It is generally supposed
that to teach that Christ was of divine nature in the days of his flesh is to
honor him; and to carry this error further, with a view, it would seem, of
honoring him as to his fleshly nature also, the theory of "Immaculate
Conception" was invented. Instead of this theory of dual nature, perfect
on the one hand by being of divine substance; and perfect on the other by a
miraculous transformation of the flesh of his mother from "sinful
flesh" to "immaculate flesh," honoring him, it robs him entirely
of merit and consequently of honor as the result of merit. If He had been
immortal before he inhabited a flesh body, and was so during his bodily
existence, he could not have died; for that which is immortal (deathless)
cannot die. And if his body was immaculate it was free from the power of that
death which came upon mankind through the sin of Adam; and in that case his
body ought not to have died.
Supposing the theory of
duality of nature--one immortal, the other immaculate flesh--during his earthly
life, it will be admitted by all that both the personality which is supposed to
have preceded the begettal of the body and the body itself are now immortal and
therefore immaculate. Is there any revealed principle of law or justice upon
which (supposing it were possible for an immortal
person to die) Jesus could be required to die now? Certainly
not, and why not? Because he stands in no sense related to any law of
death; and therefore, according to the law of death which God has revealed and
which he honors, it would be unlawful for Christ to die. Now if this law
is carried back to Jesus in the days of his flesh, if his supposed immortal
personality (which, it is claimed, pre-existed), and his fleshly body were both
free from any law of death, then his death was unlawful; and how shall we
account for a "very God" doing, or submitting himself to, an unlawful
thing? Moreover, how shall we account for the other two co-equal parts of the
Trinity allowing, yea requiring, death on the part of one who, according to the
divine law of death, ought not to have died? The further we press these
questions the more evident it becomes that instead of it being any honor to
Christ to teach that he was composed of a personal, immortal entity, and an
immaculate body, we dishonor him and the Deity, in that, according to Deity’s
own law--and we have no other governing the case--an unlawful thing was
required by two supposed persons of the Godhead, and an unlawful thing was done
by the other supposed person of the Trinity.
There are revealed facts
on this subject which cannot be ignored, and which must shape our course in
deciding the question of the nature of Christ and how salvation was exemplified
in him.
1. It is a fact that
God devised his plan of salvation in such a way as to depend upon the
death of Christ.
2. It is a fact that Jesus realized that he must die a sacrificial death in
obedience to the law of the spirit of life, or the gospel.
3. God has revealed it as His law that death cannot take place by His approval
unless the subject is in some manner involved
in the
"law of sin and death."
Now it must be evident
that an immortal Christ could not be in any sense related to the law of sin and
death; neither could an immaculate Christ be subject thereto. In order,
therefore, to really believe in the actual death of Christ we must believe that
he was of a nature capable of dying, and that he was so related to the law of
sin and death that his death, as required by the plan of salvation, should not
conflict with any revealed law of God but rather be in accordance with it; I
use the words, "really believe in the actual death of Christ,"
because one holding that Jesus was the second person of the Trinity, deathless
and co-equal with God, cannot really believe that Jesus actually died. He must,
when he says that Christ died, hold in mental reserve the thought that he who
was "God very God" could not and did not die; but he will quiet his
conscience with the thought that he does believe that his body died, and so
with this compromise he lets it go at that, which is but a sort of a bargain
made with a solemn, serious subject. But even to admit that Christ’s body died,
there must be an admission that his body, instead of being immaculate, was
involved in the law of sin and death, under the same Adamic condemnation which
all descendants of Adam are under; otherwise the belief in the death of even his
body, only, would be in direct conflict with the law and justice of God as
revealed in his Word. To believe that Jesus was mortal, under the law of sin
and death in common with those he came to redeem, and that notwithstanding this
he lived a perfect life, triumphed over sin and death and hades and thus
merited the honor and glory he now enjoys, is to honor him in the highest
sense; while to believe that he was God, immortal and immaculate, and that he
therefore could not sin, is to regard his temptation, suffering and
death as unreal, a mere sham, in which there could be no merit, no honor, no
glory.
But we must be sure
that the three propositions we have submitted are sound, and the Scriptures
must be our authority.
