“Ye must be born again,” is a statement of the Lord Himself, at once absolute in its character, and of universal application.
As those who have sinned, we need, and in Him we find, a Savior. His sacrifice has made atonement for all the sins of His people, and is sufficient for the sins of the whole world. But forgiveness of sins is not all that God’s word speaks of. It tells us of our corrupt nature, the flesh, which cannot be improved. A nature may be trained and restrained, but it cannot be changed. Man has sinned, and he is also a sinner. His sins must be atoned for, and a new nature he must receive. Hence the necessity of that new birth spoken of in John 3, for by birth, and by birth alone, does anyone receive a nature. By natural generation from Adam we receive a fallen nature; by spiritual generation of water and of the Spirit we receive a new nature, unchangeable in its character, sinless, impeccable. “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”
There are few in this land who will not own they have sinned, however trivial the iniquity may appear in their eyes; but how few have learned that their nature, derived from Adam, is not only sinful, but incapable of amendment. Yet this lesson the cross of Christ plainly teaches. It was because of this that God sent His own Son into the world in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, that He might condemn sin in the flesh. (Rom. 8:3.) It was to show the need of a new nature, that from the pierced side of a dead Christ flowed out water as well as blood. He came to make propitiation for our sins. He came, too, that we might live through Him. (1 John 4:9, 10.) It was to impress on Nicodeimis a truth so important to all, but so generally overlooked, that the Lord addressed him in a seemingly abrupt way that night: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, “Except a man be born again (or, anew), he cannot see the kingdom of God.” And what He then so plainly affirmed, “Ye must be born anew,” received a striking illustration from the incidents of His last journey to Jerusalem, recorded in Matt. 20:17-28, where the fruits of the two natures are respectively brought out.
On the one side we have the fruits of the old man illustrated in the conduct of the Jews, Gentiles, and the two disciples, James and John. on the other side we have the fruits of the new man (new when we speak of ourselves, but not new when we speak of Christ, the woman’s seed, conceived of the Holy Ghost), illustrated in the conduct of the Son of man. Hatred and self-seeking characterize the one; love and self-renunciation characterize the other. The locality, the people, the time in which this is manifested, are all worthy of notice.
1. The locality.—“Behold, we go up to Jerusalem.” In the city of the great King, where God had manifested His presence, where the ark had found its final resting place in the days of Solomon, where was the temple, and the dwelling place of the high priest, the Son of man was to be betrayed. No other spot in the whole universe would have clone as well for this act of man, for Jerusalem was regarded as the center of religious knowledge, the metropolis of Judaism. Had He been betrayed elsewhere, it might have been said, at Jerusalem they would have acted differently. But to bring out what man is, as a child of Adam, at Jerusalem He must be crucified.
2. How could that be accomplished? — “he shall be betrayed,” is the Lord’s announcement. He voluntarily surrendered Himself to do God’s will, but He was betrayed, so the Jews by one of His disciples. Judas had heard His words, had seen His acts, had received freely with the rest power to cast out devils in His name, yet He should betray Him. Acquaintance with the Lord, close intercourse with Him he surely had enjoyed, yet he would be found ready for this sin for the paltry price of thirty pieces of silver. Advantages such as none but the twelve apostles possessed may be enjoyed, and the individual turns traitor at last, unless he is born again, becoming partaker of a new, the divine, nature. Nothing short of this is of any avail.
“Betrayed” unto the chief priests and scribes they shall condemn Him to death. To execute they had no power. What they could they did, and only there stopped. They condemned Him to death. Their will was manifested, the power only was wanting. He must die, was their judgment of the case. Their hatred could never be satisfied whilst He lived.
