01.01. The Hope
I. THE H0PE.
1. The Necessary Change of Body. Man by constitution is made of and for the earth. He is physically incapable of living in the presence of God (1 Corinthians 15:50; 1 Timothy 6:16), so that a change of body is indispensable (1 Corinthians 15:50-58; Php 3:20-21; 2 Corinthians 4:16-18, 2 Corinthians 5:1-10). It is not at death but at the coming of the Lord that this change will be effected and we shall be made like Him (Colossians 3:4; 1 John 3:1-3).
2. With the Lord. The purpose and effect of this removal and change is that the Lord may have us with Himself, like Himself, to share His glory and authority and to assist in ruling His kingdom (John 14:3, John 14:17, John 14:24; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; Revelation 3:4-5, Revelation 3:21; Revelation 14:4; Revelation 17:14; Revelation 20:4).
3. This is Unique in the Ways of God. The expression “going to heaven” has become a commonplace, used as the equivalent of a sinner being delivered from hell, but it implies vastly more. A king may pardon a rebel liable to death without taking him to live in the royal palace and appointing him to high office and, honour. So sinners might have been saved from eternal death and been given eternal life without their ever being removed to the heavens as their abode. This certainly will be the lot of multitudes of the saved and might have been of all. There will be a new earth with saved nations, and God coming down to them, not their being taken up to His region (Revelation 21:1-31). That some of the saved are to be honoured as above indicated seems to be exceptional in the ways of God and is the final secret of His eternal counsels.* Since God cannot make any superior to His Son, He can do nothing greater than to cause some to share His Son’s glory and authority. This is the highest possible to the creature to all eternity.
[* Colossians 2:3 : omit “even Christ,” and read “in which,” that is, “the mystery of God in which are all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge hidden.” See Alford, and Darby, New Translation.]
4. The Principle of Selection. In view of our sinful state and wicked works it is evident that this “holy calling” to share His own kingdom and glory is given to us by God “not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal” (2 Timothy 1:9). But since not all the saved of mankind will enjoy this highest destiny there must be some principle of selection, for God always acts on moral grounds, not arbitrarily or by caprice.
(a) Enoch was translated alive to heaven before that first age developed its worst degree of corruption and long before the judgment of heaven was poured out. Concerning him the Spirit emphasizes that he looked forward to the coining of the Lord and forewarned the wicked of the judgment then to fall (Jude 1:14-15), as also that he “walked with God” (Genesis 5:24) in such wise that “before his translation he hath had witness borne to him that he had been well‑pleasing unto God” (Hebrews 11:5). Nothing therefore can be clearer than that the unique privilege of translation must be preceded by such a life of faith in God as produces a clear witness, and a holy walk which God already endorses as well‑pleasing to Himself, and which He will crown by a removal to His own sphere of the universe. Unless this were the lesson for us of this christian age why are these pointed comments upon Enoch made in the New Testament?
(b) Concerning certain Old Testament saints we are told that they desired that heavenly country, looked for that heavenly city, and therefore in practical daily life walked in separation from the world, confessing that they were strangers and pilgrims in the earth. This manner of life amongst the godless and violent was attended by manifold inconveniences and perils (Genesis 13:7-9; Genesis 14:22-23; Genesis 21:25; Genesis 23:4, Genesis 23:16; Genesis 26:15-21). The divine comment on these men of faith and this way of living is, “Wherefore God is not ashamed of them, to be called their God: for [that is, it is evident He is not ashamed of them, because] He hath prepared for them a city” (Hebrews 11:8-16), which He would not do for any of whom He might be ashamed. This “wherefore” is most significant. It shows that it was this same manner of life, their response and devotion to the call of God’s grace, that made sure to them their calling, by God’s choice, to the heavenly world. They had not been ashamed to serve the true and living God among men who did not wish to retain Him in their knowledge (Romans 1:20); He is not ashamed of them who thus confessed Him. They embraced the offer that grace made them of a place in the heavens, and in consequence they walked a sanctified life in separation from the godless; and therefore He Who was their sanctifier was not ashamed of them, and shall bring them to glory (Hebrews 2:10-11), by the first resurrection. To us also this applies: to us those of old are set forth as a weighty example (Hebrews 11:1-40); to us the Scripture, speaking specifically of our obtaining a rich entrance (i.e., by the first resurrection, instead of by the second resurrection after the millennial age) into the eternal kingdom and glory to which we are called, cries: “Give diligence to make your calling and election sure” (2 Peter 1:10-11; 1 Peter 5:10). For it was to such as had just confessed Him to be the Christ of God that Jesus solemnly said, “Whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and of My words, of Him shall the Son of Man be ashamed, when He cometh in His own glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels” (Luke 9:20-26; comp. Mark 8:38: Matthew 10:32-33: Luke 12:8-9; 2 Timothy 2:10-13).
