02.04. KINSMANSHIP WITH CHIRST
IV KINSMANSHIP WITH CHRIST IN THE RISEN BODY Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God.
1 Corinthians 15:50. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
Handle me, and see ; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.
Luke 24:39. In connection with the announcement that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," - with the reason implied in its being added, " this corruptible must put on incorruption," - a difficulty is sometimes raised. It is founded upon the supposed constitution of our Lord’s corporeal nature after his resurrection, as it is seen in the interval between that event and his ascension into heaven. Did he not, during these forty days, perform acts and offices such as ordinary " flesh and blood" performs? And did he not himself appeal to the fact of his having a fleshly body, to prove that it was not a spirit or mere ghost that appeared to the disciples, but their Lord himself in person?
Now here, generally, it must be remembered that there hangs over the risen Lord’s forty days’ sojourn on the earth a veil or cloud which the Spirit has not seen fit, by any clear revelation, to remove. Plainly, his manner of life was peculiar, and wholly different from what it was before his death He did not frequent public places of resort. He did not, as he used to do, worship in the synagogues or in the temple. He was not to be met with familiarly in the common streets and highways, on the mountain-side, or by the sea-shore. He did not go about doing good. He did not even go in and out among his chosen friends, as was his wont in the more private hours of his previous ministry. He was not, as of old, the welcome guest of Lazarus and his sisters in the quiet village of Bethany. He did not live, as if at home, among the apostles; sharing with them common fare and a common purse. All is changed. He shows himself only occasionally, and indeed rarely. And when he does show himself, it is in a strange, mysterious kind of way, by glimpses and momentary flashes as it were, in brief and hurried interviews, - like "angels’ visits, few," if not "far between." He appears and disappears, abruptly, suddenly. He comes, they know not whence. He goes, they know not whither. And none of them ask him, " Where dwellest thou?"
Mary Magdalene, weeping beside the empty sepulcher, hears her name called. It is the well-known voice of love. She turns and cries, " Babboni, which is to say. Master?" But she is not suffered to embrace her beloved. She may not tarry to enjoy his company. A short kind message to the brethren she gets. And lo ! in an instant, the interview is over (John 20:1-17).
Two weary travelers are wending their disconsolate way to Emmaus. One draws near, who is apparently, like themselves, a traveler. They do not at first recognize him. He is a stranger; but apparently he is a pious man, who can speak to them of the Messiah’s sufferings and glory; and as such they insist on entertaining him. He blesses, in his own well remembered form, their humble repast. Their eyes are opened; - they know him. And lo! again on the instant, he ceases to be seen of them: he vanishes out of their sight (Luke 24:13-32).
Twice, in successive weeks, on the first day of the week, the little company are gathered together. For security against intrusion, or against something worse, the doors are shut. Unexpected, unannounced, making a way into the room for himself, the Lord stands in the midst of them. They hear the customary salutation, " Peace be unto you," and are glad. They listen to the few words he has to say. But they seek not to detain him, nor does he offer to remain. He goes as strangely as he came. And whither he goeth they cannot tell (John 20:19-29). A party of them go fishing at the sea of Tiberias, and all the night they catch nothing. As morning dawns, one who seems to be unknown to them is seen standing on the shore. " Children, have ye any meat?" he asks; and they simply answer " No." Try once again, is his reply. The miracle which they had seen wrought before at the same spot, - the miracle of an overwhelming draught offish, - is repeated; - and the beloved disciple says to Peter, " It is the Lord." A conversation thereafter ensues, when they have come on shore, more like the fellowship of former days than what any of them had had with him since he had reappeared. It is for Peter’s sake ; - it is to meet the affecting case of the fallen apostle. That being done, this scene ends as unaccountably as the rest. Jesus is gone, and they are alone again (John 21:1-25)
Once again he met the eleven, and as it would seem, a larger number, on Mount Olivet, near Bethany, and in the act of blessing them, was carried up into heaven (Luke 24:50-51).
