Questions of Interest as to Prophecy
Table of Contents
The Antichrist Properly So Called
I AM still inquiring as to Antichrist, but I had not overlooked the difficulties. It has been taken for granted among those who expect a personal Antichrist, that he is the civil head of the Roman empire. This I question. Without doubting in the least that there will be such a blasphemous Gentile power, it seems to me that the Antichrist is another power, of which the Scriptures are even more full; the vessel of evil, religious energy, rather than that of evil public government. At least, two such manifestations of power we find in Rev. 13., for the second is a beast, as well as the first; that is, there is a second temporal power co-existent with the public imperial power, which has the throne of Satan. The first beast had risen, like previous beasts, out of the sea, i.e. out of the tumultuous floating mass of population—the Gentile world. But the second beast came out of the earth, i.e. out of the formed arrangement of God’s moral providence—the sphere whore the dragon and the beast were worshipped, and all heavenly association was blasphemed. In form of power, this second beast was like the Lamb; but his speech was like the dragon, or great hostile power of Satan: a religious, though blasphemous, character of evil at work within the sphere where Satan rules. Such a relationship will be found to be Jewish. It is the religion of the earth, not of the dwellers in heaven, and is Jewish in character—a power in the earth ostensibly connected with divine things, falsely, and verified in the sight of men by the exhibition of judicial power as of God. Rev. 19. speaks of the second beast, as the false prophet.
The Antichrist is not spoken of by name, save in the epistles of John, where his character is religious, not secular—apostate and heretical activity against the person and glory of Christ and the essential doctrines of Christianity. He denies the Father and the Son. He does not confess Jesus Christ come in flesh. He denies that Jesus is the Christ, which seems rather Jewish in its connection and evil, rather than the denial of the revelation which constitutes Christianity. Antichrist, in a word, is characterized by religious energies of evil in connection with Christianity and Judaism.
In 2 Thess. 2 it is a wicked religious, and not a more secular power which is spoken of—its impious, then its seductive, character. Verse 4 is moral opposition and insult to God, rather than the object of deference, who was publicly on Satan’s throne. It is the active personage, with Judas’ title, who opposes all divine authority—the man of sin showing himself as though he were God the contrast of Christ, who was God, and yet was the man of obedience. His presence, too, is according to the energy of Satan; and as Christ, in truth of righteousness to such as should be saved; so he, in deceit of unrighteousness to such as should be lost.
In Dan. 11:36, &c., is the king, and he shall exalt himself and magnify himself above every god, &c.; that is, we have the same qualities and acts, and yet he honors the God of forces, and honors and increases with glory a strange god. So that it would seem that the haughty rejection of the true God and self-exaltation is not inconsistent with being servant of a false one, really slave to the enemy—an old lesson learnt all through human nature, and never learnt. Self-exaltation is not supremacy. I apprehend, or am inclined to think, that this self-exaltation will be, specially in result, in Judea against God; but my difficulty just lies there, because in Dan. vii. the little horn seeks to change times and laws (i.e. I apprehend the Jewish order), and this looks like the power of the Antichrist, while the little horn there is uncommonly like the first beast (i.e. its last head). The difficulty is in apportioning the parts where both work together. The process seems natural, painful to say. The apostasy denying the Father and the Son, and that Jesus is the Christ. This throws them on Judaism (which was always the mystery of iniquity in principle), and thus on Antichrist, who at last throws off all in self-exaltation, and makes them, during the last half-week, worship a strange God, and the tribulation takes place. It seems to me that the deepest troubles in the Psalms (I do not speak of the cross) come from what has a Jewish character, not an open enemy, but a companion or familiar friend, ungodliness and strife in the city. The self-exaltation is moral character, not public power, unless in his own sphere. This self-exaltation would be his own apostate setting up in Judea; but finding it convenient for himself, and it being the work of Satan, he forces all to recognize the Roman emperor, which for Jews is apostasy. It would be the old Josephus question, save that saints who flee or bow take the place of sicarii. It is a kind of suzeraincte. This false Christ in the east making head in the interest of the western emperor against all, and deceiving the Jews by Satanic power in the east, he wields all the power of the empire; he joins the recognition of the western emperor to the Satanic deception of the Jews, his own people probably. The little horn of Dan. 7. certainly seems the more general power, which, while local (like Bonaparte, a France), governs the whole beast.
The Force of "The Last Day" in John 6
As regards John 6, the Lord is, to me, evidently substituting a blessing in resurrection to any royal Jewish blessing. Owned the prophet, and refusing to be king carnally, He goes up alone on high, and the disciples are sent away alone, toiling on the sea (a Jewish remnant strictly), and arrive as soon as He rejoins them but He is fed upon in humiliation and death, in the interval, and hence to such the blessing comes in resurrection: he (i.e. the believer) will be raised up in the last day. Jesus, will not bless him as come down here before giving him his portion where He is gone up in the power of everlasting life. The last day is in contrast with their present blessing as king. The last day is never the day of the Lord, save in the vague sense that it embraces all the closing period, which is its true force. He does not come and set up the Jews, but the Father draws, and a man comes to Him, and the way He blesses him is in the power of eternal life, raising him up when the close of all this busy and rebellious scene arrives; that shall be his portion in that day—not Messianic security now.
The Allusion in "The Last Trump."-1 Corinthians 15:52
After all the grave and wise speculations on the last trump, I strongly suspect it is merely an allusion to military matters. Somewhere in Josephus’ war, and perhaps in other books, we have the order of the breaking up of the Roman camp, and at the last trump they all break up and march forward. Now, I acknowledge that Scripture interpretation is not to be borrowed from without; but I have seen only tortured linking’s with other passages within. I am content to take the general idea of the last public call of God relating to the Church, and leave it there; but what suggested the image, I suspect, was what I say: just as κέλευσμα, in 1 Thess. 4., beyond controversy, is a similar military term used to a similar purpose. Matt. 24:31 (“ And He shall send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet”), I have not the smallest shadow of a doubt, applies to the assembling of the Jews (elect, as Isa. 65.) after Christ is come.
The Kingdom of Heaven
For myself, I have learnt much in searching the Word, with regard to the kingdom of heaven..... I find that the true idea presented by this expression is the reign of the heavens in the person of the Son of man. John Baptist proposes it in testimony, as drawing nigh; the Lord does the same; but still as a prophet. All this being rejected, the violent alone took it by force, so that it was not established, and the Lord could say while yet there: “Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.” Consequent upon the manifestation of this rejection, and of the judgment pronounced by the Lord on Israel at the end of the twelfth chapter of Matthew, this kingdom is preached as a mystery. Then it is established in mystery, but administered by Peter, who had the keys of it, when the King ascended to heaven; and, finally, it will be accomplished according to the power of the King, when Satan is cast out of heaven, and Christ receives the kingdom, and establishes blessing on earth by this means.