1. That God’s
plan of salvation was made dependent upon the death of Christ is evident from
the following scriptures:
Gen. 3: 15--And I will
put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it
shall bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Gen. 15: 8, 9--And he
(Abraham) said, Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall inherit it? And he
said unto him, Take me an heifer of three years old,
and a she goat of three years old, and a ram of three years old, and a turtle
dove, and a young pigeon. [All these were sacrifices typical of Christ.]
Numb. 21: 9--And Moses
made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and
it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld
the serpent of brass he lived.
John 3: 14, 15--And as
Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be
lifted up; that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal
life
II. Sam. 7: 14--I will
be his father, and he shall be my son. In suffering for iniquity I will chasten
him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men.
Isa. 53: 10-12--Yet it
pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief; when thou shalt make
his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days,
and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the
travail of his soul, and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall my righteous
servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I
divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the
strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered
with the transgressors; and he bear the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.
Dan.
Zec.
Phil. 2: 8--And being
found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto
death, even the death of the cross.
Matt. 26: 39--O my
Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I
will, but as thou wilt.
Acts
Heb. 12: 2--Looking
unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set
before him endured the cross, etc.
Heb. 13: 20, 21--Now
the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus that
great Shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, make
you perfect, etc.
These testimonies are
sufficient to prove our first proposition, that the death of Christ was a
necessity in the plan of salvation, and that this was God’s arrangement
"according to his determinate counsel and foreknowledge." Whether we
can ever see the reason for this or not, the fact remains the same, the
testimony is clear and emphatic. "Thou shalt bruise his heel;"
thou Abraham shalt receive thine everlasting inheritance by means of the
sacrifice typified by the offerings which I command thee to make, which is my
answer to thy question, "Lord God, whereby shall I know that I shall
inherit it?" "As Moses lifted up the serpent even so must the
Son of Man be lifted up;" by "making his soul an offering for
sin" he should cause "the pleasure of the Lord to prosper in his
hand;" "Messiah shall be cut off" as a means of
"bringing in everlasting righteousness;" "by the blood of thy
covenant shall the prisoners be sent forth out of the pit or the grave."
In dying Jesus was obedient unto death and therefore commanded of his
Father. In drinking the cup, it is "thy will" that is done. For the
joy of his reward he must endure the cross. Through the blood of the
everlasting covenant, Jesus is brought out of death.
The entire plan of
salvation is expressed in the word "covenant;" and of this covenant
the Apostle Paul says, as the Authorized Version gives it: "For where a
testament is, there must of necessity be the death of
the testator." Properly rendered, as in the Diaglott, this is, "For
where a covenant exists, the death of that which ratified it is necessary to be
produced." All is therefore predicated upon the death of Christ as the
Covenant sacrifice--a necessity according to "the determinate counsel and
foreknowledge of God." This is a divinely revealed truth; and we must
accept it as the foundation upon which, and in harmony with which, all our
reasoning and conclusions must be based.
2. That Jesus
realized that, according to the Father’s plan, he must die a sacrificial death
is evident from the following testimonies:
Matt.
John
John 12: 32--And I, if
I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
Luke
Verse 20--This cup is
the new covenant in my blood, which is shed for you.
Luke 24: 26--Ought not
Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And
beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the
scriptures the things concerning himself.
Heb.
Heb. 9: 23--It was
therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be
purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices
than these.
Heb. 10: 4-7--For it is
impossible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sins. Wherefore
when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest
not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offering and sacrifices for sin
thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo I come to do thy will, O God.
Heb.
Heb. 12: 2--* * * who
for the joy that was set before him endured the cross.
Heb. 5: 7--Who in the
days of his flesh, when he offered up prayers and supplications with strong
crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from [out of] death, and
was heard in that he feared.