(c) Thus translation, both of the living, as of the dead by the first resurrection, is consequent upon a life of faith which seizes upon the offer of the heavenly calling and shapes its course and conduct accordingly. So the Lord, dealing with the first and select resurrection, spoke of those that are accounted worthy to attain to that age and the resurrection from among the dead (Luke 20:34-36). “That age” (singular) is not a Bible term for eternity, which is not one age but many. “the ages of the ages” (thirteen times in the Revelation). “That age” is set by Christ in direct contrast to “this age,” and so means the age of the kingdom to follow this age. A general resurrection the Jews expected (John 11:34: Acts 24:15), but here Christ speaks of “the resurrection which is out from among the dead” (tees anastaseos tees ek nekron). This is the first clear intimation of such a limited, select resurrection (this doctrine also, as has been pointed out, being rooted in a germinal saying of Christ), and its terms are the key to and must control all subsequent instruction upon the subject. And it is made very clear that this resurrection is a privilege to which one must “attain” and be “accounted worthy” thereof. The notion that a share in the first resurrection is a certainty, irrespective of attainment and worthiness, can only be held in direct disregard of this primary declaration by the One who will effect the resurrection and determine who shall participate therein, the Son of God.
It was through Paul that the Holy Spirit saw fit to give in permanent written form fuller particulars as to this theme (1 Corinthians 15:1-58; 1 Thessalonians 4:1-18), and it is Paul who elsewhere repeats the words of our Lord Jesus just considered, declaring that, whereas justifying righteousness is verily received through faith in Christ, not by our own works, yet, in marked contrast, “the resurrection which is from among the dead (teen exanastasin teen ek nekron) is a privilege at which one must arrive (katanteeso) by a given course of life, even the experimental knowledge of Christ, of the power of His resurrection, and of the fellowship of His sufferings, thereby becoming conformed unto His death (Php 3:7-21). Surely the present participle (summorphizomenos becoming conformed) is significant, and decisive in favour of the view that it is a process, a course of life that is contemplated.
It has been suggested that Paul here speaks of a present moral resurrection as he does in Romans 6:1-23. But in that chapter it is simply a reckoning of faith that is proposed, not a course of personal sufferings. The subject discussed is whether the believer is to continue in slavery to sin (douleuein), as in his unregenerate days, or is the mastery (kurieuo) of sin to be immediately and wholly broken? It should be remembered that when writing to the Philippians Paul was near the close of his life and service. Could a life so holy and powerful as his be lived without first knowing experimentally the truth taught in Romans 6:1-23? Did the Holy Spirit at any time use the apostles to urge others to seek experiences which the writer had not first known, and to which therefore he could be a witness? And again, if by the close of that long and wonderful career Paul was still only longing and striving to attain to death to the “old man” and victory over sin, when did he ever attain thereto? Such reflections upon the apostle are unworthy, and, as has been indicated, the experience set forth in Romans 6:1-23 is not to be reached, or to be sought, by suffering, by attaining, by laying hold, by pressing on, or any other such effort as is urged upon the Philippians, but by the simple acceptance by faith of what God says He did for us in Christ in relation to the “old man.”