And who were these who took such a prominent part in the matter’? Not the unlettered Galileans, not the people, the rabble who knew not the law and were accursed (John 7:49); but the professed conservators and expounders of God’s word. They were not ignorant of the law or the prophets, but they condemned Him to death. The highest authorities in Israel, the chief priests and scribes of Jerusalem, must be specially guilty of this sin. Neither acquaintance with the Lord as Judas enjoyed, nor familiarity with the letter of scripture, as the chief priests and scribe: laid claim to, preserved the individuals concerned from imbruing their hands in the blood of their King and Lord.
To execute the Lord was beyond their power, so they were to deliver Him “to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify.” Examined by Pilate, He was declared to be innocent. Sent to Herod, He was brought back to Pilate as one who deserved not to die. As the Roman governor, Pilate sat to administer the law. As a rule, the Romans showed respect to law. An unrighteous governor could be impeached and punished. Paul made the magistrates at Philippi tremble, because they had beaten two Roman citizens previously uncondemned. He escaped being scourged at Jerusalem, because the chief captain was restrained by Roman law. He could appeal to Caesar, and that instant he was sheltered by the law from the fury and fanaticism of a Jewish mob. It was to no barbarian power, therefore, that the Lord was delivered. But, to show up what man is, whilst handed over to the Roman governor to be tried by law, He was mocked and scourged before being crucified. Declared by the judge to be innocent, He was given up to the malice of his soldiers, and to be the sport of Herod and of his men of war. Finding no fault in Him, Pilate yet ordered Him to be scourged, and at last, yielding to the clamor of the Jews, condemned Him to be crucified. Everywhere that man’s nature, as a child of Adam, comes out, it is found to be only evil. From the corrupt tree, only corrupt fruit must be expected.
3. From the people concerned in it, let us turn to the time when it took place. Had the crucifixion taken place in the world’s infancy, some might have excused it. Education had not time to take effect, they might have objected. Intellectual cultivation had not fully developed itself. Moral training had not a suitable sphere in which its influence could be tested. But, surely, to nullify all such excuses, and to bring out what the nature of man really is, the Lord Jesus was crucified in the reign of Tiberius. For fifteen centuries had the Jews been in possession of God’s word, read every sabbath day in the synagogues; yet the chief priests and scribes were found unchanged in heart. For centuries had the Gentiles possessed a literature betokening great intellectual cultivation. Very many of the classical writers read and valued in these days, were well known in those. The golden age of Roman literature was still existing. If secular education could avail a fallen creature to change his nature, or guide him aright, the Gentile had for long the opportunity and the means at command. The time of trial came, and found man just as ready to act unjustly, just as ready to act after the dictates of his fallen nature as ever. Neither time, nor moral training, nor mental culture, nor the possession of a divine revelation, restrained either Jew or Gentile from showing their hatred of what was good, and enmity to God in their dealing with His Son. Betrayed to the Jews, the Jews condemned Him to death, and delivered Him to the Gentiles, who, in their turn, tried and then crucified Him. Such is the simple history of man, in connection with the cross of Christ.
How refreshing to turn for one moment from the direct subject before us, the unchangeable character of our fallen nature, to the unchangeableness of God’s word. “And the third day He shall rise again.” Man showed what he was, but he could not frustrate in any one thing God’s counsel. The death of the Lord exhibited man’s nature as utterly bad; incapable of amendment. The resurrection of the Lord demonstrated God’s counsels about His Son to be incapable of alteration. And all that man, instigated by Satan, could stoop to attempt, never for one moment diverted God from His purposes of grace.
But not only have we such striking examples of the character of man’s fallen nature in those who were unconverted; but here we can advance a step further, and observe the workings of that nature in those who were converted. This is of great importance, because it sets at rest a question which often disturbs godly but uninstructed souls. They see what man is when unconverted, and—expecting that when they are converted their old nature will change—are distressed, and doubt the reality of their new birth, because the old man, when it works, is still the same. A nature, we again repeat, can never change, as the history before us proves.