Such is the historical evidence of the Lord’s manner of existence and intercourse on earth being altogether different, after he rose, from what it was before he died. In the face of this difference, it is scarcely possible to doubt that his natural had become a spiritual body - that it had been raised "in incorruption, in glory, and in power," - that it was no longer "flesh and blood," but that substance, whatever it may be, into which "flesh and blood" is to be altered when it is to "inherit the incorruptible kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 15:50). But there is one particular instance in which the Lord seems to assert the reverse of all this. When he first stood in the midst of the disciples, his sudden and inexplicable appearance disconcerted them. " They were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit." To reassure them, the Lord simply says, "Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself : handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have" (Luke 22:36-43). This verse is sometimes read and commented upon, as if the risen Saviour on that occasion had used identically the same words which Paul uses, "flesh and blood;" or, as if the words which he did use, " flesh and bones," had identically the same meaning. Hence a very serious difficulty is supposed to arise. To harmonize the saying of Christ with the doctrine of the apostle, - as they are thus respectively understood, - some have felt themselves shut up to the conclusion, that our Lord’s body did not undergo the needful change from corruption to incorruption. That it did not become a spiritual body, - until his ascension. Until then, in their view, his risen body was of the same kind with his body as it hung on the cross, and as it was laid in the grave. It was on its going into heaven, that it was so transformed from a natural to a spiritual body, as to be fitted for its heavenly immortality.
There seem to me to be insuperable objections to this solution of the difficulty. I would not, for my part, very willingly acquiesce in the idea of my Lord and Saviour being different, in any material respect, now that he has ascended into heaven, from what he was when he showed himself on earth after his resurrection. I would feel as if I were forced to give up the strongest proof I have by far of his being the same person now, in his exaltation, that he was in his humiliation; the same as to his entire humanity, body as well as spirit.
Let me speak as if I were Peter, or John, or any one of those who had been with Jesus. Let me speak, for example, as the beloved John. And I would say - Leave to me the impression which all that I saw of the Lord after he rose confirms, that he is now in heaven, - that he is to be when he comes again, - that he shall be through all eternity, - exactly what he was when he showed himself to us during the memorable forty days; - and I am satisfied. I know that, however the structure of his material frame may have been altered at his resurrection, however it may have been changed from a natural into a spiritual body, it was not so metamorphosed but that I could recognize and identify him, as the very friend on whose bosom I leaned at the supper. And not his spirit merely, or airy unsubstantial filmy ghost, could I thus recognize and identify; - but himself bodily ; his very self ; seen and felt to be the same as when he touched us upon the mount of glory, or wept with us beside the grave at Bethany, or pitied us amid the agony of the garden. If, however, you tell me that, changed as I certainly found him to be at his resurrection, he has been still farther changed in his ascension, - you make him, alas! an unknown friend to me. I am to see him again, it is true. But what he may be - what he may be like - when I see him, I cannot guess. He may be so altered that I shall need another Baptist to introduce me to him anew (John 1:35-40). But it cannot be. I remember the angel’s word: ’’This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven" (Acts 1:11). The glimpses which I got of him when in his spiritual body he revisited the earth for a season- glimpses necessarily imperfect and obscure - assure me that, when I have risen as he rose, and my body becomes spiritual like his, we shall know one another in that kingdom of God which flesh and blood cannot inherit ; - and shall have fellowship in person one with another, not as during these few weeks, only now and then, but uninterruptedly throughout endless ages. So John might feel And so I cannot help feeling too. To me, as to him, the fact of Christ’s bodily nature having undergone all the change it is ever to undergo at the resurrection, and continuing ever since to be such as it was shown to be during the forty days thereafter, - recognizably substantial and recognizably also the same as it was before death, - is a precious confirmation of that most blessed hope, that in our spiritual bodies, in the heavenly state, we are to know one another and converse with one another ; that when I and my brother meet on the resurrection morn; I among the living who are changed, he among the dead who are raised ; we shall meet, not as strangers, but as old familiar friends, - to resume some interrupted argument, or labour, or song of love divine, - and to start together on a new course of study, work, and praise, in the realms of cloudless light and everlasting bliss. The resurrection of the Lord from the dead, therefore, and not his ascension into