From these scriptures
it will be seen that Jesus realized that the redemption of fallen man depended
upon the fulfillment of his mission, in enduring great temptation and trial and
developing a character "holy, harmless and undefiled and separate from
sinners," crowned with an obedient sacrificial death upon the cross. Why
God so arranged his plan as to make this a necessity we shall consider further
along; it is sufficient now (and indeed it is a fact whether we can ever
discover why or not) that we accept the testimony declaring that it is so. This
was so important a matter in the gospel which Paul preached that he writes the
Corinthian brethren that "he delivered to them among the chief things how
that Christ died, and was buried, and rose
again." And, he further declares, "If Christ be not raised (which, of
course, implies his acceptable death), your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins,
and we are found false witnesses of God;" and, moreover, if Christ has not
been raised in attestation of the acceptability of his sacrificial death,
"then they also who have fallen asleep in Christ are perished."
Now, since we see that
God so arranged his plan of redemption as to require and depend upon the death
of Christ; and that Jesus so understood the matter and performed all that his
Father’s plan required, as a means to the attainment of the "joy that was
set before him" beyond the cross, the next question to be considered is
that of our third proposition.
3. God has
revealed it as his law that death cannot take place by His approval unless the
subject is in some manner involved in the law of sin and death.
In a previous chapter
we have shown that death is the great enemy of mankind, which came by sin. If
it sometimes appears to be a welcome visitor, it is only when of two evils it
is the lesser. In view of the fact that men are prone to wickedness in this
present fallen state, it is well that the wisdom of God has caused death to
limit human life, both as to the extent of the "multiplication of sorrow
and conception," and as to men’s length of days. But the evil which
necessitated this consequent evil is back of all this; and when we discover the
primary cause of death we shall see the divine law which governs the inception
and its continuance in the world. Death had a beginning in relation to man; and
it will have an end. Its beginning is shown by the following: "Wherefore
as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed
upon all men for that all have sinned"--Rom. 5: 12. Its end is declared as
follows: "The last enemy shall be destroyed, death"--
Following are a few
scriptures as proof of this:
Gen. 2: 17--But of the
tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day
that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Gen. 3: 17--And unto
Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast
eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it:
cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days
of thy life; thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth unto thee; and thou
shalt eat of the herb of the field: in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat
bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken; for
dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return.
Rom.
Rom.
I. Cor.
From this testimony we
learn that man is in bondage to death and the grave as the result of sin; and
that redemption from the power of death is the work to be accomplished by the
plan of salvation which God in his love devised. But deliverance from death is
predicated upon death; and here is the question, How
can death deliver from death? The death of an actual sinner would only fasten
the claims of death more tightly upon the victim; and since all mere men, from
Adam to Christ, were, in some degree, actual sinners, no man could redeem his brother
nor give to God a ransom. Supposing the possibility of an angel dying, that
would not redeem, because, since angels do not belong to the race of mankind
and therefore stand in no sense related to the law of death under which man is
held, it would be contrary to God’s law of death for an angel to die; and that
which is contrary to God’s law is unlawful and one unlawful act could not
redeem from the effects of another unlawful act. To discriminate between what
is lawful and unlawful we must be governed by the revealed law of God. Since He
made death dependent upon sin in the law given to Adam, it follows that God’s
law was, If you sin you shall die; if you do not sin
you shall not die. If you sin it will be lawful for me to impose death upon
you; if you do not sin it will be (according to my law) unlawful for me to
impose death upon you. God cannot oppose himself. He cannot break his own law.
Moreover, angels having
become spirit beings are forever free from death--they cannot, according to
God’s law, die. So it will be with the redeemed of mankind when they are
made "like unto the angels to die no more." An angel, therefore,
could not be a redeemer of the fallen race of Adam, because God’s plan
predicated redemption upon a sacrificial death, which must be consistent with
and not opposed to His law that death cannot justly take place unless there is
a relation in some sense to sin. To substitute the death of a being of another
race would be unjust, because it would require the death of one who ought not to
die for one who ought; and now it becomes still more clear that if Christ were,
as to himself, immortal; and, as to his body, immaculate, it would have been
unjust for God to have required him to die, and it would have been unlawful for
Jesus to voluntarily offer himself a victim to death. We are therefore driven
by God’s revealed law and by all that is just, reasonable and right to conclude
that a saviour that would meet all the requirements of the case must be one
whose nature was capable of dying; one whose death would be consistent with
God’s revealed law of sin and death, and therefore one whose death would be in
accordance with divine justice; and yet he must be one who, in character, is
free from sin, "holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners."