The mother of Zebedee’s children, with her two sons, prostrated herself before the Lord, desiring of Him a favor. “Grant that these my two sons may sit the one on thy right hand, the other on the left in thy kingdom.” A place of preeminence above others they sought. What place had Peter or Andrew, or any of the others, in their hearts when they asked this? They would provide for themselves, not for others; for, though the mother is introduced as the speaker, they clearly, as the history shows (Matt. 20:20-24), and Mark relates, joined in the request she made. Converted they were; the special companions of the Lord they had been (Matt. 17:1; Mark 5:37); yet that nature derived from Adam still existed, and when it was allowed to act gave no indications of any change. Man by nature is selfish. It may manifest itself in a thousand different forms, but, traced to the root, self-pleasing or self-seeking will be found at the bottom.
If such is man’s nature, what of the Son of man? As light is opposed to darkness, so what He displayed was the opposite of that which man here exhibits. James and John cared for themselves; He only cared for others. Men manifested the most intense hatred; He shows the strongest love.
“The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister.” What an entire abnegation of self is here. “The Son of man came not to be ministered unto.” Who is the Son of man? Let Psalm 8 furnish the reply. What is His position in the universe? Let Daniel 7 give the answer. The Son of man has dominion given Him by God over all the earth. The Son of man is the Ancient of days Himself. (Dan. 7:13, 22.) The great ones of the earth exercise authority over their fellows. The Son of man came to minister to His creatures. He could claim the homage of all, and command the service of the heavenly host. But on earth He appeared as a servant to minister to the children of men. The blind men of Jericho, the Syrophenician woman, the centurion, the ruler of Capernaum in Galilee, the impotent man at Bethesda, the blind beggar at the temple gate, the widow of Nain, as well as the sisters of Lazarus, tell us how truly He came to minister. He entered the chamber of Peter’s wife’s mother, and went to the house of Jairus to raise up his daughter. In the house the multitude followed Him, so that they could not so much as eat bread; but He never sent them away because He could not attend to their wants. The wilderness, and the temple thronged with worshippers, attest His readiness to feed and refresh the multitude; the well of Sychar, and the sycamore tree of Jericho, His willingness to minister to individuals.
He was God, some might say, and so could thus act. He was man also, we must remember. He hungered, He thirsted, He was weary, He lay clown to sleep, He was strengthened by an angel in the garden, He was ministered to by women for the supply of bodily wants. Perfect man He was, yet came not to be ministered unto but to minister. He could receive from His creatures, for He needed it; but He came to give them what they wanted. How gently, yet how plainly, He rebuked His disciples.
But further, whilst Jew and Gentile would be showing their enmity to Him, He would manifest love for them, for He came “to give his life a ransom for many.” For His disciples, for the Jews who condemned Him, for the Gentiles who crucified Him, that ransom would avail. He “gave himself a ransom for all,” we read in 1 Tim. 2:6; “a ransom for many,” He here says. Why this difference? Was He less inclined to save sinners when on earth than He is now? Would He limit the extent to which the value of His death could be applied? The truth must be told: He would save all; but all will not be saved. When He speaks of many, He speaks not of the extent of His desires, but of what man in his folly would restrict. All are not saved, because all will not be saved.
Such, then, are the characteristics of the divine nature as here displayed in the Son of man; for whilst His atonement is spoken of* the motive which prompted it—love—is implied. Are we then simply to study these characteristics as beautiful subjects for contemplation, with which, however, we have no concern? They are mitten for our instruction, and for our example. “Even as the Son of man,” are words which teach that as He acted so should we. Atonement was His work, and His only; but love which prompted such a sacrifice is to be manifested in His disciples. (1 John 3:1, 6.) To act as He acted, we must be partakers of the divine nature. Such characteristics and motives are not found in the unconverted children of Adam.
So Matt. 20:17-26 is a beautiful illustration of the doctrinal statement of John 3:6, and furnishes ample grounds to all who read it for the absolute statement of the Lord to Nicodemus, “Ye must be born again.”