In scripture, the term “in Christ” in its full signification as regards saints, is used in a double way.
First, as regards our position and condition in Christ, the risen Man, Firstborn from the dead, the beginning of the creation of God.
Secondly, as Head of His body, the church. And both these uses or significations put us into heaven in title and enjoyment, and give us our present place of privilege before God.
The first looks at us as individuals, in a common life by the Spirit, though associated with others; the second as in a corporate condition, and linked to the Head; the first is specifically the new man, and dates from the resurrection morning, when Christ appeared in the midst of His disciples and breathed on them, communicating His own risen life in the Holy Ghost {John 20:2222And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: (John 20:22)}. This was not conversion or the new nature, which they were partakers of already; nor was it union by the Holy Ghost in one body, but Christ as the risen corn of wheat {John 12:2424Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. (John 12:24)}, bringing them into all that in which He then stood, as man before God and as Son of the Father, the Firstborn among many brethren. It is evident that when He says, “My God and your God” {John 20:1717Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17)}, He speaks as man, and gives them the same place which He has in righteousness, life and blessing in the presence of God and in nearness to Him; and though the Holy Ghost had to be given as power {Luke 24:4949And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high. (Luke 24:49); Acts 2}, and in distinct personality, in order to bring out this place of privilege in its distinctness and fullness, yet it is important to see that this new and risen life and new creation-place date from this point, or the new man will not be clearly apprehended, nor the privileges connected with it, and in association with Christ as the risen corn of wheat either.
This figure {John 12:2424Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. (John 12:24)} evidently represents Christ as man, including within Himself in resurrection, those that are so linked with Him in this new life. He had said, “Yet a little while and the world seeth me no more, but ye see me because I live ye shall live also,” which is an evident indication this new character of life would be in an abiding connection with Himself, flowing from, and continuous with His own. This He now fulfils. Of all the actions of our blessed Lord, when manifest here in flesh, this seems to be the most precious, tender, and significant. He had often touched them before (Matt. 14:31; 17:731And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? (Matthew 14:31)
7And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid. (Matthew 17:7); 1 John 1:11That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life; (1 John 1:1)), and John had even rested in His bosom, but never had there been anything so sweet and tender as this breathing into them (¦<,NLF0F,) {John 20:2222And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: (John 20:22)}, and giving His own life in the power of the Holy Ghost, as the “Spirit of life in Christ Jesus” {Rom. 8:22For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:2)}. Only in this way could we be “in Him and He in us,” and share His thoughts and feelings in the sympathy of a common life, enjoying thus what He is, and having the capacity also for enjoying what He enjoys, in a way that far surpasses the nearest of human ties relationships, or kindred nature. But for this, even the full blessedness of the words “My Father and your Father, my God and your God” {John 20:1717Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17)}, would not be fully understood or realized. If these words convey a sense of heavenly title, and of the intimacy of His relationship with the Father, this act introduces into the depth and reality of the whole, in a way which could not otherwise have been known.
“I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it, that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.” “In that day” they were to know that Jesus was as the Son, in the Father, and not only that, but their own nearness also, “ye in me and I in you.” This corresponds with the “opened understanding” (“the mind of Christ,” though not power of testimony), described in Luke 24:36-4036And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 37But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 38And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 39Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 40And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet. (Luke 24:36‑40) evidently the same scene. In the Epistle to the Colossians also, as has been noticed, we have much more of the life of Christ developed, than of the distinct power and presence of the Spirit as in Ephesians, though as here we learn from the words, “your love in the Spirit,” that the Spirit of Christ is necessary to the activity of this life in us, which is really Christ, for “Christ is all and in all.”
In this we see what partly accounts for the defectiveness of Mr. Stuart’s system. If Mr. Grant can see nothing given to the disciples personally when the Lord “breathes on them and says, Receive ye the Holy Ghost,” {John 20:2222And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: (John 20:22)} but only their public commission; Mr. Stuart only perceives here the ecclesiastical or collective position assigned to them, and nothing individual. Now we do not question that both these are included in this scene, and that the blessed act of Christ here described, whilst emphatically though not exclusively individual, characterizes along with His presence the whole scene, confirming also the message sent by Mary Magdalene which gathered His disciples together. Mr. Stuart’s words showing all that he apprehends in it, are as follows
The breathing on the disciples in John 20 was, I believe, to give them His Spirit to act for Him during His absence, as He immediately says, “Whosoever sins ye remit they are remitted,” &c. This gift the saints collectively share in still, and it is their authority for receiving into their midst. But it was not the giving them the gift of the Holy Ghost (see Acts 1:44And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. (Acts 1:4)). This last is given to each individually. God gives it. The power was bestowed on them collectively, to act for Him in His absence (Some Answers to Inquiries, Feb.24th, 1885).