This would necessitate
1. That the Redeemer
should be in nature mortal, like unto those he would redeem.
2. That he should by inheritance, according to God’s law as expressed in the
words "And so death passed upon all men," be
included with all those of
whom it is said, "By the offence of one judgment came upon all men to
condemnation."
3. That he should bear the infirmities, temptations and trials of the race and
suffer the inherited effects of the sin which brought
sorrow, pain and death upon
the race, and yet be personally, as to character, without sin, and practically
a manifestation of the
righteousness of God.
In this way God
"would be just and the justifier of all who would believe in the
Redeemer." In this way, too, the glory would be to God, in that He would
produce one out of the race vested with the mental and moral powers necessary
to accomplish the work; merit and honor would be due to Christ, in that he
faithfully used the powers he possessed and completely triumphed; and the
blessing would be to the redeemed, in that they would be delivered from death
and the grave, and could finally exclaim triumphantly, "O death, where is
thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? Thanks be to
God who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."
But now we have three
propositions to prove again in order that what we have set forth may be shown
to rest upon the impregnable rock of divine truth. These may be reduced to the
form of three questions;
1. Was Christ mortal
like unto those he came to redeem?
2. Did he inherit the death which "passed upon all men;" and was he
born under the results of that "judgment which came upon
all men unto
condemnation?"
3. Did he bear the infirmities, temptations and trials of the fallen race and
suffer the effects of that sin which brought sorrow, pain
and death upon the race; and
yet develop a character absolutely spotless?
Now when we say that
Jesus was mortal, let it not be said that all so-called Christians believe that
he was mortal as to his body; for that only evades the real question. We are
dealing with that person called Jesus, as to what he was; and we are not
separating Jesus from his body and allowing for himself one nature, and for his
body another. As a personality Jesus cannot be thought of nor spoken of apart
from bodily existence. Therefore, what he was in nature he was bodily and there
is no other personality to be considered. When, therefore, we read that Jesus
"was made," etc., we are not reading of what the place
of his habitation was made of, as if he was one thing and the body was another.
We are reading of what the very person, the only person who was Jesus or
Christ--what he "was made," whether flesh or spirit; whether
mortal or immortal; whether maculate or immaculate. There has been so much play
upon words in an endeavor to separate "spirit entity" from body in
relation to man generally, and "Divine substance" from body in
relation to Jesus, that it is necessary that terms should be defined, so that
when we read or employ the terms "his body" we may not quibble and
endeavor to establish a theory of the "his" being a separate entity
from the "body," any more than when we speak of the floors, walls,
roof, etc., of the house--every thing of the house, we mean that the house is a
separate thing of itself independently of the component parts named. When one
employs the terms concerning Jesus, "His body, his spirit, his being, his
nature," etc., it would be the part of a quibbler to argue that the
possessive pronoun "his" is a separate personality from the component
parts named. Now let us consider our propositions:
That Jesus was, in the
days of his flesh, mortal like all descendants of Adam, inheriting the death
which passed upon the race; and born under the condemnation which all
"sins’ flesh" is under, bearing our infirmities, etc., we submit the
following proofs:
The same testimonies
will apply to what our three propositions set forth:
Gen. 3: 15--And I will
put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed.
Gen. 22: 17--* * * And thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies.
II. Sam.
Isa. 53: 2, 3--For he
shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground. *
* * He was despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows and acquainted with
grief.
John
Gal. 3: 16--. . . he saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of
one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gal. 4: 4--But when the
fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made
under the law, to redeem them that were under the law.
I. Tim.
Heb. 2: 9--But we see
Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels. . . For it
became him, for whom are all things and by whom are
all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of our
salvation perfect through suffering.
Verse 14--Forasmuch
then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself
likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him
that hath the power of death, that is, the devil.
Verses 16-18--For
verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the
seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behooved him to be made like
unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in
things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered, being tempted, he is able to
succor them that are tempted.
Heb. 4: 15--For we have
not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities;
but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
I. Peter 2: 24--Who his
own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree.