Such is that which I present to my brethren as the résumé of that which I have found, evidently without any view to controversy. The Church, such as it is presented by Paul, does not at all enter here into account; it is viewed in his writings as the body, as the bride, of Christ, identified with Him in His life such as He is in heaven, in its nature, its position, and its glory. It is a quite different thought from the administration of the kingdom. He may speak of the gathering of the saints here below as a body, as a bride, &c, because such was the extent of their privilege: we will say a word about it elsewhere; but the thought which he links with the Church is its identification with Christ. At the death of Stephen, the administration, by the Holy Spirit, of this kingdom of which Peter had the keys, was rejected at Jerusalem, as the announcement of this kingdom had been already rejected in the testimony of John Baptist, and in that of the Son of man. From that time He ceased to be presented to the Jews as a people. Up to that time, the Holy Spirit acted upon the intercession of Jesus on the cross in their favor (compare Luke 23:34, and Acts 3:17), and as if the ten thousand talents due by the death of Jesus had been remitted. The love of God still delayed in withdrawing, and it is only in Acts 28. that He renounces His efforts toward this people, over the least remnant of which He ceased not to bend down. Nevertheless, always opposing the truth preached by Paul, and forbidding to preach to the Gentiles, according to the grace of God, the Jews filled up their sins, and the wrath is come upon them to the end; they have been sold, with all that they had, until the payment be made. From thence history regards the Gentiles. The Gentiles figure on the stage, either as rejecting, from love to their idols, or as receiving the testimony of grace which was proposed to them. Jerusalem, trampled under their feet, disappears entirely from the scene, and the iniquity and the conduct of the Gentiles, whatever they may be, become the object of the judgment and ways of God, the Jews being as it were buried (see Isa. 26. and Ezek. 36.), though guarded, as the Gentiles before had been, so to speak, non-existent. It is evident that the Gentiles, professing Christians, and the Gentiles of the four monarchies subject to the beast, are the special objects of the ways of God in His government (not, however, the only ones); but it is at the time of the destruction and judgment of those in particular, that the Son of man will establish His kingdom in power, although He may subject and judge all the others afterwards. It is this of which the prophecies of the Old and the New Testament speak to us clearly.
The Church
The question of the Church is bound up with these two truths: the return of Christ, and the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church. For the Holy Spirit is come down here below, and it is that which gives to the Church its unity and its bond as a whole on earth. With the Church it is as with the body of a man, of which, it is said, all the elements are entirely renewed in a very short time; but it is always the same man: the spirit of a man which is in him is vitally linked together, and appropriates to itself new heterogeneous elements, and unity and person do not change.
There are three great truths which are linked with Christ, the center of all truth, or three different positions, if you please, in which He is seen: dead and risen; then in heaven (to which corresponds, as proof, the presence of the Holy Spirit on earth, John 16.); and, lastly, returning here below. Dead and risen, there is the Church, His body, justified and risen with Him; this is the doctrine of justification, and though evidently true for all the Church, viewed as a body, it is in its employment, for each day and for each conscience, an individual affair. The Holy Spirit, seal of this doctrine, dwells in the body of the individual as in a temple. Afterwards in heaven, Jesus is hidden in God, but crowned with glory and honor; the doctrine, which flows from it, is the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church on earth, in His body; of the Holy Spirit, who gives to this body its unity, and which renders applicable the terms: body of Christ, bride of Christ, Church of Christ,—to those who, on earth, are united to Him who is in heaven, and thus form an unity on earth; the dead in Christ being for the moment out of sight. If this is understood (for one may be converted without understanding it), we desire, as the bride of Christ, the return of the Bridegroom. Justification is tied to His death and resurrection: for we know that His death has been accepted on high. The unity of the Church, and its waiting for Christ as becomes a faithful spouse, are what is bound up with the glory of Christ on high and the presence of the Holy Ghost here below. These are the two great truths which have been specially put forward, which God Himself, I believe, has put forward in these times, and which have produced so much uneasiness in those who desire to abide outside their force..... That people may not know these things, is intelligible; that others may oppose them, is very sad; but to say that they are secondary truths, is to be seriously deceived. To make little account of the glory of Christ manifested in the unity of the Church here below, is a proof, in effect, that the glory and love of Christ for His Church are not near the heart, and therefore there is hardly the occasion of speaking to conscience. If after having insisted before a son upon what he ought to be toward an affectionate and tender father, and having shown him what a filial spirit is, he demands that one should track out his duty with exactness, one may abstain from it: he wants the spirit to understand his position; it would be the spirit of a servant, of a hireling. The feeling must be awakened for conscience to act; but woe, woe to him in whom it is wanting! It is just so with the responsibility of the Church; the grace of the relationship must be recognized, and it is the heart taught of the Holy Spirit which will understand it. I doubt not that there is enough to condemn, by conscience itself, him who wants it; but such is neither my task nor my desire. If the heart can be awakened so as to feel the force of this relationship, of this obligation, this will be the most precious prize of the battle one has to join. Israel might have been condemned by the law, but is not the call of God far stronger, and Israel more hardened not to respond to it, when it was said, and in vain: “Go yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress, according to the love of the Lord toward the children of Israel”? For us the first principle is love. If that is wanting, all is wanting.
I admit, and have admitted, that one can understand the love which saves without knowing that the Church is bride of Christ; but, in present circumstances, this is what the Holy Spirit recalls particularly: “The Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come.” Such is the normal position, the first testimony, which the Church bears. After that, it can turn to others and say: “Let him that is athirst come,” for the living waters already flow there, and “whosoever will,” &c.; but for
Christians, there is what the Spirit has bequeathed to the Church, as its true position. Its feelings are founded upon its relationships with Christ, and the Spirit demands that those who hear join this desire of His heart. Is it ill done to enlist those who have heard the voice of the good Shepherd, to take the position of the bride and join this cry, Come?
But the doctrine of the presence of the Holy Ghost in the Church here below, and of Christ’s return, are identified with its unity on earth, with its position of bride (or rather of betrothed here below, in order to be presented as a chaste virgin to Christ), and with this desire of His coming which detaches us from all that is not of Him, and attaches us entirely, exclusively to Him.
Luke 21 Compared With Matthew 24
As to Luke 21. it is much more historical, because it opens out, as revealing the Son of man, the period in which Israel is set aside and not counted in its history, or what concerns the Gentiles. Hence the Spirit records no enquiry of “the sign of thy coming and of the end of the age,” but the general history in connection with the destruction of Jerusalem. Thus, from verse 9 to verse 19 inclusive, we have the state of things from after the Lord’s death until the encircling of Jerusalem by the Roman armies, and no mention made of the abomination of desolation, and the twentieth verse gives the reply to the question of verse 7, founded on verse 6. The statement accordingly says nothing of the tribulation such as never was; but that vengeance then comes on the people and city, that all may be accomplished. This still continues, and will continue, Jerusalem being trodden down, till the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled, in the close of the Gentile dominion begun in Nebuchadnezzar. Then the fact is revealed of the state of things at the close of the dominion of Gentile power-signs in sun, moon, and stars; on earth, distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring (the last expression showing, I think, that the words are employed figuratively, though there may be possibly portents also); men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth; for the powers of heaven (the sources of the earthly state of things) shall be shaken. And then shall they (not “ye,” but they, these proud, rebellious Gentiles) see the Son of man coming in a cloud.