With these views it is easy to see how impossible it is for Mr. Stuart to understand what the new man really is, or being in Christ either, which he connects only with the descent of the Holy Ghost. As an illustration of this, he seems quite unable to comprehend what Mr. Stoney means when he distinguishes the old man from the old nature, the new man from the new nature. We cite his words
I have spoken of the need of keeping truths distinct else confusion will arise. An instance of this is furnished us in the statement, “hence every believer who never had any locus standi in the old man.” The old man, if scripture terms are to be used in a scriptural sense, is in us all, whether believer or not. It is our evil nature. We have not, nor could we, nor could any child of Adam, have a locus standi in the old man, nor be in the old man, for it is inside of us (p. 33).
Now a confusion is evident here between the new man created after God, which is the new nature in us, and new creation, which as in Christ, all believers are (p. 53).
The confusion here is in the mind of the objector, rather than in the one he corrects, for whilst he says that scripture terms are to be used in a scriptural sense, it will be seen that scripture never speaks in this way. Neither the old man nor the new man are ever said to be “in us”; the flesh is, but these terms, the old man and the new man, are always used in a general abstract sense, the old man as put off, and the new man as put on, by the believer in Christ. It is in this way exclusively that the word of God uses the term, “Lie not one to another, seeing ye have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him” (Col.3:9, 10). On this Mr. Stuart remarks
Speaking of the truth connected with practice, saints are viewed as having put off (like a garment) the old man and having put on (as a garment) the new. This, of course, is descriptive of what our life and habits as Christians should display – true Christian profession –a different thought from that which Mr. Stoney expresses (p. 46).
You put off or put on a garment, and it is the same with the old and the new man, as Mr. S. justly says, yet you cannot have a garment inside of you; moreover, it is looked upon as a whole, a completed act, and as done for us in Christ. It is not merely “descriptive of what our life and habits as Christians should display, true Christian profession,” words which again betoken the defectiveness of Mr. S. ‘s view, but far more, what has taken place before God in the death and resurrection of Christ, and our identification with Him in all this. It is when this has been realized in the soul, that Christian practice alone can follow, and it is on this the apostle founds, that which should be displayed in the Christian’s life, who has to put off in detail what is inconsistent with the new man as seen in Christ, and to put on all that He manifested (Col. 3:8-128But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. 9Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; 10And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: 11Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. 12Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; (Colossians 3:8‑12)).
In page 7, Mr. S. insists
That if the new man is not implied in the Romans believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are not viewed as having a new nature at all, that is, that they are not viewed as born of God. . . . The new birth, on which the Lord insisted, must be a mistake; [and] We are shut up to these, must we not call them monstrous conclusions? if it be an error to teach that the new man is not implied in Romans.
We are not shut up to any such monstrous conclusions, for the new man did not exist when the Lord spoke of the necessity of the new birth. When it is said that no passage of scripture can be found which speaks of the new man being in us, it may perhaps be replied that Christ is emphatically the new man, and He is in us; the reply is obvious that the abstract idea of the new man is dropped when Christ is said to be in us, and what is personal in Christ Himself introduced.
This new man “in Christ” is variously represented.