I. John 4: 2, 3--Hereby
know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come
in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus
Christ is come in the flesh is not of God.
Rom.
Verse 18--Therefore by
the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation.
II. Cor.
After the fall of our
first parents their nature was the same as before, that is, flesh and
blood, of the earth earthy; but there was a change in its condition, in that it
was no longer "very good," but it was sin-stricken, death-stricken,
and had become "sin’s flesh" in which had been begotten the diabolos
proclivities. Now for Jesus to be the "seed of the woman" he must be
of the same flesh and blood in the same condition; and his work was to overcome
the flesh proclivities, redeem himself thereby, and thus become the
"Captain of our salvation." Hence if we compare him with Adam before
sin "entered into the world" we shall see the reason why Adam was not
a "man of sorrow," while Jesus was. Sorrow, suffering and death came
as the result of Adam’s sin; and these became inherent in man’s nature.
Therefore Jesus, by being made of the "seed of Abraham," had these to
contend with in his nature and to overcome. Therefore the serpent in the form
of sin "bruised his heel;" but he, when he finally destroys sin and
all its effects and even death itself, will bruise the serpent’s head. For this
purpose he was the Word made flesh-- "sin’s flesh;"
"made of a woman;" "made lower than the angels;"
"partook of the same flesh and blood that he might destroy the
devil" (diabolos) or "sin in the flesh;" "made like
unto his brethren;" "tempted in all points like unto his
brethren;" among those included in the words "death passed upon all
men;" and with those of whom it is said that, "By one offence
judgment came upon all men unto condemnation," sin’s flesh being
under condemnation hereditarily; our old man was crucified with him, when
he was crucified, sin’s flesh being an embodiment of the "old man"
(Adam’s) sin, a sin state needing restitution and redemption; "made
sin" or sin nature for us, so as to be an exemplification of redemption
out of sin-nature, the fallen state, which "redemption of the body"
God’s people are "waiting for."
The great question
involved is, Did Jesus experience salvation? Some are shocked at the very
thought of such a question, because they are prejudiced by the theory of the
divinity and "immaculate conception." If Jesus did not experience
salvation, then his life in the flesh was a sham; for he is represented as
suffering, tempted, dying, being raised, and rewarded. We are not to be driven
from facts by the amazement of superstition. The testimony we have given shows
that Jesus was born into the fallen state into which the sin of our first
parents plunged the race. Man’s fallen state was that of his very nature, in
which "the whole creation groaneth;" and how could Jesus "come
in the flesh" without partaking of the same fallen nature?
If he did not inherit a nature which caused or necessitated his life of
suffering and his death, then all that he suffered was directly imposed upon
him without an adequate cause, and in that case according to God’s revealed law
of sin, suffering and death, there was injustice. A substitutionary saviour
would be the suffering and death of one for whose suffering and death there was
no law, and that would be unlawful. We see infants suffering, and we know that
it is according to "the law of sin and death." Sin took effect in the
beginning, the stream was poisoned at the fountain.
Recognizing the laws of God in Nature and in Revelation, we can trace
the effects to a lawful cause. Now apply this to Jesus, and we are compelled to
attribute his suffering and death to the one primary cause of the world’s
evils. Upon this principle of divine law Jesus really, in his nature, bore the
burden of mankind; and the reason that burden did not crush him and hold him
under its ponderous weight in death and hades was because he accomplished what
no man ever had been able to accomplish; and which no mere man ever could have
accomplished, namely, a life of perfect holiness despite the heavy burden of a
sin-stricken, tempting nature in which diabolos dwelt, but, in His case, to be
destroyed.