heaven, must surely be held to be the turning-point as regards the great change which it was necessary should be effected upon his bodily constitution, in order to fit it for the heavenly and eternal state. Whatever he is, as to his entire humanity, body as well as soul, when he rises from the grave, that he continues to be, - the same thenceforth and for ever. And yet he speaks of his having still "flesh and bones." How then, it is asked, can Paul say, - "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God"? The answer is, that the expressions are not identical Christ did not say - " A spirit hath not flesh and blood as ye see me have : " but - " A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have." Nor is this a mere verbal or technical distinction. The instances in which the phrase, "flesh and blood," occurs in Scripture are rare.* It is altogether a New Testament phrase. And it has a distinct meaning. It denotes man in his present bodily state, and implies that even at his best, and when doing his utmost he is unfit while in that state for his eternal heavenly home of light, love, and liberty. The phrase, "flesh and bones," is quite different, and is, as if of set purpose, differently applied. It is twice used in the New Testament ; - first, by the Lord on the occasion now before us - " A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have ;" - and secondly, by Paul, when, speaking of our oneness as believers with Christ, he says, " We are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones" (Ephesians 5:30). The corresponding Hebrew phrase is used more frequently in the Old Testament, and always, as I cannot but think, with a very definite import. The following examples may suffice : -
1. Adam says of Eve, his wife, as he receives her from the Lord, - " This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh" (Genesis 2:23).
2. Laban salutes Jacob as a kinsman, " his sister’s son," when he " runs to meet him, and embraces him, and kisses him, and brings him to his house," - "Surely thou art my bone and my flesh" (Genesis 29:14).
3. Abimelech, paying court to the men of Shechem, " his mother’s brethren," reminds them of his relationship to them, - " Remember also that I am your bone and your flesh" (Judges 9:2).
4. "All the tribes of Israel," coming to Hebron to make him king, claim a family interest in David, - " We are thy bone and thy flesh" (2 Samuel 5:1). It is Judah that evidently takes the lead in trying this argument.
5. David reproaches the elders of Judah, because, although they were his kindred, they were dilatory in welcoming him as he returned in triumph after Absalom’s defeat and death; "Ye are my brethren, ye are my bones and my flesh; wherefore, then, are ye the last to bring back the king?" (2 Samuel 19:12).
6. The king appoints Amasa to be captain of the host in the room of Joab, on the ground of relationship, - "Art thou not of my bone and of my flesh?" (2 Samuel 29:13). In all these instances, the idea of affinity, of close personal union and family relationship, is implied. A certain oneness of nature is indicated. And the uniting principle or element, - the seat or tie of union, - is not blood, or " flesh and blood," but " flesh and bones." In regard to this matter of family kinsmanship, I cannot but think that a difference is to be observed between the Scriptural or Jewish notion, and that of the Gentiles ; - with which last, that of the Gentiles, the modem notion of relationship coincides perhaps more nearly than with the other, that of the Jews and the Jewish Scriptures. In our reckoning, community of blood, or consanguinity, is the chief connecting bond. So it was among the old Gentiles. And hence Paul, at Athens (Acts 17:26), speaks of God as having "made of one blood all nations of men." Such a way of expressing the unity of the race is Gentile and Grecian, not Jewish nor according to the Jewish Scriptures. There, oneness in respect of marriage, or in respect of the unions of family and of race that flow from marriage, is expressed by a reference, not to blood, but to flesh and bones. Indeed it would almost seem as if , in this connection, the idea of the blood was studiously and of set purpose avoided. The blood, let it be borne in mind, was understood among the Jews to be the principle of the animal life. Thus the original prohibition of blood as food (Genesis 9:4) runs in this form, - "Flesh, with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." So also in the Mosaic law (Leviticus 17:14; Deuteronomy 12:13), the prohibition is made to rest on the same consideration, - " The life of all flesh is the blood thereof ; therefore ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh." " Be sure that thou eat not the blood ; for the blood is the life ; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh." The vitality of the body, as it now exists, in its present mortal state, is held to be in the blood. Hence, when Satan proposes that Job should be tried by the utmost severity of infliction upon his person that is consistent with the sparing of his animal life, he challenges God to "touch his bone and his flesh" (Job 2:5). No mention is made of his blood. Is not this significant? " His life" is to be " saved" (Job 2:6); and the blood is the life. The blood, therefore, is spared. It is the bone and the flesh that are touched. He is to be tried in his person, and in his tenderest personal relationships and friendships. ’ But save his life," says the Lord.
