descendants of Abraham, for if it did, Ishmael would be included; it refers to a
promise and reckoning, which later is revealed to be an "election", an election which
reckoned Jacob as the seed but excluded Esau. This principle, namely the fact that Israel
presents the purpose of the ages in miniature, can be seen in the construction of the book
of Genesis.