Thus this suggested exposition is neither sound experimental theology nor fair exegesis. Paul indicates as plainly as language can do that the first resurrection may be missed. His words are: “If by any means I may arrive at the resurrection which is out from among the dead.” “If by any means” (ei pos) “I may” – “if” with the subjunctive of the verb ‑ cannot but declare a condition; and so on this particle in this place Alford says, “It is used when an end is proposed, but failure is presumed to be possible”: and so Lightfoot: “The apostle states not a positive assurance, but a modest hope”: and Grimm‑Thayer (Lexicon) give its meaning as, “If in any way, if by any means, if possible,” and Ellicott to the same effect says, “the idea of an attempt is conveyed, which may or may not be successful.” Both Alford and Lightfoot regard the passage as dealing with the resurrection of the godly from death, and Ellicott’s note is worth giving in full. “‘The resurrection from the dead’; i.e., as the context suggests, the first resurrection (Revelation 20:5), when, at the Lord’s coming the dead in Him shall rise first (1 Thessalonians 4:16), and the quick be caught up to meet Him in the clouds (1 Thessalonians 4:17); comp. Luke 20:35. The first resurrection will include only true believers, and will apparently precede the second, that of non‑believers, and disbelievers, in point of time. Any reference here to a merely ethical resurrection (Cocceius) is wholly out of the question.” With the addition that the second resurrection will include believers not accounted worthy of the first, this note is excellent. The sense and force of the phrase “if by any means I may arrive” are surely fixed beyond controversy by the use of the same words in Acts 27:12 : “the more part advised to put to sea from thence, if by any means they could reach [arrive at] Phoenix, and winter there” (ei pos dunainto katanteesantes), which goal they did not reach.
Further, speaking upon the very subject of the resurrection and the kingdom promised afore by God, Paul used the same verb, again preceded by conditional terms, saying (Acts 26:6-8), “unto which promise our twelve tribes, earnestly serving God night and day, hope to attain.” Here the force of elpizei katanteesai “unto which they hope to attain” is the same as his words in Philipplans ei pos kantanteeso, “if by any means I may attain.” This hope of the Israelite of sharing in Messiah’s kingdom is plainly conditional (Daniel 12:2-3). It is assured to such an Israelite indeed as Daniel (Daniel 12:13), and to such a faithful servant of God in a period of great difficulty as Zerubbabel (Haggai 2:23). It was also offered to Joshua the high priest, but upon conditions of obedience and conduct. Joshua had been relieved of his filthy garments and arrayed in noble attire (Zechariah 3:1-5), but immediately his symbolic justification before Jehovah had been thus completed, and his standing in the presence of God assured, the divine message to him is couched in conditional language: “And the Angel of Jehovah protested unto Joshua, saying, Thus saith Jehovah of hosts, If thou wilt walk in My ways, and if thou wilt keep My charge, then thou also shalt judge My house, and shalt also keep My courts, and I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by” (Zechariah 3:6-7).
It is at this point that the “ifs” of the Word of God come in, and are so solemn and significant. Whenever the matter is that of the pardon of sin, the justifying of the guilty, the gift of eternal life, Scripture ever speaks positively and unconditionally. The sinner is “justified freely by God’s grace,” and “the free gift of God is eternal life” (Romans 3:24; Romans 6:23), in which places the word “free” means free of conditions, not only of payment. Eternal life therefore is what is called in law an absolute gift, in contrast to a conditional gift. The latter may be forfeited if the condition be not fulfilled; the former is irrevocable. But as soon as the sinner has by faith entered into this standing before God, then the Word begins at once to speak to him with “Ifs.” From this point and forward every privilege is conditional.