Sometimes it is viewed as giving us a new standing or position before God, as freed from all condemnation in Christ who is risen, after having borne, not only all our sins, but the judgment of sin in our nature, as in Rom. 8:11There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:1). “There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus.” Sometimes it is looked at according to the blessed place of righteousness, life, and glory, which Christ now occupies, for we are “made the righteousness of God in him” (2 Cor. 5:2121For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. (2 Corinthians 5:21)). In the Epistle to the Philippians – which adds the actual conformity to Christ in glory, and makes the whole future, looking at us as here on earth until Christ comes, and salvation, righteousness, and glory, as all realized then – it is to be found “in Christ,” “having the righteousness of God,” that is the object of the apostle’s desire, and to gain “the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.” This is that for which he regards all besides as worthless, for which he was apprehended of Christ Jesus. How inconsistent is this with the idea of seeking to attain to a place, in a race composed of all the redeemed, many of whom have only an earthly portion given by God to them. It involves a height so magnificent, a glory so exalted, a heavenly position so blessed, that he looked on earthly things as unworthy of a thought, and could only weep when he thought of such low things, occupying the minds of heavenly saints. When he relates what he saw of the blessings belonging to “a man in Christ” (2 Cor. 12:22I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. (2 Corinthians 12:2)), of which he was the witness and sample, as translated into the third heaven, he could only “glory” in the title and privileges which are attached to such an one. Again, he speaks of it as new creation, and that he only knows Christ now in these new and wondrous associations {2 Cor. 5:16, 1716Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. 17Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. (2 Corinthians 5:16‑17)}; showing us distinctly the estimate he formed of the new and heavenly place that belonged to man, which Christ had now taken, not according to the place man once had on earth, but according to what Christ Himself is entitled to, and claims for us also, as the result of the work accomplished by Him on earth on our behalf. Thus, in John 17, after speaking of His work as finished, He says, “Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am.”
In Eph. 1, being in Christ gives us, not righteousness and what is connected with it, but all the sweetness and depth of blessing bestowed on us, according to God’s delight in Christ Himself, and our being before Him in love, holy and without blame. In Notes and Comments on Scripture, part 6pp. 215-217, Mr. Darby thus puts it
Salvation is essentially in resurrection – of course through Christ’s death; no doubt, as regards the counsels of God, the raised are put in heavenly places but resurrection is the new estate. He “hath quickened us together with him, by grace ye are saved”; then comes the fruit and accomplishment of counsels (Eph. 2). So in Romans we have justifying and presenting in righteousness to God. And the Lord could say, “I go to my Father and your Father, my God and your God.”
The counsels of God set us individually in heavenly places, and besides that, as members of the body of Christ; and Jew and Gentile are raised up together, so as, de facto, to involve the unity of the body (p. 216).
Hence, Christ’s resurrection issues in justification of life in Romans, and quickening with Christ in Colossians and Ephesians; and resurrection with Him in Colossians involves, as part of that same plan and work, our being blessed in heavenly places, and the body of Christ.
But resurrection, after the effectual death of Christ clears us, and puts us in a new place in a new life. It saves us. We have died to sin, and are alive to God . . . The FL<,.T@B@\0F, (quickened together with) involves our being in the same glory further on.
The scripture last quoted shows that it is our position as saints, that is unequivocally in question. “Before him” is as certainly “position,” as “seated in heavenly places.” In the Gospel and Epistles of John, we have rather another aspect of this blessed truth; it is life and nature, and the indwelling of the Holy Ghost in connection with life. “One as we,” “One in us.” “We are in him that is true, in his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 5:2020And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life. (1 John 5:20)); and again, “Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us because he hath given us of his Spirit.” Now we are far from saying that Mr. Stuart denies all this, but his system is inconsistent with it, and practically excludes it. The making “in Christ” to be Headship of race lowers it to the level which that admits of; it can rise no higher, and all that is precious in it is thus lost. Then we have the refusal to allow, that “in Christ” means position; it is only condition, and the new nature is confused with the new man; so much so, that Mr. Stoney having said that the new man is not found in Romans (?), is charged by Mr. Stuart with implying that it is the old nature which produces fruit for God.
If the new man is not implied in Romans, man in nature then, can produce fruit well pleasing to God. So the ruin of man by the fall in that case is a myth, and the necessity for the new birth is all a mistake” (p. 59).
What are we to understand by “the complete newness of the man introduced by the Lord Jesus Christ? . . . If it means the new man in the believer, I am not aware that the Lord introduced that, though only in life on earth have we the perfect manifestation of it (p. 18 ).
The Lord did not bear the judgment of a nature, but the judgment due to individuals. All those whose judgment He bore, will undoubtedly be saved. It will be joy indeed, when we are for ever freed from the presence of sin within us – the old man. It would subvert Christianity to teach that the old nature has been atoned for; we should never be freed from it then (p. 23).