Such is the prophetical revelation, which presents, it seems to me, little difficulty. The exhortation which follows may suggest more; at the same time, it offers some remarkable helps as to the use of expressions. For example, “this generation shall not pass away till all be fulfilled” (verse 32), proves necessarily, either that “generation “ must be taken in an extended sense, as in Dent. 32:5, 20, and as in other passages, or, that “all” could only apply to the establishment of the state of things at the setting aside judicially of the Jewish people, because we have the treading down of Jerusalem for a long continuous period revealed. Hence we have to seek the guidance of the Spirit for the application of the passage, there being an incipient accomplishment at the destruction or treading down of Jerusalem, its desolation, vengeance, &c., which subsists still, and a far fuller one at the close preceding the coming of the Son of man. Hence the Holy Ghost records here an expression which may apply to both: “Know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.” I do not doubt that this had a certain accomplishment in the absolute suppression of the Jewish order, but no fulfillment; and that the kingdom of God will be established by the coming of the Son of man after the signs of verses 25, 26. Note also that this passage precludes the possibility of the application of “the coming of the Son of man” to the destruction of Jerusalem, because we have already had the long treading down consequent on the encompassing with armies. The full natural application of verses 28-31, then, is to the close when, those signs having taken place, the full deliverance of the Jewish faithful will take place. So verse 35 has a limited application to Judea or Palestine; but it is evident to me that there is the larger application of the coming of the day of the Lord on the whole earth. It is the day that is spoken of. Verse 36 seems to me also to refer absolutely to the character of a Jewish remnant (though in a still better sense, it will be true of the Church); but in its proper application it is the escape of judgments then, and standing before the Son of man when He takes the kingdom.
In Matt. 24. the Lord passes over all the times of the Gentiles unnoticed, and speaks only of Jerusalem, as though under judgment recognized of God, so far as to be the object of His thoughts and dealings. Verse 14 only takes the broad fact that the Gospel of the kingdom should be preached to all nations (a thing not yet accomplished to the letter), and then the end should come. I judge, then, that while the whole reply will have an accomplishment at the close, there was sufficient in the early part to guide the saints between the Lord’s ascension and the destruction of Jerusalem; but that its fulfillment will yet take place, to the end of verse 14 being general, and from verse 15 being absolutely and exclusively the last half-week of Jewish tribulation. There is a point which I think has not been duly borne in mind; it is that the unfaithful servant will, for the judgment, pass over into the time of the Son of man’s judgment, so that what is called the Church may go on, in whatever apostasy of condition, into the state of things which takes place when the Church of the faithful is gone. Laodicea is threatened with being vomited out of the Lord’s mouth, but when it is vomited, is not said, if it be taken for literal judgment. I am disposed to think Judaism will play an active part in connection with the apostate Church, and that there will be an astonishing amalgam; though, besides that, the Church form may continue until destroyed by the horns and the beast.—(Extracts from letters, ac., of a brother laboring in France.)
Ruin of the Dispensation
ROMANS 11 teaches that the Gentile dispensation was liable to failure, as the Jewish had failed before it. But the doctrine of Scripture goes much farther and declares that there would be a rubs or apostasy; nay, that the object to be at last judged was already in existence. But, before citing the direct and abundant testimony of the Word of God, it is to be premised that we must distinguish between the people of God in a dispensation, and the dispensation itself. There were many saints among the Jews, but the dispensation has been cut off. In every dispensation, man has failed, and the dispensation has been set aside, which will happen also to the present dispensation. God has never said that He will confirm to the end the Gentile dispensation. Nay, are going to see the reverse. God’s faithfulness to the Church consists in preserving the faithful, not the dispensation of the Church. The existence of the dispensation depends on the faithfulness of man; the existence of the faithful depends on the faithfulness of God. The evil which has happened in our economy will increase by man’s infidelity until this economy is cut off.
The greatest part of the difficulty, as to this subject, ordinarily felt by believers, is, that they confound the intentions of God as to the dispensation, with His counsels concerning the believers who are found in it. These counsels cannot fail to have their effect, but the dispensation may pass and terminate, (though having been to the glory of God, inasmuch as it has displayed His ways,) because the unfaithfulness of men rendered it unsuitable to be the means of manifesting His glory any longer. Then God, who knows beforehand what He will do, replaces it by another dispensation, in which man is set under another set of trials, and thus all the ways of God are manifested, and His manifold wisdom, in every manner, has its true display, even to the heavenly places.
Thus we see how distinct is the responsibility of man in any given economy, from the salvation of souls in that same economy. To confound these two things is to lose sight either of the grace of God on the one hand, or the responsibility of man on the other. Adam and Eve, formed in innocence, were tried in Eden; and they transgressed, but this hindered not the resource of divine goodness in the woman’s Seed. Noah, again, was entrusted by God with the sword of government. The entire fall of this holy trust is quite another thing from his individual salvation, which, as to him and every saved soul, rested not upon his faithfulness to God, but upon God’s faithfulness to him. So, on a larger scale, although the conduct of believers in Israel was necessarily modified and regulated by the Levitical Law, yet their personal deliverance, so far from depending upon the law, flowed from a totally opposite principle,—from the grace of God which bringeth salvation. The dispensation, as a whole, is judged, condemned, and displaced, because of its unfaithfulness to the trust which God committed to the charge of man; but the security of individuals, all through, is made good by the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Salvation, through that blood, existed before this economy, even as there will be saints in the time of Anti-Christ, but this hinders not the existence of the apostasy, for the Word of God affirms that the presence of Anti-Christ will be the sign that it is already arrived. (2 Thess. 2.)
Be it so, that this great apostasy is not yet consummated. Nevertheless, we are taught that the mystery of iniquity, which was already working from the apostolic time, was to continue, and that, on the removal of a hindrance, the wicked one was to be revealed whom the Lord should destroy by the epiphany of His presence, and that, before this, the apostasy should come. And what means all this if it be not the revelation of the ruin of the dispensation,—the revelation of an apostasy whose principles were already at work from time days of the apostle, and which only awaited the removal of the hindrance to be manifested in the grand, crowning agent of this wickedness, viz. the wicked one?
We see in the Word of God two great mysteries, which are developed during the present economy: the mystery of Christ, and the mystery of iniquity.
