The Son of God: Part 1

 •  8 min. read  •  grade level: 8
 
I am sure that I dread reasonings where affections should animate us, and the withdrawing from the place of living power, into anything like a region of notions or theories. But the mysteries of God are all of the highest practical value, in either strengthening for service, comforting under trial, or enlarging the soul’s communion.
The Apostle speaks of himself and others as “Ministers of Christ,” and also as “Stewards of the mysteries of God.” And so we, in our measure, are to be ministers (that is, servants) in all practical, personal readiness and devotedness; patient, diligent, and serviceable in labors; in all of which some of us may know how little we are in comparison with others.
But we are also to be “stewards”; and that, too, of “mysteries,” keeping uncorrupt and inviolate the peculiarities of divine revelation. Reasoning men may not receive them. The cross was foolishness to such; and “the princes of this world,” the men of philosophy who professed themselves to be wise, knew not “the wisdom of God in a mystery.” But that mystery is not to be surrendered to them in anywise. Our stewardship is of such; and it is required of stewards, that a man be found faithful (1 Cor. 4:1, 21Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. 2Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. (1 Corinthians 4:1‑2)).
The guardianship and witness of the personal glory of the Son of God form a chief part of this high and holy stewardship. I observe John guarding that glory with a jealousy quite of its own kind. There are, for instance, measures and methods recommended, when Judaizing corruptions or the like are to be dealt with.
In the Epistle to the Galatians, where the simplicity of the gospel is vindicated, there is a pleading and a yearning in the midst of earnest and urgent reasoning. But in John’s Epistles, all is peremptory. There is a summary forcing out, or keeping out, all that is not of that unction of the Holy One, which teaches the Son as well as the Father, which will admit of no lie to be of the truth, and which distinctly says, “Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father,” 1 John 2:2323Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: (but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. (1 John 2:23).
This diversity of style in the wisdom of the Spirit has its value; and we should mark it. The observing of days, or the not eating of meat are things which really depreciate the full glory and liberty of the gospel. But they are to be borne with (Rom. 14). But depreciation of the person of the Son of God would not be thus borne with, or have a decree passed in its favor after this manner.
A mere journeying from Egypt to Canaan would not have constituted true pilgrimage. Many a one had traveled that road without being a stranger and pilgrim with God. Nay, though the journey were attended with all the trials and inconveniences of such an arid and trackless wild, it would not have been divine or heavenly pilgrimage. A merely toilsome, self-denying life, even though endured with that moral courage which becomes God’s strangers on earth, will not do. In order to make that journey the journey of God’s Israel, the Ark must be in their company, borne by a people ransomed by blood out of Egypt, and tending, in their faith of a promise, to Canaan.
This was the business of Israel in the desert. They had to conduct the ark, to accompany it, and to hallow it. They might betray their weakness, and incur chastening and discipline in many a way, and on many an occasion; but if their direct business were given up, all was gone. And this did come to pass. The tabernacle of Moloch was taken up, and the star of Remphan; and this was despite of the ark of Jehovah; and the camp had, therefore, their road turned away from Canaan to Babylon or Damascus (Amos 5; Acts 7).
And what ark is in the midst of the saints now for safe and holy and honorable conduct through this desert world, if not the name of the Son of God? What mystery is committed to our stewardship and testimony, if not that? “He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed.” 2 John 99Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. (2 John 9), 10. The wall of partition is to be raised by the saints between them and Christ’s dishonor.
It is upon the heart a little to consider the Lord Jesus as Son of God; and, if He give help from Himself, the subject will be a blessing to us.
We are baptized “in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Matthew 28:1919Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: (Matthew 28:19). This carries with it the formal declaration of the mystery of the Godhead; the Son being a divine person (in the recognition or declaration of this sentence), as is the Father, and as is the Holy Spirit.
It appertains to other scriptures to give us the same mystery (that the Father, the Son and the Spirit are three persons in the one divine glory or Godhead), in other and more moral ways; showing it in its grace and power, and in its application to our need, our life, and our edification. John’s Gospel specially does this, drawing it out from its orderly form, as in the words of baptism, and giving it to our understanding as saints, our affections, and our consciences, making it our possession in faith and communion.
In connection with this, I might observe, that in chapter 1:14, the saints are heard, as it were, interrupting the story of the glories of Jesus, and sealing, by their testimony, the great truth of “the Word” being “made flesh.” And in the fervor which became them at such a moment, they break or interrupt the current of their own utterances in that verse. For they begin to speak of the Word made flesh, but, ere they end that record they (in a parenthesis) publish His personal glory, which they say they had seen, even “the glory as of the only begotten of the Father.” And this only begotten of the Father is spoken of, very soon afterward, as “in the bosom of the Father”—words to be deeply cherished by our souls. (Verse 18.)
Matthew and Mark first notice His Sonship of God at His baptism.
Luke goes further back, and notices it at His birth.
But John goes back further still, even to the immeasurable, unspeakable distance of eternity, and declares His Sonship “in the bosom of the Father.”
There were, I doubt not, different apprehensions of Him, different measures of faith touching His person, in those who called on Him. He Himself owns, for instance, the faith of the centurion, in apprehending His personal glory, to be beyond what He had found in Israel. (Matt. 8: Luke 7.) But all this in no wise affects what we hear of Him, that He was the Son “in the bosom of the Father,” or “that Eternal Life, which was with the Father,” and was manifested to us. (1 John 1.)
We must not, beloved, touch this precious mystery. We should fear to dim the light of that love in which our souls are invited to walk on their way to heaven. And—what is a deeper and tenderer thought, if I may be bold to utter it—we should fear to admit of any confession of faith (rather, indeed, of unbelief) that would defraud the divine bosom of its eternal, ineffable delights, and which would tell our God that He knew not a Father’s joy in that bosom, as He opened it; and which would tell our Lord that He knew not a Son’s joy in that bosom as He lay there from all eternity.
I cannot join in this. If there are persons in the Godhead, as we know there are, are we not to know also that there are relationships between them? Can we dispense with such a thought? Is there not revealed to faith, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit; the Son begotten, and the Spirit proceeding? Indeed there is. The persons, in that glory are not, independent, but related. Nor is it beyond our measure to say that the great archetype of love, the blessed model or original of all relative affection, is found in that relationship.
Can I be satisfied with the unbelieving thought, that there are not Persons in the Godhead, and that Father, Son, and Spirit are only different lights in which the One Person is presented? The substance of the gospel would be destroyed by such a thought. And can I be satisfied with the unbelieving thought that these Persons are not related? The love of the gospel would be dimmed, by such a thought.
(To be Continued).