enness
(Gal. v. 19-21).
Tertullian draws a striking contrast between Israel, just now baptized
into Moses, but caring more for appetite than for God, and Christ, after
His baptism, also in the desert, fasting forty days. "The Lord
figuratively retorted upon Israel His reproach" (_Baptism_, xx.)
We are not to suppose that but for their complaining God would have
suffered them to hunger, although Moses declared that the reason why
flesh should be given to them in the evening, and in the morning bread
to the full, is "for that the Lord heareth your murmurings." But there
would have been some difference in the time of the grant, to ripen their
faith, some more direct manifestation of His grace, to reward their
patience, if unbelief had not precipitated His design. Thus the
disciples, when they awakened Jesus in the storm, received the rescue
for which they clamoured, but forfeited some higher experience which
would have crowned a serener confidence: "Wherefore did ye doubt?"
Israel receives what is best in the circumstances, rather than the ideal
best, now made unsuitable by their impatience and infidelity. But while
the Lord discontinued the test of need and penury, which had proved to
be too severe a discipline, He substituted the test of fulness. For we
read that the removal of their suspense and anxiety by the gift of manna
from heaven was "to prove them whether they will walk in My laws or no"
(ver. 4). And in so doing it was seen that worldly and unthankful
natures are not to be satisfied; that the disloyal at heart will
complain, however favoured. For "the children of Israel wept again and
said, Who will give us flesh to eat? We remember the fish which we did
eat in Egypt for nought, the cucumbers and the melons and the leeks and
the onions and the garlick: but now our soul is dried away; there is
nothing at all: we have nought save this manna to look to" (Num. xi.
4-6). Onions and garlick were more satisfactory to gross appetites than
angels' food.
At this point we learn that what is called prosperity may indeed be a
result of spiritual failure; that God may sometimes abstain from strong
measures with a soul because what ought to mould would only crush; and
may grant them their hearts' lust, yet send leanness withal into their
souls. Perhaps we are allowed to be comfortable because we are unfit to
be heroic.
And we also learn, when prosperous, to remember that plenty, equally
with want, has its moral aspect
|