The counsels which are found engaged in the first have their accomplishment in heaven. The union of Christ’s body with Him in glory is evidently to have its accomplishment on high. But, by the power of the Holy Ghost, there should have been on earth, during this economy, a manifestation of the union of the body of Christ. Here, however, the responsibility of man enters into this manifestation here below, though at the end all be to the glory of God. Wherefore, the dispensation may be in ruin, though the counsels of God never fail: on the contrary, our he shall turn to His glory, while he judges us justly.
In this sphere of human responsibility, Satan may introduce himself from the moment that man rests not absolutely upon God. We know it by the experience of every day.
It is, then, revealed that the mystery of iniquity shall have its course. Here the question is not of counsels, but of an evil done in time. It is a question here of the mystery of iniquity: the apostasy, or revolt, is no mystery. There is no need of a revelation to tell us that a man who denies Jesus Christ is no Christian: he says so. But here there is an evil put in train within the bosom of Christendom in relation with Christianity, of which the wicked one is to be the full manifestation, as the glory of Christ and the Church will be the full accomplishment of the mystery of Jesus Christ. The word “ iniquity “ and the word “wicked one” are the same in the original, save that one indicates the thing; the other, the person; it is pre-eminently. “ the lawlessness “ and the “lawless one.” This mystery of iniquity, then, was put in train from the time of the apostle: later on, the veil would be taken away, the apostasy would be there, and, lastly, the wicked one find his end by the manifestation of Christ’s coming. There was a principle of lawlessness actually at work, though in mystery, which was to continue and, grow up, and, when the letter was removed, was to issue in the complete revelation of the man of sin, whose presence is after the energy of Satan with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish, God Himself sending the lost an energy of error that they should believe a lie. That is, we have here described, not a more secular power under which the world groaned, but a religious, though blasphemous, evil, intimately connected with, and resulting from, corrupted Christianity, as one of its chief sources. Thus is the economy to close. Such is the revelation of this passage. Also, as is to be seen elsewhere, this is to be in order to introduce the glory and reign of Christ, that all the earth may be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord.
The Lord tells us that “as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man; “ and “ likewise also as it was in the days of Lot,” &c. Yet there were saints there whom God preserved; but for all that, the world of their days was in 1 ruin-state. Even thus shall it be when the Son of man is revealed. The predicted state of the present economy at its close is to be analogous to the awful state of things which was then judged of the Lord—a state of apostasy. Compare 1 Tim. 4:1-7. 2 Tim. 3:1-5. In the one, a departure or apostasy from the faith chiefly in practical points; in the other, the return of Christendom to an awful condition, resembling heathenism in its moral evils, maintaining withal the form of godliness while its power is denied. In Rom. 1, the Holy Ghost had spoken of the reprobate state of the Gentiles: these terrible characteristics were already true of the heathen. But in 2 Tim., we find that the same thing would be true, in the last days, of those who were professing Christians. They were to lapse into the worst moral evils of heathenism. The outwardly grossest are to be replaced by others of a subtler and worse character, from the rejection of a fuller light from God. From such the faithful were to turn away. Evil men and seducers are to wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived. Is not that a state of ruin, when the description of Christendom is that men shall be such as the Gentiles, whom God gave up to a mind devoid of all judgment? (Compare Rom. 1. 2. and 2 Tim. 3. in the Greek.) It is the general character of these perilous times, which demanded extraordinary warnings.
So in 1 John 2:18, 19. “Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.” The coming of the antichrist was a subject of warning even to the babes in Christ. “Even now are there many antichrists, whereby we know that it is the last time.” Finally, the apostle directs the attention of the babes to the coming of the Savior. The presence of antichrist is a sign of the ruin, not of the faithful, but of the economy as a whole, and of its speedy cutting off. The passage confirms the testimony, that the evil which was to be the occasion of excision was introduced from the beginning, and was to continue till God struck the blow of judgment, which should destroy the wicked one. This evil is here marked, not as infidelity, but as apostasy from Christianity. “They went out from us.” It had set in even at that time. Antichristian evil was found to have its worst spring from the profession of Christ. The Word of God teaches us that the evil, which is the object of the judgment of the Lord Jesus at His return, had crept within the Church, even in apostolic days; that it should continue, and, in spite of God’s patience and goodness, draw down judgment, See the entire epistle of Jude. Certain men had crept in unawares, foreordained to this condemnation. Although, at that moment, these persons might not have been yet so manifested, the apostle gives them, by the prophetic Spirit, these three characters: the natural hatred of the heart alienated from God, such as Cain’s; the teaching of error for reward, like Balaam; and open rebellion against the priesthood and royalty of Christ, like that of Core. In this last state they perish. He says that these were they of whom Enoch prophesied, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh, &c. What was there already in the Church, was the direct mark for the judgment of Christ when He comes, and so predicted from the first. Enoch prophesied of these. The presence of saints does not hinder that. The evil which is to terminate by open revolt and to be judged at Christ’s advent, was found in the Church. What impression does this epistle produce, if it be not a warning to a faithful remnant against a terrible evil which was to bring on judgment—an evil found within the bosom of the Church, of which the state of Sodom and Gomorrah and the fallen angels presented the frightful, but just, picture? Was it not a state of fall and ruin, which might be only in the bud, it is true, at that time, but whose traits and doom were not hidden from the Spirit of prophecy in the apostle? If there is obscurity in all that, there is at least in this obscurity a terrible shade, which God has put there, and which should induce us not to glide so easily by; above all, when the subject in question is one so grave as the destiny of the Church. And here I have an important remark to make. This epistle of Jude, which treats especially of the ruin, like that of John, which puts believers on their guard against antichrist, is not addressed to a Church, but to the faithful in general, as having a common interest, a common destiny. As much may be said of 2 Peter, which also speaks of it, though having a character more in connection with Christians from among the Jews.
The Olive Tree. - Romans 11
The apostle had concluded all under sin without difference, the Jew having only added transgressions under the law: and he had closed the account of the privileges of the saints in the eighth chapter. Not, it is true, on the ground of the elevation of Christ to be head of the body, (that is the subject of the Ephesians,) but on a principle of a headship of Christ going beyond Abraham and David, and extending to a position which answered to that of Adam, the figure of Him that was to come—the new resurrection Man. This blotted out the idea of Israel as to distinctive position before God. Lifted up from the earth, He was to draw all men in a new way. God was the God of the Gentiles, as well as of the Jews. The free gift had all men for its object. The consequent blessings are then enquired into; the presence of the Holy Ghost,—they were called, justified, and glorified, and never to be separated from God’s love in Christ Jesus. This closes the eighth chapter.