It is truly “in all wisdom and prudence” that God has made known to us the mystery of His will (Ephesians 1:8-9). The indispensable minimum, justification, without which no further blessing is possible, and which the sinner is utterly unable to acquire, having no nature that can produce ought acceptable to God, this God grants freely through the atoning work of the Lord Jesus. But now that a new nature has been implanted by grace, capable through the Spirit of pleasing God, all attainment is made conditional upon the exertion that this new nature is able to make, and must make. The whole promised land, together with the title to share it and the power to conquer it, are gifts of covenant grace, but no one shall get an inch more than he sets his own foot upon, by the use of the power freely granted to faith that obeys. And some who had equal title with the rest shall not reach the inheritance at all, though neither shall they ever get back to Egypt. “Let him that readeth understand,” and ponder the “ifs” of the epistle to the Hebrews.* [* See my “Firstborn Sons.”] The comments of Mr. David Baron upon the incident of Joshua are impressive. (The Visions and Prophecies of Zechariah, 103‑105.) I extract the following. “The word ‘protested’ means solemnly to protest, and is intended to express the solemnity and importance of the charge about to be made. The expressions, ‘Walk in My ways’ and ‘Keep My charge’ are frequently used in the Pentateuch for ‘holding on in the way of life, well‑pleasing to God, and for keeping the charge given by God.’ The first part of the charge refers particularly to Joshua’s personal attitude towards the Lord ‑ to fidelity in his personal relations to God; and the second to the faithful performance of his official duties as high priest. And the reward of his thus studying (in his personal and official capacity) to present himself approved unto God will be (a) ‘Then thou shalt also judge My house . . .’ (b) ‘And shalt also keep My courts . . . ’ (c) But the climax of promise in this verse is reached in the last clause, ‘And I will give thee places to walk among these that stand by. . .’ ‘These that stand by’ ‑ as we see by comparing the expression with verse 4 - are the angels, who were in attendance on the Angel of Jehovah, and who ‘stood before Him’ ready to carry out His behests. The Jewish Targum ... is, I believe, nearer the truth [than many christian commentators] when it paraphrases the words, ‘In the resurrection of the dead I will revive thee, and give thee feet walking among these seraphim.’ Thus applied to the future the sense of the whole verse would be this: ’If thou wilt walk in My ways and keep My charge, thou shalt not only have the honour of judging My house and keeping My courts, but when thy work on earth is done thou shalt be transplanted to higher service in heaven, and “have places to walk” among these pure, angelic beings who stand by Me, hearkening unto the voice of My word’ (Psalms 103:20-21). Note the ‘ifs’ in this verse, my dear reader, and lay to heart the fact that, while pardon and justification are the free gifts of God to all that are of faith, having their source wholly in His infinite and sovereign grace, and quite apart from work or merit on the part of man, the honour and privilege of acceptable service and future reward are conditional upon our obedience and faithfulness: therefore seek by His grace and in the power of His Spirit to ‘walk in His ways and to keep His charge,’ and in all things, even if thine be the lot of a ‘porter’ or ‘doorkeeper’ in the House of God, to present thyself approved unto Him, in remembrance of the day when ‘we must all be made manifest before the judgment‑seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad’ (2 Corinthians 5:10).” By virtue of their relationship to Abraham all Israelites are natural sons of the kingdom which is the goal of their national hopes according to the purpose and promise of the God of Abraham; but the King has told them plainly, first, that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, together with all the prophets ‑ that is, all the men of faith and devotion ‑ shall be in that kingdom, but secondly, that it is very possible that some of the sons of the kingdom may forfeit their entrance thereinto (Matthew 8:10-12: Luke 13:28-29); for there are those who may have been first in privilege and opportunity who shall be last in final attainment.
If, therefore, an Israelite attains to that kingdom it will be on the basis of a covenant made by God with his federal head, Abraham; the source of which covenant is the grace of God in Christ, the working principle of which on man’s side is faith proving itself by obedience. Wherein now does this differ in basic principle from that new and better covenant which introduces to better, that is, to heavenly privileges, to sharing the heavenly sphere of that same kingdom, not only its earthward side? This new and higher order of things is also derived from a covenant made with our federal Head, its source is in that same grace of God, its working principle on our side is a faith that proves its quality in obedience.