Some people object to
this and ask, Why should Jesus suffer as the result of
the sin of Adam? We may answer by asking, Why do all
Adam’s descendants suffer from that cause? If the rejoinder is, We suffer because we sin ourselves, then we ask, Do we not
suffer before we commit personal sin; and do not thousands die without having
committed a single sin? To what shall we trace the cause? "By one man sin
entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death
passed upon all men." To cry out that our fallen state into which we are
born is not "our fault" will not help the matter. If it is not
"our fault" it is our fact, and it is the fact we must deal
with whether all can see the adequate cause of the fact or not. But all nature
is a lesson to show the discerning mind that defects or "faults,"
call them by what name we will, are transmitted, naturally too, now
since sin has thrown a "very good" state into an abnormal state. Now
let us view the entire race as down in the "valley of the shadow of
death" as the inherited effect of sin; and let us realize that God’s plan
of redemption requires that one of the race shall climb to the top of the
mountain without stumbling or falling. Not one is found able to perform the
task. To send an angel to do it would be no task and therefore no merit to the
angel. To send a "co-equal god" to do it would be trifling; for it
would be nothing but a sham. But for one burdened with the nature of fallen
humanity it would be a task--yes a task which no mere man could accomplish.
What must be done then? Is there no hope for these fallen ones down in this
"valley of the shadow of death?" No hope if they are left to find
help of themselves. The arm of the Lord must reach down and come to the rescue.
But how? By miraculously and suddenly lifting them all
to the mountain top? God could have done that, of course, so far as power was
concerned; but then there would have been no merit to any one. Here is the
beauty of the divine plan, then, in that God in His love does his part of
helpless man; and yet there is a part to be performed in one of the fallen
which shall be a wonderful achievement on his part and by which he merits
reward; and yet there is a part for all the rest who will be benefited to
perform in order to partake of the results of the triumph of the one who
accomplishes the work. The hand divine reaches down and produces one "made
in all points like unto his brethren;" but he is begotten in the valley,
not on the mountain top. The difference between him and "his
brethren" is not a difference of nature; for his first work is to redeem
his own nature before he can be the "captain of the salvation" of
"his brethren." The difference is that by divine begettal, and by
special guardianship, providentially as to human environments, and divinely by
Holy Spirit and angelic ministration, in all of which the love of God shines
gloriously as primarily our Saviour. Then Jesus, with these divine helps, does
his part with human nature tested and tried to its utmost limit, in which his
temptation, sufferings and death are real; and so he carries the heavy
load and yet ascends the mountain-top to be the Redeemer of all who identify
themselves with him in the appointed way. Thus was salvation exemplified
really, practically and experimentally in the person of Jesus the Christ.
To present the matter
in a different form, we may view Jesus as commencing his work where Adam left
us, not in that state wherein Adam was created "very good." There was
no life of "sorrow and suffering" between Adam and the tree of life;
Jesus was "a man of sorrow and acquainted with grief," without any
personal fault of his own. Adam before he sinned was in paradise: Jesus was
born into a lost paradise. There was no cross between Adam and the tree of
life; Jesus was born into a state in which there was no access to life eternal
and the crown of glory, except by way of
How beautiful the plan,
that, since Adam’s fall (and the fall of the race in him, Jesus included) was
first mental, second moral, third physical, redemption through Christ was,
first mental, unison with God; second, moral, harmony with the divine
attributes, third, physical, redemption of body, or consubstantiality with
Deity. Thus Jesus became "the fulness of the Godhead bodily," and the
"only name given under heaven whereby we must be saved." Man’s
relation to Adam and the fallen state he caused, is expressed by the words
"in Adam;" our relation to Christ and the reconciled state he
effected is expressed by the phrase "in Christ." Since this has been effected by means of God manifested in the flesh by the
Spirit, Jesus is the one name in focal manifestation. He is the Father
manifested by the Spirit; and therefore to be in Christ is to be "in the name
(one name) of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."
Now there are some who
try to evade the force of those passages which prove that Jesus was "made
in all points like unto his brethren" and that he took part of "the
same" flesh and blood as the race, by claiming that he was not actually of
mortal, sinful flesh, but that he was "sent in the likeness of sinful
flesh," emphasizing the word "likeness" as if it meant something
similar to, but not the same thing. If this were true we should still have the
same incongruity of one dying who, according to God’s law, ought not to die.