But then naturally arises the question: If Jews and Gentiles are indiscriminately admitted by faith, what comes of the promises made to Israel as God’s people? This question the apostle answers in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters, showing that God had foretold that they would be a disobedient and gainsaying people, as they had in fact stumbled at the stumbling stone. The question then, here discussed, is not Church privileges, but how to reconcile their being indiscriminate with the distinctive promises to Israel. And, therefore, (chap. 11) the apostle asks, Has God cast away His people? And here he comes entirely on earthly ground:. for Israel never were, and never will be, and were never promised to be, a heavenly people; whereas, the Church, in its higher and distinctive and proper privileges, was a heavenly people, and had Christ’s suffering portion for them upon earth. They were sitting in heavenly places in him; but they were to have a place actually on earth; and here they replaced for a time Israel. But that did not at all set aside the promises to Israel as such—there was no blending of them. A Jew, or circumcision, was nothing now. One displaced the other on earth. In heaven the distinction was unknown. Christ was the head of the body in heaven, but he was no Messiah of the Gentiles upon earth, though the Gentiles were to trust in Him, so that the apostle could justify himself by the Old Testament.
But then, how reconcile these things? God had not cast away His people. First, He had reserved an elect remnant. Secondly. it was to provoke, as. He had declared He would, to jealousy, His ancient people; therefore, not to cast them off. Thirdly, Israel would be saved as a whole by Christ’s coming again and going forth from Zion. But this last, instead of blending, was preceded by the threat of utterly cutting off the Gentile branches. Now, it is quite clear that this cannot refer to the heavenly body of Christ, (for it cannot be so cut off,) but to God’s dealings with them on earth. And this is yet more evident, because the Israelites are said to be grafted into their own olive tree, which clearly has nothing to do with the Church as a heavenly body: because that is not their olive tree any more than a Gentile’s. All were alike here, children of wrath. There was no difference. It was one God, and one Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. But there was an administration of promises, and immutable promises, which did naturally belong to them. The Gentiles came in here, inasmuch as, being united to Christ the true seed of Abraham, they come into the promises and blessing of Abraham. But on repentance, Israel down here on earth will be grafted into their own olive tree, where we are now contrary to nature. But all this “naturally,” and “contrary to nature,” has no place in our proper church position: all is beyond nature, and contrary to nature there. Yea, though we had known Christ after the flesh, (and He was seed of David according to the flesh, and Abraham was the Jew’s father after the flesh)—but, though we had known Christ after the flesh, we were now to know Hint no more, though we recognize His title. The glory of the Messiah of Israel will be established, but not on the principles, though both be received by grace, on which the Church is set in heaven; because there can be no Israel known there. They have their own olive tree down here, and the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. But in Christ, as known to the Church, there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free; but Christ is all and in all. The Church of heavenly places has put on Christ, and knows nothing else.
And it is because the Church at Jerusalem did yet, as to earth, refer to this special place of Jews, according to the mind of God Himself, (and not as if it did not itself enter into the full heavenly privileges,) according to the sermon of Acts 3., where the unbelieving Jews are still treated as the children of the covenant which God made with Abraham—that the Pentecostal Church has been spoken of as having a Jewish character. It is not that those who composed it did not form part of the heavenly Church and body of Christ; but that God, till Jerusalem had rejected the testimony of the Holy Ghost about a glorified Christ, as she had rejected a humble Christ, did not finally cast her off as having no snore hope. She had deserved it, indeed, but God answered the intercession of Christ for that nation upon the cross, by the Spirit in the mouth of Peter, in Acts 3., (as indeed as a nation He will hereafter, only in a remnant saved by grace) telling them that now, if they repented, He would send Jesus, and the times of refreshing would come. But when he called, there was still “none to answer,” and judgment, though with long patience, took its course. And Paul appears (Col. 1.) as minister of the Church, to fulfill the word of God, and of the Gospel, to every creature under heaven; and the full heavenly indiscriminate character of the one body is brought out. Nobody ever dreamt that the Jewish saints were not of it; but they justly discerned the blessed patient dealings of God with His ancient and beloved people—the nation for which Christ died, and for which He interceded—and the full bringing out of the doctrine of that heavenly body which knew no difference of Jew within itself at all, nor Christ Himself after the flesh, while it recognized the truth of all the rest.
Difference of Position in Glory
Difference there is. The Savior recognizes the setting on His right hand and on His left; and many other passages prove it. Now, if this depend on the blood of Christ, this would attribute a various value to it: make it uncertain and imperfect in the extent of its efficacy. The blood of the Lamb gives to all their sole title to be in the glory, and gives to all an equal and perfect justification from sin; and therefore, in its effect, there can be no difference: to suppose a difference is to call in question the completeness of its efficacy. But there is a difference: and this, while the title to be in the glory is for all in the blood, depends therefore on something else. It is, in the accomplishment of the counsels of God the Father, given to those for whom it is prepared; and given, (though man is not in the least the judge of that labor, and there are first that shall be last, and last first,) according to the working and energy of the Spirit of God, and faithfulness through grace in service. God does what He will with His own. Still we know that, in doing so, He displays what He is, and is consistent with Himself; and position and ‘reward answer to the sovereignty of God, which has given us a position, and the operation of the Spirit, by which we have walked in it. It is the sovereignty of God, we know from the Lord’s answer to the sons of Zebedee, and the parable in Matt. 20. It is the fruit of labor, as we know from 1 Cor. 3:8; the parables, Luke 19 and Matt. 15; 1 Thess. 2:19, 20, 2 John 3. I suppose it will not be questioned that this work is through the efficacious operation of the Spirit of God.
The Sermon on the Mount
The question is not whether the Church can take these directions, and use them by the Spirit, for her guidance. If they are addressed to others than the Church, then a condition is found to have existed to which the testimony of Christ applies, but which is not the Church. If it is solely and exclusively the Church, then there is no example (here at least) of disciples other than the Church; and we are to take the disciples as being, during the lifetime of Jesus, the Church; and the proper and peculiar blessedness of that body, in the unity of the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven, becomes a mere casual difference.
I say, then, that the disciples were not then the Church, though they afterwards became the first nucleus of it, and that the sermon on the mount is not addressed to the Church, nor could be; though the Church now has it for its guide in its walk. If I say to one who has never been at court, You cannot join the king’s court but in a court dress. It is clear that he will have to wear the court dress when there; for what I say means that that is the dress that suits the court; but the man, as yet, does not form part of the king’s court. But farther, the kingdom of heaven is not the Church; and while we enter into it in the way of being the Church, others may enter into it in another way, as the Jews and others during the millennium; and this dress prescribed in the sermon on the mount may be as needed for those who are to enter in in that way, as for those who, by this new form of the manifold wisdom of God, become the Church of God in earth. Thus, when it is said, “Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth,” this may be true of those who shall inherit the earth in a millennial way, and I believe will be true, and more literally and immediately true than it is of the Church, and that to confine it to the Church as exclusively true of it, is only ignorance. This shows the bearing of the question. Then, as to the fact, I say that the disciples were not then the Church, and could not be addressed as the Church; Christ being not yet dead and risen again, and the Spirit not given. They were addressed in their then condition. And is there any great wonder in that ?