Mr. Stoney writes, “It is a denial of the work of Christ as to the annulling of the old man, to allege that we could be justified and retain it.” It would be a denial of the truth of God’s word, and of fact, and certainly a misconception of a very important section of the Gospel in the Romans, to teach that we have got rid o f the old man (p. 37). . . . Has not the man of Rom. 7 the new nature?
Unquestionably. And this Mr. Stoney admits (see p. 49), where he calls it the divine nature (p. 58).
Mr. Stuart’s system in all this is diametrically opposed to what most of us have learned from the word of God; so much so, that he cannot even comprehend that our Lord on the cross “bore the judgment of a nature,” or “terminated the old man, judicially or otherwise,” still less “the complete newness of the man introduced by the Lord Jesus.” He inquires “if it means the new man in the believer,” &c. He will not have a standing in the old man, nor in the new, nor position either, nor that the old man is “got rid of” in any sense.
What, then, is the meaning of our old man having been crucified with Christ {Rom. 6:66Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. (Romans 6:6); Gal. 2:2020I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20)}? If it was nailed to the cross, identified with Him there (and the Holy Ghost by the apostle, so states it), and Christ has died, was buried and is risen, surely it was judicially terminated. Certainly death brought it to its end in the cross of Christ; it cannot rise again out of His grave. So God regards it, and faith takes the same estimate of it as God does, and rejoices to do so. How many a believer has found freedom and liberty of soul in this very fact, denied by Mr. S.! No doubt, the flesh or the old nature is in us, and practically we all have to watch against it, as every Christian knows; but scripture does speak of the nature being judged in the cross, for if the “old man” “is crucified,” surely that is its judgment, and sin in the flesh has been condemned {Rom. 8:33For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: (Romans 8:3)}, that is, dealt with judicially– not in our persons, but in the death of the Son of God. If we do not keep that in view – as the place where its character was shown, and what was due to it, and God’s own dealing with it, and making a full end of it there (where, so to speak the battle was fought on our behalf), we shall never be free for the battleground is transferred to the place of weakness and defeat, our own hearts or experience. This is not denying that evil has to be resisted within, but the power of God is seen, as for us, in the cross, even when dealing with sin in the flesh to the uttermost. It has had its full sentence not only passed, but executed upon it there, and this apart from ourselves and our own efforts, and therefore the practical means of deliverance. “I am crucified with Christ,” says the apostle, “nevertheless I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me” (Gal. 2:2020I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. (Galatians 2:20)). Where else but in the cross has the “I” been judged, or “crucified,” the old man been put off {Col. 3:9, 109Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; 10And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: (Colossians 3:9‑10); Eph. 4:2222That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; (Ephesians 4:22)}, and, if put off, left, so to speak in the grave of Christ? “As many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ” (Gal. 4:2727For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband. (Galatians 4:27)); for baptism is death, and in it we are risen with Christ, through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead; and so have put on Christ; and again, “Putting off the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ,” which is effected in His death (Col. 4:11, 1211And Jesus, which is called Justus, who are of the circumcision. These only are my fellowworkers unto the kingdom of God, which have been a comfort unto me. 12Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Christ, saluteth you, always laboring fervently for you in prayers, that ye may stand perfect and complete in all the will of God. (Colossians 4:11‑12)).
We have a remarkable figure of this judgment, both of the person and the nature, in the association of the stones taken out of Jordan, placed at Gilgal, with the circumcision of the people. These stones were set up by Joshua, both in Jordan and at Gilgal; the twelve stones evidently represented Israel, for their death and resurrection could only be in figure, but having passed through Jordan – which was death – they set up the witness of this at Gilgal, where they were circumcised, as having put off the body of the flesh, which as we have seen, was judged on the cross, and annulled there for faith. Hence they always returned to Gilgal after their victories, and there the reproach of Egypt was rolled away.
In the sight of God the flesh is gone, and only Christ is seen otherwise the soul would never be clear from the distress produced by its actual presence, and the consciousness of what it is – enmity against God {Rom. 8:77Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. (Romans 8:7)}. How otherwise, could it be free from the responsibilities flowing from its existence in the flesh, or at liberty before God, if the old man were not “judicially terminated” in the cross, and so “put off”? We are not only dead, but buried also (Rom. 6 Col. 2), to show the end of the old man, and of all that we are by nature, that the body of sin {Rom. 6:66Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. (Romans 6:6); cp. Col.2:11}, that is, sin as a whole, might be brought to nought that henceforth we should not serve sin.
