IT is, however, the fact now, that throughout Christendom theology limits sin to flagrant, or at any rate overt, acts of transgression, and teaches men that, human nature being what it is, there must needs be sin on the part of the Christian; and one reason of this Christ-dishonoring result is very plain. They agree in general to put themselves under the law as the rule of life. Now, as surely as the flesh is in us, it is utterly impossible that the law should not provoke those under it to sin. Nay, it was what the law was given for. It is not meant to make men sinners, which God could not do, but when they were sinners, to make the sin evident, and to bring it out unmistakeably. In a certain sense the object was wholesome and merciful in the result, because it was to hinder people from deceiving themselves. It was directly calculated to guard those that had sinned, and really were guilty before God, from being able to gloss over their sins and pretend they had none. It was to prove them distinctly obnoxious to judgment, and to make them cry out to God for mercy, glad to find the free grace that God has provided in the Lord Jesus Christ and by His redemption.
Such a process it pleased God to carry on before the Savior came, preparing the way for Him and His work in this as in other respects. But then it is another thing altogether, now that He is come, and the grace and truth of God in all its fullness, and the redemption that Christ has accomplished. It is a totally different thing to go back from the gospel and put oneself in that condition of law in which souls necessarily were before, in order to make them feel the impossibility of law availing them and their need of grace in Christ. If it was in due season then, it is unbelief now, when God's word entitles the believer to the enjoyment of what He has wrought and of what He is. Law is not enacted for a righteous man (which and more the believer surely is), but for lawless and insubordinate souls, for impious and sinful (which believers are not); as, on the other hand, the right and intended use of the saving grace of God is to teach us, that, having denied impiety and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, and justly, and piously in the present age (or course of things), awaiting the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ. By grace, therefore, the soul is put as absolutely clean by virtue of Christ's redemption before God, once utterly guilty and lost, but now without a charge on His part.
What more do I want? That the same Savior who died and rose for me should be now living and active on my behalf in all the gracious exercise of His watchful loving holy care, succoring me in the midst of my trials for His name's sake, and from man's, the world's, and Satan's hatred. He is in the glory, and I am in the wilderness, going on, toiling, suffering, but awaiting Him to come and take me to Himself in that glory whither He is gone. For the present I am here. He was crucified, and, while here, exposed to very various enemies, not only to their malicious power, but to the serpent's wiles. And who and what am I to stand or march through? It is here that priesthood applies to saints, and for such ends. It is to minister to them the suited succor, that we may receive mercy and find grace for seasonable help. It is from One too, Who knows all by His own experience in depths beyond comparison; Who knows what an enemy Satan is, and how great his subtlety and his malice; from One therefore not only as divine, but that can succor on the ground of being once tried to the uttermost Himself as man, but still One Who is priest as Son of God, and not merely because He has that nature which I have, although I have it in a fallen unholy state which He had not. I have humanity tainted: He was and is the Holy One, not only as God, but as man. Certainly however, this is no reason why He should not sympathize, but the contrary. For it is selfishness and sin which hinder sympathy, not holiness and love.
But we are told “we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities.” Mark, the apostle does not speak about our sins; nor is there any ground whatever to confound “infirmities” with sins. He supposes a people that have now done with their sins by the grace of God, because by the blood of Christ they are blotted out forever. They are set, therefore, with their faces Godward and heavenward; but still they are in the wilderness. And above is the Lord Jesus in all His active love and grace occupied with them individually, and able to sympathize with our infirmities, as One tempted in all things in like manner apart from sin. No doubt one of the sources which commonly pervert the character of Christ's priesthood is from looking in a natural way to our Lord Jesus. Men can not make out how He can be dealing with every one at once according to His word. But this is a simple matter of faith. The word of God is as plain about the suited care of the Lord Jesus in His priestly office, as about the efficacy of His redemption for each believer. And as to the total absence of sin, there is exactly the same phrase used for the one case as for the other, as displayed in salvation when He appears a second time. (Compare Heb. 4:1515For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. (Hebrews 4:15) with chapter 9:28).
Accordingly it is in this way that the Holy Ghost treats it. “Having therefore a great high priest passed as he hath through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast the profession.” For therein lay the difficulty. Their peril was lest they should compromise Christ Jesus or go back. The apostle never hints at the danger of assurance, but insists on holding it firm to the end. That they should doubt the forgiveness of their sins does not occur to the Spirit of God, if I may so speak. Beyond controversy He could not treat the work of Christ with such contempt as to raise the question whether it does not absolutely effect the end for which God had given Him to die. Rather does He call on the children to hold fast the boldness and the boast of hope firm to the end, resting in their simplicity, which is their wisdom, on the fullness of divine grace in Christ. It is for this very reason they in their trials want sympathy, as well as to be helped and strengthened; and the priesthood of Christ does this for the holy brethren.
It is not a question here of meeting unholy men, and pardoning those who are taught of God to cry to Him about their sins and ruin. This is in the gospel of God's grace found elsewhere, but not here. It is not the point in priesthood, but rather “let us hold fast the confession.” Christ was in all points tempted like as we are, without sin excepted. It is not merely without sinning, but without sin:” temptation in His case was absolutely apart from sin. “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need,” grace for seasonable help.
In the next chapter (5.) this is pursued, and in a manner full of importance and interest, although men often overlook it. “For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God.” This they apply to the Lord Jesus. “Well,” you ask, “was He not taken from among men?” I answer that the Holy Spirit is not giving this as a description of His priesthood at all, but of priesthood in contrast with His. “For every high priest taken from among men is established for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins; who can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way, for that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason hereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.” The third verse ought to make it indisputably plain to any believer. The same high priest of the first two verses is described in the third verse also; and he expressly requires to offer for himself—not merely for others, but also for his own need—to offer for sins. Is it not obvious then, that it is such a high priest as Aaron or Aaron's son, not such a one as Christ, Who, if compared, is accordingly also contrasted in the description? “And no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called by God, as was Aaron. So also Christ glorified not Himself” (ver. 4, 5). He begins with a point of similarity, but it is only to bring out contrast. He did not take it to Himself. He Who said to Him, Thou art My Son, said also elsewhere, A priest Thou forever after the order of Melchisedec. He was addressed by God accordingly. Thus the essence of our Lord's priesthood here, where the root, stock, and fruits are all before us, is this, that He was not merely Son of man, but the Son of God.
Most blessed to see, that being Son of God He deigned to become a man, the Son of man; but the ground laid down is what He is essentially in His own right and title, not merely what He became, but what He is, the Son of God, as none else was of men or angels. The high priest, with whom chapter 5 opens, is merely a child of Adam like another, who could exercise forbearance toward the ignorant and erring, because he was no better himself. He was himself also clothed with infirmity. It was but natural therefore that he on this ground should feel for his fellows. But all this is exactly in contrast with the place, and dignity, and grace of the Lord as priest.
(To be continued, D.V.)