But farther. Could one in the Church, a Christian now, as it has been put by one opposed to my view, have sat on the mount with the disciples, and listened with the disciples to this sermon, as addressed to himself as well as to them? I answer at once, No. He would have said, How blessed to my soul are these instructions; what a guide to my feet in this dark world; how my soul delights in them, and in Him who gave them! But he would have felt that they were addressed to them, and not to him. He was in the kingdom, he had the secret of the Lord, and the Holy Ghost dwelling in him. And this one word, “Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven,” would at once make him feel, “This is for them, addressed exclusively to them.” It is impossible that such language as, “Ye shall in no case enter,” can be addressed to those who are already within, who are in and of the kingdom. It gives the immediate consciousness that the address is to others, though it may at the same time give the consciousness that the principles addressed belong to those that are within. That they got new instructions, belonging to the remnant, is most true such as would not have suited any others. That this remnant became the nucleus of the Church, and carried these instructions along with them into it, is equally true. But they were not then addressed as the Church, nor even as being in the kingdom; nor could they be, for neither were set up. And this sermon is in prospect of the setting up of the kingdom, and shows the qualities and persons suited to it before it was so set up, and in no case even alludes to the Church.
For my own part, though a practical direction in principle, I have no doubt that verse 25 applies to the then position of Christ with the nation, and that the nation is now suffering the consequences of not acting on the principle there stated. I add, that while all the teaching here remains eternally true for everyone, yet that, as it stands here, it could be addressed now neither to saint nor sinner. Not to a saint; for it is a question of entering into the kingdom of heaven. Not to sinners; for it is not an address of grace to them at all, nor is redemption once mentioned at all, but doing Christ’s sayings as the ground of entry. (See 7:21.) To say that it will be true as regards heaven for us, is avoiding the question. It is running an analogy, and a just one; but it is not what is said or treated in the sermon on the mount. I affirm, then, that the sermon on the mount was addressed to the disciples in their then state; and I should think it very natural that it should be so. But their then state was not that of the Church, but very far indeed from it.
Earthly Blessing Preceded by Judgments
IT is admitted on all hands that there is a time, or dispensation, in which the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. This is a great object held out in prophecy. The question between us is, Now is this to be brought about? They say: “By our preaching, or by the preaching of the Gospel.” I take the best ground for them. How do they know that? How do they conclude that? Did the Gospel ever do it before? Was it ever promised that it should do it? That man is responsible for its not doing so, I freely admit—but that is not the question. And that he is guilty, too, I admit; I conceive, indeed, that therefore the Gentile Church will be cut off, because it has not done so; and therefore we may say, as a Church, it is damnably guilty because it has not clone so. But, as to actual result, those I speak of pass by the present sin of the Church, and then prophesy (i.e. assert as to the future) that of which they can have no experience as to the past,—that their exertions will do it. They charge us with looking into prophecy: undoubtedly we do, and use it as God intended it, as a charge and warning against our present sin and state; while they prophesy for themselves that which is credit for themselves— though never has the professing Church at large been so far from godliness as now; if not, why all this labor, effort, formation of societies, for home or continental purposes? This is the simple difference: we acknowledge it as a result of God’s power; they say, without God’s word: (and we must add, against it:) “It will be done by our instrumentality.” Believers say, with God’s word, It will not be done thus. We quarrel not with their efforts; (but join in them according to our ability of God, as far as our poor hearts permit us;) but we do quarrel with their assumption as the coming result of their own labors, as if they were prophets, of that of which God has prophesied otherwise. They prophesy: we consult the word, and apply it to judge ourselves, and find the Church guilty. Our assertion, accordingly, is this:
1. That there is no prophecy or promise in Scripture, (which, as to means—observe, of future accomplishment—is prophecy,) that the gradual diffusion of the Gospel shall convert the world. If there be, let them produce it; if not, I affirm that they are assuming something future, without any warrant for it, but their own thoughts.
2. That the prophecies always connect the filling of the world with the knowledge of the glory—with judgments. And, We add, to those who are laboring without reference to this glory, yet are looking to the gathering out of God’s elect—faithfully perhaps—that there is a vast purpose of God, and one which is the result of all God’s purposes, not embraced in their views; and that, as teachers of God’s mind and will, their system must be wholly and utterly defective; for the earth is to be full of the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea. They recognize, and justly, that that cannot be, as it never has been, and as we have seen that it was not intended to be, by the Gospel. There must, therefore, if they admit the truth of God’s word, be some great plan and act of God’s power, on which his mind is especially set, (for His glory in the earth, as in heaven, must be His end, as well as our desire, because we are His saints, and have the mind of Christ,) of which they embrace nothing, teach nothing.
And now, what do we complain of? Is it not prying into futurity? Far otherwise. Is it not taking the testimony of God and applying it to the present lodgment, and therefore offering the sacrifice of folly? I do say it is the privilege of the saints to know what is revealed. It is mere infidelity and unbelief—simple infidelity and unbelief, and rejection of the promise, “He shall show you things to come;” and again: “But God hath revealed then unto us by his Spirit!” that is, the things which He hail prepared for them that love Him. Men may say, It is presumption! But it is no more presumption in me to believe what God has said, and has declared that He has revealed to us for our blessing as to this, than it is to believe what He has stated concerning the accomplished work of Christ: and I suspect the notion of presumption runs pretty much together as to both. Yet this is not my present subject—but this: that the Church is hiding the present judgment of itself from its eyes—that God’s judgments are upon the Church in warning, and they will not hear; and therefore they will be cut off, if they repent not— “And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot; for it is sealed: and the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned. Wherefore the Lord said (smith too,) Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvelous work among this people, even a marvelous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.” (Is. 29:11-14.)