The passage referred to is Rom. 8: 3--"For what the law could not do, in
that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of
sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." The latter part of
the verse shows the object to be attained, namely, "to condemn sin in
the flesh." "The flesh," says the apostle in another place, "lusteth against the Spirit." That is, the
lustfulness of flesh, which was propagated by the sin of our first parents,
makes it "sinful flesh," and a state which, uncleansed by whatever
law God gives as a means of cleansing, first provisionally, and second
absolutely, is under divine condemnation and unfit for reconciliation to Him.
This inherent lustfulness was the diabolos to be overcome and finally
destroyed, by a life that would be a curbing, checking and condemning of all
the fleshly proclivities. This would be to practically "condemn sin in the
flesh," which the passage says was the object in view in God’s sending
Jesus Christ "in the likeness of sinful flesh." It will therefore be
readily seen that one coming in another sort of flesh could not condemn sin in
the flesh in which was the diabolos to be overcome and destroyed. The one
fitted for the work must have the flesh in which inhered the
Adamically-produced sin-proclivities in order that he might "condemn sin
in the very flesh" in which lust in the sense of inordinate desire had
come to exist as the result of sin. For God to send Jesus in "the likeness
of sinful flesh" was for him to send him in sinful flesh itself.
If there be still a
disposition to play upon the word "likeness," let it be remembered
that a writer’s use of any word must be governed by the sense in which he uses
it; and no one has a right to assume for the writer a meaning to suit a theory.
It happens that this same apostle Paul uses a similar word in another letter;
and a comparison can therefore be made and a clue to his meaning be
found. In
There is another way in
which some attempt to construe scripture to suit the theory that Jesus was a
separate personality from his body. It is by quoting the words of Heb. 2:
16--"For verily he took (margin, taketh) not on him the nature of angels;
but he took on him the seed of Abraham." The claim is made that the
"he" who "took" existed as a person before "he took on
him the seed of Abraham." This claim arises from a dwarfed understanding
of the use of words. It is similar to the argument based upon the words
"his body" which seeks to separate the "his" from the body,
as meaning a separate immortal entity; but the apostle speaks of "the
bodies of those beasts" in Heb. 13: 11, in which case the "disputer
about words to no profit" will see the absurdity to which his premises
lead. He will hardly be prepared to claim for the beasts a separate existence
from their bodies because the apostle uses the phrase "bodies of the
beasts."
Suppose one should say
to one building a house, "Your house begins to assume a handsome
appearance" no one would conclude that the house was a pre-existent thing,
and that it must actually exist before it could begin to assume a handsome
appearance; nor could any one conclude that the house was an active agent in so
assuming. One is compelled to use the noun which stands for that which is to be
a completed thing before there is a beginning to produce it.
Now the fact is that
God begat Jesus, and that he was "born of a woman" whose nature was
sinful flesh and blood. In the very nature of things Jesus could not be an
active agent in bringing about his own existence. For the apostle to say that "he
took on him the seed of Abraham" is, therefore, to say that he was made in
the nature of Abraham, and this is so explained in the very next verse, which
begins with "Wherefore." It is as if the apostle had said,
"Jesus took on him the nature of Abraham in the sense of being made or
constituted of the same flesh and blood that Abraham was--wherefore in all
things (as to nature) it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren,
that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest; for had he been of
any other flesh or nature, he could not have been touched with the feeling of
our infirmities," nor tempted in such a manner as to be able to
"succor them that are tempted."
Again it happens that a
clue is given us in this case. Verse 14 reads, "Forasmuch then as the
children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise
took part of the same." In the same sense that the children were
partakers, he was a partaker of "the same" flesh and blood. In the
same sense that Jesus partook of "the same flesh and blood,"
the children partook of it. If the words "took part" mean that
Jesus must have existed before he "took part," then the word
"partakers" must mean that "the children" existed before
they could be "partakers." The truth leaves no way of escape from its
real meaning. The human family constitute the totality of "flesh and
blood;" each individual partakes, or is a partaker; and Jesus was no
exception. Therefore the Apostle John is very emphatic in declaring that he
that denieth that Jesus came in the flesh is antichrist. The reason is
because such a contention distorts the entire plan of redemption as it was
exemplified in Christ; it makes God appear unjust and Jesus unworthy of the
great reward he attained to; while the truth, harmonious, glorious truth, presents
to our view a beautiful system which manifests the love and the justice of God;
the faithfulness, fidelity and marvelous triumph of His glorious Son; and
consequent blessing brought within the reach of poor fallen man. Let it be
noted that the apostle in Heb.