But all this, (says Mr. S.) is spoken of Christians, not of their evil nature, which is anything but terminated judicially or otherwise. We are to be dead to it precisely because it is not dead. Now it is very important, if we are to be clear on such points, to keep distinct in our minds the difference between person and nature. Statements are made at times, as if the old man our evil nature, derived from Adam by the fall, is dead and gone (p. 37).
Sometimes Mr. S. appears to admit what at others he denies on this head, namely, the condemnation of the old man. “If by judicial condemnation is meant its being condemned . . .I could quite accept it.” Why, then, find fault with it? – to most minds that is exactly what the expression conveys, but though in the scripture, it does not agree with Mr. S.’s system, as is evident from the passages quoted above, and hence the contradiction. He adds
Condemning the old man, or crucifying it, conveys to me a different thought from judicially terminating it. Such language distorts the gospel” (p. 36).
He crucified our old man with Christ. But Romans 6 treats of that which is to be made good experimentally in each one of us.
True, but we are brought down thus to experience, instead of apprehending by faith what God has done for us as the basis of all experience. How can Mr. S. say that it is “spoken of Christians that they have died”? It is certainly not the Christian as such, but looked at as in the flesh that the individual has died, and his old nature, position, and condition ended before God, and for faith. “The real question,” and “an important one, Am I practically dead to sin?” (p. 37) – Mr. Stuart’s great point – is just confusing and perplexing souls when put in this way. We are declared to have died, and our old nature to be crucified, or dead and gone, and that is the “real and important question, according to divine teaching.” To make it thus consist in, “Am I practically dead to sin?” is to weaken and destroy the effect of the truth as God has brought it to us in His word, throwing the soul back upon its experimental state, instead of upon what God has wrought for it on the cross. No one but a rampant heretic would say, as to fact, that his evil nature was “dead and gone”; but to teach that our Lord did not bear, on the cross, “the judgment of a nature,” where scripture speaks of sin in the flesh as condemned {Rom. 8:33For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: (Romans 8:3)}, and our old man crucified with Christ {Rom. 6:66Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. (Romans 6:6)}, is very-serious denial of scripture truth. To imply, also, that this is the same as, or has even any resemblance to, “atoning for the old nature” (p.23), is really throwing dust in the eyes. The former is a blessed truth, the latter a revolting absurdity.
The new man is seen in Christ Himself, and the “man in Christ,” subsequent to resurrection, for blessed and perfect as He ever was in every association or position, He is now no longer connected with earth as once in the days of His flesh but has commenced life in a new order and character in resurrection power and condition, being raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, is no longer in any way accessible to temptation {testing} (Rom. 6:4, 9-114Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:4)
9Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. 10For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 11Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 6:9‑11)), having death and resurrection between Himself and it, which is true to faith of ourselves likewise. In Rom. 7 it is life, and the aspiration of for {sic} life, and to this Mr. Stoney refers, in contrast with our position in Christ, described in Rom. 8, though, no doubt, there experimentally realized. It is in Ephesians and Colossians we are said to have put off the old man, and put on the new man, but Christ is all, and in all {Col. 3:9, 109Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; 10And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: (Colossians 3:9‑10) Eph. 4:2222That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; (Ephesians 4:22)}.
Thus, not only the position and existence of the new man, as an abstract thought of what we are in Christ, is wanting in Mr. S.’s scheme, but the fact that he makes the being in Christ to consist exclusively in the reception of the Holy Ghost, fully accounts for his being unable even to perceive, what is in question. Now we see these blessed realities in our Lord Himself, as presented in type, in the meat-offering. In the fine flour is depicted the pure and perfect humanity of Christ, mingled with oil, the type of the Holy Ghost in living energy, acting in and from His birth but the anointing with oil followed, indicating the descent of the Holy Ghost (Lev. 2:5, 65And if thy oblation be a meat offering baken in a pan, it shall be of fine flour unleavened, mingled with oil. 6Thou shalt part it in pieces, and pour oil thereon: it is a meat offering. (Leviticus 2:5‑6)) personally upon Him at His baptism. The same things, in measure, are true of us, but just as the fine flour, the growth of this earth, or the green ears of corn, and the wave-sheaf, set forth the perfect human nature of the Lord, which formed the foundation, in every case, of the offering, so, when the Lord speaks of Himself as the risen corn of wheat multiplied {John 12:2424Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. (John 12:24)}, we have, in reality, the new man introduced by Christ, which gives the characteristic position of the believer, though it could not be known in its full power and personal display till Pentecost.