If it be so, that these things are hid, then I say it is a solemn judgment from God—his greatest judgment on the Church thus to hide them—a sign of judgment that they may be changed. Yet men seem to rejoice and pride themselves on their wisdom in knowing nothing about them—rejoice in the last heaviest sign, the deep hope-obscuring cloud, before the judgments of God break down upon them who have willfully staid abroad in the field because they believed not, or received not the word, and warning, and threatenings of God the Lord. For there is one that Doeth and judgeth—poor man! If the Lord hath indeed poured out upon you a deep sleep and hath closed your eyes, the prophets, and rulers, and seers hath He covered; then woe for you; and what shall the sheep do? All your services are but folly; for when God, perhaps, is calling for repentance, behold, you are in joy; when judgment is ready to strike, you are rejoicing; when God calls to fasting, and weeping, and mourning, behold, you are killing sheep and slaying oxen. If the testimony of God be not received as applicable in our present state, then all our worship and service must be guided by man’s judgment, and our fear by the precept of men, and be foolishness and rebellion in His sight. But ye say, We will not consider ... ..I say not to you, look at the hopes and the future glory, but I say, God has warned of judgment now. I speak of something which applies to you now; yea, why even of yourselves judge ye not that which is right? Does not the Church, do not we, deserve judgment? The Lord hearken to the supplication of His servants, that our eyes may be opened! Infidel liberty is not Christian liberty. God may use it for His own purposes in punishing the wicked, as He saith, “O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the staff in their hand is mine indignation.” But if the people rejoice in Resin and rehab, trust in this Tiglath Pileser does but show their infidelity, and will be their distress, and not their strength; for yet it is but a little while (and indeed it is the rod of God against the corruption of the Church) His anger will cease, and his indignation, in their destruction. The prophet may be grieved at the evil of the Church, but the spirit of infidelity is the spirit of pride—a proud man which enlargeth his desire as hell, neither stayeth at home. It will have its day, perhaps, against a corrupt and guilty church: it may seek to sit upon the mount of God, but as soon as the Lord has accomplished His whole work upon Mount Zion and Jerusalem, He will punish the stout heart of the king of Assyria, and the glory of his high looks; and the spirit of the prophet will be of grief, intercession and pity, that the wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous than he. The Lord will hearken, hear and deliver; for though he be proud, his heart that is lifted up is not righteous in and the just shall live by his faith. Of this infidelity may be sure, that it will rack its heart in bitterness for the madness with which it is now proud; for God’s eye is upon it, and the proof of it is, that it sees Him not; it is rushing in blindness into the bitterness of God’s wrath. There will they be in great fear, for God is in the generation of the righteous.
The Sympathy of Christ
I would NOW add a little which, I hope, may clear up some minds as to Christ’s sympathy with us. First, I assume that my reader holds, as myself, the true and real humanity of the Lord, both in body and soul; that He was a true living man in flesh and blood.
Christ was a man in the truest sense of the word, body and soul. The question is as to His relation to God as man. We are all agreed that He was sinless. He had true humanity, but united to Godhead. He was God manifest in flesh. Scripture speaks simply, saying, He partook of flesh and blood. That is what the Christian has simply, and as taught of God, to believe. Was His humanity then without a divine spring of thought and feeling? Were it said it was not of or from His humanity, I should have nothing to say; but to say there was none in it, unsettles the doctrine of Christ’s person. There was the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and the divine nature was a spring of many thoughts and feelings in Him. This is not the whole truth; but to deny it, is not truth. If it be merely meant that humanity has not in itself a divine spring, that is plain enough; it would not be humanity. I am equally aware that it will be said, that it was in His person; but to separate wholly the humanity and divinity in springs of thought and feeling, is dangerously overstepping Scripture. Is it meant that the love and holiness of the divine nature did not produce, was not a spring of thought and feeling in His human soul? This would be to lower Christ below a Christian. If so, it is merely a round-about road to Socinianism.—His humanity, it is said, was not sui generis. This too is confusion. The abstract word humanity means humanity and no more: and, being abstract, must be taken absolutely; according to its own meaning. But, if it is meant that, in fact, the state of Christ’s humanity was not sui generis, it is quite wrong, for it was united to Godhead, which no one else’s humanity over was; which, as to fact, alters its whole condition. For instance, it was not only sinless, but in that condition incapable of sinning; and to take it out of that condition is to take it out of Christ’s person. What conclusion do I draw from all this?—That the wise soul will avoid the wretched attempt to settle in such a manner questions as to Him whom no one knoweth but the Father. The whole process of the reasoning is false.
To turn, then, to Scripture, we are told of the sinless infirmities of human nature, and that Christ partook of them. Now, I have no doubt this has been said most innocently; but, not being Scripture, we must learn in what sense it is used. Now, that Christ was truly man, in thought, feeling, and sympathy, is a truth of cardinal blessing and fundamental importance to our souls. But I have learnt thereby, not that humanity is not real humanity, if there is a divine spring of thought and feeling in it; but that God can be the spring of thought and feeling in it, without its ceasing to be truly and really man. This is the very truth of infinite and unspeakable blessedness that I have learnt. This, in its little feeble measure, and in another and derivative way, is true of us now, by grace. He who searches the hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit. This is true in Jesus in a yet far more important and blessed way. There was once an innocent man left to himself; the spring of thought and feeling being simply man, however called on by every blessing and natural testimony of God without. We know what came of it. Then there was a man whose heart, alas! was the spring “ from within,” of evil thoughts and the dark train of acts that followed. What I see in Christ is man, where God has become the spring of thought and feeling. And, through this wonderful mystery, in the new creation in us, all things are of God. That, if we speak of His and our humanity, is what distinguishes it. Metaphysically to say, “His and our humanity,” is nonsense; because humanity is an abstraction which means nothing but itself, and always itself, and nothing else: just as if I said Godhead; and if I introduce any idea of its actual state, I am destroying the idea and notion the word conveys. But the moment I do associate other ideas, I must introduce the whole effect and power of these ideas to modify the abstract one according to the actual fact. Thus, humanity is always simply humanity. The moment I call it His, it is sui generis, because it is His and in fact humanity sustained by Godhead is not humanity in the same state as humanity un-sustained by Godhead. Sinless humanity, sustained in that state by Godhead, is not the same as sinful humanity left to itself.
But Scripture never uses the term that Christ was subject to infirmities. Nor is being in infirmities necessary to sympathy with those in them; but being out of them, though having a nature capable of apprehending in itself the suffering it brings into. The mother sympathizes with the babe in the pain she does not feel.
Further, Christ is contrasted in His priestly sympathies with men having infirmity. The law makes men priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, the Son consecrated for evermore. (Heb. 7:28.) The high priest taken from among men had compassion, for that (while priest, note) he was compassed with infirmity. That was more man’s way of sympathy; for he had to offer for his own sins. Instead of this, Christ in the days of His flesh, when He was not a priest, cried to Him who was able to save Him from death, took the place of lowly, subject, sorrowful man, and received the weight of it in His soul, and then, being made perfect, acts as priest. It is not said that He was infirm like us, but in all points tempted like as we are; and that He suffered, being tempted, and therefore is able to succor them that are tempted. Another important passage, connected with this, is in Matthew. Christ took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses. Now, how was this? “And he cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all that were sick: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses.” I do not doubt His whole soul entered into them, in the whole sorrow and burden of them before God, in the full sense of what they were, so viewed, in order to set them aside and bar Satan’s power as to them. But was He sick and infirm because Himself took our infirmities? Clearly not. In a word, it is not being Himself in the state with which He sympathizes which gives the sympathy. Christ partook of flesh and blood; that is what Scripture states, and that is the whole matter. He was a true real man in flesh and blood. That He was truly a man and an Israelite in true flesh and blood, born such, no one questions. But His associations in relationship with God were with the saints in Israel. They no doubt had the thoughts and feelings of an Israelitish saint; that is, Israel’s responsibility, failure, hopes and promises formed the basis, or structure, or character of their feelings as saints; but Christ’s relationship was with them. And this is the distinctive character of the book of Psalms. It takes up Israelitish hopes, and circumstances and conditions, no doubt, but as held by the saints only; and excludes the ungodly as an adverse party. Now, that was Christ’s place. It was association with the holy remnant in their Israelitish condition. Their relationship to God was a holy relationship; and though they might go through every test and trial of the new nature and faith on which it was founded, and acknowledge all the failure and the sin under which they were suffering, their relationship was a holy one with God. Into that Christ enters; and, therefore, though He may enter into their sorrows and bear their guilt, He has no need to be in any other relationship to God than a holy one. In that He may feel the effects of another, just as a renewed soul, because it is near God and feels accordingly, feels its former state of sin and guilt; but it is not in it, save where guilt is not yet removed from the conscience, in which position of feeling, clearly, Christ was solely as a substitute. He is not associated with man’s or Israel’s distance, (save as bearing sin,) but with the children’s relationship to God. Because the children partake of flesh and blood, He partook of them. The taking flesh and blood is stated as the consequences of his relationship with the children. Let us quote the passages:
“Both He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified, are all of one.”
“Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren.”
“I and the children which God has given me.” (Compare Isaiah 8.)
“I will put my trust in Him.”
That is, the proof of His being in human nature is godly relationship in man.
It was not, then, that by taking flesh and blood He placed himself in the distance of man; but that, because he associated himself with the children, He partook of flesh and blood, and that is all that is said. The Sanctifier and the sanctified being all of one, He was not ashamed to call them brethren. But His relationship was with the sanctified. His spirit entered into every sorrow, His soul passed through every distress, and He suffered under every temptation; but His relationship with God was never man’s or Israel’s as it then was, unless the cross be spoken of, because, His was sinless, theirs sinful. It was His own. His relative position, that is, His relation to God, was according to what He was, whatever He might take upon Him or enter into in spirit, which included every sorrow and every difficulty felt, according to the full force of truth, and that before God.
This distinctive relationship with the remnant before God, the Psalms specifically show. The Spirit of Christ does not accept the position of Israel as it then stood; but distinguishes (see Ps. 1.) the Godly Man as alone owned or approved of God, and Christ, born in the world, owned as Son, and decreed King in Zion in spite of adversaries. He identifies Himself with the excellent on the earth. (Ps. 16.) God is good to Israel, even to them that are of a clean heart. He is God of Jacob, but a refuge to the remnant alone. With them, Christ in spirit identifies Himself, and abhors the rest, looking for help—judicial help—against an ungodly nation.
The circumstances of His baptism were a remarkable illustration of this. Did the Lord take His place with the Pharisees and scribes who were not baptized? Clearly, not. When does He associate Himself with Israel? In the first movement of the answer of faith to the testimony of God: when the people went to be baptized, Jesus also went. Now, that was the answer of grace to God’s testimony in John, in the remnant in whose hearts He was acting—the first and lowest beginning of it—still, it was the movement of the heart under God’s grace, in answer to the testimony. It was really the gracious part of Israel; it was really the excellent, the godly remnant, with whom Christ identified himself in their godliness. He was fulfilling righteousness.
Regeneration Essential for the Kingdom of God
The third chapter of John first brings the subject of the operations of the Spirit before us at large.— “A man must be born again,” born of water and of the Spirit. But, while this is generally taken simply, that he must be regenerate to be saved, the passage states much more.—He cannot see nor enter into the kingdom of God, a kingdom composed of earthly things and heavenly things, of which a Jew must be born again to be partaker (however much he fancied himself a child of the kingdom) even in its earthly things, which Nicodemus, as a teacher of Israel, ought to have known, as from Ezek. 36:21-38; and to the heavenly things of which the Lord could not direct them then, save as showing the door, even the cross, a door which opened into better and higher things: wherein (as in the Spirit’s work, being prerogative power, “so was every one that was born of the Spirit,” and Gentiles therefore might be partakers of it—for it made, not found, men, what it would have them) the Lord declared that God loved not the Jew only, but the world. In this passage itself, then, we have not merely the individual renewed, and fit for heaven, but the estimate of the Jew, a kingdom revealed, embracing earthly and heavenly things, which the regenerate alone saw, and into which they entered—to the heavenly things of which, the cross, as yet as unintelligible as the heavenly things themselves, formed the only door: wherein was exhibited the Son of man lifted up, and the Son of God given in God’s love to the world. “In the regeneration,” of which the Spirit’s quickening operation in the heart was the first fruits, “this Son of man would sit on the throne of His glory.”
The principle then, on which men dwell, is true; but the revelation of this chapter is much wider and more definite than they suppose. It is not merely that the man is changed or saved; but he sees and enters a kingdom the world knows nothing of till it comes in power; and moreover, that such an one receives a life as true and real, and much more important and blessed than any natural life in the flesh. It is not merely changing a man by acting on his faculties, but the giving a life which may act indeed now, through these faculties, on objects far beyond them, as the old and depraved life on objects within its or their reach; but in which he is made partaker of the divine nature, in which not merely the faculties of his soul have new objects, but as in this he was partner with the first Adam, the living soul, so in that with the second Adam, the quickening Spirit. And we must add, that the Church, in order to its assimilation with Him in it, is made partaker of this, consequent upon His resurrection, and therefore is made partaker of the life according to the power of it thus exhibited; and has its existence consequent upon, yea, as the witness of, the passing away (blessed be God!) of all the judgment of its sins; for it has its life from, and consequent upon, the resurrection of Christ out of that grave in which He bore its sins. It exists, and has not its existence but, consequent upon the absolute accomplishment and passing away of its judgment.
This, then, is the real character of our regeneration into the kingdom, where the charge of sin is not, nor can be, upon us, being introduced there by the power of that in which all is put away. The life of the Church is identified with the resurrection of Christ, and therefore the unqualified forgiveness of all its flesh could do, for it was borne, and borne away. The justification of the Church is identified with living grace, for it has it, because quickened together with Him, as out of the grave, where He bore all its sins.
Thus are necessarily connected regeneration and justification; and the operation of the Spirit, not a mere acting on the faculties, a work quite separate from Christ and known by its fruits, while the death of Christ is something left to reason about; but it is a quickening together with Christ out of their trespasses and sins, in which I find myself indeed morally dead, but Hint judicially dead for me, and therefore forgiven, and justified necessarily, as so quickened. The resurrection of Christ proves that there will be a judgment, says the apostle. (Acts. 17.) It proves that there will be none for me, says the Spirit by the same blessed apostle, for he was raised for my justification. He was dead under my sins; God has raised Him; and where are they? The Church is quickened out of Jesus’ grave, where the sins were left.