Another aspect of this
subject is Christ’s relation to the law of Moses. This
law had been "added" to the Abrahamic covenant "till the seed
should come to whom the promise was made"--Gal.
There were two classes
under Moses’ law, which may be termed men of sight and men of faith. The former
submitted to the law as a law only, by which they were to be governed in
temporal matters; the latter did all that the former did, but they, being men of
faith, saw through the types of the law him who was its end--Jesus. One of
these classes stood related to Moses, on the one hand, and the other to Moses
and Jesus. To the men of faith the ceremonies, sacrifices, etc., of the law
were temporary and provisional means by which they could receive in advance
certain blessings and immunities, pending their confirmation by Jesus. Among
these blessings were reconciliation to God, protection
of life in infancy and during special occasions of worship, and immunity from
diseases of the surrounding nations. Their "days were long in the
land" proportionately to their obedience to the law. When a man of sight
only offered his sacrifice to God, he received only the temporal blessings
which the law vouchsafed to him; but when the man of faith offered his
sacrifice he received both the temporal benefits and the heavenly which
depended for their eternal fulfillment upon the fulfillment of the law by
Jesus, who was its Alpha and Omega. Had Jesus failed to fulfill his mission all
benefits of the law would have been temporary only; and all who "died in
faith" or fell "asleep in Christ" would have
"perished" (I. Cor. 15: 18). The law of
Moses was really a specification of the mission of Christ. It was Christ
enfolded, while when his work was done, he was the law unfolded; the
specification was laid aside and the work, which was the specification carried
out, stood out in bold relief as a manifestation of the wisdom and goodness of
God.
The Apostle Paul says,
"If there had been a law given which could have given life, verily
righteousness should have been by the law"--Gal.
1. It would restrain
sin in the nation of
2. It would show its subjects their weakness and inability to earn eternal life
by a law of such righteous demands.
3. It would point them from themselves to the only one whom God had provided as
able to accomplish the task.
When the law had fully
shown man’s inability to reach the blessings of life eternal by means of it,
because of the "weakness of the flesh," the "body prepared"
was ready. Hence the apostle says, "When we were without strength, in due
time Christ died for the ungodly"--Rom. 5: 6. To the Judaizers who
desired to cling to the shadow and ignore the substance, Peter said, "Now
therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which
neither our fathers nor we were able to bear"--Acts
Now here is another
evidence of the necessity of the Divine sonship of Christ. He must be one prepared
of God; for the work to be done had been proved by four thousand years of
experience, and made certain by a law of God, to be beyond the power of mere
man: no mere man could meet the requirements. The arm of the Lord must be
stretched out or all was for ever lost.
Not only was the law of
Moses a means by which to prepare a national body for the work of God in the
earth, but it was a means in the hands of God of preparing him who said,
"Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared
me.* * * Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first that
he may establish the second"--Heb. 10: 5. In the national body there was
being prepared the body of Jesus, which would be the only permanent sacrifice
for sin.
The result of this
preparation was that Jesus was born under a law already prepared to be a
guardian of his life in the hands of those who would be careful custodians of
the precious one entrusted in their hands. Their careful observance of the law
in its relation to mother and child would insure the protection of the child
from death by disease or accident till he would become capable of voluntarily
doing his Father’s will. At twelve years of age he realized that he must
"be about his Father’s business." At thirty years of age he declares
that to "fulfill all righteousness" he must be baptized. Then, after
three and a half years, the end of his probationary life had come, and although
he had fulfilled the law that far, the law seized him in its condemnation and
made him "a curse" by finding him hung upon a tree--"Christ hath
redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is
written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree"--Gal. 3: 13. Here was
a clause in the law that cursed every one that should hang on a tree; but here
was also a victim who had done nothing amiss. What must be done? Repeal the
law? No. The law is always righteous that will condemn and curse sinful flesh;
because sinful flesh is the result of sin, and it is unfit for God’s eternal
purpose and "cannot inherit the