If there is anything in this view, the Jewish mode of expressing kinsmanship, by unity of flesh and bones rather than of blood, bears the trace or mark of a higher conception than our Gentile phraseology embodies. To say that you and I are " of one blood," is to put our unity upon low ground; upon the ground of our being joint partakers of the same animal nature and lower animal life, - the " life which is the blood." To say that we are " one bone and one flesh," - that I am " bone of your bone and flesh of your flesh," or you of mine, - if the origin or original meaning of the language is realized, - is to elevate our affinity, our kinsmanship and brotherhood, into a higher region. It is to extricate it from the conditions of the lower economy, in which we are partners with the brutes which perish, and to give it a direction upwards to the state in which humanity is to be perfect, incorruptible, and immortal. Is it not possible that the words put into the mouth of unfallen Adam, on his receiving Eve, his spouse, at the hands of the Lord, may have been intended by the inspiring Spirit for this very purpose, - to place the marriage-union on this higher footing? She " is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh?" We are one, corporeally as well as spiritually one; not however, as regards our blood merely, or that lower animal life which is in the blood, but as regards the condition of our human nature which is independent of that life, and above it. And is not the apostle’s argument about marriage (Ephesians 5:30), in which he uses the identical words which Adam spoke concerning Eve, and applies them to the church’s relation to her heavenly Spouse, somewhat remarkable in connection with our present argument? He virtually identifies the union of Christ and his people with the union of husband and wife. He interchanges, as it were, or rather associates, what is spiritual in the one with what is bodily in the other. He gives a corporeal character, in a sense, to the heavenly marriage-union, as well as a spiritual character to the earthly. And in doing so he adopts, surely designedly and deliberately, and not accidentally, the same language which Adam employs in welcoming Eve. "We are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones ;" - so says the apostle of the heavenly marriage-union. " This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh ;" - so says our first father of the earthly.
Such being the use and wont, if I may so speak, of the Holy Spirit in employing this phrase, " flesh and bones," and such being the marked distinction between it and the other phrase, " flesh and blood," - is it too much to suppose that the Lord had this very peculiarity of meaning in view when he said, - " A spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have" ?
He vindicated his corporeity; he asserted his manhood, his bodily manhood, as still a real bodily manhood, after his resurrection. And God be praised that he did so. God be praised, also, that he did so by a more emphatic and convincing proof than his merely partaking of human food would have implied. He did indeed eat once before his disciples (Luke 24:43). That seems to have been the only instance of his doing so ; for it is not said that he ate with the two brethren at Emmaus, or with those whom he met at the sea of Galilee. That he condescended, on that one occasion of his first appearance to the eleven gathered together at Jerusalem, to partake of man’s ordinary diet, was a most gracious accommodation to the weak faith of his disciples. But on reflection, they might have felt that this was no more than angels, and he himself as the Angel of the Covenant, had done of old, long before the incarnation; as when the three celestial visitors were entertained by Abraham at noon-day, and the two by Lot at night (Genesis 18:19) They might be thankful for his own surer words addressed first to them all collectively, and then to Thomas in particular ; - words most significant of continued corporeity in the resurrection state : - " Handle me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have ;" - "Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands ; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side ; and be not faithless, but believing."