We know, from Acts 1, that, through the Holy Ghost, He gave commandments to His disciples, after His resurrection proof of the action of the Holy Ghost in the new and risen Man before ascension, and its blessed and further results for us.
The apostle tells us that the object of his instruction warning, labor, and conflict, was to “present every man perfect in Christ Jesus”; thus, indeed, we shall be presented through grace, and we have to grow up to “a perfect man,” “to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ” {Eph. 4:1313Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: (Ephesians 4:13)}. This looks onward to the future, and how we are to be presented before God, but whether it be the future or the present, this is “the ground on which He has set us in His presence” – we are before Him in love. And again, “Of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption” (1 Cor. 1:3030But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: (1 Corinthians 1:30)), the last having in view the complete accomplishment of all in glory, that “He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.” So that Christ is the measure of the Christian standing, in the place in which He is found before God, for this is not His exclusively personal place on the throne. When He says Himself, “My God, and your God”{John 20:1717Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. (John 20:17)}, He speaks as man, and speaks of a place, or standing which He has acquired for us. We must either conclude that Christ has only representatively this standing justified before the throne, or that the believer has no standing, or position, in Christ before God at all. Mr. Stuart may say, “I reject the latter” (p. 36), but what has he not lost? – the true Christian position in Christ is entirely gone.
Thus he himself declares
We are told, “This Man’s – that is, the Lord Jesus Christ’s – standing determines the Christian’s standing.”
Is this so? . . . We are accepted by virtue of His sacrifice. If we apply the word “standing” to Him, we must mean the ground on which He is for Himself in God’s presence. His standing – to use Mr. Stoney’s term – cannot of itself determine the Christian’s standing. That would be, on the one hand, to ignore, or reject, our need of atonement; or, on the other hand, to teach that He had need of it also, which last would be blasphemy. It is His sacrifice which determines our standing (Is it the Truth of the Gospel? p. 19).
Without adopting the word “standing” as one to be preferred in speaking of our blessed Lord, the effect of this reasoning is evidently to shut out the vast range of what belongs to Him, and is conferred by God on Him as Man, in which we can have a part, according to the thoughts and counsels of His love, but which Mr. Stuart excludes by limiting us to the two alternatives, namely: the standing of the believer before the throne, justified, which Christ could not have; and secondly, to that place on the throne which is absolutely and exclusively His own, and one, therefore, in which we could not share. He ignores, in all this, what it is hardly possible any one, who has been even slightly conversant with what has been elicited from scripture through the writings of brethren, can be ignorant of – the fact that there is this middle place (if such an expression may be allowed) between these two, which the Lord has taken, because, as His love assures, He would not abide alone {John 12:2424Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit. (John 12:24)}. Now, to say that our Lord had a place in heaven by virtue of His own blood, would be to imply that He needed that blood (as we do) to be there; but to say that in doing His (that wonderful) work, in which sin was put away, He, being what He was, so glorified God as Man, that He could take a new place as Man, and for man, in heaven, in which we share as men in Christ, is a totally different thing, though, to Mr. S., it seems impossible.
It is impossible to have our standing in the righteousness of God. I cannot have a standing in God’s consistency with His character; I can, however, have my standing in harmony with it, and I can be an illustration of it (p. 32).