Moreover, since the man of true faith in that earlier age could aspire to this same heavenly city and country as ourselves there manifestly was no difference in his position and ours in this matter, though it may be he had only a more distant view and not so full a revelation of the purpose of God in all this project. So that if they of old could miss their share, on what principle of righteousness shall we be exempted from their need of diligence and obedience? Such exemption not only would contain an invidious and inexplicable distinction, but it would prove highly dangerous to our moral fibre and our zeal for godliness. And has not this been seen? We heard it boldly stated from a platform, that the sharing in the bridal glories of the wife of the Lamb is guaranteed absolutely no matter what our practical life may or may not have been. But obviously if the very highest of all honours cannot possibly be forfeited plainly nothing is forfeitable, and the whole notion of reward for effort, so heavily emphasized in Holy Scripture, is swept away. For ourselves we repudiate this common teaching as grossly immoral in its tendency, the sheerest antinomianism, and flatly repugnant to the Word. The Lord told His disciples that status in the kingdom of the heavens was to be determined by the measure of obedience and of having encouraged others to obedience, and He as clearly added that entrance itself into that kingdom was conditional upon a certain degree of practical righteousness (Matthew 5:19-20). He further plainly warned the apostles themselves that except they turned from their high-mindedness, and became as humble as a little child, they should on no account enter into the kingdom (Matthew 18:3). And this same possibility of missing our inheritance by practical misconduct became a stock element in the apostolic teaching of their converts, and most especially and notably of Paul (1 Corinthians 6:7-10; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:5).
It followed that godly Israelites, bent on securing a share with Abraham in the kingdom of Messiah, served God, as Paul says, with the utmost earnestness and ceaselessly: “earnestly (en ekteneia) serving God night and day” (Acts 26:7). It is an intensive form of this very word which Paul employs in the Philippian passage (epekteinomenos) to describe his own strenuous endeavours in godly service and suffering to reach that same goal, the out‑resurrection. The word pictures the racer leaning far forward, stretched out toward the goal, straining every fibre to win the coveted prize. It is the sharpest possible rebuke to the complaisant idea that so great a reward is guaranteed to all believers irrespective of piety, zeal, devotion, and life‑long perseverance. Nor is there warrant for the assertion that to Paul only or even first were these themes made known. He indeed learned them direct from the Lord, but so did other “holy apostles and prophets,” according to his own statement (Ephesians 1:1). These mighty truths were as much the need of and as much the property of those many saints whom Paul never taught as of that portion of the church of God to whom he ministered. And that the other apostles did in fact know and teach the truth of a select resurrection, prior to the general resurrection of all men, and thus knew and taught prior even to Paul’s conversion, is seen from the statement in Acts 4:2, that from the very earliest days they “proclaimed in Jesus the resurrection which is out from among the dead” (teen anastasin teen ek nekron). The clearness of their understanding of this first, select resurrection, of which the Lord had spoken while with them, is shown by the definiteness and vigour with which they announced it., for katangello, in the A.V. weakly rendered “preach,” means “to proclaim with authority, as commissioned to spread the tidings throughout those who hear them” (Westcott, on 1 John 1:5). Therefore such a resurrection was not revealed for the first time when Paul wrote to the Thessalonians; those who were apostles before him made it their business to announce this truth to all to whom they proclaimed the gospel, for, as Paul himself tells us, it was the “commandment of the eternal God” that the secret counsel of which the first resurrection is part should be “made known unto all the nations” (Romans 16:26), which demanded that other heralds before and besides Paul should receive and proclaim the message. When first writing to the Thessalonians he could say that they already “knew perfectly” about the day of the Lord, and when writing again he added that he had told them about these things when with them (1 Ephesians 5:2;