Time

by J. N. Darby
I do not think we have any knowledge of time as time is in itself. I measure from one event to another and so enclose periods, but cannot without facts with intervals. Distance is not exactly the same, because I discern it by a sense which sees an interval at one time. All I know of time is "I am now." When I compare this with events, I am conscious it is not "now", and there is time.
As events only proceed from God, "I am" to Him never changes. He is in Himself always. Events come from His will, and are relative not absolute. When I speak of an event before what happened today, I look at it as having happened in a "now" which is not present. This I extend by invented measures.
“Infinite" I admit of course we cannot know, though we know it is not "finite infinite". But without existence I do not understand time or eternity—but God is. When I begin to count time, I count necessarily from "now", for I am now. I then speak of times not finishing in thought. Ante and post make no difference whatever, except by events, and if I look post I must imagine events or I cannot take a step beyond now. The starting point in both is "now", and I go on both ways from that and cannot finish.
When Christ's eternal nature is spoken of it is said, "In the beginning," all events and genomena by which time had an existence being supposed—"was the Word." That is existence per se—eternal, divine.
When historical creation is spoken of, it is supposed God created; for example, all genomena egeneto (things made came into being) by One who "was", but it is not stated and this was fitting. Creation being, there must be a Creator. What we wanted to know was Creation. The highest, holiest way of speaking of God was thus saying nothing about Him but that He acted. As to Christ, it was of the utmost importance to know that He was before and eternal.
All this talk about "bounded" or "unbounded space" is a mistake. I know what "bounded space" is very well indeed—a field is a bounded space, because I know what a bound is, being bounded. That I can negative, but I never conceive any negative proposition. I cannot conceive "not", for there is nothing to conceive. I can deny a bound when a bound is supposed, but it is no idea of the opposite at all.
I cannot conceive all space as a known whole. My only conception of it is that it is not within the limits of my finite conception. But that is what "infinite" means. It is no positive idea, for then it is finite-has bounds.
If it be said that "we cannot conceive God," I answer "certainly not by an idea." If I did it must be adequate, and He would not be God. But I do know He is not within the range and capacity of my idea, and that is something very material in our knowledge. When it is said, "He that loveth not, knoweth not God; for God is love," that is another thing. It is not an idea, but a moral nature morally apprehended. Space, time, and measures have no place in it at all.
It is another order of things. Affections, even human, are not ideas.
Past time without a commencement is not possible thought, because when I say "past" I have already commenced with the "now". I do not see why infinite division cannot be thought of, because the parts are bounded.
I remember a teacher of mathematics sought to show by a tangent, an indivisible angle, but he had only to make a circle with a longer radius and division was made.
The only idea I have of time is bounded by events which are not "now". But as far as without, then I seek to know it. I have no idea of time, but the principle of eternity only contradicted by experience. "I am"—that is not time as having duration, but in a point, but with a notion excluding bounded time, so leading up to God who is necessarily "I AM", which is the nearest approach to conceiving eternity, which in itself I cannot conceive at all. I conceive God existing, and never doing anything but existing.
I repeat, my only idea of space, except bounded or enclosed space, is practically infinitude, not conceived as so much for then it is finite, but as simply endless, for example, negatively. I do not say "existing time"-nothing properly exists in time which exists consciously. For example, consciousness is not cognizant of time. But I exist in space. So I do not begin it here as I do time by "now". I cannot conceive when a body cannot be, unless when one is; for example, I only conceive space as space without measurement, but room where.
“Nothing" cannot become, because there is nothing to become, but that does not say God could not speak and it be made—created.
Son of God and Son of Man
Son of God
That Christ has been the Son of God eternally is a truth most carefully set forth in Scripture and to be faithfully maintained and insisted upon. It is of paramount importance and crucial to Christianity. He was God's Son before coming into the world (1 John 4:14), continues to be so now (v. 15), and was so even when here on earth (John 1:14). There has never been a time when He was not the Son of God. He is such eternally.
But there did come a time when He was begotten of God as a man. This is something quite distinct from His eternal sonship, but depends upon that truth. As a man, He was conceived in Mary's womb by the power of the Holy Ghost and, as such, was called the Son of God. "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." Luke 1:35.
I believe that it is in this sense that God says: "Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee" (Heb. 1:5), and that He refers to Him as "My Son" in Psa. 2:7, 12. He is there the King (the Messiah), who will receive of God the heathen and the uttermost parts of the earth and will rule over them with an iron rod. He is also thus owned in Heb. 1:5; 5:5. It is something that begins in time and with His humanity— though He personally has been the Father's Son from everlasting and will always be such.
There are, then, two ways in which the term "the Son of God" is applied to the Lord. One is what He has been eternally, and the other is what He also became as man. As I said, used in the latter sense, it is something quite distinct from the other, but is dependent upon its being true of Him. In other words, of whom else could it possibly be said that He would be conceived in the womb by the power of the Holy Ghost? Surely, it could be said of none other than Him who had ever been the Father's son, dwelling in His bosom and declaring it to man, "daily His delight." Prov. 8:30.
Son of Man
The Lord is seen as "the Son of man" in at least two respects. To begin with, it is in His humiliation and suffering that He is viewed as "the Son of man". Then, and in answer to all that, He is seen as such in His exaltation and universal headship. In general terms, these are the two aspects, in which He is presented as "the Son of man".
Of course, in order to have such a title, the Lord must become a man. He "made Himself of no reputation [emptied Himself]... and being found in fashion as a man." Phil. 2:7, 8. "A body hast Thou prepared Me." Heb. 10:5. As a man, He was capable of suffering all that we suffer, so that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God.
And though not subject to it, He was even capable of experiencing death. Had He never taken part in flesh and blood, these things never could have been so of Him.
He was a man of a moral order quite apart from that of fallen man. He was "in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." "Unleavened... fine flour mingled with oil." "The second man is the Lord from heaven." "The Son of man which is in heaven." "He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground." Though on earth, He was from heaven; His life was there and His sustenance was from thence. He was, in short, not that "first man", but the "second Man".
Now, as "the Son of God", He was rejected (Psa. 2). And so He has been exalted and given universal headship (Psa. 8). "But now we see not yet all things put under Him" and before we do, Israel must suffer and be sifted and refined (Psa. 3-7). Then His "people shall be willing" (Psa. 110:3), and He will manifestly take His place as Head over all that He has created (John 1:50, 51). I say "all that He has created," because "it is manifest that He is excepted, which did put all things under Him.”
On earth He was "despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief" Isa. 53:3. "I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people." Psa. 22:6. And it was on earth as the Son of man that He was put to death: "The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again." Mark 8:31. It will be in this very scene of His humiliation, death, and sufferings that He will be seen, not only over Israel (though that is true enough), but as "the Son of man" over all things! As such, He will execute judgment on the living and the dead (John 5:27; Acts 17:31; 1 Peter 4:5; etc.). It is fitting and just that it should be so.
In Acts 3, God pleads with Israel one last time through Peter, but they resist the strivings of the Holy Spirit. Then in Acts 7, He testifies against them through Stephen, and the door is swung shut on that nation for the time being. As they are about to stone him to death, Stephen looks up and sees not the Son of God or the Son of David, but "the Son of man standing on the right hand of God." After that the Lord is seen as "the Son of man" in just three places: Heb. 2 where His universal supremacy in the kingdom is the thought, and in Rev. 1 and 14 where He is about to execute judgment. Never in the epistles proper is He thus spoken of.
D. Graham
“I have seen all the works that are done UNDER THE SUN; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit." Eccl. 1:14.