Constantly, alas! does Mr. S. submit scripture, when it militates against his views, to this sort of intellectual puzzle, which needs to be dissected, or the meaning is lost to those who accept it. Now we read that we “cannot have a standing in God’s consistency with His character.” But it is God’s acts in righteousness which are in question, both in dealing with sin in the cross, in giving Christ a place before Him, according to what He has done, and giving it to us in Him also, so that “we are made, or become, the righteousness of God in him”; and this is displaying divine righteousness; thus we can have a standing in this divine righteousness, Christ’s own position, ours in Him being founded on it, expressed in these blessed but righteous acts; not only the wall, but “the street of the heavenly city was pure gold, like unto clear glass.” The next verse (2 Cor. 6:11We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that ye receive not the grace of God in vain. (2 Corinthians 6:1)), where the apostle beseeches that the grace of God should not be received in vain, shows that this position “in Christ” is a present one. Eph. 1:4, 54According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 5Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, (Ephesians 1:4‑5) are also relegated to one future, “as our calling, of which we are now to know the hope” (p. 24). “God’s purpose is, too that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love” (p. 8); thus again are we deprived of our present blessings.
Mr. Stoney finds fault with my writing, “By standing is meant the title and ability, through grace, for a fallen and once guilty creature to be before the throne of God without judgment overtaking him.” Now he tells us the true standing is “as Christ is,” I will quote the whole verse to which he refers us. “Herein is love made perfect with us, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as he is, even so are we in this world” (1 John 4:1717Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. (1 John 4:17)). It is plain, then, if we get in this verse the true Christian standing, that it has some connection with the thought of the throne, since the Christian is to have boldness in the day of judgment by that which he knows is true of him now. Simple folk would probably conclude that, if this passage defines the true Christian standing, connected, as it certainly is, with the thought of the day of judgment, there can be nothing, after all, so radically wrong in that which I wrote, but to which Mr. S. here takes such exception (p. 28).
How far this is from the apostle’s thought, that our standing has some connection with the throne or the day of judgment will appear, by observing that he looks at the most solemn moment that can ever occur in the history of man, when the heaven and earth flee away, and others, even the wicked dead, are raised, to stand before the great white throne for judgment (the angels also, being reserved to the judgment of that day); and he says that love has wrought so wondrously for us even here, by making us, even now, as Christ is in this world, that we can have boldness in view of it. How destructive of the force of this most lovely passage, to make it teach that it is a question of ourselves, and extract from it the notion of our standing before the throne, because others then will do so in that most solemn day. What follows still further perplexes the passage.
Second argument I can say, I have a standing; I could not say, I am a standing. Now John here expresses what we are, not what we have.
But the apostle is speaking of what gives boldness, or confidence, and the excellence of that title in God’s presence on which it rests. Now this title, though Mr. Stuart cannot see it, does consist in what Christ is, and we may, and do stand before God in what He is, for His title to be in God’s presence, after having borne our sins, and the judgment of them, is now righteously ours. It should be observed, that the apostle has already given us divine life and the value of the sacrifice, the propitiation for our sins, as that which love has provided to meet our guilty condition. He then proceeds further, and speaks of love, further assuring us, in that God dwells in us, and we in Him; then to show how love is made perfect, he rises to the high and blessed thought of Christ’s own place of righteousness, nearness, and acceptance, and says, “As he is, so are we in this world” {1 John 4:1717Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. (1 John 4:17)}; that is, even though in the midst of sin and death. What I am therefore, shows what I have, since it what He is, and has, as God’s accepted One.
Third argument
The apostle predicates something as true of the believer in this world. “As Christ is, so are we in this world.”
Now when we think of our standing before God, as scripture treats of it, we think of being before Him who sits enthroned in the highest heaven, not of what we are in this world, though our standing before Him in heaven is to be known by us whilst on earth.
Can anything exceed the poverty of spiritual vision to which this would-be exactitude of the human mind brings its author!
Mr. Stuart, indeed, can only think of a standing before the throne, not merely as a title, as he has told us abundantly, but as a locality. The apostle John’s spiritual apprehension happily, has no such narrow limit, and though not occupied with position so much as the apostle Paul, yet, including this he gives us here the range of our position, whatever may be in view with reference to the future, drawing his conclusion from what we now are, before we have the glorified bodies which will witness, in another scene, to the perfection of the place already given us. For, wherever we may be, as Christ is, so are we in God’s sight, and that, even now: all this is effaced by this narrow notion about the throne. How completely, alas! is the truth eclipsed on these all-important points of divine revelation, acceptance in Christ, and the nearness consequent on it, in what being in Christ consists the position before God it gives us, the primary end of the old man, the putting on of the new, the very meaning of these terms, with the substitution of Headship of race for them, so that on each distinctive point the truth of God is subverted.