There is, therefore, no real inconsistency between the apostle saying "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," and the risen Lord saying, "I have flesh and bones." The two expressions are quite distinct. The first, "flesh and blood," denotes the human bodily nature, liable to dissolution and decay. The other, " flesh and bones," points rather to its higher spiritual development in a structure having extension and form, - bones and flesh of some sort, - but not necessarily of a sort resolvable into dust, and perishable. And when the Lord used that phrase to indicate his resumed corporeity, purposely avoiding the former, he may be understood as addressing to his disciples an affecting appeal.
You thought that I was gone, and that you were never to see me more in the flesh. Now, when I appear, you take me for a spirit, from whose approach you shrink as from a strange and alarming phantom. But I have not left you, nor have I taken or received a nature in which you can claim no affinity to me and I have no union and communion with you. My manhood is still such, that in respect of it I may be your kinsman, and you may be to me, what Eve was to Adam, " bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh." True, you may not retain me in the, body here ; I cannot welcome your embraces, as I used to do when I was a sojourner among you ; " I go to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." (John 20:17) But I go possessed of a bodily frame in which I am still one with you, and you are still one with me. We are one, as husband and wife are one, or as brethren in the flesh are one. I claim to be still one of you ; of the same body and the same family with you. And I would have you to look upon yourselves as still one with me, of the same body, now spiritually quickened, and of the same family, with me ; " members of my body, of my flesh and of my bones."
We surely cannot altogether err in regarding our Lord’s remarkable language, especially when interpreted by the scriptural usage, as designed to teach some such lesson as this, ultimately at least, if not immediately, to the apostles and to us. At all events, it is clear that it is no contradiction of the statement that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption." That statement is the ground on which the apostle rests the assurance that our bodies must and shall undergo such a change as is needful for removing the disqualifications under which they now labour. It must be so, for otherwise we could not enter heaven in the body ; - " for this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality." It shall be so, for we are to enter heaven in the body; - " So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory."
What the change is to be, and how it is to be effected, it is needless to inquire particularly. Enough has been said already on that subject. It may be more profitable to notice some practical lessons which it suggests.
I. By an irresistible argument, a fortiori, it bars the door against whatever is unholy, impure, sensual, or vile. If even physical corruptibility is inadmissible in heaven, what shall we say of moral defilement? Is the body better than the spirit? If even the righteous cannot pass into these realms of light and glory with a body corruptible and mortal, how think you that you can reach them with mind, heart, and soul, polluted and unclean? How can you, who work iniquity, enter into the kingdom of God, if even sinless flesh and blood cannot inherit it?
Think of the far different doom awaiting you. You, as well as the righteous, survive death. For you, as well as for them, there is a resurrection. But in the Lord’s own awful words, it is a "resurrection of damnation!" Your bodies, as well as the bodies of the righteous, will undergo a change then; a change that will make them as indestructible as your immortal spirits are. Oh ! what will it be for you to meet your God on that resurrection day! - "unjust still and filthy still!" - furnished with bodies of fearfully enhanced power for evil, and intensified sensibility to pain! What will it be for you to reap in such bodies the bitter, bitter fruits of your sowing to the flesh now! And these bodies, ah ! they are made to last for ever. The worm that dieth not will never eat them away. The fire that is not quenched will never consume them. That tremendous sacrifice of righteous retribution is salted with salt for its endless preservation! (Mark 9:48-50). Ye workers of iniquity, have you no knowledge? Will you not be moved to tremble at the prospect of an eternity like that?
II. How high and holy is that fellowship with Christ into which you are brought, as " members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones! " He took your natural body, corruptible and mortal, that you might take his spiritual body - incorruptible, immortal. In respect of your corporeal as well as your spiritual nature, you are married, you are united to Christ. You who believe are thus thoroughly, out and out, one with him. Yes, you who believe.
O wondrous power of faith ! How mighty a spell lies in so simple an act! Only believe, thou doubting, trembling soul. Believe! Christ is near thee saying to thee, Believe! Believe in me, as joining myself in spirit and in body to thee; - to bear thy sin, to atone for thy guilt; - to take thy place, to be thy substitute, thy surety, thine elder brother, thy kinsman redeemer; - to obey for thee, to suffer for thee, to bring thee back to my Father and thy Father, to my God and thy God. Believe in me also as joining thee in body and in spirit to myself ; espousing thee to myself: that thou mayest be a "member of my body, of my flesh and of my bones." Believe in me as sharing with thee the very corporeity which I have myself; that I may present thee among my brethren before the Father, saying - ’ Behold I and the children whom thou hast given me".
O wondrous power of faith, uniting thee thus to Christ!. Nay rather, O wondrous power and glory and beauty of him to whom faith unites thee ! And what a union ! How close, how constant, how comprehensive ! Whatever it was necessary should happen to him, must happen also to thee. ’ The Lord from heaven" could carry to heaven nothing corruptible, nothing mortal, either in himself or in any of his members. Therefore " this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."
III. What a motive to be spiritually minded and heavenly minded ! And to be so more and more, as our union to Christ grows closer, and the time of our being glorified with him draws nearer ! Our present bodies are corruptible and mortal. In respect of them, we are of the earth, earthy. This condition or quality which now belongs to them, calls for acts and offices which cannot be omitted with impunity. It entails upon us the necessity of discharging the functions by which life in the individual and in the race is maintained ; those functions of the animal organization and the social economy which in this world repair the waste of corruption and the ravages of death. To neglect these functions - to affect a spirituality that is above them - is folly and sin. The direst consequences have ever come of the attempt. Let it be broadly stated, that as he lives now in the body man must obey the laws and fulfill the ends of his bodily nature and bodily condition. To do so is plainest duty. But surely it is duty that ought to occupy only a subordinate place in his esteem.
About what shall I be occupied? About things relating to my present body, corruptible and mortal? Or about things that will task to the uttermost the energy of my body, when it shall have become incorruptible and immortal ? What is to engage my mind, what is to interest my heart? Is it eating and drinking - marrying and giving in marriage ? These are indeed matters with which I must concern myself ; for they involve the life and health of the body as it now is, and of the social state for which, as it now is, the body is adapted. But the body is not to be long what it is now ; the social state for which it is now adapted is to pass away. Mortality is to be swallowed up of life. In heaven they " neither marry nor are given in marriage ; neither can they die any more ; but are equal unto the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection" (Luke 20:35-36).
Surely the things which should chiefly engage my mind and interest my heart, in the view of what I am then to be, and where I am then to be, - are the pursuits for which my risen body, in that heavenly world, will be adapted, rather than those for which my natural body here on earth is fitted. Surely I should be giving myself to the acquiring of those tastes and habits that will be found to be congenial, when I am raised in Christ incorruptible, in body a well as in spirit, to be with him in glory for ever.
IV. Finally, what a reason is there, in this high hope, for patient waiting, all the days of our appointed time, till our change come. Many and bitter are the griefs occasioned by the corruptible and mortal nature of our present bodies, and the sad vicissitudes of the mortal state with which they connect us. Pain, suffering, sickness, disease, rack the limbs and waste the frame. Sorrow and trouble come, through the ravages which death works in this changing world. But courage! child of God. It is but a little while. The Lord is about to change all things soon. " This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written. Death is swallowed up in victory." Yes ! " He will swallow up death in victory, and the Lord God shall wipe away tears from off all faces" (Isaiah 25:8). THE END.